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.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

37213 

Vol. 86, No. 133 

Thursday, July 15, 2021 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 925 

[Doc. No. AMS–SC–20–0093; SC21–925–1 

FR] 

Grapes Grown in a Designated Area of 

Southeastern California; Increased 

Assessment Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule implements a 

recommendation from the California 

Desert Grape Administrative Committee 

(Committee) to increase the assessment 

rate established for the 2021 and 

subsequent fiscal periods. The 

assessment rate will remain in effect 

indefinitely unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated. 

DATES: Effective August 16, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bianca Bertrand, Management and 

Program Analyst, or Gary D. Olson, 

Regional Director, California Marketing 

Field Office, Marketing Order and 

Agreement Division, Specialty Crops 

Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 

487–5901 or Email: BiancaM.Bertrand@

usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Richard Lower, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, or Email: Richard.Lower@

usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, 

implements an amendment to 

regulations issued to carry out a 

marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 

900.2(j). This rule is issued under 

Marketing Agreement and Order No. 

925, as amended (7 CFR part 925), 

regulating the handling of grapes grown 

in a designated area of southeastern 

California. Part 925 (referred to as the 

‘‘Order’’) is effective under the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), 

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ The 

Committee locally administers the 

Order and is comprised of producers 

and handlers of grapes operating within 

the production area, and a public 

member. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this final rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866 and 13563. Executive Orders 

12866 and 13563 direct agencies to 

assess all costs and benefits of available 

regulatory alternatives and, if regulation 

is necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts and equity). 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, reducing costs, 

harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. This action falls within a 

category of regulatory actions that the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) exempted from Executive Order 

12866 review. 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 13175— 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments, which 

requires agencies to consider whether 

their rulemaking actions would have 

tribal implications. AMS has 

determined this final rule is unlikely to 

have substantial direct effects on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Under the Order now in effect, 

grape handlers in the production area 

are subject to assessments. Funds to 

administer the Order are derived from 

such assessments. It is intended that the 

assessment rate be applicable to all 

assessable grapes for the 2021 fiscal 

period and continue until amended, 

suspended, or terminated. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. Such a 

handler is afforded the opportunity for 

a hearing on the petition. After the 

hearing, USDA would rule on the 

petition. The Act provides that the 

district court of the United States in any 

district in which the handler is an 

inhabitant, or has his or her principal 

place of business, has jurisdiction to 

review USDA’s ruling on the petition, 

provided an action is filed no later than 

20 days after the date of the entry of the 

ruling. 

This rule increases the assessment 

rate from $0.020 per 18-pound lug of 

assessable grapes handled, the rate that 

was established for the 2018 and 

subsequent fiscal periods, to $0.040 per 

18-pound lug of assessable grapes 

handled for the 2021 and subsequent 

fiscal periods. 

The Order authorizes the Committee, 

with the approval of USDA, to formulate 

an annual budget of expenses and 

collect assessments from handlers to 

administer the program. The members 

are familiar with the Committee’s needs 

and with the costs of goods and services 

in their local area and are in a position 

to formulate an appropriate budget and 

assessment rate. The assessment rate is 

formulated and discussed in a public 

meeting. Thus, all directly affected 

persons have an opportunity to 

participate and provide input. 

For the 2018 and subsequent fiscal 

periods, the Committee recommended, 

and USDA approved, an assessment rate 

of $0.020 per 18-pound lug of assessable 

grapes handled. That assessment rate 

continued in effect from fiscal period to 

fiscal period until modified, suspended, 

or terminated by USDA upon 

recommendation and information 

submitted by the Committee or other 

information available to USDA. 

The Committee met on November 4, 

2020, and unanimously recommended 

expenditures of $85,500, and an 

assessment rate of $0.040 per 18-pound 

lug of assessable grapes handled for the 

2021 and subsequent fiscal periods. In 

comparison, the previous fiscal period’s 

budgeted expenditures were $121,100. 

The assessment rate of $0.040 is $0.020 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
37214 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

higher than the rate currently in effect. 

The Committee recommended 

increasing the assessment rate to 

provide adequate income to cover the 

Committee’s budgeted expenses for the 

2021 fiscal period, as well as add funds 

to the contingency reserve. Funds in the 

reserve are expected to be 

approximately $50,100 at the end of the 

2021 fiscal period, which is within the 

Order’s requirement to carryover no 

more than approximately one fiscal 

period’s budgeted expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2021 fiscal period include $50,000 for 

management and compliance expenses, 

$19,500 for direct office expenses, and 

$16,000 for shared office, facilities, and 

maintenance expenses. 

Budgeted expenses for the 2020 fiscal 

period were $56,000 for management 

and compliance expenses, $28,500 for 

production research, $20,700 for direct 

office expenses, and $15,900 for shared 

office, facilities, and maintenance 

expenses. 

In 2020, the Committee determined 

that the contingency reserve fund had 

grown too large, so the Committee used 

$37,100 from the reserve to help fund 

the 2020 budget rather than raise the 

assessment rate. 

The Committee derived the 

recommended assessment rate by 

considering anticipated expenses, an 

estimated crop of 2.5 million 18-pound 

lugs of assessable grapes, and the 

amount of funds available in the 

authorized contingency reserve. Income 

derived from handler assessments, 

calculated at $100,000 (2.5 million 18- 

pound lugs of assessable grapes 

multiplied by $0.040 assessment rate), is 

expected to be adequate to cover 

budgeted expenses of $85,500, as well 

as add a small amount of funds 

($14,500) back into the contingency 

reserve. Funds in the reserve are 

estimated to be $50,100 at the end of the 

2021 fiscal period. 

The assessment rate established in 

this rule will continue in effect 

indefinitely unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated by USDA 

upon recommendation and information 

submitted by the Committee or other 

available information. 

Although this assessment rate will be 

in effect for an indefinite period, the 

Committee will continue to meet prior 

to or during each fiscal period to 

recommend a budget of expenses and 

consider recommendations for 

modification of the assessment rate. The 

dates and times of Committee meetings 

will be available from the Committee or 

USDA. Committee meetings are open to 

the public and interested persons may 

express their views at these meetings. 

USDA will evaluate Committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking would be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

Committee’s 2021 fiscal period budget, 

and those for subsequent fiscal periods, 

will be reviewed and, as appropriate, 

approved by USDA. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

rule on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this final regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to such actions in 

order that small businesses will not be 

unduly or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

There are approximately 10 handlers 

subject to the regulation under the 

Order, and approximately 21 producers 

of grapes in the production area. Small 

agricultural producers are defined by 

the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) as those having annual receipts of 

less than $1,000,000, and small 

agricultural service firms have been 

defined as those whose annual receipts 

are less than $30,000,000 (13 CFR 

121.201). 

According to the Committee data, 

USDA Market News Shipping Point 

Data, and National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS), the national 

average producer price data released in 

2020 for the 2019 production year was 

approximately $10.62 per 18-pound lug. 

Assuming that the 2020 producer price 

remains the same as that for 2019 and 

using Committee data for the 2020 total 

grape production of 2,448,021 18-pound 

lugs, the total 2020 value of the grape 

crop was $25,997,983 (2,448,021 18- 

pound lugs times $10.62 per 18-pound 

lug equals $25,997,983). Dividing the 

total grape crop value by the estimated 

number of producers (21) yields an 

estimated average receipt per producer 

of $1,237,999, which is above the SBA 

threshold for small producers. 

According to USDA Market News 

data, the reported terminal price for 

2020 for grapes ranged between $18.95 

to $24.95 per 18-pound lug. The average 

of this range is $21.95 ($18.95 plus 

$24.95 divided by 2). Multiplying the 

2020 grape total production of 2,448,021 

18-pound lugs by the estimated average 

price per 18-pound lug of $21.95 equals 

$53,734,061. 

Dividing this figure by 10 regulated 

handlers yields estimated average 

annual handler receipts of $5,373,406, 

which is below the SBA threshold for 

small agricultural service firms. 

Therefore, using the above data and 

assuming a normal distribution, the 

majority of producers may be 

considered large entities while the 

majority of handlers in the production 

area may be classified as small entities. 

Based upon information from NASS, 

the grower price reported for grapes in 

2019 was $1,180 per ton ($10.62 per 18- 

pound lug) of grapes. In order to 

determine the estimated assessment 

revenue as a percentage of the total 

grower revenue, we calculate the 

assessment rate ($0.040 per 18-pound 

lug) times the estimated production 

(2,500,000 18-pound lugs), which equals 

the assessment revenue of $100,000. 

The grower revenue is calculated by 

multiplying the grower price of $10.62 

per 18-pound lug times the estimated 

production (2,500,000 18-pound lugs), 

which equals the grower revenue of 

$26,550,000. 

In the final step, dividing the 

assessment revenue by the grower 

revenue indicates that, for the 2021 

fiscal period, the estimated assessment 

revenue as a percentage of total grower 

revenue would be about 0.38 percent. 

This rule increases the assessment 

rate collected from handlers for the 2021 

and subsequent fiscal periods from 

$0.020 to $0.040 per 18-pound lug of 

assessable grapes handled. The 

Committee unanimously recommended 

2021 expenditures of $85,500 and an 

assessment rate of $0.040 per 18-pound 

lug of assessable grapes handled. The 

assessment rate of $0.040 per 18-pound 

lug of assessable grapes handled is 

$0.020 higher than the rate currently in 

effect. The volume of assessable grapes 

for the 2021 fiscal period is estimated to 

be 2,500,000 18-pound lugs. Thus, the 

$0.040 per 18-pound lug of assessable 

grapes handled should provide 

$100,000 in assessment income 

(2,500,000 multiplied by $0.040). 

Therefore, income derived from handler 

assessments is expected to be adequate 

to cover budgeted expenses for the 2021 

fiscal period. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2021 fiscal period include $50,000 for 

management and compliance expenses, 

$19,500 for direct office expenses, and 

$16,000 for shared office, facilities, and 

maintenance expenses. Budgeted 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 37215 

expenses for the 2020 fiscal period were 

$56,000 for management and 

compliance, $28,500 for production 

research, $20,700 for direct office, and 

$15,900 for shared office, facilities, and 

maintenance. 

The Committee recommended 

increasing the assessment rate to 

provide adequate income to cover the 

Committee’s budgeted expenses for the 

2021 fiscal period, while adding funds 

to its financial reserve. This action is 

expected to maintain the Committee’s 

reserve balance at a level that the 

Committee believes is appropriate and 

meets the requirements of the Order. 

Prior to arriving at this budget and 

assessment rate recommendation, the 

Committee discussed various 

alternatives, including maintaining the 

current assessment rate of $0.020 per 

18-pound lug of assessable grapes 

handled, and increasing the assessment 

rate by a different amount. However, the 

Committee determined that the 

recommended assessment rate should 

fully fund budgeted expenses and add 

funds to the contingency reserve. 

This rule increases the assessment 

obligation imposed on handlers. 

Assessments are applied uniformly on 

all handlers, and some of the costs may 

be passed on to producers. However, 

these costs are expected to be offset by 

the benefits derived by the operation of 

the Order. 

The Committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the industry. All 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meeting and encouraged to 

participate in Committee deliberations 

on all issues. Like all Committee 

meetings, the November 4, 2020, 

meeting was a public meeting, and all 

entities, both large and small, had an 

opportunity to express views on this 

issue. Finally, interested persons were 

invited to submit comments on this 

rule, including the regulatory and 

information collection impacts of this 

action on small businesses. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35), the Order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by OMB and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Fruit 

Crops. No changes in those 

requirements will be necessary as a 

result of this rule. Should any changes 

become necessary, they would be 

submitted to OMB for approval. 

This rule will not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

southeastern California grape handlers. 

As with all Federal marketing order 

programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. USDA has not 

identified any relevant Federal rules 

that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with 

this final rule. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

A proposed rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on March 26, 2021 (86 FR 

16085). Copies of the proposal were 

provided by the Committee to producers 

and handlers. Finally, the proposed rule 

was made available through the internet 

by USDA and the Office of the Federal 

Register. A 45-day comment period 

ending May 10, 2021, was provided to 

allow interested persons to respond to 

the proposal. Seven comments were 

received. 

Five of the comments received were 

in favor of the assessment rate increase 

and two were neither in favor nor 

opposed to the proposal. 

Four of the five comments in favor 

were generally supportive of the 

assessment rate. The other comment in 

favor appeared to misunderstand the 

rule’s merits, the parties affected, and its 

potential impact on the industry, but 

was nonetheless supportive of the 

action. 

Two of the comments referenced the 

consideration of small businesses and 

the impact of this rule. One of the 

comments incorrectly assumed that 

small businesses would pay a lower 

assessment rate than their larger 

counterparts. The comment also 

believed that assessments were paid by 

‘‘producers/growers’’ and suggested that 

such assessments be proportionate to 

their production. 

As previously discussed in the rule, 

assessments are paid only by handlers 

and such assessments are applied 

uniformly regardless of the size of the 

handler based on the volume of product 

that they handle. As stated above, and 

in the proposed rule, some of the 

increased cost of assessment may be 

passed on to producers, but such costs 

are believed to be offset by the benefits 

derived by the operation of the Order. 

In addition, a RFA analysis was 

conducted by USDA in consideration of 

this action to ensure that the regulatory 

action fits the scale of businesses subject 

to the action and that small businesses 

will not be unduly or disproportionately 

burdened by it. 

One comment raised questions 

regarding what grapes are assessable 

under this rule. Further, the comment 

requested clarity in the role of the 

Committee in recommending the 

assessment increase and the 

Committee’s public outreach to ensure 

that all interested parties were able to 

provide input. 

Under the Order, only grapes 

produced within the production area as 

defined in the Order are subject to 

assessment. Also prescribed by the 

Order, the Committee is the 

administrative body duly appointed by 

USDA to oversee the Order’s operation. 

The Committee is made up of producers 

and handlers operating within the 

production area, and a public member. 

As such, Committee members are 

familiar with the program’s needs and 

with the costs of goods and services in 

their local area. They are, therefore, in 

a position to formulate an appropriate 

budget and to recommend the 

assessment rate. Committee actions are 

recommended at public meetings where 

the meetings have been duly posted and 

promoted throughout the industry and 

all industry participants are encouraged 

to attend and provide input. 

Two comments mistakenly associated 

the assessment rate increase with 

COVID–19 and California wildfire relief 

efforts that would provide economic 

stimulus for the desert grape industry. 

This action is not correlated with any 

external event or events, nor any 

economic challenges that may have 

been precipitated by such events. The 

assessment rate increase is related only 

to the cost of the Committee’s budgeted 

expenditures for the upcoming year and 

the projected size of the desert grape 

crop for that year. 

One comment questioned why excess 

assessments collected are held over in a 

financial reserve fund and requested 

more information with regards to what 

happens with these funds. 

Section 925.42 provides the authority 

for the Committee to hold excess funds 

as a reserve against future expenditures. 

The Committee may hold no more than 

approximately one fiscal period’s 

expenses in reserve. Funds held in 

reserve are primarily to be used to: (1) 

Defray expenses, during any fiscal 

period, prior to the time the assessment 

income is sufficient to cover such 

expenses; and (2) cover deficits incurred 

during any fiscal period when 

assessment income is less than 

expenses. 

Lastly, one comment suggested that 

the assessment rate should only be 

established for one year and that the rate 

should be reassessed at the end of that 

period. The commentor felt that one 

year would allow the Committee to 

collect data to assess the impact of the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
37216 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

1See: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/ 

connect/db2ac10c-7b92-4bb4-a0d3-885641738711/ 

Petition-YAK-112014.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. 

2 IYAK asked that the supporting data remain 

confidential because it contains proprietary 

information. 

3See: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/ 

connect/aa5f69d7-ddc6-44bc-9ff3-bc9489fcd338/ 

IYAK-FSIS-response-120314.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. 

4See: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/ 

connect/c109452f-4497-4144-815e-6a382b94a113/ 

FSIS-Final-Response-IAK080315.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. 

increase and determine whether it 

should be continued in the future. 

As stated above and in the proposed 

rule, while the assessment rate is 

effective for an indefinite period of time, 

the Committee will continue to meet 

prior to or during each fiscal period to 

recommend a budget of expenses and 

consider recommendations for 

modification of the assessment rate. 

USDA will evaluate Committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Notice and comment 

rulemaking to adjust the assessment rate 

would be undertaken as necessary. 

Accordingly, no changes will be made 

to the rule as proposed. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: https://www.ams.

usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/smallbusinesses. Any questions about the 

compliance guide should be sent to 

Richard Lower at the previously 

mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Committee and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that this rule will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 925 

Grapes, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 925 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 925—GRAPES GROWN IN A 

DESIGNATED AREA OF 

SOUTHEASTERN CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 925 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 925.215 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 925.215 Assessment rate. 

On and after January 1, 2021, an 

assessment rate of $0.040 per 18-pound 

lug is established for grapes grown in a 

designated area of southeastern 

California. 

Bruce Summers, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–14731 Filed 7–14–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Food Safety and Inspection Service 

9 CFR Part 352 

[Docket No. FSIS–2019–0028] 

RIN 0583–AD73 

Inspection of Yak and Other Bovidae, 

Cervidae, and Camelidae Species 

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection 

Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and 

Inspection Service (FSIS) is amending 

its regulations to define yak and include 

it among ‘‘exotic animals’’ eligible for 

voluntary inspection under 9 CFR part 

352. This change is in response to a 

petition for rulemaking from a yak 

industry association, which FSIS 

granted in 2015. Additionally, FSIS is 

revising the definitions of antelope, 

bison, buffalo, catalo, deer, elk, 

reindeer, and water buffalo to make 

them more scientifically accurate. 

Moreover, FSIS is responding to 

comments on whether all farmed-raised 

species in the biological families 

Bovidae, Cervidae, and Camelidae, if 

not already subject to mandatory 

inspection, should be eligible for 

voluntary inspection, and whether any 

species in these families should be 

added to the list of amenable species 

requiring mandatory inspection. 

DATES: Effective September 13, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rachel Edelstein, Assistant 

Administrator, Office of Policy and 

Program Development by telephone at 

(202) 205–0495. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 1, 2020, FSIS proposed to 

amend its regulations (9 CFR 352.1) to 

add yak to its list of ‘‘exotic animals’’ 

eligible for voluntary inspection (85 FR 

33034, June 1, 2020). FSIS proposed to 

define yak as a long-haired bovid animal 

originally found throughout the 

Himalaya region of southern Central 

Asia and the Tibetan Plateau. The 

proposed rule explained that while yak 

was not listed in the regulations as an 

‘‘exotic animal,’’ the Agency has 

inspected yak under its voluntary 

program for several years. 

As FSIS explained in the proposed 

rule, on September 3, 2014, the 

International Yak Association (IYAK) 

submitted a petition for rulemaking,1

under 9 CFR part 392, requesting that 

FSIS amend 9 CFR 352.1(k) to include 

yak under the definition of an ‘‘exotic 

animal.’’ The petitioner stated that 

because FSIS had voluntarily inspected 

yak for many years, it had created an 

expectation among breeders and buyers 

that FSIS would continue to inspect 

yak. On November 21, 2014, IYAK 

submitted additional supporting data.2

IYAK had surveyed United States yak 

producers and found that continued 

FSIS inspection of yak meat was critical 

to the industry as a whole. 

After reviewing the petition and 

supporting data, FSIS decided to grant 

the petition, and stated that it would 

continue to voluntarily inspect yak 

while FSIS went through rulemaking to 

add yak to the list of exotic animals 

eligible for voluntary inspection.3 4

In the proposed rule, FSIS also 

requested comments on whether the 

regulations should be amended to list as 

eligible for voluntary inspection all 

farm-raised species in the biological 

families Cervidae (e.g., moose, all deer 

and elk), all Bovidae not currently 

subject to mandatory inspection (e.g., 

water buffalo and impalas), and 

Camelidae (e.g., camel, llama, and 

alpaca). And, based on interest from 

stakeholders, FSIS requested comment 

as to whether any species in these 

families, if not currently subject to 

mandatory inspection, should be. FSIS 

already requires the inspection of some 

species of the biological family Bovidae 

under the Federal Meat Inspection Act 

(FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601(w)). These 

species include cattle, sheep, and goats. 

After considering the comments 

received on the proposed rule, 

discussed below, FSIS is finalizing the 

proposed rule with some changes. In 

response to public comment, the final 

rule will also amend 9 CFR 352.1 to 

revise the definitions of antelope (9 CFR 

352.1(c)), bison (9 CFR 352.1 (e)), 

buffalo (9 CFR 352.1(f)), catalo (9 CFR 

352.1(g)), deer (9 CFR 352.1(j)), elk (9 

CFR 352.1(l)), reindeer (9 CFR 352.1(x)), 

and water buffalo (9 CFR 352.1(aa)) to 

make them more taxonomically 

accurate. 

Responses to Comments 

FSIS received seven comments from 

individuals, a yak producer, and a llama 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES