13896 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(a)(1) of this section: Provided, that if a

dealer or exhibitor who uses a

computerized recordkeeping system

believes that APHIS Form 7005/VS

Form 18–5 and APHIS Form 7006/VS

Form 18–6 are unsuitable for him or her

to make, keep, and maintain the

information required by paragraph (a)(1)

of this section, the dealer or exhibitor

may request a variance from the

requirement to use APHIS Form 7005/

VS Form 18–5 and APHIS Form 7006/

VS Form 18–6.

(i) The request for a variance must

consist of a written statement describing

why APHIS Form 7005/VS Form 18–5

and APHIS Form 7006/VS Form 18–6

are unsuitable for the dealer or exhibitor

to make, keep, and maintain the

information required by paragraph (a)(1)

of this section, and a description of the

computerized recordkeeping system the

person would use in lieu of APHIS

Form 7005/VS Form 18–5 and APHIS

Form 7006/VS Form 18–6 to make,

keep, and maintain the information

required by paragraph (a)(1) of this

section. APHIS will advise the person as

to the disposition of his or her request

for a variance from the requirement to

use APHIS Form 7005/VS Form 18–5

and APHIS Form 7006/VS Form 18–6.

(ii) A dealer or exhibitor whose

request for a variance has been denied

may request a hearing in accordance

with the applicable rules of practice for

the purpose of showing why the request

for a variance should not be denied. The

denial of the variance shall remain in

effect until the final legal decision has

been rendered.

* * * * *

§ 2.78 [Amended]

9. In § 2.78, paragraph (d) is amended

by adding the words ‘‘APHIS Form

7001/’’ immediately before the words

‘‘VS Form 18–1’’.

§ 2.102 [Amended]

10. In § 2.102, paragraph (a)(3), the

beginning of the second sentence is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Veterinary Services’’ and adding the

words ‘‘APHIS Form 7009/VS’’ in their

place.

Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of

March 1995.

Terry L. Medley,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 95–6369 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

9 CFR Parts 91 and 92

[Docket No. 94–076–1]

Cattle Imported In-Bond for Feeding

and Return to Mexico

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Interim rule and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: We are amending the animal

exportation and importation regulations

by removing provisions that allow the

temporary, in-bond importation of cattle

from Mexico into the United States for

feeding and return to Mexico for

slaughter. We are taking this action

because the U.S. Customs Service, to

comply with provisions of the North

American Free Trade Agreement, has

discontinued its collection of duties and

bonds on cattle imported into the

United States from Mexico. Without a

bond, we are unable to meaningfully

penalize importers who fail to return

those cattle to Mexico. We believe,

therefore, that the current in-bond

program must be terminated to prevent

the dissemination into the United States

of animal diseases by in-bond cattle that

remain in the United States in violation

of the regulations.

DATES: Interim rule effective March 30,

1995. Consideration will be given only

to comments received on or before May

15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

APHIS, PPD, Regulatory Analysis and

Development, 4700 River Road Unit

118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. Please

state that your comments refer to Docket

No. 94–076–1. Comments received may

be inspected at USDA, room 1141,

South Building, 14th Street and

Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except holidays. Persons wishing to

inspect comments are requested to call

ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate

entry into the comment reading room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

David Vogt, Senior Staff Veterinarian,

APHIS, Veterinary Services, Import/

Export Animals Staff, 4700 River Road

Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737–1231;

(301) 734–8170.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 9 CFR part 92

prohibit or restrict the importation of

certain animals into the United States to

prevent the introduction of

communicable diseases of livestock and

poultry. Subpart D of part 92 (§§ 92.400

through 92.435), referred to below as the

regulations, pertains to the importation

of ruminants. Sections 92.424 through

92.429 of the regulations contain

specific provisions regarding the

importation of ruminants, including

cattle, from Mexico.

Before the effective date of this rule,

§ 92.427(e) of the regulations provided

for the temporary importation of cattle

from Mexico into the United States

under United States Customs bond for

feeding and return to Mexico for

slaughter. Cattle imported under this inbond program were exempt from some

requirements that applied to the

importation of other cattle from Mexico,

but were subject to additional

restrictions during the time they were in

the United States that did not apply to

other cattle imported from Mexico.

Specifically, in-bond cattle from

Mexico could be imported without

meeting the requirements of

§ 92.427(c)(1) regarding herd tests for

tuberculosis and without meeting the

requirements of § 92.427(d)(1) regarding

herd tests for brucellosis if the cattle

were: (1) Moved directly by land from

the port of entry to an approved

quarantined feedlot; (2) removed from

the quarantined feedlot only to be

moved directly to a Mexican port of

entry for return to Mexico for slaughter;

and (3) moved only in trucks or railway

cars that had been sealed with a seal

applied by a U.S. Department of

Agriculture inspector.

Additionally, in-bond cattle from

Mexico could be imported without the

official record of negative brucellosis

test required by § 92.424(b) and without

meeting the requirements of § 92.427(d)

regarding brucellosis if the cattle were

under 24 months of age and were

accompanied by a certificate stating that

the cattle had been vaccinated for

brucellosis.

The movement, quarantine, and

vaccination requirements discussed

above were designed to prevent the

transmission of animal diseases from inbond Mexican cattle to other animals in

the United States. However, if the

importer of the in-bond Mexican cattle

did not adhere to those requirements,

there was a serious risk that those cattle,

which had not been tested for

tuberculosis or brucellosis prior to

entering the United States, would

spread disease to domestic livestock. As

a means of ensuring that the in-bond

Mexican cattle were maintained in

accordance with the regulations while

in the United States and were actually

returned to Mexico upon completion of

their feeding period in the United

States, the regulations required that the

importer of the Mexican cattle post a
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13897

bond with the U.S. Customs Service at

the port of entry. The bond required by

the Customs Service could be as high as

three times the duty value of the cattle,

so it was clearly in an importer’s best

interests to meet all the requirements of

the regulations.

However, on January 1, 1994, the U.S.

Customs Service discontinued its

collection of duties and bonds on

imported Mexican cattle in order to

comply with provisions of the North

American Free Trade Agreement. As a

consequence, importers no longer had to

post a bond when importing cattle from

Mexico into the United States for

feeding and return to Mexico, although

the Customs Service continued to track

such cattle entering and leaving the

United States. The penalty for failing to

return in-bond Mexican cattle to Mexico

upon completion of their feeding period

has been reduced to $400.

Since the Customs Service

discontinued its collection of bonds, the

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS) has monitored the inbond program to determine whether the

program could remain viable despite the

lack of a posted bond. Recently, some

importers of cattle under the in-bond

program have indicated to APHIS that

they would be willing to accept the

$400 fine—a relatively insignificant

amount when compared to the bond

that would have been forfeited before

the Customs Service discontinued

collecting the bond—if the importers

could move their cattle to slaughter or

other destinations in the United States

without returning the cattle to Mexico

for slaughter, as required under the inbond program’s regulations. Evidently,

those importers believe that even with

the $400 fine, it would be more

profitable to sell their cattle in the

United States than in Mexico. In fact,

we are now aware of at least one case

in which an importer did remove his inbond Mexican cattle from a quarantined

feedlot and send the cattle to slaughter

in the United States. APHIS has the

option of pursuing civil and criminal

action against an importer in such cases,

but we believe that there remains the

strong possibility that importers will

choose to accept the risk of criminal and

civil action against them sometime in

the future in order to move their inbond Mexican cattle to slaughter or

other destinations in the United States.

As stated above, in-bond Mexican

cattle were exempted from meeting

certain testing requirements for

tuberculosis and brucellosis; clearly,

cattle that have not met those testing

requirements present a greater than

average risk of spreading disease to

domestic livestock. The quarantine and

movement restrictions of the in-bond

program were specifically designed to

mitigate that increased disease risk, so

it follows that cattle moved in violation

of those quarantine and movement

restrictions would present a greater than

average disease risk. It has become

evident that the posting of a bond is

necessary to ensure compliance with the

provisions of the in-bond program, but

APHIS has no statutory authority to

institute a bond system similar to that

which had been administered by the

U.S. Customs Service at U.S. ports of

entry on the Mexican border prior to

January 1, 1994. Therefore, we believe

that it is necessary for us to terminate

the in-bond program described in

§ 92.427(e) in order to prevent the

introduction into, and dissemination

within, the United States of disease.

Therefore, we are removing

§ 92.427(e), ‘‘Cattle imported in bond for

feeding and return to Mexico,’’ in its

entirety. The termination of the in-bond

program also entails the removal of five

references to the in-bond program that

are found elsewhere in part 92 and in

the animal export regulations in 9 CFR

part 91. Specifically, we are amending:

• Section 91.3(a) by removing a

provision that exempts in-bond Mexican

cattle from the requirement that all

animals intended for exportation to

Mexico be accompanied from the State

of origin of the export movement to the

border of the United States by an origin

health certificate;

• Section 91.5 by removing a

provision that exempts in-bond Mexican

cattle from certain pre-export health

testing requirements;

• Section 92.424(b) by removing a

provision that exempts in-bond Mexican

cattle from the requirement for an

official record of brucellosis testing;

• Section 92.426(a) by removing a

provision requiring in-bond Mexican

cattle to be inspected at the port of entry

and found free from communicable

disease and fever tick infestation; and

• Section 92.427(c)(2) by removing a

provision that exempts in-bond Mexican

cattle from the M-branding requirement.

Miscellaneous

As noted above, we are removing

§ 92.427(e) in its entirety, including

footnote 10, which cites regulations of

the U.S. Customs Service concerning

movement in bond. Therefore, to keep

the footnotes in the subpart numbered

consecutively, we are amending

§§ 92.430, 92.431, 92.433, 92.434, and

92.435 by redesignating footnotes 11

through 22 as footnotes 10 through 21.

Emergency Action

The Administrator of the Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service has

determined that conditions exist that

warrant publication of this interim rule

without prior opportunity for public

comment. The recent steep devaluation

of the Mexican peso has created a strong

economic incentive for importers of inbond cattle from Mexico to send such

cattle to slaughter in the United States,

rather than in Mexico as required by the

regulations. Because Customs has

discontinued collecting bonds, prompt

action is necessary to prevent the

dissemination into the United States of

animal diseases by in-bond Mexican

cattle that remain in the United States

in violation of the regulations. We are

making this rule effective 15 days after

its publication in the Federal Register to

provide importers in the United States

and exporters in Mexico adequate notice

of this action in order to prevent undue

stress on cattle already in transit from

Mexico and undue hardship on the

owners, importers, and exporters of

cattle from Mexico.

Because prior notice and other public

procedures with respect to this action

are impracticable and contrary to the

public interest under these conditions,

we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553

to make this rule effective 15 days after

its publication in the Federal Register.

We will consider comments that are

received within 60 days of publication

of this rule in the Federal Register.

After the comment period closes, we

will publish another document in the

Federal Register. It will include a

discussion of any comments we receive

and any amendments we are making to

the rule as a result of the comments.

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

purposes of Executive Order 12866 and,

therefore, has not been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget.

This rule amends the animal

exportation and importation regulations

by removing provisions regarding the

temporary, in-bond importation of cattle

from Mexico into the United States for

feeding and return to Mexico for

slaughter.

Several feedlots in the United States

could be economically affected by this

proposed change in the regulations, but

we anticipate that the impact will be

minimal. In fiscal year 1993,

approximately 61,000 Mexican cattle

were imported into the United States for

feeding and return to Mexico for
13898 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

slaughter under U.S. Customs bond.

They included 24,811 cattle imported

into Arizona, 3,878 into California, 69

into New Mexico, and 32,059 into

Texas. APHIS estimates that as many as

18 different feedlots in Arizona,

California, New Mexico, and Texas were

used for the feeding of in-bond Mexican

cattle during the height of in-bond

activity. Currently, there are about 10

feedlots that have facilities for the

feeding of in-bond Mexican cattle, but

only about 5 of those feedlots have been

used recently to feed in-bond Mexican

cattle.

The termination of the in-bond

program is expected to have a negligible

impact on feedlots in the United States.

Most are large businesses (defined as

having more than $1.0 million in annual

gross receipts, according to Small

Business Administration size criteria)

and usually use only a small portion of

the feedlot for in-bond Mexican cattle.

The majority of the area in the feedlots

is generally used to feed either other

imported Mexican cattle or domestic

cattle. With the termination of the inbond program, we anticipate that any

affected feedlots will use their entire

areas to feed other imported Mexican

cattle or domestic cattle.

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.

Executive Order 12778

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State

and local laws and regulations that are

inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not

require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court

challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no information

collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects

9 CFR Part 91

Animal diseases, Animal welfare,

Exports, Livestock, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements,

Transportation.

9 CFR Part 92

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,

Poultry and poultry products,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, 9 CFR parts 91 and 92

are amended as follows:

PART 91—INSPECTION AND

HANDLING OF LIVESTOCK FOR

EXPORTATION

1. The authority citation for part 91 is

revised 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 2.17, 2.51, and

371.2(d).

§ 91.3 [Amended]

2. In § 91.3, paragraph (a), the second

sentence is amended by removing the

words ‘‘, except cattle from Mexico

imported into the United States in bond

for temporary feeding and return to

Mexico,’’.

§ 91.5 [Amended]

3. In § 91.5, the introductory text is

amended by removing the words ‘‘,

except cattle from Mexico imported into

the United States in bond for temporary

feeding and return to Mexico, except

cattle from Mexico imported into the

United States in bond for temporary

feeding and return to Mexico,’’.

PART 92—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN

ANIMALS AND POULTRY AND

CERTAIN ANIMAL AND POULTRY

PRODUCTS; INSPECTION AND OTHER

REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN

MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND

SHIPPING CONTAINERS THEREON

4. The authority citation for part 92

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306;

21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b,

134c, 134d, 134f, 135, 136, and 136a; 31

U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(d).

§ 92.424 [Amended]

5. In § 92.424, paragraph (b), the

second sentence is amended by

removing the words ‘‘pursuant to

§ 92.427(e)(2), or’’.

§ 92.426 [Amended]

6. In § 92.426, paragraph (a), the first

sentence is amended by removing the

words ‘‘or in bond for temporary entry

in accordance with § 92.427(e) of this

part’’.

§ 92.427 [Amended]

7. In § 92.427, paragraph (c)(2), the

first sentence is amended by removing

the words ‘‘or in bond for temporary

entry in accordance with § 92.427(e) of

this part’’.

8. In § 92.427, paragraph (e),

including footnote 10, is removed.

§§ 92.430 through 92.435 [Amended]

9. In §§ 92.430 through 92.434,

footnotes 11 through 21 and their

references in the text are redesignated as

footnotes 10 through 20, respectively.

Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of

March 1995.

Terry L. Medley,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 95–6371 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

9 CFR Part 92

[Docket No. 94–085–1]

Importation of Sheep and Goats From

Canada and Mexico

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Interim rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

regulations for importing sheep and

goats from Canada and Mexico to

require that, with the exception of sheep

and goats imported through land border

ports for immediate slaughter, and

wethers imported through land border

ports, all sheep and goats imported into

the United States from Canada and

Mexico be accompanied by an import

permit. This change is necessary to

prevent the importation of sheep and

goats that may be affected with scrapie.

DATES: Interim rule effective March 10,

1995. Consideration will be given only

to comments received on or before May

15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

Docket No. 94–085–1, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service, Policy and

Program Development, Regulatory

Analysis and Development, 4700 River

Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–

1228. Please state that your comments

refer to Docket No. 94–085–1.

Comments received may be inspected at

USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th

Street and Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except holidays. Persons wishing to

inspect comments are requested to call

ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate

entry into the comment reading room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Joyce Bowling, Staff Veterinarian, or Dr.

Roger Perkins, Staff Veterinarian,

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service, Veterinary Services, National

Center for Import and Export, 4700

River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD

20737–1228. Telephone: (301) 734–

8170.