Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 65747

the acreage will be the harvested production,

or our reappraisal if the crop is not harvested;

and

(2) All harvested production from the

insurable acreage.

(e) Mature production of smooth green and

yellow peas, lentils, and seed peas that do

not qualify as contract seed peas under the

policy terms, and that are not deliverable

under the contract or are sold under the

contract for less than the contract price, may

be adjusted for quality deficiencies. No

adjustment for quality deficiencies will be

allowed for Austrian Winter Peas.

(1) Production will be eligible for quality

adjustment if:

(i) Deficiencies in quality, in accordance

with the United States Standards for Whole

Dry Peas, Split Peas, and Lentils, result in

production grading U.S. No. 2 or worse

because of defects, color, skinned production

(lentils only), odor, material weathering, or

distinctly low quality; or

(ii) Substances or conditions are present

that are identified by the Food and Drug

Administration or other public health

organizations of the United States as being

injurious to human or animal health.

(2) Quality will be a factor in determining

your loss only if:

(i) The deficiencies, substances, or

conditions resulted from a cause of loss

against which insurance is provided under

these Crop Provisions and which occurs

within the insurance period;

(ii) The deficiencies, substances, or

conditions result in a net price for the

damaged production that is less than the

local market price;

(iii) All determinations of these

deficiencies, substances, or conditions are

made using samples of the production

obtained by us or by a disinterested third

party approved by us; and

(iv) The samples are analyzed by a grader

licensed to grade dry peas under the

authority of the United States Agricultural

Marketing Act or the United States

Warehouse Act with regard to deficiencies in

quality, or by a laboratory approved by us

with regard to substances or conditions

injurious to human or animal health. Test

weight for quality adjustment purposes may

be determined by our loss adjuster.

(3) Dry Pea production that is eligible for

quality adjustment, as specified in sections

12(e) (1) and (2), will be reduced as follows:

(i) The highest local market price for the

qualifying damaged production will be

determined on the earlier of the date such

damaged production is sold or the date of

final inspection for the unit. The highest

local market price for the qualifying damaged

production will be determined in the local

area to the extent feasible. We may obtain

prices from any buyer of our choice. If we

obtain prices from one or more buyers

located outside your local market area, we

will reduce such prices by the additional

costs required to deliver the dry peas to those

buyers. Discounts used to establish the net

value of the damaged production will be

limited to those that are usual, customary,

and reasonable.

The value will not be reduced for:

(A) Moisture content;

(B) Damage due to uninsured causes; or

(C) Drying, handling, processing, or any

other costs associated with normal

harvesting, handling, and marketing of the

dry peas; except, if the value of the damaged

production can be increased by conditioning,

we may reduce the value of the production

after it has been conditioned by the cost of

conditioning but not lower than the value of

the production before conditioning;

(ii) The value per pound of the damaged

or conditioned production will be divided by

the local market price to determine the

quality adjustment factor;

(iii) The number of pounds of the damaged

or conditioned production will then be

multiplied by the quality adjustment factor to

determine the production count to be

included in section 12(d); and

(iv) Any production harvested from plants

growing in the insured crop may be counted

as production of the insured crop on a weight

basis.

13. Prevented Planting.

Your prevented planting coverage will be

60 percent of your production guarantee for

timely planted acreage. If you have limited or

additional levels of coverage as specified in

7 CFR part 400, subpart T, and pay an

additional premium, you may increase your

prevented planting coverage to a level

specified in the actuarial documents.

Signed in Washington, D.C., on December

9, 1997.

Kenneth D. Ackerman,

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 97–32619 Filed 12–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–08–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Part 94

[Docket No. 97–034–3]

Change in Disease Status of The

Netherlands Because of BSE

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as

final rule.

SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final

rule, without change, an interim rule

that added The Netherlands to the list

of countries where bovine spongiform

encephalopathy (BSE) exists. We took

this action because BSE was detected in

a cow in The Netherlands. The effect of

the interim rule was to prohibit or

restrict the importation of live

ruminants and certain fresh, chilled,

and frozen meat, and certain other

animal products and animal byproducts

from ruminants which have been in The

Netherlands. The interim rule was

necessary to reduce the risk that BSE

could be introduced into the United

States.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The interim rule was

effective on March 21, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

John Cougill, Staff Veterinarian, Animal

Products Program, National Center for

Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700

River Road Unit 40, Riverdale, MD

20737–1231, (301) 734–3399; or e-mail:

jcougill@aphis.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In an interim rule effective April 10,

1997, and published in the Federal

Register on April 15, 1997 (62 FR

18263–18264, Docket No. 97–034–1), we

amended our regulations by adding The

Netherlands to the list of countries

where BSE exists. We took this action

because BSE was detected in a cow born

in The Netherlands. We also published

another interim rule in the Federal

Register on May 7, 1997 (62 FR 24802,

Docket No. 97–034–2), that changed the

effective date of the April 1997 interim

rule from April 10, 1997, to March 21,

1997. The change in effective date was

necessary to ensure that the prohibitions

and restrictions established by the April

1997 interim rule applied to animal

products and byproducts that were

shipped to the United States from The

Netherlands between March 21, 1997,

when BSE was detected in The

Netherlands, and April 10, 1997, when

the first interim rule was signed.

Comments on the interim rule were

required to be received on or before June

16, 1997. We received two comments by

that date. They were from a company

that imports cattle semen and an

importer of meat and meat byproducts.

They are discussed below.

The commenters did not oppose

adding The Netherlands to the list of

countries where BSE exists. However,

one comment expressed concerns about

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service regulations that restrict the

importation of veal from countries

where BSE is known to exist. The other

comment concerned the trade protocols

of the United States and other countries

for importing cattle semen from

countries where BSE exists. Both

comments are outside the scope of the

interim rule. However, we continually

review and update our regulations to

make them consistent with current

scientific data. We will consider these

comments as we review our regulations.

If we decide to make any changes to our

regulations in response to these

comments, we will publish a proposed

rule in the Federal Register.
65748 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Therefore, based on the rationale set

forth in the April 1997 interim rule, we

are affirming the provisions of the

interim rule without change.

This action also affirms the

information contained in the interim

rule concerning Executive Orders 12866

and 12988 and the Paperwork

Reduction Act.

Further, for this action, the Office of

Management and Budget has waived the

review process required by Executive

Order 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule affirms an interim rule that

amended our regulations by adding The

Netherlands to the list of countries

where BSE exists. We took this action

because BSE was detected in a cow in

that country. The effect of the interim

rule was to prohibit or restrict the

importation of certain fresh, chilled, and

frozen meat, and certain other animal

products and animal byproducts from

ruminants which have been in The

Netherlands. The interim rule was

necessary to reduce the risk that BSE

could be introduced into the United

States.

BSE is a slowly progressing fatal

degenerative disease that affects the

central nervous system of cattle. The

disease was first diagnosed in 1986 in

Great Britain, where it is sometimes

called ‘‘mad cow disease.’’ Infected

animals may display changes in

temperament, abnormal posture,

incoordination and difficulty in rising,

decreased milk production, and loss of

body condition despite continued

appetite. The causative agent of BSE is

not completely characterized, and there

is no treatment for the disease. At the

current time, the disease is not known

to exist in the United States. There is no

vaccine to prevent BSE nor is there a

test to detect the disease in live animals.

Given those factors, the import

restrictions imposed by the interim rule

are the most effective means available

for ensuring that BSE does not enter the

United States from The Netherlands.

Preventing the introduction of BSE

into the United States is critical. In

addition to the potential threat to public

health, BSE also has the potential to

cause severe economic hardship for the

U.S. livestock industry. Great Britain’s

experience with the disease provides an

insight into how damaging BSE can be

to livestock. Between November 1986

(when BSE was first diagnosed in Great

Britain) and May 1996, an estimated

160,540 head of cattle in approximately

33,455 herds were diagnosed with BSE

in Great Britain. The epidemic peaked

there in January 1993, with almost 1,000

new cases per week. All of the animals

in Great Britain showing signs of BSE,

most of which were dairy cows between

3 and 5 years of age, were destroyed.

If BSE were introduced into the

United States, livestock losses would

likely be much greater than in Great

Britain, because the United States raises

more cattle. However, assuming the

same number of cattle losses in the

United States as in Great Britain

(160,540), the introduction of BSE into

the United States would cost U.S.

livestock producers $177 million, based

on the current price of $1,100 per head

for dairy cows. The $177 million figure

does not include higher production

costs that would likely be incurred by

U.S. producers, due to the presence of

the disease.

U.S. export and consumer markets

would also be affected. The United

States currently restricts the importation

of live ruminants and ruminant

products from all countries where BSE

is known to exist. Presumably, if BSE

were introduced into the United States,

other countries would adopt similar

restrictions on the exportation of live

ruminants and ruminant products from

the United States. Such restrictions by

other countries would be devastating

economically. In 1993, for example, the

dollar value of U.S. exports of both

bovine animals and bovine animal meat

totaled $2.1 billion. Those export sales

could be lost in their entirety.

Consumers would incur higher costs

due to higher prices for ruminant

products and increased prices for

competitive products, such as poultry.

We expect that restricting the

importation of live ruminants and

ruminant products from The

Netherlands will have little or no

impact on U.S. consumers. This is

because The Netherlands does not

export live ruminants to the United

States. Also, U.S. imports of ruminant

products from The Netherlands are

minimal when compared against total

U.S. imports or overall U.S. supply

(imported and domestically produced)

of those commodities. In 1996, the

volume of ruminant products imported

from The Netherlands, categorized into

seven broad product groups, was as

follows: 149,906 kilograms (kg) of fresh

or frozen beef with bone; 2,060 kg of

prepared or preserved beef; 307,259 kg

of variety meats; 458 cattle embryos;

3,016,847 kg of miscellaneous animal

products; and 1,587,244 kg of animal

feed. These seven product groups

represent 40 subcategories of products

imported from The Netherlands. For

most subcategories, The Netherlands’

share of the total U.S. imports of that

product was 1 percent or less. The

Netherlands’ share exceeded 10 percent

of the total U.S. imports in only 5

subcategories. However, even for those

5 product subcategories, The

Netherlands’ share of overall U.S.

supply was not significant. Because The

Netherlands is not a significant supply

source for the U.S. market, restrictions

on imports from The Netherlands

should not have a significant effect on

consumer prices in the United States.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act

requires that agencies consider the

economic impact of rule changes on

small entities. We expect the interim

rule will have little or no impact on

small entities in the United States

because imports of ruminants and

ruminant products from The

Netherlands affected by this interim rule

have been minimal in the past. Small

brokers, agents, and others in the United

States who are directly involved in the

importation and sale of ruminant

products from The Netherlands should

be able to obtain substitutes from

alternative sources. We were unable to

determine the number of small entities

engaged in these activities.

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.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,

Meat and meat products, Milk, Poultry

and poultry products, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

PART 94—RINDERPEST, FOOT-ANDMOUTH DISEASE, FOWL PEST (FOWL

PLAGUE), EXOTIC NEWCASTLE

DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER,

HOG CHOLERA, AND BOVINE

SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY:

PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED

IMPORTATIONS

Accordingly, we are adopting as a

final rule, without change, the interim

rule that amended 9 CFR part 94 and

that was published at 62 FR 18263–

18264 on April 15, 1997.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 147a, 150ee, 161, 162,

and 450; 19 U.S.C. 1306, 21 U.S.C. 111, 114a,

134a, 134b, 134c, 134f, 136, and 136a; 31

U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4331 and 4332; 7 CFR

2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of

December 1997.

Craig A. Reed,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–32779 Filed 12–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P