livestock

[xt_go_advt_1]
TitleActionFR DocPublishedAgencyAgency NameExcerptsAbstractHTMLPDF
TitleActionFR DocPublishedAgencyAgency NameExcerptsAbstractHTMLPDF
Scope of Sections 202(a) and (b) of the Packers and Stockyards ActRule2017-2259310/18/2017DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentThe United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program is withdrawing the interim final rule (IFR) published in the Federal Register on Dec … The United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program is withdrawing the interim final rule (IFR) published in the Federal Register on December 20, 2016. Had the IFR become effective, it would have added a paragraph to the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act (P&S Act) addressing the scope of sections 202(a) and (b) of the P&S Act, which enumerate unlawful practices under the Act. Specifically, the IFR would have added a paragraph to the regulations further explaining the scope of sections 202(a) and (b) of the P&S Act such that certain conduct or actions, depending on their nature and the circumstances, could be found to violate the P&S Act without a finding of harm or likely harm to competition. GIPSA accepted and analyzed comments on the IFR received on or before March 24, 2017. In addition, in the April 12, 2017 Federal Register, GIPSA solicited and analyzed comments received on or before June 12, 2017, on four alternative actions regarding the disposition of the IFR. After careful review and consideration of all comments received, GIPSA is withdrawing the IFR.scope-of-sections-202a-and-b-of-the-packers-and-stockyards-actFR-Doc-2017-22593
Importation of Bone-In Ovine Meat From UruguayRule2017-1922509/12/2017DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are amending the regulations governing the importation of certain animals, meat, and other animal products by allowing, under certain conditions, the importation of bone-in ovine meat from Uruguay. Based on the evidence in a risk … We are amending the regulations governing the importation of certain animals, meat, and other animal products by allowing, under certain conditions, the importation of bone-in ovine meat from Uruguay. Based on the evidence in a risk assessment that we prepared, we believe that bone-in ovine meat can safely be imported from Uruguay provided certain conditions are met. This final rule will provide for the importation of bone-in ovine meat from Uruguay into the United States, while continuing to protect the United States against the introduction of foot-and-mouth disease.importation-of-bone-in-ovine-meat-from-uruguayFR-Doc-2017-19225
Importation of Beef From a Region in ArgentinaRule2017-0101901/19/2017DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentIn a final rule published in the Federal Register on July 2, 2015, and effective on September 1, 2015, we amended the regulations governing the importation of certain animals, meat, and other animal products to allow, under cert … In a final rule published in the Federal Register on July 2, 2015, and effective on September 1, 2015, we amended the regulations governing the importation of certain animals, meat, and other animal products to allow, under certain conditions, the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) beef from a region in Argentina located north of Patagonia South and Patagonia North B, referred to as Northern Argentina. However, we inadvertently limited the requirement for the maturation of carcasses to meat derived from bovines. Therefore, we are amending the paragraph to remove the limitation.importation-of-beef-from-a-region-in-argentinaFR-Doc-2017-01019
Scope of Sections 202(a) and (b) of the Packers and Stockyards ActRule2016-3042412/20/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentThe Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program (P&SP) is amending the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended an … The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program (P&SP) is amending the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented (P&S Act). GIPSA is adding a paragraph addressing the scope of sections 202(a) and (b) of the P&S Act. This interim final rule clarifies that conduct or action may violate sections 202(a) and (b) of the P&S Act without adversely affecting, or having a likelihood of adversely affecting, competition. This interim final rule reiterates USDA's longstanding interpretation that not all violations of the P&S Act require a showing of harm or likely harm to competition. The regulations would specifically provide that the scope of section 202(a) and (b) encompasses conduct or action that, depending on their nature and the circumstances, can be found to violate the P&S Act without a finding of harm or likely harm to competition. This interim final rule finalizes a proposed amendment that GIPSA published on June 22, 2010. GIPSA is now publishing as an interim final rule what was proposed on June 22, 2010, with slight modifications, in order to allow additional comment on these provisions.scope-of-sections-202a-and-b-of-the-packers-and-stockyards-actFR-Doc-2016-30424
Unfair Practices and Undue Preferences in Violation of the Packers and Stockyards ActProposed Rule2016-3043012/20/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentThe Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program (P&SP) is proposing to amend the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1 … The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program (P&SP) is proposing to amend the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented (P&S Act). The proposed amendments will clarify the conduct or action by packers, swine contractors, or live poultry dealers that GIPSA considers unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive and a violation of section 202(a) of the P&S Act. The proposed amendments will also identify criteria that the Secretary will consider in determining whether conduct or action by packers, swine contractors, or live poultry dealers constitutes an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage and a violation of section 202(b) of the P&S Act. This proposed rule identifies the conduct or action that is a per se violation of section 202(a) of the P&S Act, includes an illustrative list of conduct or action, absent demonstration of a legitimate business justification, GIPSA believes is unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive and a violation of section 202(a) of the P&S Act regardless of harm to competition, and clarifies that any conduct or action that harms or is likely to harm competition is a violation of section 202(a) of the P&S Act. The proposed rule also includes criteria the Secretary will consider in determining whether conduct or action constitutes an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage and a violation of section 202(b) of the P&S Act.unfair-practices-and-undue-preferences-in-violation-of-the-packers-and-stockyards-actFR-Doc-2016-30430
Poultry Grower Ranking SystemsProposed Rule2016-3042912/20/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentThe Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program (P&SP) is proposing to amend the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1 … The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Program (P&SP) is proposing to amend the regulations issued under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented (P&S Act). The proposed amendments will identify criteria that the Secretary may consider when determining whether a live poultry dealer's use of a poultry grower ranking system for ranking poultry growers for settlement purposes is unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive or gives an undue or unreasonable preference, advantage, prejudice, or disadvantage. The proposed amendments will also clarify that absent demonstration of a legitimate business justification, failing to use a poultry grower ranking system in a fair manner after applying the identified criteria is unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive and a violation of section 202(a) of the P&S Act regardless of whether it harms or is likely to harm competition.poultry-grower-ranking-systemsFR-Doc-2016-30429
Exportation of Live Animals, Hatching Eggs, and Animal Germplasm From the United StatesRule2016-2586010/26/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentIn a final rule published in the Federal Register on January 20, 2016, and effective on February 19, 2016, we revised our regulations regarding the exportation of livestock from the United States. Among other revisions, we expand … In a final rule published in the Federal Register on January 20, 2016, and effective on February 19, 2016, we revised our regulations regarding the exportation of livestock from the United States. Among other revisions, we expanded the scope of the regulations so that, if the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) knows that an importing country requires an export health certificate endorsed by the competent veterinary authority of the United States for any animal other than livestock or for any animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or gametes intended for export to that country, the animal or other commodity must have an endorsed export health certificate in order to be eligible for export from the United States. While, in the preamble for that rule, we indicated that APHIS is the competent veterinary authority of the United States, and must endorse the export health certificate in such instances, this was not reflected in the regulations themselves. This document corrects that error.exportation-of-live-animals-hatching-eggs-and-animal-germplasm-from-the-united-statesFR-Doc-2016-25860
Livestock Mandatory Reporting: Reauthorization of Livestock Mandatory Reporting and Revision of Swine and Lamb Reporting RequirementsRule2016-1904008/11/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentOn April 2, 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) implemented the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) program as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (1999 Act). … On April 2, 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) implemented the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) program as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (1999 Act). The LMR program was reauthorized in October 2006 and September 2010. On September 30, 2015, the Agriculture Reauthorizations Act of 2015 (2015 Reauthorization Act) reauthorized the LMR program for an additional 5 years until September 30, 2020, and directed the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) to amend the LMR swine reporting requirements. This final rule incorporates the swine reporting revisions contained within the 2015 Reauthorization Act and a minor revision to the lamb reporting requirements under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, USDA Livestock Mandatory Reporting regulations.livestock-mandatory-reporting-reauthorization-of-livestock-mandatory-reporting-and-revision-of-swineFR-Doc-2016-19040
Environmental Policies and Procedures; Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act and Related AuthoritiesRule2016-1807508/03/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentThe Farm Service Agency (FSA) is consolidating, updating, and amending its regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). FSA's previous NEPA regulations had been in place since 1980. Signifi … The Farm Service Agency (FSA) is consolidating, updating, and amending its regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). FSA's previous NEPA regulations had been in place since 1980. Significant changes to the structure of FSA and the scope of FSA's programs require changes in FSA's NEPA regulations. The changes will also better align FSA's NEPA regulations with the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations and meet the FSA responsibilities for periodic review of their categorical exclusions (CatExs). CatExs involve proposed actions that typically do not result in individual or cumulative significant environmental effects or impacts and therefore do not merit further environmental review in an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The additions to the existing list of CatExs improves the clarity and consistency of the regulations. This final rule also expands and clarifies the list of proposed actions that require an EA. The FSA NEPA implementing regulations also cover the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) programs that FSA administers on behalf of CCC. In addition, this rule makes conforming changes to existing references to FSA NEPA regulations in other FSA regulations. The revisions to the FSA NEPA implementing regulations are intended to improve transparency and clarity of the FSA NEPA process for FSA program participants, and to provide for a more efficient environmental review that will lead to better decisions and outcomes for stakeholders and the environment. Finally, in coordination with the Rural Housing Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and Rural Utilities Service, this rule removes the old NEPA regulations.environmental-policies-and-procedures-compliance-with-the-national-environmental-policy-act-andFR-Doc-2016-18075
Importation of Sheep, Goats, and Certain Other RuminantsProposed Rule2016-1681607/18/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are proposing to amend the regulations that govern the importation of animals and animal products to revise the conditions for the importation of live sheep, goats, and certain other non-bovine ruminants, and products derived from s … We are proposing to amend the regulations that govern the importation of animals and animal products to revise the conditions for the importation of live sheep, goats, and certain other non-bovine ruminants, and products derived from sheep and goats, with regard to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and scrapie. We are proposing to remove BSE- related import restrictions on sheep and goats and most of their products, and to add import restrictions related to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies for certain wild, zoological, or other non- bovine ruminant species. The conditions we are proposing for the importation of specified commodities are based on internationally accepted scientific literature and will in general align our regulations with guidelines set out in the World Organization for Animal Health's Terrestrial Animal Health Code.importation-of-sheep-goats-and-certain-other-ruminantsFR-Doc-2016-16816
Importation of Bone-In Ovine Meat From UruguayProposed Rule2016-1562507/01/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are proposing to amend the regulations governing the importation of certain animals, meat, and other animal products by allowing, under certain conditions, the importation of bone-in ovine meat from Uruguay. Based on the evidence i … We are proposing to amend the regulations governing the importation of certain animals, meat, and other animal products by allowing, under certain conditions, the importation of bone-in ovine meat from Uruguay. Based on the evidence in a risk assessment that we have prepared, we believe that bone-in ovine meat can safely be imported from Uruguay provided certain conditions are met. This proposal would provide for the importation of bone-in ovine meat from Uruguay into the United States, while continuing to protect the United States against the introduction of foot-and-mouth disease.importation-of-bone-in-ovine-meat-from-uruguayFR-Doc-2016-15625
Civil Penalties Inflation AdjustmentsRule2016-1553406/30/2016DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORInterior DepartmentThis rule adjusts the level of civil monetary penalties contained in Indian Affairs regulations with an initial ``catch-up'' adjustment under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 and Office of M … This rule adjusts the level of civil monetary penalties contained in Indian Affairs regulations with an initial ``catch-up'' adjustment under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance.civil-penalties-inflation-adjustmentsFR-Doc-2016-15534
Use of Electronic Information Exchange Systems; Miscellaneous AmendmentsRule2016-1461606/21/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are amending our regulations regarding the importation or exportation of animals and animal products and plants and plant products to address instances where the current regulations require the use of a hard-copy form or specif … We are amending our regulations regarding the importation or exportation of animals and animal products and plants and plant products to address instances where the current regulations require the use of a hard-copy form or specify that a particular document must be submitted in writing. This final rule amends the regulations to provide the flexibility needed for persons to take advantage of electronic systems when a regulation has a limiting requirement. The amendments we are making in this final rule are not to mandate the use of electronic systems or preclude the use of paper documents; rather, they address those instances where our regulations specify a submission method to the exclusion of other methods.use-of-electronic-information-exchange-systems-miscellaneous-amendmentsFR-Doc-2016-14616
Livestock Mandatory Reporting: Revision of Lamb Reporting RequirementsRule2016-0404702/29/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentOn April 2, 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) implemented the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) program as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (1999 Act). … On April 2, 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) implemented the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) program as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (1999 Act). The LMR program was reauthorized in October 2006 and again in September 2010. On September 30, 2015, the Agriculture Reauthorizations Act of 2015 (2015 Reauthorization Act) reauthorized the LMR program for an additional 5 years and directed the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) to amend the LMR lamb reporting requirements by redefining terms within the Code of Federal Regulations not later than 180 days after enactment. This direct final rule incorporates the lamb reporting changes contained within the 2015 Reauthorization Act under the USDA LMR regulations.livestock-mandatory-reporting-revision-of-lamb-reporting-requirementsFR-Doc-2016-04047
Direct Farm Ownership Microloan; CorrectionRule2016-0427102/29/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentIn a final rule that was published and effective on January 21, 2016, we added Direct Farm Ownership Microloan (DFOML) to the existing Direct Loan Program. The final rule resulted in inadvertently omitting paragraphs that were previous … In a final rule that was published and effective on January 21, 2016, we added Direct Farm Ownership Microloan (DFOML) to the existing Direct Loan Program. The final rule resulted in inadvertently omitting paragraphs that were previously in the Farm Loan Programs general eligibility requirements. The inadvertently removed paragraphs specified alternatives for demonstrating managerial ability. This document corrects that omission by revising the section in the regulations to reinsert that text.direct-farm-ownership-microloan-correctionFR-Doc-2016-04271
Livestock Mandatory Reporting: Reauthorization of Livestock Mandatory Reporting and Revision of Swine and Lamb Reporting RequirementsProposed Rule2016-0395602/29/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentOn April 2, 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) implemented the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) program as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (1999 Act). … On April 2, 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) implemented the Livestock Mandatory Reporting (LMR) program as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (1999 Act). The LMR program was reauthorized in October 2006 and September 2010. On September 30, 2015, the Agriculture Reauthorizations Act of 2015 (2015 Reauthorization Act) reauthorized the LMR program for an additional 5 years until September 30, 2020, and directed the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) to amend the LMR swine reporting requirements. In addition, the lamb industry requested revisions to the lamb reporting requirements as authorized through the 1999 Act. This proposed rule would incorporate the requested lamb reporting revisions, and would incorporate the swine reporting revisions contained within the 2015 Reauthorization Act under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, USDA Livestock Mandatory Reporting regulations.livestock-mandatory-reporting-reauthorization-of-livestock-mandatory-reporting-and-revision-of-swineFR-Doc-2016-03956
Conditions for Payment of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Indemnity ClaimsRule2016-0253002/09/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are amending the regulations pertaining to certain diseases of livestock and poultry to specify conditions for payment of indemnity claims for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). Specifically, we are providing a formula th … We are amending the regulations pertaining to certain diseases of livestock and poultry to specify conditions for payment of indemnity claims for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). Specifically, we are providing a formula that will allow us to split such payments between poultry and egg owners and parties with which the owners enter into contracts to raise or care for the eggs or poultry based on the proportion of the production cycle completed. This action is necessary to ensure that all contractors are compensated appropriately. We are also providing for the payment of indemnity for eggs required to be destroyed due to HPAI, thus clarifying an existing policy. Finally, we are requiring owners and contractors, unless specifically exempted, to provide a statement that at the time of detection of HPAI in their facilities, they had in place and were following a biosecurity plan aimed at keeping HPAI from spreading to commercial premises.conditions-for-payment-of-highly-pathogenic-avian-influenza-indemnity-claimsFR-Doc-2016-02530
Direct Farm Ownership MicroloanRule2016-0103801/21/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentThe Farm Service Agency (FSA) is adding Direct Farm Ownership Microloan (DFOML) to the existing Direct Loan Program. The revisions to the Direct Loan Program regulations consist of application, eligibility, repayment terms, and secur … The Farm Service Agency (FSA) is adding Direct Farm Ownership Microloan (DFOML) to the existing Direct Loan Program. The revisions to the Direct Loan Program regulations consist of application, eligibility, repayment terms, and security requirements to better serve the unique operating needs of small family farm operations. The existing Microloans (ML) in the Direct Loan Program already include MLs for operating loans (OL). DFOML is expected to make farm ownership loans (FOs) available and more attractive to small operators through reduced application requirements, more timely application processing, and added flexibility for Youth Loan (YL) borrowers in meeting the farm experience eligibility requirement.direct-farm-ownership-microloanFR-Doc-2016-01038
Exportation of Live Animals, Hatching Eggs, and Animal Germplasm From the United StatesRule2016-0096201/20/2016DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are revising the regulations pertaining to the exportation of livestock from the United States. Among other things, we are removing most of the requirements for export health certifications, tests, and treatments from the regul … We are revising the regulations pertaining to the exportation of livestock from the United States. Among other things, we are removing most of the requirements for export health certifications, tests, and treatments from the regulations, and instead directing exporters to follow the requirements of the importing country regarding such processes and procedures. We are retaining only those export health certification, testing, and treatment requirements that we consider necessary to have assurances regarding the health and welfare of livestock exported from the United States. We also are allowing pre- export inspection of livestock to occur at facilities other than an export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation, under certain circumstances, and replacing specific standards for export inspection facilities and ocean vessels with performance standards. These changes will provide exporters and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) with more flexibility in arranging for the export of livestock from the United States while continuing to ensure the health and welfare of the livestock. Additionally, if APHIS knows that an importing country requires an export health certificate endorsed by the competent veterinary authority of the United States for any animal other than livestock, including pets, or for any hatching eggs or animal germplasm, we are requiring that the animal, hatching eggs, or animal germplasm have such a health certificate to be eligible for export from the United States. This change will help ensure that all animals, hatching eggs, and animal germplasm exported from the United States meet the health requirements of the countries to which they are destined. Finally, we are making editorial amendments to the regulations to make them easier to understand and comply with.exportation-of-live-animals-hatching-eggs-and-animal-germplasm-from-the-united-statesFR-Doc-2016-00962
Brucellosis and Bovine Tuberculosis; Update of General ProvisionsProposed Rule2015-3151012/16/2015DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREAgriculture DepartmentWe are proposing to consolidate the regulations governing bovine tuberculosis, and those governing brucellosis. As part of this consolidation, we are proposing to transition the tuberculosis and brucellosis programs away from a State c … We are proposing to consolidate the regulations governing bovine tuberculosis, and those governing brucellosis. As part of this consolidation, we are proposing to transition the tuberculosis and brucellosis programs away from a State classification system based in disease prevalence. Instead, States and Tribes would implement animal health plans that identify sources of the diseases within the State or Tribal lands and specify mitigations to address the risk posed by those sources. The consolidated regulations would also set forth standards for surveillance, epidemiological investigations, and affected herd management that must be incorporated into each animal health plan, with certain limited exceptions; would provide revised conditions for the interstate movement of cattle, bison, and captive cervids; and would provide revised conditions for APHIS approval of tests, testing laboratories, and testers for bovine tuberculosis or brucellosis. Finally, we are proposing to revise the bovine tuberculosis- and brucellosis-related import requirements for cattle and bison to make these requirements clearer and assure that they more effectively mitigate the risk of introduction of these diseases into the United States.brucellosis-and-bovine-tuberculosis-update-of-general-provisionsFR-Doc-2015-31510
[xt_go_advt_2]
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *