This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

27797

Vol. 61, No. 107

Monday, June 3, 1996

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Part 92

[Docket No. 95–044–1]

The Importation of Ratites and

Hatching Eggs of Ratites

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend

the animal import regulations to relieve

certain restrictions on the importation of

ratites and hatching eggs of ratites into

the United States from Canada. We

believe that these proposed actions can

be taken without increasing the risk of

introducing poultry or livestock

diseases into the United States.

Additionally, we propose to allow adult

ostriches from any country to be

imported, in accordance with the

regulations, through the New York

Animal Import Center, based on space

availability. Currently, with certain

exceptions, ostriches may not be

imported into the United States if they

exceed either 36 inches in height or 30

pounds in weight. We are proposing this

change after determining that the New

York Animal Import Center has the

facilities and trained personnel to

handle adult ostriches. We believe that

these proposed amendments would

facilitate the importation into the

United States of ratites and hatching

eggs of ratites while ensuring the

continued protection of the health of

livestock and poultry in the United

States.

DATES: Consideration will be given only

to comments received on or before

August 2, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

Docket No. 95–044–1, Regulatory

Analysis and Development, PPD,

APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road

Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.

Please state that your comments refer to

Docket No. 95–044–1. 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.

Tracye Butler, Staff Veterinarian,

Import/Export Animals, National Center

for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700

River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD

20737–1231, (301) 734–5097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 9 CFR part 92

(referred to below as ‘‘the regulations’’)

govern the importation into the United

States of certain animals and birds,

including ostriches and other flightless

birds known as ratites, and their

hatching eggs, to prevent the

introduction of communicable diseases

of livestock and poultry.

Section 92.101 of the regulations,

among other things, imposes general

restrictions on the importation of ratites

and hatching eggs of ratites. Paragraph

(b)(3)(i) of § 92.101 requires that all

ratites, except ratites imported as

zoological birds, and all hatching eggs of

ratites entering the United States must

originate from certified pen-raised

flocks and must be identified. Ratites

must be identified by means of a

microchip implant, hatching eggs of

ratites by marking on the shell.

Paragraph (b)(3)(i) also requires certain

recordkeeping, reporting, and

inspections related to the flock and

premises of origin. Paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of

§ 92.101 prohibits, with certain

exceptions, the importation of ostriches

more than 36 inches in height or 30

pounds in weight at the time of arrival

in the United States.

Section 92.103 of the regulations,

among other things, requires that an

importer submit a completed import

permit application to import ratites or

hatching eggs of ratites into the United

States. The import permit application

provides, among other things,

information on the name and location of

the quarantine facility in the United

States that will maintain the ratites or

hatching eggs of ratites during the

mandatory quarantine period.

Section 92.104 of the regulations,

among other things, requires that ratites

and their hatching eggs offered for

importation from any part of the world

be accompanied by a certificate issued

by a full-time salaried veterinary officer

of the national government of the

exporting country or issued by a

veterinarian authorized or accredited by

the national government of the

exporting country and endorsed by a

full-time salaried veterinary officer of

the national government of that country.

The certificate must state, among other

things, that ratites and their hatching

eggs offered for importation have been

inspected and found free of evidence of

communicable diseases and are

identified in accordance with the

provisions in § 92.101.

Section 92.105 of the regulations,

among other things, specifies

requirements for the inspection of

ratites and hatching eggs of ratites at the

port of entry in the United States.

Paragraph (a) of § 92.105, among other

things, allows hatching eggs of ratites to

be offered for importation into the

United States at any international

airport, or any land-border port within

20 miles of an international airport,

serviced by Customs. In addition,

hatching eggs of ratites may be shipped,

in bond, from the port of first arrival to

the Customs port of entry where the

eggs will be inspected and quarantined.

Paragraph (c) of § 92.105 provides that

ratites, other than hatching eggs of

ratites, imported from any part of the

world must be inspected by a veterinary

inspector of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) at a

listed port of entry. The ports of entry

listed for ostriches are New York, NY;

Stewart Airport, Newburgh, NY; and

Miami, FL. The ports of entry listed for

ratites other than ostriches are New

York, NY; Stewart Airport, Newburgh,

NY; Miami, FL; and Honolulu, HI.

Section 92.106 of the regulations,

among other things, imposes quarantine

requirements on ratites and hatching

eggs of ratites. Paragraph (b)(1) of

§ 92.106, among other things, requires

ratites imported from any part of the

world to be quarantined upon arrival for

a minimum of 30 days to determine the

ratites’ freedom from ectoparasites and

communicable diseases. Paragraph

(b)(3) of § 92.106 requires that ratites be
27798 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 107 / Monday, June 3, 1996 / Proposed Rules

treated for ectoparasites during the

quarantine by an inspector until the

inspector determines that the ratites are

free of ectoparasites. Paragraph (b)(2) of

§ 92.106, among other things, requires

hatching eggs of ratites imported from

any part of the world to be quarantined

upon arrival, incubated for

approximately 42 days, and held in

quarantine for a minimum of 30 days

following the hatch of the last chick in

the lot, to determine the ratites’ freedom

from communicable diseases.

Additionally, the ratites and hatching

eggs of ratites must be tested for and

found free of viral diseases of poultry,

including exotic Newcastle disease.

Ratites and Hatching Eggs of Ratites

From Canada

We are proposing to exempt certain

ratites and hatching eggs of ratites from

Canada from quarantine requirements

upon arrival in the United States. We

are proposing this relief for ratites that

meet the following conditions: (1) They

were hatched and raised in Canada; or

(2) if imported into Canada, they were

quarantined upon arrival in Canada for

a minimum of 28 days at a Canadian

quarantine facility and remained in

Canada for an additional 60 days

following quarantine. We are also

proposing to exempt ratite hatching eggs

that were laid in Canada from U.S.

quarantine requirements. We would

continue to require that these ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites be accompanied

by a health certificate, in accordance

with current § 92.104(a), (c), and (d),

and that they meet the other applicable

requirements of the regulations.

We are proposing this change to the

regulations because we believe that

ratites and their hatching eggs from

Canada present a minimal risk of

introducing animal and poultry diseases

into the United States, as explained

below.

Currently, Canada’s import

regulations allow ratites to be imported

into Canada only from Germany, The

Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.

We have determined that Canadian

requirements for importing ratites and

their hatching eggs into Canada are

similar to U.S. requirements for

importing ratites and their hatching eggs

into the United States. Specifically,

ratites imported into Canada must meet

the following conditions to be eligible

for entry into a Canadian quarantine

station: (1) They were hatched in and

have never been outside the country of

origin, or they have been quarantined in

the country of origin for at least 60 days;

(2) they were inspected within 30 days

immediately prior to the date of export

and were found to be free from evidence

of viral diseases of poultry, including

Newcastle disease, and as far as could

be determined have not been exposed to

disease within the preceding 60 days;

(3) they tested negative for viral

diseases; and (4) they were inspected

and declared healthy by a Canadian

veterinary inspector upon arrival in

Canada. Upon arrival in Canada, the

imported ratites must enter a Canadian

quarantine station and remain in

quarantine for a minimum of 28 days.

During that time, they are thoroughly

checked for ticks and other external

parasites. Fecal samples are taken and

checked for internal parasites. The

detection of internal or external

parasites necessitates treatment;

however, no vaccine against Newcastle

disease or laryngotracheitis is

administered. The detection of viral

diseases may necessitate slaughter and

disposal of the carcass.

Hatching eggs of ratites that are

imported into Canada also undergo

quarantine to ensure the hatched chicks

are free from disease. Hatching eggs of

ratites imported into Canada must enter

a Canadian quarantine station and

remain in Canadian quarantine for a

minimum of 45 days following the

hatch of the last chick in the lot in order

for the chicks to be eligible for an

Agriculture Canada health certificate for

importation into the United States.

Ratites imported into Canada under

the conditions described above would

present a negligible disease risk if

allowed to enter the United States

without undergoing quarantine. The

quarantine period in Canada would

offer sufficient opportunity for the

diagnosis of communicable diseases.

Upon release from quarantine, the

imported ratites would join Canadian

flocks for a minimum of 60 days.

Additionally, ratites do not live in the

wild in Canada, and, therefore, ratites of

unknown disease history could not be

trapped in the wild and then added to

Canadian flocks for subsequent

importation into the United States.

Because of these factors, neither ratites

imported into Canada, nor any

Canadian-origin ratites, would have

occasion to be exposed to any

communicable disease of concern to the

United States.

We therefore believe that removing

the quarantine requirement for certain

ratites and hatching eggs of ratites from

Canada is warranted to eliminate

duplications in Canadian and U.S.

disease-prevention measures and relieve

an unnecessary regulatory burden.

We are also proposing to exempt

ratites imported from Canada for

consignment directly to slaughter in the

United States from the requirement in

§ 92.104(c)(8) that the ratites be treated

for ectoparasites within 3 to 14 days

before they are exported from Canada.

We are proposing this change to

minimize potential pesticide residue

problems in ratite meat and to

acknowledge that ratites from Canada

that are consigned directly to slaughter

in the United States would have little,

if any, opportunity to come into contact

with and transfer ticks to other animals.

It is also unlikely that any ticks that

could be on the ratites would be ticks

exotic to the United States because there

are no known ticks in Canada that are

exotic to the United States.

In addition, we are proposing to

exempt Canadian ratite flocks from the

pen-raised requirement and the

identification and recordkeeping

requirements in § 92.101(b)(3). These

requirements were established to

prevent wild-caught ratites from being

added to a ‘‘pen-raised’’ flock and then

imported into the United States as

ratites produced and maintained in a

pen-raised flock. Because there are no

wild ratites in Canada and because

Canadian import restrictions make it

unlikely that any wild-caught ratites

would be imported into Canada, it does

not appear that it is necessary to require

Canadian flocks to meet the pen-raised

requirement and the identification and

recordkeeping requirements in

§ 92.101(b)(3).

We are also proposing to allow ratites

from Canada that are exempt from

quarantine upon arrival to be offered for

importation at the following ports, in

addition to the ports listed in

§ 92.105(c): Anchorage, AK; Fairbanks,

AK; Los Angeles, CA; San Diego, CA;

Denver, CO; Jacksonville, FL; Port

Canaveral, FL; St.Petersburg-Clearwater,

FL; Tampa, FL; Atlanta, GA; Eastport,

ID; Chicago, IL; New Orleans, LA;

Houlton, ME; Jackman, ME; Portland,

ME; Detriot, MI; Baltimore, MD; Boston,

MA; Port Huron, MI; Sault Ste. Marie,

MI; Minneapolis, MN; Great Falls, MT;

Opheim, MT; Raymond, MT;

Sweetgrass, MT; Alexandria Bay, NY;

Buffalo, NY; Champlain, NY; Dunseith,

ND; Pembina, ND; Portal, ND; Portland,

OR; San Juan, PR; Galveston, TX;

Houston, TX; Highgate Springs, VT;

Blaine, WA; Lynden, WA; Oroville, WA;

Seattle, WA; Spokane, WA; Sumas, WA;

and Tacoma, WA.

We are proposing this change

because, as explained above, ratites

hatched and maintained in Canada, or

legally imported into Canada, would

present little, if any, risk of carrying an

exotic animal or poultry disease, or of

harboring ectoparasites that could

transmit exotic diseases to animals or

poultry in the United States.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 107 / Monday, June 3, 1996 / Proposed Rules 27799

Consequently, we do not believe that

these ratites need to be individually

handled and inspected at the port of

arrival. Under these circumstances, it

appears that ratites from Canada that

would not require quarantine upon

arrival in the United States could be

offered for importation at ports other

than those currently allowed, including

small, limited ports that lack restraint

and holding facilities.

Canadian-origin hatching eggs of

ratites would also be allowed to be

offered for importation at the ports

listed above and could continue to be

offered for importation at any

international airport, or at any landborder port within 20 miles of an

international airport, serviced by

Customs, in accordance with

§ 92.105(a).

We believe that increasing the number

of ports through which ratites and their

hatching eggs may enter the United

States from Canada would facilitate

trade between the United States and

Canada, in accordance with the North

American Free Trade Agreement and

the General Agreement on Tariffs and

Trade.

We are proposing to exempt ratites

and hatching eggs of ratites from Canada

from the import permit requirements

found in § 92.103 if the ratites and

hatching eggs qualify for exemption

from quarantine upon arrival in the

United States and enter the United

States at a Canadian land border port, as

listed in § 92.203(b). This exemption

would apply only to those ratites and

hatching eggs that are imported from

Canada through a land border port. If

Canadian ratites or hatching eggs of

ratites enter the United States through

an airport or ocean port, then the ratites

or hatching eggs must be accompanied

by an import permit so that port

inspectors will have prior notification of

the arrival of the shipment of ratites or

hatching eggs and be available to check

the shipment.

The exemptions discussed above for

ratites and hatching eggs imported into

the United States from Canada would be

set forth in § 92.107 in new paragraphs

(b) and (c). Sections 92.101, 92.103,

92.104, 92.105, and 92.106 would be

amended to indicate that § 92.107

contains exemptions for ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites imported into

the United States from Canada.

Adult Ostriches

We are also proposing to allow

ostriches greater than 36 inches in

height or 30 pounds in weight to be

imported into the United States from

any country through the port of New

York, NY, or through Stewart Airport,

Newburgh, NY, and be quarantined at

the New York Animal Import Center

(NYAIC), based on space availability. As

a result of our experience enforcing the

regulations, we believe the NYAIC now

has the facilities and trained personnel

to handle adult ostriches. Additionally,

if an ostrich greater than 36 inches in

height or 30 pounds in weight were

imported into the United States from

Canada without requiring quarantine, in

accordance with the requirements

proposed in this document, then that

adult ostrich would be permitted entry

into the United States through any of

the ports proposed for the importation

of Canadian ratites.

Miscellaneous

We are proposing to make a correction

to § 92.103(a)(1) to remove a reference to

§ 92.214. When part 92 was divided into

seven subparts in 1990, some references

within paragraphs no longer applied.

We corrected most of these references,

but we inadvertently overlooked the

reference to § 92.214 in § 92.103(a)(1).

Section 92.103(a)(1) provides import

permit requirements and exceptions to

those requirements for birds; whereas

§ 92.214 explains import permit

requirements for poultry. Therefore, we

are proposing to remove the reference to

§ 92.214 from § 92.103(a)(1).

We are also proposing to make minor

editorial changes for clarity and

consistency, and we are proposing to

amend §§ 92.103 and 92.104 by adding

a reference to the end of each section for

the Office of Management and Budget

control number assigned to approved

information collection and

recordkeeping requirements.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This proposed rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12866. This 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 proposed rule would relieve

some restrictions on the importation

into the United States of ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites from Canada and

on the importation into the United

States of adult ostriches. We anticipate

that this proposed rule would affect

only the ostrich industry because very

few ratites other than ostriches have

been imported into the United States

since first being allowed in 1986.

Ostrich production in the United

States has been growing rapidly over the

last few years. According to a recent

estimate, there are approximately 6,000

to 7,000 ostrich owners and more than

70,000 breeding ostriches in the United

States. Each farm owns an average of 8

to 10 adult ostriches, but each farm’s

holdings can range anywhere from 2 to

200 adult ostriches. All of these farms

are considered small entities by Small

Business Administration standards

(annual gross receipts of less than

$500,000). The American Ostrich

Association reports its membership at

3,650 as of September 1995.

Over the last 2 to 3 years, the supply

of ostriches in the United States has

steadily increased, which has greatly

reduced domestic prices. For example,

in 1992, market prices for ostriches of

different ages ranged as follows: 3-

month-old chicks sold for

approximately $6,000 a pair; 6-monthold chicks sold for $8,000 to $15,000 a

pair; yearlings sold for $12,000 to

$25,000 a pair; 2-year-olds sold for

$25,000 to $40,000 a pair; and adults

(breeding pairs) sold for $40,000 up to

$100,000 a pair, depending upon proven

breeding capabilities. Recent market

prices for ostriches of different ages

show a dramatic decrease from the

market prices of 1992; estimates of 1995

market prices for ostriches of different

ages are as follows: 3-month-old chicks

sell for approximately $1,300 a pair; 6-

month-old chicks sell for approximately

$2,150 a pair; yearlings sell for

approximately $4,300 a pair; 2-year-olds

sell for approximately $8,600 a pair; and

adults (breeding pairs) sell for

approximately $14,700 a pair,

depending upon proven breeding

capabilities. Further, when compared to

the market prices listed above for 1995,

the estimated market prices for the first

quarter of 1996 show approximately a

fifty percent decrease in the market

prices for ostriches in all age categories.

No live ratites have been imported

into the United States from any country

since April of 1994. Removing the

quarantine and other requirements for

Canadian ratites and their hatching eggs

could encourage imports by decreasing

the cost of importing these ratites and

hatching eggs. However, because of the

decrease in market prices described

above, we do not expect a heavy volume

of ostriches or other ratites from Canada

to be imported into the United States as

a result of this rule.

In addition, though the hatching eggs

of ratites are more readily available, are

cheaper to transport, and can be

quarantined at private facilities,

historically only about 26 percent of the

imported eggs (this includes fertile and

infertile eggs) have hatched chicks that

survived beyond 30 days. Despite being

a financially dangerous option,

importers continue to import hatching

eggs and are trying to improve their rate
27800 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 107 / Monday, June 3, 1996 / Proposed Rules

of hatch and chick survival. However,

because of the relatively low hatch and

survival rate and the reduced market

prices of ostriches of different ages, we

do not expect a heavy volume of the

hatching eggs of ratites from Canada to

be imported into the United States as a

result of this rule.

Any imports from Canada that might

result from this rule could cause a

further decline in the domestic prices of

ratites in the United States. However,

we expect that domestic ratite importers

would benefit by having fewer

restrictions on Canadian imports. Over

the short term, the proposed changes in

the regulations might have a minor

adverse economic impact on domestic

ostrich producers. Over the long term,

we expect the domestic ratite industry

to benefit from any imports that may

occur because reduced ostrich prices

could lead to larger domestic

populations of ostriches, benefiting

consumers of ostriches and ostrich

products. A larger domestic ratite

population could further enhance the

economic viability of commercial ratite

breeding, slaughter, feather, and leather

markets.

We expect that the economic effect of

allowing the importation of adult

ostriches from all countries into the

United States through the New York

Animal Import Center would be

insignificant because of the drastic

decrease in the market prices of

ostriches.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12778

This proposed rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12778, Civil

Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is

adopted: (1) All State and local laws and

regulations that are inconsistent with

this rule will be preempted; (2) no

retroactive effect will be given to this

rule; and (3) administrative proceedings

will not be required before parties may

file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule contains no new

information collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 92

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,

Poultry and poultry products,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping.

Accordingly, 9 CFR part 92 would be

amended as follows:

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

1. The authority citation for part 92

would continue 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 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

2. Section 92.101 would be amended

as follows:

a. By removing paragraph (b)(3)(ii).

b. By redesignating paragraphs as

follows:

Old designation New designation

(b)(3)(i) ...................... (b)(3).

(b)(3)(i)(A) ................. (b)(3)(i).

(b)(3)(i)(B) ................. (b)(3)(ii).

(b)(3)(i)(C) ................. (b)(3)(iii).

(b)(3)(i)(D) ................. (b)(3)(iv).

(b)(3)(i)(D)(1) ............. (b)(3)(iv)(A).

(b)(3)(i)(D)(2) ............. (b)(3)(iv)(B).

(b)(3)(i)(D)(3) ............. (b)(3)(iv)(C).

(b)(3)(i)(E) ................. (b)(3)(v).

(b)(3)(i)(F) .................. (b)(3)(vi).

(b)(3)(i)(G) ................. (b)(3)(vii).

(b)(3)(i)(H) ................. (b)(3)(viii).

(b)(3)(i)(I) ................... (b)(3)(ix).

(b)(3)(i)(J) .................. (b)(3)(x).

(b)(3)(i)(K) ................. (b)(3)(xi).

(b)(3)(i)(L) .................. (b)(3)(xii).

c. By revising newly redesignated

paragraph (b)(3) introductory text, to

read as set forth below.

d. In newly designated paragraph

(b)(3)(vi), by removing the reference

‘‘(b)(3)(i)(D)’’ and adding ‘‘(b)(3)(iv)’’ in

its place.

e. In newly designated paragraph

(b)(3)(vii), by removing the reference

‘‘(b)(3)(i)(B)’’ and adding ‘‘(b)(3)(ii)’’ in

its place, and by removing the reference

‘‘(b)(3)(i)(C)’’ and adding ‘‘(b)(3)(iii)’’ in

its place.

f. In newly designated paragraph

(b)(3)(x), the first sentence, by removing

the reference ‘‘(b)(3)(i)(B)’’ and adding

‘‘(b)(3)(ii)’’ in its place, and by removing

the reference ‘‘(b)(3)(i)(C)’’ and adding

‘‘(b)(3)(iii)’’ in its place.

g. In newly designated paragraph

(b)(3)(x), the fourth sentence, by

removing the reference ‘‘(b)(3)(i)(E)’’ and

adding ‘‘(b)(3)(v)’’ in its place.

§ 92.101 General prohibitions; exceptions.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) Except for ratites imported as

zoological birds, and ratites and ratite

hatching eggs imported from Canada in

accordance with § 92.107, ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites may not be

imported into the United States unless

the following conditions are met:

* * * * *

§ 92.102 [Amended]

3. Section 92.102(c) would be

amended by removing the reference

‘‘§ 92.105(a)’’ and adding ‘‘§ 92.105’’ in

its place.

4. Section 92.103 would be amended

as follows:

a. In paragraph (a)(1), the first

sentence, by removing the reference

‘‘92.214’’ and adding ‘‘92.107(b)’’ in its

place.

b. By revising paragraphs (a)(1)(xiii),

(a)(2)(iii), and (a)(2)(iv) to read as set

forth below.

c. In paragraph (a)(2)(v), by removing

‘‘§ 92.101 (b)(3)(i)(G) and (b)(3)(i)(J)’’

and adding ‘‘§ 92.101 (b)(3)’’ in its place;

and by removing ‘‘§ 92.101 (b)(3)(i)(B)

and (b)(3)(i)(C)’’ and adding

‘‘§ 92.101(b)(3)’’ in its place.

d. At the end of the section, by adding

an OMB control number to read as set

forth below.

§ 92.103 Import permits for birds; and

reservation fees for spaces at quarantine

facilities maintained by APHIS.

(a) * * *

(1) * * *

(xiii) In addition, the application for

a permit to import ratites or hatching

eggs of ratites, except for ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites imported from

Canada in accordance with § 92.107,

shall specify the number of ratites or

hatching eggs intended for importation,

the size of the flock of origin, and the

location of the premises where the flock

of origin is kept; and shall state that,

from the date of application through the

date of export, APHIS representatives

shall be granted access to the premises

where the flock of origin is kept. (For

ratites intended for importation as

zoological birds, the flock of origin shall

be the ratites intended for importation.)

(2) * * *

(iii) In addition, a permit to import

ratites or hatching eggs of ratites, except

for ratites or hatching eggs of ratites

imported from Canada in accordance

with § 92.107, will be denied or

withdrawn unless APHIS

representatives are granted access to the

premises where the flock of origin is

kept (or, in the case of zoological birds,

to the premises where the birds are

kept), from the date of the application

for the permit through the date of

export;

(iv) Except for ratites intended for

importation as zoological birds and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 107 / Monday, June 3, 1996 / Proposed Rules 27801

ratites and hatching eggs of ratites

imported from Canada in accordance

with § 92.107, a permit to import ratites

or hatching eggs of ratites will be denied

or withdrawn unless an APHIS

representative has visited the premises

where the flock of origin is kept within

the 12-month period before the intended

importation and has determined that the

flock is pen-raised and contains

sufficient breeding pairs to produce the

number of ratites or hatching eggs

intended for importation.

* * * * *

(Approved by the Office of Management and

Budget under control number 0579–0040)

5. Section 92.104 would be amended

as follows:

a. By revising paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(8),

(c)(13), (c)(14), (c)(15), (c)(16), (d)(2),

(d)(9), (d)(10), and (d)(11) to read as set

forth below.

b. At the end of the section, by adding

an OMB control number to read as set

forth below.

§ 92.104 Certificates for pet birds,

commercial birds, zoological birds, and

research birds.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) That, except when the certificate is

for zoological birds or ratites imported

from Canada in accordance with

§ 92.107, the flock of origin is pen-raised

and the ratites covered by the certificate

were produced and maintained in that

flock;

* * * * *

(8) That, except as provided in

§ 92.107 for ratites imported from

Canada for immediate slaughter, the

ratites were treated at least 3 days but

not more than 14 days before being

loaded for shipment to the United States

with a pesticide of a type and

concentration sufficient to kill

ectoparasites on the ratites;

* * * * *

(13) That the number of ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites exported from

the flock of origin has not exceeded the

ceiling required to be established under

§ 92.101(b)(3)(ix);

(14) That all the ratites and hatching

eggs of ratites in the flock from which

the ratites come were identified in

accordance with § 92.101(b)(3);

(15) Except for ratites imported from

Canada in accordance with § 92.107, the

number of ratite laying hens in the flock

from which the ratites come;

(16) For ratites required to be treated

prior to shipment with a pesticide for

ectoparasites, the certificate must also

state the name, concentration, and date

of administration of the pesticide used

to treat the ratites;

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(2) That, except when the certificate is

for hatching eggs of ratites imported

from Canada in accordance with

§ 92.107, the flock of origin is penraised, and the hatching eggs covered by

the certificate were produced by that

flock;

* * * * *

(9) That the number of ratites and

hatching eggs of ratites exported from

the flock of origin has not exceeded the

ceiling required to be established under

§ 92.101(b)(3)(ix);

(10) That all the ratites and hatching

eggs of ratites in the flock from which

the hatching eggs come were identified

in accordance with § 92.101(b)(3);

(11) Except for hatching eggs of ratites

imported from Canada in accordance

with § 92.107, the number of ratite

laying hens in the flock from which the

hatching eggs come.

(Approved by the Office of Management and

Budget under control number 0579–0040)

6. Section 92.105 would be amended

as follows:

a. In paragraph (a), by revising the

first sentence to read as set forth below.

b. In paragraph (c), by revising the

introductory text and paragraph (c)(1) to

read as set forth below.

§ 92.105 Inspection at the port of entry.

(a) All commercial birds, zoological

birds, and research birds, including

hatching eggs of ratites, but excluding

other ratites, imported into the United

States, must be inspected by the port

veterinarian at the Customs port of

entry, which may be any international

airport, or any land-border port within

20 miles of an international airport,

serviced by Customs, as well as, for

Canadian-origin hatching eggs of ratites,

ports listed in § 92.107 (c). However,

hatching eggs of ratites may be shipped,

in bond, from the port of first arrival to

the Customs port of entry at which they

will be quarantined, for inspection, at

that port.

* * * * *

(c) Ratites, other than hatching eggs of

ratites, imported from any part of the

world must be inspected at the Customs

port of entry by a veterinary inspector

of APHIS and, except as provided in

§ 92.107(b) for ratites imported from

Canada, shall be permitted entry only at

one of the following ports of entry:

(1) Ostriches:

(i) Up to 36 inches in height (as

measured from the top of the head to the

base of the feet) or 30 pounds in weight:

New York, NY; Stewart Airport,

Newburgh, NY; and Miami, FL.

(ii) Exceeding 36 inches in height or

30 pounds in weight: New York, NY,

and Stewart Airport, Newburgh, NY.

* * * * *

§ 92.106 [Amended]

7. Section 92.106 would be amended

as follows:

a. In paragraph (b)(1), the first

sentence, by adding the words ‘‘, except

as provided in § 92.107,’’ immediately

following the words ‘‘any part of the

world’’.

b. In paragraph (b)(2), the first

sentence, by adding the words ‘‘, except

as provided in § 92.107,’’ immediately

following the words ‘‘any part of the

world’’.

8. Section 92.107 would be amended

as follows:

a. By adding the paragraph

designation ‘‘(a)’’ immediately

preceding the words ‘‘In-bond

shipments from Canada.’’

b. By adding new paragraphs (b) and

(c) to read as follows:

§ 92.107 Special provisions.

* * * * *

(b) Ratites from Canada. Ratites that

were hatched and raised in Canada or

ratites that were legally imported into

Canada and, upon arrival in Canada,

were quarantined for a minimum of 28

days at a Canadian quarantine facility

and remained in Canada for an

additional 60 days following completion

of quarantine may be imported into the

United States:

(1) Without being quarantined upon

arrival in the United States; and

(2) At any of the following ports of

entry: Anchorage, AK; Fairbanks, AK;

Los Angeles, CA; San Diego, CA;

Denver, CO; Jacksonville, FL; Miami,

FL; Port Canaveral, FL; St.PetersburgClearwater, FL; Tampa, FL; Atlanta, GA;

Honolulu, HI; Eastport, ID; Chicago, IL;

New Orleans, LA; Boston, MA;

Baltimore, MD; Houlton, ME; Jackman,

ME; Portland, ME; Detroit, MI; Port

Huron, MI; Sault Ste. Marie, MI;

Minneapolis, MN; Great Falls, MT;

Opheim, MT; Raymond, MT;

Sweetgrass, MT; Alexandria Bay, NY;

Buffalo, NY; Champlain, NY; New York,

NY; Stewart Airport, Newburgh, NY;

Dunseith, ND; Pembina, ND; Portal, ND;

Portland, OR; San Juan, PR; Galveston,

TX; Houston, TX; Highgate Springs, VT;

Blaine, WA; Lynden, WA; Oroville, WA;

Seattle, WA; Spokane, WA; Sumas, WA;

and Tacoma, WA; and

(3) If offered for entry at a Canadian

land border port listed in § 92.203(b),

without an import permit; and

(4) If consigned directly to slaughter

from the port of entry, without being

treated for ectoparasites within 3 to 14
27802 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 107 / Monday, June 3, 1996 / Proposed Rules

days before shipment to the United

States, as otherwise required by

§ 92.104(c)(8).

(c) Ratite eggs from Canada. Hatching

eggs of ratites that were laid in Canada

may be imported into the United States:

(1) Without being quarantined upon

arrival in the United States; and

(2) At any of the ports of entry listed

in paragraph (b)(2) of this section or

authorized by § 92.105(a); and

(3) If offered for entry at a Canadian

land border port listed in § 92.203(b),

without an import permit.

Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of

May 1996.

Lonnie J. King,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 96–13810 Filed 5–31–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

12 CFR Part 229

[Regulation CC; Docket No. R–0926]

Availability of Funds and Collection of

Checks

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Board is proposing

amendments to its Regulation CC

relating to the availability of funds and

collection of checks. The proposed

amendments do not represent any major

policy changes and are intended to

clarify the regulation and, in some

cases, reduce the compliance burden for

depository institutions.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before August 2, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments, which should

refer to Docket No. R–0926, may be

mailed to Mr. William W. Wiles,

Secretary, Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

D.C. 20551. Comments addressed to Mr.

Wiles also may be delivered to the

Board’s mail room between 8:45 a.m.

and 5:15 p.m. and to the security control

room outside of those hours. Both the

mail room and the security control room

are accessible from the courtyard

entrance on 20th Street between

Constitution Avenue and C Street NW.

Comments may be inspected in Room

MP–500 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00

p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Louise Roseman, Associate Director

(202/452–2789), Division of Reserve

Bank Operations and Payment Systems;

Stephanie Martin, Senior Attorney (202/

452–3198), Heatherun Allison, Attorney

(202/452–3565), Legal Division; Manley

Williams, Staff Attorney, (202/736–

5565), Division of Consumer and

Community Affairs. For the hearing

impaired only, contact Dorothea

Thompson, Telecommunications Device

for the Deaf (TDD) (202/452–3544),

Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System, 20th and C Streets

NW., Washington, D.C. 20551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board

is proposing amendments to its

Regulation CC (12 CFR Part 229),

Availability of Funds and Collection of

Checks. The proposed amendments are

clarifying and technical in nature and

do not represent any major policy

changes. The proposed amendments to

subpart B of the regulation, governing

availability schedules and disclosures,

address a variety of issues, including the

treatment of deposits received at

‘‘contractual’’ branches (such as affiliate

banks). Many of the proposed

amendments are designed to reduce the

burden on depository institutions of

complying with the regulation. For

example, the proposed amendments

would provide more flexibility for banks

giving hold notices under emergency

conditions, clarify the various media by

which written notices may be given, and

delete certain notice content

requirements. The Board is also

proposing to update the Model Forms in

Appendix C.

The proposed amendments to subpart

C, governing collection of checks, would

make various clarifications of the

interaction between Regulation CC and

the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.),

set forth rules for checks drawn on

banks in Guam, American Samoa, and

the Northern Mariana Islands, and

address other check collection matters.

The Board is specifically requesting

comment on the time required for a

bank to qualify a returned check for

automated processing (§ 229.31(a)), the

provisions regarding the extension of

the midnight deadline (§ 229.30(c)), and

the extent of a presenting bank’s

preferred claim against a closed paying

bank (§ 229.39(d)).

A red-lined version of the proposed

amendments to the regulation, model

forms, and Commentary is available

from the Board’s Freedom of

Information Office or by calling 202–

452–3684.

Section-by-Section Analysis

Available for withdrawal (§ 229.2(d)).

The regulation defines ‘‘available for

withdrawal’’ to mean available for all

uses generally permitted to the customer

for actually and finally collected funds

under the bank’s account agreement or

policies. The Commentary to this

definition clarifies that funds are

considered available for withdrawal

even if they are being held to satisfy,

among other things, the customer’s

liability arising from the certification,

guaranty, or acceptance of a check or the

sale of a cashier’s or teller’s check. The

Board has received several inquiries as

to whether funds would be considered

available for withdrawal if they are

being held to satisfy a contingent

obligation of the customer relating to the

customer’s account. For example, a

depositary bank might receive a

notification that the customer has

authorized a debit to the account at a

point-of-sale terminal. Banks often

‘‘memo-post’’ these debits to the

customer’s account in advance of the

settlement date. The Board proposes to

revise the Commentary to clarify that

funds held to meet contingent

obligations of the customer related to

the account are considered to be

available for withdrawal.

Definition of ‘‘bank’’ (§ 229.2(e)). The

regulation states that, for purposes of

subpart C, the term ‘‘bank’’ includes any

person engaged in the business of

banking, including a Federal Reserve

Bank, a Federal Home Loan Bank, and

a state or unit of general local

government to the extent that the state

or unit of general local government acts

as a paying bank. The Board proposes to

amend the regulation’s definition of

‘‘bank’’ to clarify that the Federal

Reserve Banks, the Federal Home Loan

Banks, and state or units of general local

government are not necessarily engaged

in the business of banking,

notwithstanding the fact that they are

included in this definition.

Definition of ‘‘traveler’s check’’

(§ 229.2(hh)). The Commentary states

that ‘‘[t]raveler’s checks that are not

issued by banks may not have any

words on them identifying a bank as

drawee or paying agent * * *.’’ Some

commenters have interpreted this

provision to mean that traveler’s checks

are prohibited from having words on

them identifying a bank. The Board

proposes to revise the Commentary to

clarify that only a description of a

possible situation, and not a

prohibition, is intended.

Notice requirement to state amount of

deposit (§§ 229.13(g) and 229.16(c)).

Regulation CC requires a notice of an

exception hold (§ 229.13(g)(1)(i)(B)) or a

case-by-case hold (§ 229.16(c)(2)(i)(B)) to

include the amount of the deposit from

which funds will be held. Some banks

have noted that when they learn that a

check is being returned by the paying