Elimination of the Requirement That Livestock Carcasses Be Marked “U.S. Inspected and Passed” at the Time of Inspection Within a Slaughter Establishment for Carcasses To Be Further Processed Within the Same Establishment, 9695-9698 [2019-04993]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 52 / Monday, March 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
crop year expenditures of $83,790. Prior
to arriving at this budget, the Committee
considered information from its Budget
Subcommittee (Subcommittee), which
met on June 7, 2018. The Subcommittee
discussed alternative expenditure levels
and assessment rates, including not
changing the assessment rate or
adjusting expenses. Ultimately, the
Subcommittee and the Committee
recommended an assessment rate of
$0.15 per hundredweight of dates
handled after considering several factors
including the anticipated 2018–19 crop,
the Committee’s estimated 2018–19
reserve carry-in and other income, and
its anticipated expenses.
A review of historical and preliminary
information pertaining to the upcoming
crop year indicates that the producer
price for the 2017–18 crop year was
approximately $142.00 per
hundredweight of dates. Utilizing that
price, the estimated crop size, and the
assessment rate of $0.15 per
hundredweight, the estimated
assessment revenue for the 2018–19
crop year as a percentage of total
producer revenue will be approximately
0.1 percent ($0.15 per hundredweight
divided by $142 per hundredweight).
This action increases the assessment
obligation imposed on handlers. While
assessments impose some additional
costs on handlers, the costs are minimal
and uniform on all handlers. Some of
the additional costs may be passed on
to producers. However, these costs
would be offset by the benefits derived
by the operation of the Order. In
addition, the Committee’s and the
Subcommittee’s meetings were widely
publicized throughout the California
date industry. All interested persons
were invited to attend the meetings and
encouraged to participate in Committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all
Committee meetings, the June 28, 2018,
meeting was a public meeting, and all
entities, both large and small, were able
to express views on this issue.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the Order’s information
collection requirements have been
previously approved by OMB and
assigned OMB No. 0581–0178,
Vegetable and Specialty Crops. No
changes in those requirements are
necessary as a result of this action.
Should any changes become necessary,
they would be submitted to OMB for
approval.
This final rule imposes no additional
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
on either small or large California date
handlers. As with all Federal marketing
order programs, reports and forms are
periodically reviewed to reduce
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Mar 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
information requirements and
duplication by industry and public
sector agencies. As noted in the initial
regulatory flexibility analysis, USDA
has not identified any relevant Federal
rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with this final rule.
AMS is committed to complying with
the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the internet and other
information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and
services, and for other purposes.
A proposed rule concerning this
action was published in the Federal
Register on November 2, 2018 (83 FR
55111). Copies of the proposed rule
were provided to all California date
handlers. The proposal was also made
available through the internet by USDA
and the Office of the Federal Register. A
30-day comment period ending
December 3, 2018, was provided for
interested persons to respond to the
proposal. No comments were received.
Accordingly, no changes will be made
to the rule as proposed.
A small business guide on complying
with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop
marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/
rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses.
Any questions about the compliance
guide should be sent to Richard Lower
at the previously mentioned address in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, including the
information and recommendation
submitted by the Committee and other
available information, it is hereby found
that this rule will tend to effectuate the
declared policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 987
Dates, Marketing agreements,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 987 is amended as
follows:
PART 987—DOMESTIC DATES
PRODUCED OR PACKED IN
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
1. The authority citation for part 987
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Section 987.339 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 987.339
Assessment rate.
On and after October 1, 2018, an
assessment rate of $0.15 per
hundredweight is established for dates
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9695
produced or packed in Riverside
County, California.
Dated: March 12, 2019.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–04909 Filed 3–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 316
[Docket No. FSIS 2018–0019]
RIN 0583–AD69
Elimination of the Requirement That
Livestock Carcasses Be Marked ‘‘U.S.
Inspected and Passed’’ at the Time of
Inspection Within a Slaughter
Establishment for Carcasses To Be
Further Processed Within the Same
Establishment
Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS), USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FSIS is amending the Federal
meat inspection regulations to eliminate
the requirement that livestock carcasses
be marked with the official inspection
legend at the time of inspection in a
slaughter establishment, if the carcasses
are to be further processed in the same
establishment.
DATES: Effective April 17, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roberta Wagner, Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy and
Program Development, Food Safety and
Inspection Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture; Telephone: (202) 205–0495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In the past, slaughter establishments
often would ship carcasses to other
establishments for further processing
into primal, subprimal, and other meat
cuts and products. Today however, most
establishments that slaughter swine,
cattle, sheep, or goats also fabricate the
carcasses into various primal and
subprimal parts, as well as other meat
products. More specifically, after a
carcass has passed inspection, the
slaughter establishment typically moves
it, under control, to another department
in the same establishment for further
processing. The establishment then
typically ships the resulting meat food
products, rather than marked carcasses,
in fully labeled containers either for
further processing at other
establishments or into commerce.
E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM
18MRR1
9696
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 52 / Monday, March 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
FSIS regulations at § 316.9(a) have
required that all livestock carcasses be
marked with the inspection legend
when they are inspected and passed on
the slaughter floor, even if they are to
be further processed within the same
establishment. Numerous slaughter
establishments have requested and been
granted waivers (§ 303.1(h)) from this
requirement, as they further process the
carcasses elsewhere in the same
establishment, after which the resulting
products are marked with the inspection
legend. FSIS experience with
establishments operating under these
waivers has shown that they have no
difficulty ensuring that only inspected,
passed and properly marked parts enter
into commerce and also ensuring, when
applicable, that only inspected, passed
and marked carcasses are shipped into
commerce.
Accordingly, on July 31, 2018, FSIS
proposed that establishments no longer
be required to mark carcasses with the
inspection legend on the slaughter floor,
if the carcasses are to be further
processed in the same establishment (83
FR 36794). The proposal did not change
the regulations that require that all
primals, subprimals, parts and other
meat food products be properly labeled
and bear the mark of inspection before
entering commerce (§ 316.9(b)). Under
the proposed rule, FSIS inspection
personnel would verify whether the
establishment is shipping marked
carcasses or whether the establishment
is further processing the carcasses in the
establishment and marking the
processed parts appropriately before the
parts leave the establishment.
Final Rule
After consideration of all the
comments, FSIS is finalizing the
provisions of the July 31, 2018,
proposed rule with one change. The
final rule does not include the proposed
requirement that establishments have
procedures in their HACCP plans,
Sanitation SOPs, or prerequisite
programs to ensure that (1) unmarked
carcasses are further processed only in
the slaughtering establishment; (2)
unmarked carcasses that, for any reason,
are not further processed in the
slaughtering establishment do not leave
the establishment unmarked; and (3)
unmarked and retained carcasses or
parts remain under FSIS control until
the establishment makes any corrections
that are necessary to render the carcass
or part eligible to bear the mark of
inspection.
Comments and Responses
FSIS received one comment from a
trade association and five comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
from individuals in response to this
rule. One individual and the trade
association generally supported the
proposed changes. A summary of
comments and FSIS responses follows.
Comment: A trade association
representing members of the meat
industry stated that the economic
impact analysis assumes that all
establishments that are currently
marking carcasses will stop after the
implementation of the final rule.
According to the trade association, not
all establishments will change their
marking practices because some
establishments ship whole carcasses,
some package primals in bulk packaging
(making the mark necessary to comply
with regulation), and some will not
want to incorporate controls for
unmarked carcasses into their HACCP
plans. The commenter also stated
customer requirements, production
practices, and product mix can affect
the marking of carcasses. The trade
association argued that the proposed
rule does not create a stronger incentive
to discontinue carcass marking than the
waiver process.
Response: The Agency agrees that it is
likely that not all establishments will
stop marking carcasses after
implementation of the final rule.
Establishments that ship whole
carcasses will need to continue to mark
carcasses. However, FSIS believes that
the advantage to discontinuing the
marking of carcasses is strong enough
that most establishments will do this
after implementation of the final rule,
provided the establishment does not
ship the carcass outside the
establishment for further processing. In
response to the comment, FSIS adjusted
the expected post-rule percentage of
carcasses that will not be marked from
100 percent to 90–95 percent in the final
rule economic impact analyses. FSIS
estimates that elimination of the
requirement to mark carcasses will yield
an annual cost-saving of $0.82 million
to $0.93 million per year.
Comment: The same trade association
comment stated that because the
proposed rule would require
establishments to incorporate unmarked
carcass procedures into the HACCP
system, sanitation SOPs, or other
prerequisite programs, FSIS is just
replacing one regulation with another,
and that the proposed rule is not a
deregulatory action as defined by E.O.
13771. The comment stated that other,
existing regulations require
establishments to prevent uninspected
or condemned carcasses from entering
commerce and that inspected and
passed carcasses and parts bear the
mark before leaving the official
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
establishment. Further, the comment
argued that HACCP controls are specific
to the establishment based on a
thorough hazard analysis and that only
if the movement of unmarked carcasses
poses a significant food safety risk in the
process should a control be put in place.
The comment stated that the movement
of unmarked carcasses likely would not
pose a significant food safety risk at
establishments.
Response: FSIS agrees that
requirements concerning the movement
and marking of carcasses already occur
in other regulations: 9 CFR part 310,
addresses the retaining of carcasses that
may be unfit for human consumption; 9
CFR part 314, addresses condemned and
inedible product; 9 CFR part 316,
addresses marking of products and
containers; and 9 CFR part 317,
addresses labeling, marking devices,
and containers. Together, these existing
regulations adequately require that
establishments control the movement of
unmarked carcasses. Accordingly, in the
final provisions in § 316.9(b), FSIS has
removed the requirement that
establishments incorporate unmarked
carcass procedures into their HACCP
plans, sanitation SOPs, or other
prerequisite programs.
Comment: One individual questioned
FSIS’s regulatory authority to deviate
from the exact language in the Federal
Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) when
changing the language in the
regulations.
Response: The FMIA requires that
carcasses and parts (21 U.S.C. 604) and
meat food products (21 U.S.C. 606)
found not to be adulterated be marked
‘‘Inspected and passed’’ by FSIS
inspectors. The FMIA does not require
that this marking be done at a specific
time or in a specific location in the
establishment, especially if carcasses are
being processed into parts or into meat
food products within the same
establishment. The new regulations in
316.9(a) will ensure that the specific
intent of the FMIA marking
requirements continue to be met in the
contemporary market, i.e., that
carcasses, parts, and meat food products
found not adulterated by USDA
inspectors enter commerce only if
marked ‘‘Inspected and Passed.’’
Comment: One individual opposed
the changes and questioned the risk of
a carcass leaving the facility unmarked
under this rule. The individual also
questioned FSIS’s oversight for
establishments under this new rule.
Response: The new language at
§ 316.9(a) states that ‘‘Each carcass that
has been inspected and passed in an
official establishment must be marked at
the time of inspection with the official
E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM
18MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 52 / Monday, March 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
inspection legend containing the
number of the official establishment, if
the carcass is to be shipped into
commerce from the establishment
without further processing.’’ Therefore,
all carcasses not further processed at the
establishment must be marked with the
official inspection legend before
entering commerce. FSIS will continue
to provide inspection at establishments
to verify that establishments meet this
requirement, as well as to ensure that all
meat food products are properly marked
and labeled before entering commerce.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, and
the Regulatory Flexibility Act
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
benefits, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order (E.O.) 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility. This final
rule has been designated as a ‘‘nonsignificant’’ regulatory action under
section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly,
the final rule has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under E.O. 12866.
Economic Impact Analysis
FSIS is removing the requirement for
carcasses slaughtered in an
establishment to bear the mark of
inspection after being inspected and
passed on the slaughter floor if the
carcasses are to be further processed in
the same establishment. Since this
requirement is no longer necessary to
prevent adulterated food product from
entering commerce (see explanation in
the Background section above),
removing it will have no negative public
health impact. Nor will it impose costs
on the industry or the Agency.
Regarding benefits from the
rulemaking, removing an unnecessary
requirement will allow establishments
the flexibility to innovate and to operate
in the most efficient manner. In
addition, it will also allow FSIS to
utilize its resources more appropriately
by relieving inspectors of unnecessary
tasks. The expected benefits from this
final rule will accrue from time and
resource savings. Inspected and passed
carcasses meant for further processing
in the same establishment where the
animals were slaughtered will not have
to wait for the mark of inspection but
can move directly to further processing.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
Thus, establishments that slaughter
livestock and process livestock
carcasses in the same facility will
benefit from fewer delays in their
operations and greater flexibility to
conduct processing operations on
inspected and passed carcasses.
FSIS received only one comment on
the proposed rule’s economic impact
analysis. The comment, from the
industry, argued that some
establishments will continue to mark
the carcasses after the implementation
of the final rule. In response to this
comment, FSIS adjusted the expected
post-rule percentage of carcasses
processed within the same
establishment that will not be marked
from 100 percent to 90–95 percent.
Agency data showed that there are
approximately 797 meat slaughtering
establishments, and approximately 676
of them (∼85 percent) do both
slaughtering and processing.1 FSIS
estimates that in these 676
establishments, approximately 95
percent of the carcasses are further
processed in the same establishment.
Given that the annual production of
meat by Federal inspected
establishments is approximately 150
million heads,2 roughly 120.9 million
carcasses are subject to the requirements
in § 316.9 (150 million × 85 percent × 95
percent). Assuming that it takes
establishment labor, on average, 3
seconds to mark each carcass, and that
approximately half of the
establishments already have waivers
from the requirement, and that an
additional 40–45 percent of the
carcasses will not be marked after
implementation of this final rule,
approximately 40,310 to 45,349
additional hours will be saved by this
final rule. Most establishments use
hired workers to do the marking. If we
assume that the average hourly pay
(salary plus benefits) is $20,3 then the
time saved is equivalent to
approximately $0.81 to $0.91 million
annually.
In addition, such establishments will
no longer need to replace the broken or
worn out stamps previously used for
marking carcasses on the slaughter floor.
Typically, a stamp (usually made of
1 Data
source: Public Health Information System
as of June 2017, provided by FSIS’s Office of Data
Integration and Food Protection (now the Office of
Planning, Analysis and Risk Management).
2 Livestock Slaughter 2016 Summary (April
2017). USDA, National Agricultural Statistics.
https://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/
LiveSlauSu//2010s/2017/LiveSlauSu-04-192017.pdf, p.15, accessed 11/16/2018.
3 Data source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
report of average wage of meat slaughterers and
packers. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/
oes513023.htm/., accessed 06/2017.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9697
bronze) costs $225 and lasts 5 years.4
The annualized cost of the stamp is $55
(if the interest rate is 7 percent) or $50
(if the interest rate is 3 percent).
Assuming each establishment (that does
not already have a waiver from the
requirement to mark carcasses and is
expected to stop marking because of the
final rule) uses one stamp per year, the
annual savings on these stamps will be
between $13,300 and $16,700.
Additionally, establishments will no
longer need to make written requests for
waivers from the requirement to mark
carcasses further processed within the
same establishment and will no longer
need to wait to have such requests
approved. Further, because FSIS
inspected and passed carcasses will no
longer be required to bear the mark of
inspection if they are sent for further
processing in the same establishment,
FSIS inspectors will no longer need to
verify this mark, and will have more
time to focus on activities that are more
important in ensuring food safety, such
as verifying that establishments meet
HACCP regulations and collecting
product samples. These savings are
minimal and have not been quantified.
There are no expected costs associated
with this rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Assessment
The FSIS Administrator has made a
determination that this final rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities, as defined by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601). The final
rule will not increase costs to the
industry.
Executive Order 13771
Consistent with E.O. 13771 (82 FR
9339, February 3, 2017), FSIS has
estimated that this final rule will yield
cost savings. Therefore, this rule is an
E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.
Paperwork Reduction Act
There are no new paperwork or
recordkeeping requirements associated
with this final rule under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
E-Government Act
FSIS and USDA are committed to
achieving the purposes of the
E-Government Act (44 U.S.C. 3601, et
seq.) by, among other things, promoting
the use of the internet and other
information technologies and providing
increased opportunities for citizen
4 Data from Ketchum Manufacturing Inc., a
manufacturer of meat stamps, through telephone
interview on 4/17/2017.
E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM
18MRR1
9698
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 52 / Monday, March 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
access to Government information and
services, and for other purposes.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform
This final rule has been reviewed
under E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform.
Under this rule: (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) no
administrative proceedings will be
required before parties may file suit in
court challenging this rule.
Executive Order 13175
This rule has been reviewed in
accordance with the requirements of
E.O. 13175, ‘‘Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments.’’ E.O. 13175 requires
Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with tribes on a governmentto-government basis on policies that
have tribal implications, including
regulations, legislative comments or
proposed legislation, and other policy
statements or actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
FSIS has assessed the impact of this
rule on Indian tribes and determined
that this rule does not, to our
knowledge, have tribal implications that
require tribal consultation under E.O.
13175. If a Tribe requests consultation,
FSIS will work with the Office of Tribal
Relations to ensure meaningful
consultation is provided where changes,
additions and modifications identified
herein are not expressly mandated by
Congress.
USDA Non-Discrimination Statement
No agency, officer, or employee of the
USDA shall, on the grounds of race,
color, national origin, religion, sex,
gender identity, sexual orientation,
disability, age, marital status, family/
parental status, income derived from a
public assistance program, or political
beliefs, exclude from participation in,
deny the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination any person in the United
States under any program or activity
conducted by the USDA.
How To File a Complaint of
Discrimination
To file a complaint of discrimination,
complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, which
may be accessed online at https://
www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_
12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you
or your authorized representative.
Send your completed complaint form
or letter to USDA by mail, fax, or email:
Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20250–9410, Fax: (202) 690–7442
Email: program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication
(Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.),
should contact USDA’s TARGET Center
at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD).
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of
rulemaking and policy development is
important. Consequently, FSIS will
announce this Federal Register
publication online through the FSIS
web page located at: https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/federal-register.
FSIS also will make copies of this
publication available through the FSIS
Constituent Update, which is used to
provide information regarding FSIS
policies, procedures, regulations,
Federal Register notices, FSIS public
meetings, and other types of information
that could affect or would be of interest
to our constituents and stakeholders.
The Constituent Update is available on
the FSIS web page. Through the web
page, FSIS is able to provide
information to a much broader, more
diverse audience. In addition, FSIS
offers an email subscription service
which provides automatic and
customized access to selected food
safety news and information. This
service is available at: https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe. Options
range from recalls to export information,
regulations, directives, and notices.
Customers can add or delete
subscriptions themselves, and have the
option to password protect their
accounts.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 316
Food labeling, Food packaging, Meat
inspection.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, FSIS is amending 9 CFR part
316 as follows:
PART 316—MARKING PRODUCTS
AND THEIR CONTAINERS
1. The authority citation for part 316
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601–695; 7 CFR 2.18,
2.55.
2. In § 316.9, revise paragraph (a),
redesignate paragraphs (b) through (d)
as paragraphs (c) through (e),
■
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
respectively, and add a new paragraph
(b) to read as follows:
§ 316.9 Products to be marked with official
marks.
(a) Each carcass that has been
inspected and passed in an official
establishment must be marked at the
time of inspection with the official
inspection legend containing the
number of the official establishment, if
the carcass is to be shipped into
commerce from the establishment
without further processing.
(b) A passed and inspected carcass
that is to be further processed in the
slaughtering establishment need not be
marked with the official inspection
legend at the time of inspection.
*
*
*
*
*
Done in Washington, DC.
Carmen M. Rottenberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019–04993 Filed 3–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
12 CFR Part 350
RIN 3064–AE65
Disclosure of Financial and Other
Information by FDIC-Insured State
Nonmember Banks
Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is
amending its regulations by rescinding
and removing its regulations entitled
Disclosure of Financial and Other
Information By FDIC-Insured State
Nonmember Banks. Upon the removal
of the regulations, all insured state
nonmember banks and insured statelicensed branches of foreign banks
(collectively, ‘‘banks’’) would no longer
be subject to the annual disclosure
statement requirement set out in the
existing regulations. The financial and
other information that has been subject
to disclosure by individual banks under
the regulations is publicly available
through the FDIC’s website.
DATES: This rule will be effective April
17, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Storch, Chief Accountant,
Division of Risk Management
Supervision, (202) 898–8906 or rstorch@
fdic.gov; Andrew Overton, Examination
Specialist (Bank Accounting), Division
of Risk Management Supervision, (202)
E:\FR\FM\18MRR1.SGM
18MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 52 (Monday, March 18, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9695-9698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04993]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 316
[Docket No. FSIS 2018-0019]
RIN 0583-AD69
Elimination of the Requirement That Livestock Carcasses Be Marked
``U.S. Inspected and Passed'' at the Time of Inspection Within a
Slaughter Establishment for Carcasses To Be Further Processed Within
the Same Establishment
AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FSIS is amending the Federal meat inspection regulations to
eliminate the requirement that livestock carcasses be marked with the
official inspection legend at the time of inspection in a slaughter
establishment, if the carcasses are to be further processed in the same
establishment.
DATES: Effective April 17, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberta Wagner, Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy and Program Development, Food Safety
and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Telephone:
(202) 205-0495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In the past, slaughter establishments often would ship carcasses to
other establishments for further processing into primal, subprimal, and
other meat cuts and products. Today however, most establishments that
slaughter swine, cattle, sheep, or goats also fabricate the carcasses
into various primal and subprimal parts, as well as other meat
products. More specifically, after a carcass has passed inspection, the
slaughter establishment typically moves it, under control, to another
department in the same establishment for further processing. The
establishment then typically ships the resulting meat food products,
rather than marked carcasses, in fully labeled containers either for
further processing at other establishments or into commerce.
[[Page 9696]]
FSIS regulations at Sec. 316.9(a) have required that all livestock
carcasses be marked with the inspection legend when they are inspected
and passed on the slaughter floor, even if they are to be further
processed within the same establishment. Numerous slaughter
establishments have requested and been granted waivers (Sec. 303.1(h))
from this requirement, as they further process the carcasses elsewhere
in the same establishment, after which the resulting products are
marked with the inspection legend. FSIS experience with establishments
operating under these waivers has shown that they have no difficulty
ensuring that only inspected, passed and properly marked parts enter
into commerce and also ensuring, when applicable, that only inspected,
passed and marked carcasses are shipped into commerce.
Accordingly, on July 31, 2018, FSIS proposed that establishments no
longer be required to mark carcasses with the inspection legend on the
slaughter floor, if the carcasses are to be further processed in the
same establishment (83 FR 36794). The proposal did not change the
regulations that require that all primals, subprimals, parts and other
meat food products be properly labeled and bear the mark of inspection
before entering commerce (Sec. 316.9(b)). Under the proposed rule,
FSIS inspection personnel would verify whether the establishment is
shipping marked carcasses or whether the establishment is further
processing the carcasses in the establishment and marking the processed
parts appropriately before the parts leave the establishment.
Final Rule
After consideration of all the comments, FSIS is finalizing the
provisions of the July 31, 2018, proposed rule with one change. The
final rule does not include the proposed requirement that
establishments have procedures in their HACCP plans, Sanitation SOPs,
or prerequisite programs to ensure that (1) unmarked carcasses are
further processed only in the slaughtering establishment; (2) unmarked
carcasses that, for any reason, are not further processed in the
slaughtering establishment do not leave the establishment unmarked; and
(3) unmarked and retained carcasses or parts remain under FSIS control
until the establishment makes any corrections that are necessary to
render the carcass or part eligible to bear the mark of inspection.
Comments and Responses
FSIS received one comment from a trade association and five
comments from individuals in response to this rule. One individual and
the trade association generally supported the proposed changes. A
summary of comments and FSIS responses follows.
Comment: A trade association representing members of the meat
industry stated that the economic impact analysis assumes that all
establishments that are currently marking carcasses will stop after the
implementation of the final rule. According to the trade association,
not all establishments will change their marking practices because some
establishments ship whole carcasses, some package primals in bulk
packaging (making the mark necessary to comply with regulation), and
some will not want to incorporate controls for unmarked carcasses into
their HACCP plans. The commenter also stated customer requirements,
production practices, and product mix can affect the marking of
carcasses. The trade association argued that the proposed rule does not
create a stronger incentive to discontinue carcass marking than the
waiver process.
Response: The Agency agrees that it is likely that not all
establishments will stop marking carcasses after implementation of the
final rule. Establishments that ship whole carcasses will need to
continue to mark carcasses. However, FSIS believes that the advantage
to discontinuing the marking of carcasses is strong enough that most
establishments will do this after implementation of the final rule,
provided the establishment does not ship the carcass outside the
establishment for further processing. In response to the comment, FSIS
adjusted the expected post-rule percentage of carcasses that will not
be marked from 100 percent to 90-95 percent in the final rule economic
impact analyses. FSIS estimates that elimination of the requirement to
mark carcasses will yield an annual cost-saving of $0.82 million to
$0.93 million per year.
Comment: The same trade association comment stated that because the
proposed rule would require establishments to incorporate unmarked
carcass procedures into the HACCP system, sanitation SOPs, or other
prerequisite programs, FSIS is just replacing one regulation with
another, and that the proposed rule is not a deregulatory action as
defined by E.O. 13771. The comment stated that other, existing
regulations require establishments to prevent uninspected or condemned
carcasses from entering commerce and that inspected and passed
carcasses and parts bear the mark before leaving the official
establishment. Further, the comment argued that HACCP controls are
specific to the establishment based on a thorough hazard analysis and
that only if the movement of unmarked carcasses poses a significant
food safety risk in the process should a control be put in place. The
comment stated that the movement of unmarked carcasses likely would not
pose a significant food safety risk at establishments.
Response: FSIS agrees that requirements concerning the movement and
marking of carcasses already occur in other regulations: 9 CFR part
310, addresses the retaining of carcasses that may be unfit for human
consumption; 9 CFR part 314, addresses condemned and inedible product;
9 CFR part 316, addresses marking of products and containers; and 9 CFR
part 317, addresses labeling, marking devices, and containers.
Together, these existing regulations adequately require that
establishments control the movement of unmarked carcasses. Accordingly,
in the final provisions in Sec. 316.9(b), FSIS has removed the
requirement that establishments incorporate unmarked carcass procedures
into their HACCP plans, sanitation SOPs, or other prerequisite
programs.
Comment: One individual questioned FSIS's regulatory authority to
deviate from the exact language in the Federal Meat Inspection Act
(FMIA) when changing the language in the regulations.
Response: The FMIA requires that carcasses and parts (21 U.S.C.
604) and meat food products (21 U.S.C. 606) found not to be adulterated
be marked ``Inspected and passed'' by FSIS inspectors. The FMIA does
not require that this marking be done at a specific time or in a
specific location in the establishment, especially if carcasses are
being processed into parts or into meat food products within the same
establishment. The new regulations in 316.9(a) will ensure that the
specific intent of the FMIA marking requirements continue to be met in
the contemporary market, i.e., that carcasses, parts, and meat food
products found not adulterated by USDA inspectors enter commerce only
if marked ``Inspected and Passed.''
Comment: One individual opposed the changes and questioned the risk
of a carcass leaving the facility unmarked under this rule. The
individual also questioned FSIS's oversight for establishments under
this new rule.
Response: The new language at Sec. 316.9(a) states that ``Each
carcass that has been inspected and passed in an official establishment
must be marked at the time of inspection with the official
[[Page 9697]]
inspection legend containing the number of the official establishment,
if the carcass is to be shipped into commerce from the establishment
without further processing.'' Therefore, all carcasses not further
processed at the establishment must be marked with the official
inspection legend before entering commerce. FSIS will continue to
provide inspection at establishments to verify that establishments meet
this requirement, as well as to ensure that all meat food products are
properly marked and labeled before entering commerce.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act
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 benefits, distributive impacts, and equity).
Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying
both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and
of promoting flexibility. This final rule has been designated as a
``non-significant'' regulatory action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
Accordingly, the final rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866.
Economic Impact Analysis
FSIS is removing the requirement for carcasses slaughtered in an
establishment to bear the mark of inspection after being inspected and
passed on the slaughter floor if the carcasses are to be further
processed in the same establishment. Since this requirement is no
longer necessary to prevent adulterated food product from entering
commerce (see explanation in the Background section above), removing it
will have no negative public health impact. Nor will it impose costs on
the industry or the Agency.
Regarding benefits from the rulemaking, removing an unnecessary
requirement will allow establishments the flexibility to innovate and
to operate in the most efficient manner. In addition, it will also
allow FSIS to utilize its resources more appropriately by relieving
inspectors of unnecessary tasks. The expected benefits from this final
rule will accrue from time and resource savings. Inspected and passed
carcasses meant for further processing in the same establishment where
the animals were slaughtered will not have to wait for the mark of
inspection but can move directly to further processing. Thus,
establishments that slaughter livestock and process livestock carcasses
in the same facility will benefit from fewer delays in their operations
and greater flexibility to conduct processing operations on inspected
and passed carcasses.
FSIS received only one comment on the proposed rule's economic
impact analysis. The comment, from the industry, argued that some
establishments will continue to mark the carcasses after the
implementation of the final rule. In response to this comment, FSIS
adjusted the expected post-rule percentage of carcasses processed
within the same establishment that will not be marked from 100 percent
to 90-95 percent.
Agency data showed that there are approximately 797 meat
slaughtering establishments, and approximately 676 of them (~85
percent) do both slaughtering and processing.\1\ FSIS estimates that in
these 676 establishments, approximately 95 percent of the carcasses are
further processed in the same establishment. Given that the annual
production of meat by Federal inspected establishments is approximately
150 million heads,\2\ roughly 120.9 million carcasses are subject to
the requirements in Sec. 316.9 (150 million x 85 percent x 95
percent). Assuming that it takes establishment labor, on average, 3
seconds to mark each carcass, and that approximately half of the
establishments already have waivers from the requirement, and that an
additional 40-45 percent of the carcasses will not be marked after
implementation of this final rule, approximately 40,310 to 45,349
additional hours will be saved by this final rule. Most establishments
use hired workers to do the marking. If we assume that the average
hourly pay (salary plus benefits) is $20,\3\ then the time saved is
equivalent to approximately $0.81 to $0.91 million annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data source: Public Health Information System as of June
2017, provided by FSIS's Office of Data Integration and Food
Protection (now the Office of Planning, Analysis and Risk
Management).
\2\ Livestock Slaughter 2016 Summary (April 2017). USDA,
National Agricultural Statistics. https://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/LiveSlauSu//2010s/2017/LiveSlauSu-04-19-2017.pdf, p.15,
accessed 11/16/2018.
\3\ Data source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) report of
average wage of meat slaughterers and packers. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes513023.htm/., accessed 06/2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, such establishments will no longer need to replace the
broken or worn out stamps previously used for marking carcasses on the
slaughter floor. Typically, a stamp (usually made of bronze) costs $225
and lasts 5 years.\4\ The annualized cost of the stamp is $55 (if the
interest rate is 7 percent) or $50 (if the interest rate is 3 percent).
Assuming each establishment (that does not already have a waiver from
the requirement to mark carcasses and is expected to stop marking
because of the final rule) uses one stamp per year, the annual savings
on these stamps will be between $13,300 and $16,700.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Data from Ketchum Manufacturing Inc., a manufacturer of meat
stamps, through telephone interview on 4/17/2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, establishments will no longer need to make written
requests for waivers from the requirement to mark carcasses further
processed within the same establishment and will no longer need to wait
to have such requests approved. Further, because FSIS inspected and
passed carcasses will no longer be required to bear the mark of
inspection if they are sent for further processing in the same
establishment, FSIS inspectors will no longer need to verify this mark,
and will have more time to focus on activities that are more important
in ensuring food safety, such as verifying that establishments meet
HACCP regulations and collecting product samples. These savings are
minimal and have not been quantified. There are no expected costs
associated with this rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Assessment
The FSIS Administrator has made a determination that this final
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601). The final rule will not increase costs to the industry.
Executive Order 13771
Consistent with E.O. 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017), FSIS has
estimated that this final rule will yield cost savings. Therefore, this
rule is an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.
Paperwork Reduction Act
There are no new paperwork or recordkeeping requirements associated
with this final rule under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501-3520).
E-Government Act
FSIS and USDA are committed to achieving the purposes of the E-
Government Act (44 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.) by, among other things,
promoting the use of the internet and other information technologies
and providing increased opportunities for citizen
[[Page 9698]]
access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
This final rule has been reviewed under E.O. 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. Under this rule: (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) no
administrative proceedings will be required before parties may file
suit in court challenging this rule.
Executive Order 13175
This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of
E.O. 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments.'' E.O. 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies
that have tribal implications, including regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
FSIS has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian tribes and
determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have tribal
implications that require tribal consultation under E.O. 13175. If a
Tribe requests consultation, FSIS will work with the Office of Tribal
Relations to ensure meaningful consultation is provided where changes,
additions and modifications identified herein are not expressly
mandated by Congress.
USDA Non-Discrimination Statement
No agency, officer, or employee of the USDA shall, on the grounds
of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual
orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status,
income derived from a public assistance program, or political beliefs,
exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination any person in the United States under any program or
activity conducted by the USDA.
How To File a Complaint of Discrimination
To file a complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, which may be accessed online at https://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you or your
authorized representative.
Send your completed complaint form or letter to USDA by mail, fax,
or email: Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of
Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410,
Fax: (202) 690-7442 Email: program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for
communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), should contact
USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy
development is important. Consequently, FSIS will announce this Federal
Register publication online through the FSIS web page located at:
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/federal-register.
FSIS also will make copies of this publication available through
the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information
regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal Register
notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information that
could affect or would be of interest to our constituents and
stakeholders. The Constituent Update is available on the FSIS web page.
Through the web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much
broader, more diverse audience. In addition, FSIS offers an email
subscription service which provides automatic and customized access to
selected food safety news and information. This service is available
at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe. Options range from recalls to
export information, regulations, directives, and notices. Customers can
add or delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password
protect their accounts.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 316
Food labeling, Food packaging, Meat inspection.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, FSIS is amending 9 CFR
part 316 as follows:
PART 316--MARKING PRODUCTS AND THEIR CONTAINERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 316 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601-695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.55.
0
2. In Sec. 316.9, revise paragraph (a), redesignate paragraphs (b)
through (d) as paragraphs (c) through (e), respectively, and add a new
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 316.9 Products to be marked with official marks.
(a) Each carcass that has been inspected and passed in an official
establishment must be marked at the time of inspection with the
official inspection legend containing the number of the official
establishment, if the carcass is to be shipped into commerce from the
establishment without further processing.
(b) A passed and inspected carcass that is to be further processed
in the slaughtering establishment need not be marked with the official
inspection legend at the time of inspection.
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC.
Carmen M. Rottenberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-04993 Filed 3-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P