[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 15 (Thursday, January 23, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3445-3446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-1634]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 15 / Thursday, January 23, 1997 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 3445]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. 96-005-2]
Cattle Exportations; Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Test
Requirements
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final rule, with two changes, an interim
rule that amended the regulations by eliminating requirements for pre-
export diagnostic tests for tuberculosis and brucellosis in certain
cattle being exported from the United States directly to slaughter. As
amended by this document, the rule eliminates the tuberculosis and
brucellosis test requirements for slaughter cattle exported from States
free of brucellosis or tuberculosis and those exported to countries
that the Administrator has determined have an acceptable disease
surveillance system and that agree to share with the United States any
findings of brucellosis or tuberculosis in U.S. origin cattle. We
believe that these test requirements can be eliminated without
compromising the integrity of our brucellosis and tuberculosis
surveillance systems. This rule facilitates the movement of U.S.
slaughter cattle to foreign countries.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 23, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Michael David, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Import/Export Animals,
National Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit
39, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-5034.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 9 CFR part 91, ``Inspection and Handling of
Livestock for Exportation'' (referred to below as the regulations),
prescribe conditions for exporting animals from the United States.
Section 91.5 requires, among other things, that cattle intended for
exportation be tested for tuberculosis and brucellosis.
In an interim rule effective on February 15, 1996, and published
in the Federal Register on February 23, 1996 (61 FR 6917-6918, Docket
No. 96-005-1), we amended the cattle exportation regulations in 9 CFR
part 91 to remove the tuberculosis and brucellosis test requirements
for cattle being exported for slaughter. We amended the regulations to
remove these testing requirements for cattle exported directly to
slaughter in a foreign country, if the receiving country has a disease
surveillance system equivalent to that of the United States, as
determined by the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS), and if the receiving country agrees to
share any findings of brucellosis or tuberculosis in U.S. origin cattle
with APHIS. In addition, we amended the regulations to remove these
testing requirements for any cattle moving directly to slaughter from a
State designated as free of tuberculosis or brucellosis in 9 CFR 77.1
or 78.41, respectively. This action relieved restrictions and
facilitated the movement of U.S. slaughter cattle to foreign countries.
We solicited comments concerning the interim rule for 60 days
ending April 23, 1996. We received two comments by that date. Both
comments were from State Departments of Agriculture. The comments are
discussed below.
Both commenters agreed with the economic benefits of the rule and
the actions taken by the interim rule. However, both commenters were
concerned with the wording about Mexico having a tuberculosis
surveillance system equivalent to that of the United States.
We understand and agree with the commenters' concerns. Federal
slaughter plants in Mexico have a tuberculosis surveillance system in
place. This rule deals with exports to Mexico of slaughter cattle but
not other cattle. In the interim rule we should have specified that the
slaughter plants in Mexico, to which the slaughter cattle are being
exported, have tuberculosis surveillance systems that are acceptable to
the United States. As a result of these comments, we are making changes
in this final rule to revise two references to specify that the
Administrator has determined that Canada and Mexico have acceptable
tuberculosis surveillance systems at slaughter plants for the purposes
of receiving cattle exported from the United States for slaughter.
For consistency, we are making the same changes for brucellosis
testing. Therefore, two references will be changed to specify that the
Administrator has determined that Canada has an acceptable brucellosis
surveillance system at slaughter plants for the purposes of receiving
cattle exported from the United States for slaughter.
Therefore, based on the rationale set forth in the interim rule
and in this document, we are adopting the provisions of the interim
rule as a final rule, with the changes discussed in this document.
This final rule also affirms the information contained in the
interim rule concerning Executive Orders 12372 and 12988 and the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule
has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive
Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
As stated in the interim rule published in the Federal Register on
February 23, 1996, timely compliance with sections 603 and 604 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) was impracticable to
make this rule effective in time for U.S. exporters of slaughter cattle
to take advantage of a favorable marketing situation. This final rule
includes the analysis of the economic impact of this regulatory change
on small entities.
Our interim rule amended the regulations in Sec. 91.5 to remove the
tuberculosis and brucellosis testing requirements for cattle moving
directly to slaughter in a foreign country. Cattle exported directly
for slaughter no longer require tuberculosis or brucellosis tests
[[Page 3446]]
prior to exportation when the receiving country (1) has a disease
surveillance system at slaughter plants that is acceptable to the
United States and (2) agrees to share any findings of tuberculosis or
brucellosis in U.S. origin cattle with APHIS. Cattle moving directly to
slaughter present a negligible risk of transmitting either brucellosis
or tuberculosis to other cattle. Monitoring of these cattle by the
receiving country will provide information on the source of any
affected cattle within the United States. The interim rule also removed
these test requirements for cattle moving directly to slaughter when
they originate from a Class Free State for brucellosis or an
Accredited-Free State for tuberculosis. Cattle exported for slaughter
from a State which is free of brucellosis or tuberculosis present a
negligible risk of carrying brucellosis or tuberculosis, respectively.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that we specifically
consider the economic impact associated with rule changes on small
entities. The Small Business Administration's definition of a small
entity involved in cattle exportation is one whose total sales is less
than $0.5 million annually. In 1992 there were 1,034,189 cattle and
calf farms in the United States, of which 1,011,591, or 97.8 percent,
would be considered small entities. The number of these entities
exporting cattle for slaughter to Mexico and Canada or exporting cattle
for slaughter from a brucellosis or tuberculosis free State is unknown.
There were 148,906 and 71,781 cattle, except breeding cattle,
exported from the United States in 1994 and 1995, respectively. In both
years, over 99 percent of the cattle were exported to Mexico and
Canada. Approximately 50 percent of the cattle exported to Canada moved
directly to slaughter and virtually all of the cattle exported to
Mexico moved directly to slaughter.
To the extent that the elimination of testing requirements
represents a reduction in operating costs, any entity bypassing this
testing will benefit economically from the rule change. The degree to
which an entity is affected depends on its market power or on the
extent to which the cost reduction can be retained by the entity.
Without information on either profit margins and operational expenses
of the affected entities or the supply responsiveness of the affected
industry, the affect cannot be precisely predicted. However, we expect
that some exporters will experience a small economic benefit as a
result of eliminating the test requirements and their associated costs.
The cost of these tests vary depending upon where and how the tests
are performed. Brucellosis tests may be administered along with the
tuberculosis test. Brucellosis and tuberculosis tests cost pennies per
animal when performed at a market concentration center where a card
test is used. At a farm the brucellosis and tuberculosis tests cost as
much as $19.00 per animal including labor, laboratory costs, and
miscellaneous charges. This cost would be only slightly lower for
performing the tuberculosis test alone. With such a low cost per
animal, we do not expect these changes to have a significant impact on
any entity, whether small or large.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Regulatory Reform
This action is part of the President's Regulatory Reform
Initiative, which, among other things, directs agencies to remove
obsolete and unnecessary regulations and to find less burdensome ways
to achieve regulatory goals.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 91
Animal diseases, Animal welfare, Exports, Livestock, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 9 CFR part 91 which was
published at 61 FR 6917-6918 on February 23, 1996, is adopted as a
final rule with the following changes:
PART 91--INSPECTION AND HANDLING OF LIVESTOCK FOR EXPORTATION
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 105, 112, 113, 114a, 120, 121, 134b, 134f,
136, 136a, 612, 613, 614, and 618; 46 U.S.C. 466a and 466b; 49
U.S.C. 1509(d); 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).
2. Section 91.5 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i),
(a)(2), (b)(1)(iv) and (b)(2) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 91.5 Cattle.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Cattle exported directly to slaughter in a country that the
Administrator has determined has an acceptable tuberculosis
surveillance system at slaughter plants and that agrees to share any
findings of tuberculosis in U.S. origin cattle with APHIS; or
* * * * *
(2) The Administrator has determined that the following countries
have an acceptable tuberculosis surveillance system at slaughter
plants: Canada and Mexico.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) Cattle exported directly to slaughter in a country that the
Administrator has determined has an acceptable brucellosis surveillance
system at slaughter plants and that agrees to share any findings of
brucellosis in U.S. origin cattle with APHIS; or
* * * * *
(2) The Administrator has determined that the following country has
an acceptable brucellosis surveillance system at slaughter plants:
Canada.
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC, this 16th day of January 1997.
Donald W. Luchsinger,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 97-1634 Filed 1-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
