80 FR 10323 - Cattle Fever Tick; Importation Requirements for Ruminants From Mexico
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 38 (February 26, 2015)
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 38 (February 26, 2015)
| Page Range | 10323-10325 | |
| FR Document | 2015-04074 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 38 (Thursday, February 26, 2015)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 10323-10325] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-04074] ======================================================================== Rules and Regulations Federal Register ________________________________________________________________________ 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. Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. ======================================================================== Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 38 / Thursday, February 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations [[Page 10323]] DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 9 CFR Part 93 [Docket No. APHIS-2012-0073] RIN 0579-AD91 Cattle Fever Tick; Importation Requirements for Ruminants From Mexico AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations to recognize the State of Sonora as a region in Mexico that is free of fever ticks. We are also establishing an exemption from acaricide dipping treatment requirements, and the documentation requirements associated with such dipping, that were formerly applicable to cattle and other ruminants originating from Sonora as a condition of eligibility for entry to the United States, provided that certain conditions are met. This action will remove restrictions on the importation of cattle and other ruminants from Sonora that we believe are no longer necessary and reduce the costs associated with tick dipping for exporters and importers of ruminants. DATES: Effective March 30, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Betzaida Lopez, Senior Staff Veterinarian, National Import Export Services, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3300. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The regulations in 9 CFR part 93 prohibit or restrict the importation of certain animals, birds, and poultry into the United States to prevent the introduction of communicable diseases of livestock and poultry. Subpart D of part 93 (Sec. Sec. 93.400 through 93.436, referred to below as the regulations) governs the importation of ruminants; within subpart D, Sec. Sec. 93.424 through 93.429 specifically address the importation of various ruminants from Mexico into the United States. On July 17, 2014, we published in the Federal Register (79 FR 41652-41656, Docket No. APHIS-2012-0073) a proposal\1\ to amend the regulations by recognizing the State of Sonora as a region in Mexico that is free of fever ticks. We also proposed to establish an exemption from acaricide dipping treatment requirements, and the documentation requirements associated with such dipping, that have applied to cattle and other ruminants originating from Sonora as a condition of eligibility for entry to the United States, provided that certain conditions are met. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2012-0073. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending September 15, 2014. We received two comments by that date. They were from a cattle producers' association and an individual. One commenter supported the proposed rule. The other expressed a generalized opposition, but did not address the actual content of the proposed rule. Thus, there is no need to address that comment. Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, without change. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. In accordance with 5 U.S. C. 604, we have performed a final regulatory flexibility analysis, which is summarized below, regarding the economic effects of this rule on small entities. Copies of the full analysis are available on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1 for a link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We are recognizing the Mexican State of Sonora as a region that is free of fever ticks. Under this rulemaking, importers of cattle from Sonora will have to submit an application either for inspection or dipping, but not both, as was previously required. From 2009 to 2013, 1.21 million cattle were imported yearly from Mexico. About one-fourth came from Sonora. Cattle imported into the United States from Mexico are generally purchased by stocker operations that background the cattle on pasture before they are shipped to feedlots. The average unit price of cattle imported from Mexico between 2009 and 2013 was about $440. The average cost of dipping with an acaricide is $3.50 to $10.00 per head. It takes approximately 5 seconds for 3 cattle to cross a dipping vat. For an average 500-head herd, dipping takes about 15 minutes. To inspect a 500-head herd takes from 4 to 12 hours. Depending on the size of the herd and time needed for inspection, some importers may choose to have the cattle dipped rather than inspected. The estimated cost of dipping is equivalent to about 1 to 2 percent of the value of the imported cattle. Any resulting cost savings realized by U.S. cattle importers due to inspection rather than dipping of cattle will depend on the relative price responsiveness of the sellers and buyers of the cattle. APHIS does not expect the rule to result in an increase of any consequence in the number of cattle imported from Mexico. Executive Order 12988 This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 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 In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S. C. 3501 et se.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements included in this final rule, which were filed under 0579-0425, have been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). When OMB notifies us of its decision, if approval is denied, we will publish a document in the Federal [[Page 10324]] Register providing notice of what action we plan to take. E-Government Act Compliance The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to compliance 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. For information pertinent to E-Government Act compliance related to this rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2727. List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 93 Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR part 93 as follows: PART 93--IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND POULTRY, AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND POULTRY PRODUCTS; REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING CONTAINERS 0 1. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 0 2. In Sec. 93.400, the definition of fever tick is revised to read as follows: Sec. 93.400 Definitions. * * * * * Fever tick. Rhipicephalus annulatus, Rhipicephalus microplus, and any other species of tick determined by the Administrator to be a vector of bovine babesiosis and specified on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/portal/aphis/ourfocus/importexport. * * * * * Sec. 93.423 [Amended] 0 3. In Sec. 93.423, paragraph (c) is amended by removing the words ``splenetic, southern, or tick fever'' and adding the words ``bovine babesiosis'' in their place. 0 4. In Sec. 93.427, paragraph (b) and the OMB citation at the end of the section are revised to read as follows: Sec. 93.427 Cattle and other bovines from Mexico. * * * * * (b)(1) Cattle from regions of Mexico that APHIS has determined to be free from fever ticks. APHIS has evaluated certain regions of Mexico in accordance with Sec. 92.2 of this chapter, and determined that they are free from fever ticks; a list of all such regions is found on the Internet http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/portal/aphis/ourfocus/importexport. Copies of the list are also available by contacting APHIS at the following address: Regionalization Evaluation Services, National Import Export Services, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737. Regions may be removed from the list based on a determination by APHIS that fever ticks exist in the region, on the discovery of tick-infested cattle from the region at a port of entry into the United States, or on information provided by a representative of the government of that region that fever ticks exist in the region. Cattle from regions of Mexico that APHIS has determined to be free from fever ticks may be imported into the United States subject to the following conditions: (i) The cattle are accompanied by a certificate issued in accordance with Sec. 93.405 that states that the cattle originate from a region of Mexico that APHIS has determined to be free from fever ticks. (ii) If the cattle will transit to the United States through an area of Mexico that APHIS has not determined to be free from fever ticks, they are moved in a sealed means of conveyance, and that seal remains intact throughout such transit. (iii) The cattle are presented for entry into the United States at a land border port of entry listed in Sec. 93.403(c). (iv) The cattle are segregated at the U.S. port of entry from cattle from regions of Mexico that APHIS has not determined to be free from fever ticks. (v) The importer, or his or her agent, executes and delivers to the inspector at the port of entry an application for inspection or supervised dipping. In this application, the importer, or his or her agent, waive all claims against the United States for any loss or damage to the cattle occasioned by or resulting from inspection or dipping or from the fact that the cattle are later found still to be tick infested, and for any loss or damage to any other cattle in the importer's possession or control that come in contact with the dipped cattle. (vi) The cattle are either inspected by an APHIS inspector at the port of entry for evidence of tick infestation or are treated with a tickicidal dip that is listed in Sec. 72.13 of this chapter under the supervision of an inspector at the port of entry. (vii) If any cattle are determined to be infested with fever ticks, the lot of cattle is refused entry and may only be imported into the United States subject to the requirements in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. (2) Cattle from regions of Mexico that APHIS has not determined to be free from fever ticks. Cattle from regions of Mexico that APHIS has not determined to be free from fever ticks may only be imported into the United States subject to the following conditions: (i) The cattle have been inspected by a veterinarian in Mexico and, in the determination of the veterinarian, are free from fever ticks and all evidence of communicable diseases, and have not been exposed to communicable diseases, other than bovine babesiosis, during the 60 days prior to movement to a port of entry into the United States. (ii) The cattle have been treated in Mexico with a tickicidal dip that is listed in Sec. 72.13 of this chapter within 7 to 14 days before being offered for entry into the United States. (iii) The cattle are accompanied by a certificate issued in accordance with Sec. 93.405 that states that this inspection and dipping have occurred. (iv) The cattle are presented for entry into the United States at the port of entry at Santa Teresa, NM, or a port of entry within Texas that is listed in Sec. 93.403(c). (v) The importer, or his or her agent, executes and delivers to the inspector at the port of entry an application for inspection and supervised dipping. In this application, the importer, or his or her agent, agrees to waive all claims against the United States for any loss or damage to the cattle occasioned by or resulting from this dipping or from the fact that the cattle are later found to still be infested with ticks, and for any loss or damage to any other cattle in the importer's possession or control that come in contact with the dipped cattle. (vi) When offered for entry, the cattle receive an inspection by an inspector. If free from fever ticks, the cattle are treated once with a tickicidal dip that is listed in Sec. 72.13 of this chapter 7 to 14 days after the dipping required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section. If found to be infested with fever ticks, the cattle are refused entry and may not be inspected again at a port of entry until they are again dipped and 7 to 14 days have elapsed. (vii) The cattle are not imported into an area of Texas that is quarantined in accordance with Sec. 72.5 of this chapter for bovine babesiosis, or for tick infestation. * * * * * [[Page 10325]] (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control numbers 0579-0040, 0579-0224, 0579-0393, and 0579-0425) Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of February 2015. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 2015-04074 Filed 2-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
![10323
Rules and Regulations Federal Register
Vol. 80, No. 38
Thursday, February 26, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER introduction of communicable diseases We are recognizing the Mexican State
contains regulatory documents having general of livestock and poultry. Subpart D of of Sonora as a region that is free of fever
applicability and legal effect, most of which part 93 (§§ 93.400 through 93.436, ticks. Under this rulemaking, importers
are keyed to and codified in the Code of referred to below as the regulations) of cattle from Sonora will have to
Federal Regulations, which is published under governs the importation of ruminants; submit an application either for
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
within subpart D, §§ 93.424 through inspection or dipping, but not both, as
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by 93.429 specifically address the was previously required.
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of importation of various ruminants from From 2009 to 2013, 1.21 million cattle
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL Mexico into the United States. were imported yearly from Mexico.
REGISTER issue of each week. On July 17, 2014, we published in the About one-fourth came from Sonora.
Federal Register (79 FR 41652–41656, Cattle imported into the United States
Docket No. APHIS–2012–0073) a from Mexico are generally purchased by
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE proposal1 to amend the regulations by stocker operations that background the
recognizing the State of Sonora as a cattle on pasture before they are shipped
Animal and Plant Health Inspection to feedlots.
region in Mexico that is free of fever
Service The average unit price of cattle
ticks. We also proposed to establish an
exemption from acaricide dipping imported from Mexico between 2009
9 CFR Part 93 and 2013 was about $440. The average
treatment requirements, and the
[Docket No. APHIS–2012–0073] documentation requirements associated cost of dipping with an acaricide is
with such dipping, that have applied to $3.50 to $10.00 per head. It takes
RIN 0579–AD91 approximately 5 seconds for 3 cattle to
cattle and other ruminants originating
from Sonora as a condition of eligibility cross a dipping vat. For an average 500-
Cattle Fever Tick; Importation head herd, dipping takes about 15
Requirements for Ruminants From for entry to the United States, provided
minutes. To inspect a 500-head herd
Mexico that certain conditions are met.
takes from 4 to 12 hours. Depending on
We solicited comments concerning the size of the herd and time needed for
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health our proposal for 60 days ending
Inspection Service, USDA. inspection, some importers may choose
September 15, 2014. We received two to have the cattle dipped rather than
ACTION: Final rule. comments by that date. They were from inspected. The estimated cost of dipping
a cattle producers’ association and an is equivalent to about 1 to 2 percent of
SUMMARY: We are amending the
individual. One commenter supported the value of the imported cattle. Any
regulations to recognize the State of
the proposed rule. The other expressed resulting cost savings realized by U.S.
Sonora as a region in Mexico that is free
a generalized opposition, but did not cattle importers due to inspection rather
of fever ticks. We are also establishing
address the actual content of the than dipping of cattle will depend on
an exemption from acaricide dipping
proposed rule. Thus, there is no need to the relative price responsiveness of the
treatment requirements, and the
address that comment. Therefore, for the sellers and buyers of the cattle. APHIS
documentation requirements associated
reasons given in the proposed rule and does not expect the rule to result in an
with such dipping, that were formerly
in this document, we are adopting the increase of any consequence in the
applicable to cattle and other ruminants
proposed rule as a final rule, without number of cattle imported from Mexico.
originating from Sonora as a condition
change.
of eligibility for entry to the United Executive Order 12988
States, provided that certain conditions Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
are met. This action will remove Flexibility Act This final rule has been reviewed
restrictions on the importation of cattle under Executive Order 12988, Civil
This final rule has been determined to Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts
and other ruminants from Sonora that
be not significant for the purposes of all State and local laws and regulations
we believe are no longer necessary and
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, that are inconsistent with this rule; (2)
reduce the costs associated with tick
has not been reviewed by the Office of has no retroactive effect; and (3) does
dipping for exporters and importers of
Management and Budget. not require administrative proceedings
ruminants.
In accordance with 5 U.S. C. 604, we before parties may file suit in court
DATES: Effective March 30, 2015.
have performed a final regulatory challenging this rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. flexibility analysis, which is
Betzaida Lopez, Senior Staff Paperwork Reduction Act
summarized below, regarding the
Veterinarian, National Import Export economic effects of this rule on small In accordance with section 3507(d) of
Services, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road entities. Copies of the full analysis are the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) available on the Regulations.gov Web (44 U.S. C. 3501 et se.), the information
851–3300. site (see footnote 1 for a link to collection or recordkeeping
requirements included in this final rule,
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulations.gov) or by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER which were filed under 0579–0425,
Background have been submitted for approval to the
INFORMATION CONTACT.
The regulations in 9 CFR part 93 Office of Management and Budget
prohibit or restrict the importation of 1 To view the proposed rule and the comments (OMB). When OMB notifies us of its
certain animals, birds, and poultry into we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/ decision, if approval is denied, we will
the United States to prevent the #!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2012-0073. publish a document in the Federal
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:38 Feb 25, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER1.SGM 26FER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_10361/page/1.svg)
![10324 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 38 / Thursday, February 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Register providing notice of what action certain regions of Mexico in accordance (vii) If any cattle are determined to be
we plan to take. with § 92.2 of this chapter, and infested with fever ticks, the lot of cattle
determined that they are free from fever is refused entry and may only be
E-Government Act Compliance
ticks; a list of all such regions is found imported into the United States subject
The Animal and Plant Health on the Internet http:// to the requirements in paragraph (b)(2)
Inspection Service is committed to www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/portal/aphis/ of this section.
compliance with the E-Government Act ourfocus/importexport. Copies of the (2) Cattle from regions of Mexico that
to promote the use of the Internet and list are also available by contacting APHIS has not determined to be free
other information technologies, to APHIS at the following address: from fever ticks. Cattle from regions of
provide increased opportunities for Regionalization Evaluation Services, Mexico that APHIS has not determined
citizen access to Government National Import Export Services, to be free from fever ticks may only be
information and services, and for other Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant imported into the United States subject
purposes. For information pertinent to Health Inspection Service, 4700 River to the following conditions:
E-Government Act compliance related Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737. (i) The cattle have been inspected by
to this rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly Regions may be removed from the list a veterinarian in Mexico and, in the
Hardy, APHIS’ Information Collection based on a determination by APHIS that determination of the veterinarian, are
Coordinator, at (301) 851–2727. fever ticks exist in the region, on the free from fever ticks and all evidence of
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 93 discovery of tick-infested cattle from the communicable diseases, and have not
region at a port of entry into the United been exposed to communicable
Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, States, or on information provided by a diseases, other than bovine babesiosis,
Poultry and poultry products, representative of the government of that during the 60 days prior to movement
Quarantine, Reporting and region that fever ticks exist in the to a port of entry into the United States.
recordkeeping requirements. region. Cattle from regions of Mexico (ii) The cattle have been treated in
Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR that APHIS has determined to be free Mexico with a tickicidal dip that is
part 93 as follows: from fever ticks may be imported into listed in § 72.13 of this chapter within
the United States subject to the 7 to 14 days before being offered for
PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN following conditions: entry into the United States.
ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND (i) The cattle are accompanied by a (iii) The cattle are accompanied by a
POULTRY, AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, certificate issued in accordance with certificate issued in accordance with
BIRD, AND POULTRY PRODUCTS; § 93.405 that states that the cattle § 93.405 that states that this inspection
REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF originate from a region of Mexico that and dipping have occurred.
CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING APHIS has determined to be free from (iv) The cattle are presented for entry
CONTAINERS fever ticks. into the United States at the port of
■ 1. The authority citation for part 93 (ii) If the cattle will transit to the entry at Santa Teresa, NM, or a port of
continues to read as follows: United States through an area of Mexico entry within Texas that is listed in
that APHIS has not determined to be § 93.403(c).
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301–8317; (v) The importer, or his or her agent,
21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7
free from fever ticks, they are moved in
CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. a sealed means of conveyance, and that executes and delivers to the inspector at
seal remains intact throughout such the port of entry an application for
■ 2. In § 93.400, the definition of fever transit. inspection and supervised dipping. In
tick is revised to read as follows: (iii) The cattle are presented for entry this application, the importer, or his or
§ 93.400 Definitions. into the United States at a land border her agent, agrees to waive all claims
port of entry listed in § 93.403(c). against the United States for any loss or
* * * * *
Fever tick. Rhipicephalus annulatus, (iv) The cattle are segregated at the damage to the cattle occasioned by or
Rhipicephalus microplus, and any other U.S. port of entry from cattle from resulting from this dipping or from the
species of tick determined by the regions of Mexico that APHIS has not fact that the cattle are later found to still
Administrator to be a vector of bovine determined to be free from fever ticks. be infested with ticks, and for any loss
babesiosis and specified on the Internet (v) The importer, or his or her agent, or damage to any other cattle in the
at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/ executes and delivers to the inspector at importer’s possession or control that
portal/aphis/ourfocus/importexport. the port of entry an application for come in contact with the dipped cattle.
inspection or supervised dipping. In (vi) When offered for entry, the cattle
* * * * * receive an inspection by an inspector. If
this application, the importer, or his or
§ 93.423 [Amended] her agent, waive all claims against the free from fever ticks, the cattle are
United States for any loss or damage to treated once with a tickicidal dip that is
■ 3. In § 93.423, paragraph (c) is
the cattle occasioned by or resulting listed in § 72.13 of this chapter 7 to 14
amended by removing the words
from inspection or dipping or from the days after the dipping required in
‘‘splenetic, southern, or tick fever’’ and
fact that the cattle are later found still paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section. If
adding the words ‘‘bovine babesiosis’’ in
to be tick infested, and for any loss or found to be infested with fever ticks, the
their place.
damage to any other cattle in the cattle are refused entry and may not be
■ 4. In § 93.427, paragraph (b) and the
importer’s possession or control that inspected again at a port of entry until
OMB citation at the end of the section they are again dipped and 7 to 14 days
are revised to read as follows: come in contact with the dipped cattle.
(vi) The cattle are either inspected by have elapsed.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 93.427 Cattle and other bovines from an APHIS inspector at the port of entry (vii) The cattle are not imported into
Mexico. for evidence of tick infestation or are an area of Texas that is quarantined in
* * * * * treated with a tickicidal dip that is accordance with § 72.5 of this chapter
(b)(1) Cattle from regions of Mexico listed in § 72.13 of this chapter under for bovine babesiosis, or for tick
that APHIS has determined to be free the supervision of an inspector at the infestation.
from fever ticks. APHIS has evaluated port of entry. * * * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:38 Feb 25, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER1.SGM 26FER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_10361/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 38 / Thursday, February 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 10325
(Approved by the Office of Management Jeff Pienta, Senior Attorney, Office of threshold solely because of payments
and Budget under control numbers General Counsel, Farm Credit related to or change(s) in the value of a
0579–0040, 0579–0224, 0579–0393, Administration, McLean, VA 22102– qualified pension plan that was
and 0579–0425) 5090, (703) 883–4020, TTY (703) 883– available to all employees on the same
Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of 4056. basis at the time they joined the plan.
February 2015. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
We believe that application of the
Kevin Shea, existing rule could create such an
I. Objective unintended effect and reduce the
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service. The objective of this rule is to effectiveness of the disclosure.
improve the quality of disclosure Therefore, on November 17, 2014, we
[FR Doc. 2015–04074 Filed 2–25–15; 8:45 am]
information shareholders receive on proposed amending existing
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
senior officer and highly compensated § 620.6(c)(2)(i) to exclude reporting
employee compensation. employees’ compensation in the Table if
the employees were not senior officers
FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION II. Background and would be considered highly
Congress explained in section 514 of compensated employees solely because
12 CFR Part 620 of payments related to or change(s) in
the Farm Credit Banks and Associations
RIN 3052–AD02 Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (1992 value of the employees’ qualified
Act) 1 that disclosures of financial pension plans provided that the plans
Disclosure to Shareholders; Pension information and compensation paid to were available to all employees on the
Benefit Disclosures senior officers, among other disclosures, same basis at the time the employee
provide System shareholders with joined the plan.
ACTION: Final rule.
information necessary to better manage III. Comments and Our Response
SUMMARY: The Farm Credit their institution and make informed
The comment period for the proposed
Administration (FCA, we or our) decisions regarding the operation of
rule closed on December 17, 2014 (79
amends our regulations related to Farm their institution. In addition, the FCA
FR 68376, Nov. 17, 2014). We received
Credit System (System) bank and Board declared its commitment to
four comment letters on our proposed
association disclosures to shareholders support the cooperative business model
rule: One comment letter from the
and investors of senior officer and structure by encouraging member-
Independent Community Bankers of
compensation in the Summary borrowers to participate in the America (ICBA), responding on behalf
Compensation Table (Table). Under the management, control, and ownership of of its members; one comment from a
final rule, System banks and their institutions.2 Providing member- Farm Credit bank (FCB); one comment
associations are not required to report in borrowers with transparent and letter from a System association; and
the Table the compensation of complete disclosures regarding the one comment letter from the Farm
employees who are not senior officers compensation of senior officers and Credit Council, responding on behalf of
and who would not otherwise be certain other highly compensated its members. Two commenters
considered ‘‘highly compensated employees is essential to fostering an supported the proposed rule, one
employees’’ but for the payments related environment wherein member- supported it with suggested changes,
to, or change(s) in value of, the borrowers can do so effectively. and one opposed the rule. In the
employees’ qualified pension plans, With this as one of our objectives, we discussion below, we address the
provided that the plans were available issued a final rule on October 3, 2012, significant comments. After careful
to all employees on the same basis at the that enhanced disclosure of senior consideration of the comments, the
time the employees joined the plans. officer compensation and other related proposed rule is finalized without any
DATES: Effective Date: The regulation topics. Section 620.6(c)(2)(i) requires changes.
will be effective 30 days after System Banks and associations to
publication in the Federal Register disclose senior officer compensation for A. Transparency and Quality of
during which time either one or both the last 3 fiscal years. For purposes of Disclosure
Houses of Congress are in session. We this reporting requirement only, The ICBA opposes the proposed rule
will publish a notice of the effective § 620.6(c)(2)(i) extends the regulatory and urges the FCA to withdraw the
date in the Federal Register. definition of ‘‘senior officers’’ to include proposed rule or adopt the ICBA’s
Compliance Date: System banks and any employee whose compensation recommendations. The ICBA asserts that
associations must comply with the final level was among the five highest paid the proposed rule reduces transparency
rule for compensation reported in the during the reporting period. The intent of pension disclosures to System
Table for the fiscal year ending 2015, of this extension was to ensure that shareholders and seeks to allow System
and may implement the final rule System banks and associations provide institutions to hide significant
retroactively for the fiscal years ended shareholders with necessary enhancements to pensions and other
2014, 2013, and 2012. However, compensation information on highly compensation arrangements by not
retroactive application is not required, compensated employees even though disclosing them. We agree with the
and we would expect footnote they did not fall within the regulatory ICBA that employee compensation
disclosure of the change in calculation definition of ‘‘senior officer.’’ The intent should be reported in this disclosure
for the fiscal years to which the final was not to provide compensation item if the employee’s compensation
rule was applied. information on employees who would reaches the highly compensated
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: only reach the ‘‘highly compensated’’ employee threshold due to large or
Michael T. Wilson, Policy Analyst, significant bonuses and other such
1 PublicLaw 102–552, 106 Stat. 4131 (1992).
Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit 2 See
payments. As we explained in the
FCA Policy Statement ‘‘Cooperative
Administration, McLean, VA 22102– Operating Philosophy—Serving the Members of
proposed rule, however, there would be
5090, (703) 883–4124, TTY (703) 883– Farm Credit System Institutions’’ (FCA–PS–80), no reporting requirement for this
4056, Or dated October 14, 2010. disclosure item solely for employees
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:38 Feb 25, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26FER1.SGM 26FER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_10361/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-18 13:05:12
Document Modified: 2015-12-18 13:05:12
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | Effective March 30, 2015. | |
| Contact | Dr. Betzaida Lopez, Senior Staff Veterinarian, National Import Export Services, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3300. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 10323 | |
| RIN Number | 0579-AD91 | |
| CFR Associated | Animal Diseases; Imports; Livestock; Poultry and Poultry Products; Quarantine and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR