[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 9 (Friday, January 13, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4198-4203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00588]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
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.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 9 / Friday, January 13, 2017 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 4198]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 65
[Doc. No. AMS-LPS-16-0014]
Addition of Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling Requirements for
Venison
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) proposes to amend the
country of origin labeling (COOL) regulation to add muscle cuts of
venison and ground venison to mandatory COOL requirements. AMS is
issuing this proposed rule to conform to amendments to the Agricultural
Marketing Act of 1946 (Act) as mandated by the Agricultural Act of 2014
(2014 Farm Bill), that added muscle cuts of venison and ground venison
to the list of covered commodities subject to mandatory COOL.
DATES: Submit comments on or before March 14, 2017. Pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the recordkeeping burden that
would result from this proposal must be received by March 14, 2017.
ADDRESSES: All comments should reference the docket number AMS-LPS-16-
0014; the date of submission; and the page number of this issue of the
Federal Register. Comments may also be submitted to: Julie Henderson,
Director, COOL Division; Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program,
Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA);
Room 2614-S, STOP 0216; 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC
20250-0216. AMS will make the comments available for public inspection
at the above address during regular business hours or via the Internet
at www.regulations.gov.
Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), send comments
regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate, ways to minimize burden,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, or any other aspect of this collection of
information to the above address. Comments concerning the information
collection under PRA also should be sent to the Desk Office for
Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Please be advised that all comments submitted in response to this
proposed rule will be included in the record without change and will be
made available to the public on the Internet at www.regulations.gov.
The identity, including any personal information provided, of the
individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Henderson, Director, COOL
Division; Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program, Agricultural Marketing
Service, USDA; Room 2614-S, STOP 0216; 1400 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250-0216; telephone (202) 720-4486; or email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866 or Executive Order 13563.
Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has waived the
review process.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule is not intended to have a
retroactive effect. The Act prohibits states or political subdivisions
of a state to impose any requirement that is in addition to, or
inconsistent with, any requirement of the Act. There are no civil
justice implications associated with this proposed rule.
Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism. This Order directs agencies to construe, in regulations and
otherwise, a Federal statute to preempt state law only where the
statute contains an express preemption provision. No federalism
implications are associated with this proposed rule.
With regard to consultation with states, as directed by Executive
Order 13132, AMS previously consulted with the states that have country
of origin labeling programs. Currently, AMS has cooperative agreements
with 47 states to assist in the enforcement of the COOL program and has
communications with all 50 states on a regular basis.
Background and Proposed Revisions
AMS is proposing to add venison and ground venison to the list of
covered commodities subject to mandatory COOL regulation in conformance
to section 12104(b) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill)
(Pub. L. 113-79). Retailers and suppliers would subsequently be
required to keep records and provide their customers notification of
the country of origin of muscle cuts and ground venison that they sell.
Individuals that supply venison, whether directly to retailers or
indirectly through other participants in the marketing chain, would be
required to establish and maintain country of origin information for
venison and supply this information to retailers. As a result,
producers, handlers, manufacturers, wholesalers, importers, and
retailers of venison would be affected.
This proposed rule would amend the country of origin labeling
regulations (7 CFR part 65). AMS proposes to add definitions for
cervidae (Sec. 65.117), ground venison (Sec. 65.178), and venison
(Sec. 65.270). The proposed rule would amend definitions for covered
commodity (Sec. 65.135(a)(1) and (2)), production step (Sec. 65.230),
raised (Sec. 65.235), slaughter (Sec. 65.250), and United States
country of origin (Sec. 65.260(a)) by adding references to venison.
AMS proposes to amend country of origin notification
[[Page 4199]]
(Sec. 65.300(h)) to add references to ground venison, and
responsibilities of suppliers (Sec. 65.500(b)(1)) to include
references to venison and cervidae.
Additional administrative changes are necessary to reflect the
withdrawal of beef and pork commodities from the COOL regulations as
published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2016 (81 FR 10761).
Therefore, AMS is proposing to amend production step (Sec. 65.230),
raised (Sec. 65.235), and United States country of origin (Sec.
65.260) by removing references to beef and pork from these definitions.
AMS is seeking comments on the aforementioned definitions and
requirements. AMS also invites comments concerning potential economic
and other effects of this proposed rule.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Administrator of AMS has
considered the economic effect of this action on small entities and has
determined that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The purpose of RFA is
to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such
actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly burdened.
Venison Industry
In general, the supply chain for venison and ground venison
consists of: Producers (ranchers); slaughterhouses, processors,
importers, wholesalers, and distributors (intermediary firms); and
retailers. Under this proposed rule, all entities in the supply chain
would be affected. Because the venison industry is very small at all
levels of the supply chain, the overall impact of this proposed rule
would be insignificant. According to the 2014 North American Deer
Farmers Association's Venison Council, most venison is sold to
restaurants, which are not subject to COOL requirements.
The proposed rule would impose recordkeeping requirements on
venison producers and intermediary firms selling venison destined for
retail channels. Individual retailers selling venison would also be
subject to point of sale labeling and recordkeeping requirements. Each
participant in the venison supply chain would bear recordkeeping costs
as well as costs associated with modifications to their business
practices.
Producers
USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) estimated
that, in 2012, there were 4,042 deer farms and 1,199 elk farms,
totaling 5,241 venison farms, in the U.S. This is a decrease from 7,571
in 2007. Of the venison producers identified in a Texas A&M University
2007 study,\1\ 32 percent of survey respondents were breeding and
hunting operations and 7 percent were hunting-only operations.
Moreover, the trophy-hunting segment of the venison industry represents
the primary end market for the breeding stock industry. Breeding and
hunting and hunting-only operations are not considered to be producers
of venison for consumption that are subject to COOL. Relying on the
NASS and Texas A&M data, AMS assumes that 60 percent of the ranches, or
3,144 producers, raise animals for meat consumption. Virtually all
venison-producing operations that would be subject to the amended COOL
regulations are small businesses under the criteria established by the
Small Business Administration (SBA) [13 CFR 121.201]. SBA defines small
agricultural producers as those having annual receipts of less than
$750,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Anderson, D.P., Frosch, B.J., and Outlaw, J.L. Economic
Impact of the United States Cervid Farming Industry. APFC Research
Report 07-4, August 2007. Agricultural & Food Policy Center. Texas
A&M University: College Station, TX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While AMS believes that venison producers already maintain birth
and raising records on each animal (which may include ear tagging,
radio frequency identification devices, and other related means of
identification on either an animal or a lot basis) as a normal part of
business operations and animal husbandry practices, venison producers
may use an affidavit to proclaim where the animals they produce are
born and raised, not by individual but for the whole herd. Two factors
drive the cost to venison producers to comply with this proposed rule:
The time to create the initial affidavit and the time to administer and
maintain the affidavit annually. AMS estimates it will take each
venison producer 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to create and sign the initial
affidavit used to substantiate country of origin claims and carry out
the purposes of this regulation. If producers sign an affidavit of
country of origin on all animals in the herd, the affidavit will
suffice to achieve the purposes of this regulation even if some of the
venison produced ultimately is not sold to retail establishments
covered by the regulation.
For venison producers, it is assumed that the added work needed to
generate an affidavit from an existing recordkeeping system for country
of origin is primarily a bookkeeping task. This task may be performed
by an independent bookkeeper, or in the case of operations that perform
their own bookkeeping, an individual with equivalent skills. The Bureau
of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes wage rates for bookkeepers,
accounting, and auditing clerks. In estimating recordkeeping costs, May
2015 wage rates and benefits published by BLS from the National
Compensation Survey are used. It is assumed that this wage rate
represents the cost for venison producers to hire an independent
bookkeeper. In the case of venison producers who currently perform
their own bookkeeping, it is assumed that this wage rate represents the
opportunity cost of the producers' time for performing these tasks. The
May 2015 wage rate is estimated at $23.23 per hour. For this analysis,
an additional 33 percent is added to the wage rate to account for total
benefits, which include Social Security, unemployment insurance,
workers compensation, etc. resulting in $30.90 per hour. Recordkeeping
time for venison producers to generate and sign a producer affidavit is
estimated at 15 minutes (0.25 hours) per operation. This 0.25 hours
multiplied by 3,144 producers at a cost of $30.90 per hour results in
approximately $24,287 to generate affidavits to substantiate country of
origin claims. Annual maintenance is estimated to take 5 minutes (0.083
hours) for each of the 3,144 operations at a cost of $30.90 per hour
for total annual costs of $8,063. Therefore, the total cost estimates
for producers are $32,351, or approximately $10.29 per firm.
Intermediary Firms
Any establishment that supplies retailers with venison or ground
venison would be required to provide country of origin information to
retailers. This includes importers, slaughterhouses, processors,
wholesalers, and distributors.
From 2011 to 2015, USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS)
reported venison imports of 21.78 million pounds valued at $79.3
million. For those years, the average annual venison imports were 4.356
million pounds valued at $15.86 million, or $3.64 per pound. During
this period, the United States saw a dramatic increase in venison
imports, with virtually all of it originating from New Zealand. For an
imported venison covered commodity, the importer of record must ensure
that
[[Page 4200]]
records provide clear product tracking from the port of entry into the
U.S. to the immediate subsequent recipient. In addition, the records
must accurately reflect the country of origin in relevant U.S. Customs
and Border Protection entry documents and information systems.
Regulated firms must maintain records to verify the accuracy of COOL
declarations for a period of one year from the date of the transaction
(purchase or sale of animals for slaughter, or venison meat at each
point in the supply chain). AMS expects that importers already maintain
records mandated by other Federal Statutes (e.g., Bioterrorism Act of
2002; Tariff Act of 1930) that would be sufficient to verify compliance
with COOL.
Of intermediaries potentially affected by the proposed rule, SBA
classifies as small those manufacturing firms with less than 500
employees and wholesalers with less than 100 employees. Therefore,
approximately 93 percent of the general-line grocery wholesalers are
small businesses. According to NASS' 2012 Economic Census, there were a
total of 2,162 meat and meat products specialty wholesaler firms. Of
these, 2,043 firms had less than 100 employees, meaning approximately
95 percent of meat wholesalers are small firms. That same Census
reported that 2,354 out of 2,629 (90 percent) livestock processing and
slaughtering firms were in operation and classified as small
businesses. USDA's Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) reported that
577 FSIS-inspected establishments (22 percent) in the U.S. process
(i.e., slaughter and process or process-only) non-amenable species,
which include venison.
Intermediaries are generally assumed to have prior experience with
COOL compliance and are expected to have lower costs needed to meet the
requirements of this proposed rule than they did when COOL was first
implemented. Wholesalers would incur recordkeeping costs, costs
associated with supplying country of origin information to retailers,
costs associated with segmenting products by country of origin, and
additional handling costs. Given that venison is such a small
percentage of proteins on the market, it is estimated that few
intermediaries handle venison meat for sale to retail.
Since virtually all intermediary firms are assumed to already have
a recordkeeping system in place for other COOL covered commodities, it
is estimated that one (1) hour will be required to add venison to the
design at a cost of $45 per firm. The initial recordkeeping costs are
estimated by using the Label Cost Model developed for the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) by RTI International for including additional
country of origin information to a livestock processor's records
($33.75 per hour with an additional 33 percent added to cover benefit
costs for a total of $45.00 per hour). While the cost will be higher
for some firms and lower for others, it is believed that $45 per hour
represents a reasonable estimate of average cost for all firms. Based
on this calculation, it is estimated that the initial recordkeeping
costs for the 577 firms specializing in livestock processing and
slaughtering of non-amenable species will be approximately $25,965.
Intermediaries such as handlers, processors, importers and wholesalers
(except livestock processing and slaughtering) are considered to
already have sufficient recordkeeping and documentation systems in
place to convey COOL information for venison products. Thus, no
recordkeeping, set-up, and maintenance burden is estimated for these
entities.
Maintenance activities will include inputting, tracking, and
storing country of origin for venison. Since this is mostly an
administrative task, the cost is estimated by using the May 2015 BLS
wage rate from the National Compensation Survey for administrative
support occupations ($17.40 per hour with an additional 33 percent
added to cover benefit costs for a total of $23.14 per hour). This
occupation category includes stock and inventory clerks and record
clerks. Annual maintenance for venison processing and slaughter
facilities is estimated to take 5 minutes (0.083 hours) at a cost of
$23.14 per hour, for a total annual cost of $1,108. Total initial and
maintenance costs for 577 livestock processing firms are estimated to
be $27,073, or $46.92 per firm.
Retailers
According to the definition of retailer under the Perishable
Agricultural Commodities Act of 1930, the number of retailers that
would be affected by this proposed rule is considerably smaller than
the total number of retailers nationwide. There are 4,504 retail firms
subject to mandatory COOL regulations. An estimated 88 percent (3,964
out of 4,504) of retail firms are considered small businesses.
Only a small percentage of the producers identified by the
previously mentioned Texas A&M University 2007 study actually sell
venison and an even smaller percentage sell venison products to retail
stores subject to COOL. Venison meat is available through some
specialty grocers and national chains that focus on `natural' meats.
USDA's Economic Research Service supermarket sales data for venison and
elk meat show that a total of 350,404 pounds were sold in supermarkets
(the regulated retail firms subject to COOL) during the 5-year period
from 2008 through 2012, or an average of 70,081 pounds per year.
Average annual retail sales of venison are less than 2 percent of
annual venison imports (70,000 divided by 4.4M pounds) without even
accounting for domestic production. Most venison meat is consumed in
restaurants, which are not subject to COOL requirements.
The number of retailers selling venison is a small subset of the
COOL-regulated retailer population. Retailers choosing to carry venison
products would accrue additional recordkeeping costs associated with
supplying country of origin information to consumers as well as
additional handling costs. USDA estimates that 3 percent of retailers
(135 firms out of 4,504 retailers in the U.S.) will carry venison. AMS
estimates that 88 percent of these retailers will be small businesses,
consistent with the overall retailer population.
It is estimated that each of the 135 retail firms will require one
(1) hour to add venison to existing data management systems. The
initial recordkeeping costs for retailers are estimated by using the
same Label Cost Model developed for FDA by RTI International for
including additional country of origin information to a retailer's
records. It is assumed that limited information, such as one-color
redesign of a paper document, will be sufficient to comply with the
rule's recordkeeping requirements (total salary and benefit costs of
$45.00 per hour). Based on one hour per firm at $45 per hour and 135
firms, initial recordkeeping costs at retail are estimated to be
approximately $6,075. The yearly storing and maintenance cost for
retailers is estimated by using the May 2015 BLS wage rate from the
National Compensation Survey for administrative support occupations
($23.14 for wages plus benefits per hour). Annual maintenance for
retail firms is estimated to take 30 minutes (0.5 hours) on average for
135 retail firms, because only a small subset, about 3 percent, of the
4,504 retailers will sell venison, at a cost of $23.14 per hour for
total annual maintenance costs of $1,562. Total initial and maintenance
costs for 135 retailers are estimated to be $7,637.
Accordingly, the Administrator of AMS has conducted this Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and has determined that this proposed
rule will not have a significant economic impact
[[Page 4201]]
on a substantial number of small entities. However, AMS invites
comments concerning potential effects of this proposed rule.
AMS has considered any significant alternatives to this proposal
that accomplish the statutory objectives and minimize the significant
economic impact of the proposal on small entities. AMS does not believe
there are other Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with the proposed rule. The effect of this proposed rule would be
limited to a small number of firms that produce, process, and market
venison. The only effective means of achieving the results mandated by
the 2014 Farm Bill is through this proposed regulatory action.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501-3520) (PRA), AMS is requesting OMB approval for a new information
collection to add venison as a COOL covered commodity. The overall
total burden for initial set-up, annual storage, and maintenance to
comply with reporting and recordkeeping requirements for 3,856
recordkeepers is estimated to be 1,873 hours. OMB previously approved
information collection requirements associated with all other COOL
covered commodities and regulated firms and assigned OMB control number
0581-0250. This proposed rule would increase the overall reporting and
recordkeeping burden due to the anticipated increase in number of
respondents from the venison industry. Therefore, a NEW information
collection is required to carry out the requirements of this proposed
rule. AMS intends to merge this new information collection, upon OMB
approval, into the approved 0581-0250 collection.
Below, AMS has described and estimated the annual burden, i.e., the
amount of time and cost of labor, for entities to prepare and maintain
information to participate in this proposed mandatory labeling program.
AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen access to government information
and services, and for other purposes. As with all mandatory regulatory
programs, recordkeeping burdens are periodically reviewed to reduce
information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector
agencies. The Act, as amended, provides authority for this action.
Title: Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling Requirements for
Venison Meat.
OMB Number: 0581-NEW.
Type of Request: This is a NEW collection.
Abstract: The information collection requirements are essential to
carry out this rule.
COOL provisions of the Act require retailers and suppliers of COOL
covered commodities to verify the accuracy of COOL claims. Only records
maintained in the course of the normal conduct of the business are
required to serve as verification. This proposed rule would add this
recordkeeping requirement for producers, intermediaries, and retailers
of venison meat. This public reporting burden is necessary to ensure
conveyance and accuracy of country of origin and method of production
declarations relied upon at the point of sale at retail. The public
reporting burden also assures that all parties involved in supplying
venison and ground venison meat to retail stores maintain and convey
accurate information as required.
AMS believes that typical venison ranching operations have already
developed much of the necessary recordkeeping (for example, birth,
health, feeding records, and other documentation used to manage and
identify the flock or herd) through normal animal husbandry and
business practices. Furthermore, producer affidavits shall also be
considered acceptable records that suppliers may utilize to initiate
origin claims. Therefore, the estimated incremental costs for venison
producers to supplement existing records with country of origin
information will be relatively small per firm. Examples of initial or
start-up costs would be any additional recordkeeping burden to record
the required country of origin information and transfer this
information to handlers, processors, wholesalers, or retailers via
records used in the normal course of business.
Table 1 displays the estimated annual costs associated for venison
producers, intermediaries, and retailers. This public reporting burden
is necessary to ensure conveyance and accuracy of country of origin and
method of production declarations relied upon at the point of sale at
retail. The public reporting burden also assures that all parties
involved in supplying covered commodities to retail stores maintain and
convey accurate information as required.
Table 1--Estimated Initial Set-Up and Estimated Annual Storage
Maintenance Costs Associated With Paperwork Burden
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial & set-up costs (incurred one
time only) Firms Initial costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Venison Producers....................... 3,144 $24,287
Handlers, Processors, Importers & 0 0
Wholesalers (except livestock
processing & slaughtering).............
Livestock Processing & Slaughtering (non- 577 25,965
amenable species)......................
Retailers............................... 135 6,075
-------------------------------
Total Initial & Set-Up Costs........ 3,856 56,327
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Storing & Maintenance Costs Firms Maintenance
(yearly maintenance cost burden) costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Venison Producers....................... 3,144 8,063
Handlers, Processors, Importers & 0 0
Wholesalers (except livestock
processing & slaughtering).............
Livestock Processing & Slaughtering (non- 577 1,108
amenable species)......................
Retailers............................... 135 1,562
-------------------------------
Total Annual Storing & Maintenance 3,856 10,694
Costs..............................
-------------------------------
Total Estimated Set-Up and .............. 67,061
Annual Maintenance Costs.......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4202]]
The request for approval of the new information collection is as
follows:
Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for initial set-up,
recordkeeping, storage, and maintenance is estimated to average 14
minutes (0.24 hours) per response from all respondents (venison
producers, livestock processers and slaughterers, and retailers).
Initial Set-Up Burden
Respondents: Producers, processors, slaughterhouses, handlers,
wholesalers, importers, and retailers of venison and ground venison
meat.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,856.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 3,856.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,498 hours.
Annual Storage Maintenance Burden
Respondents: Producers, processors, slaughterhouses, handlers,
wholesalers, importers, and retailers of venison and ground venison
meat.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,856.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 3,856.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 376 hours.
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
AMS, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2)
the accuracy of AMS' estimate of the burden of the proposed collection
of information including the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public
record. A 60-day period is provided to comment on the information
collection burden. Comments should reference OMB No. 0581-NEW and be
sent to Julie Henderson, Director, COOL Division; Livestock, Poultry,
and Seed Program, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA; Room 2614-S,
STOP 0216; 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-0216;
telephone (202) 720-4486; or email [email protected]. All comments
received will be available for public inspection. All responses to this
proposed rule will be summarized and included in the request for OMB
approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
Comments concerning the information collection under PRA should
also be sent to the Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC
20503.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 65
Agricultural commodities, Food labeling, Meat and meat products,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, AMS proposes to amend 7 CFR
part 65 as follows:
PART 65--COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING OF LAMB, CHICKEN, GOAT, AND
VENISON MEAT, PERISHABLE AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES, MACADEMIA NUTS,
PECANS, PEANUTS, AND GINSENG
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 65 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq.
0
2. Revise the part heading of 7 CFR part 65 as set forth above.
0
3. Add Sec. 65.117 to read as follows:
Sec. 65.117 Cervidae.
Cervidae means any one of the various species that are raised for
the production of venison meat, such as whitetail deer, elk, fallow
deer, axis deer, sika, red deer (maral), musk deer, rusa deer,
antelope, nilgai, pronghorn, reindeer, and caribou.
0
4. Amend Sec. 65.135 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 65.135 Covered commodity.
(a) * * *
(1) Muscle cuts of lamb, chicken, goat, and venison;
(2) Ground lamb, ground chicken, ground goat, and ground venison;
* * * * *
0
5. Add Sec. 65.178 to read as follows:
Sec. 65.178 Ground Venison.
Ground venison means comminuted venison of skeletal origin that is
produced in conformance with all applicable Food Safety and Inspection
Service labeling guidelines.
0
6. Revise Sec. 65.230 to read as follows:
Sec. 65.230 Production step.
Production step means, in the case of lamb, chicken, goat, and
venison, born, raised, or slaughtered.
0
7. Revise Sec. 65.235 to read as follows:
Sec. 65.235 Raised.
Raised means, in the case of lamb, chicken, goat, and venison, the
period of time from birth until slaughter or in the case of animals
imported for immediate slaughter as defined in Sec. 65.180, the period
of time from birth until date of entry into the United States.
0
8. Revise Sec. 65.250 to read as follows:
Sec. 65.250 Slaughter.
Slaughter means the point in which a livestock animal (including
chicken and cervidae) is prepared into meat products (covered
commodities) for human consumption. For purposes of labeling under this
part, the word harvested may be used in lieu of slaughtered.
0
9. Amend Sec. 65.260 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 65.260 United States country of origin.
* * * * *
(a) Lamb, chicken, goat, and venison:
* * * * *
0
10. Add Sec. 65.270 to read as follows:
Sec. 65.270 Venison.
Venison means meat produced from animals in the cervidae family.
0
11. Amend Sec. 65.300 by revising paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 65.300 Country of origin notification.
* * * * *
(h) Labeling Ground Lamb, Ground Goat, Ground Chicken, and Ground
Venison. The declaration for ground lamb, ground goat, ground chicken,
and ground venison covered commodities shall list all countries of
origin contained therein or that may be reasonably contained therein.
In determining what is considered reasonable, when a raw material from
a specific origin is not in a processor's inventory for more than 60
days, that country shall no longer be included as a possible country of
origin.
* * * * *
0
12. Amend Sec. 65.500 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 65.500 Recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * * (1) Any person engaged in the business of supplying a
covered commodity to a retailer, whether directly or indirectly, must
make available information to the buyer about the country(ies) of
origin of the covered commodity. This information may be provided
either on the product itself, on
[[Page 4203]]
the master shipping container, or in a document that accompanies the
product through retail sale. In addition, the supplier of a covered
commodity that is responsible for initiating a country(ies) of origin
claim, which in the case of lamb, chicken, goat, and venison is the
slaughter facility, must possess records that are necessary to
substantiate that claim for a period of 1 year from the date of the
transaction. For that purpose, packers that slaughter animals that are
tagged with an 840 Animal Identification Number device without the
presence of any additional accompanying marking (i.e., ``CAN'' or
``M'') may use that information as a basis for a U.S. origin claim.
Packers that slaughter animals that are part of another country's
recognized official system (e.g. Canadian official system, Mexico
official system) may also rely on the presence of an official ear tag
or other approved device on which to base their origin claims. In the
case of cervidae, producer affidavits shall also be considered
acceptable records that suppliers may utilize to initiate origin
claims, provided it is made by someone having first-hand knowledge of
the origin of the covered commodity and identifies the covered
commodity unique to the transaction.
* * * * *
Dated: January 9, 2017.
Bruce Summners,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-00588 Filed 1-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P