[Federal Register: February 5, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 24)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5802-5805]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05fe03-5]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 94
[Docket No. 01-037-2]
Importation of Used Farm Equipment From Regions Affected With
Foot-and-Mouth Disease
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final rule, without change, an interim
rule that amended the regulations concerning foot-and-mouth disease to
prohibit the importation of used farm equipment from regions affected
with foot-and-mouth disease unless the equipment has been steam-cleaned
prior to export to the United States so that it is free of exposed dirt
and other particulate matter. The interim rule also provided that
cleaned equipment that arrives at the port of arrival with a minimal
amount of exposed dirt may, under certain conditions, be cleaned at
[[Page 5803]]
the port of arrival. The interim rule was necessary to help prevent the
introduction of foot-and-mouth disease into the United States.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The interim rule became effective on March 31, 2001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Karen James-Preston, Assistant
Director, Technical Trade Services Team, National Center for Import and
Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 40, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;
(301) 734-8364.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the
regulations) govern the importation of specified animals and animal
products into the United States in order to prevent the introduction of
various animal diseases, including foot-and-mouth disease (FMD).
Because of the highly communicable nature of FMD, it is necessary to
protect livestock that are free of the disease from any animals, animal
products, or other articles that might be contaminated with the FMD
virus.
In an interim rule effective March 31, 2001, and published in the
Federal Register on May 13, 2002 (67 FR 31935-31938, Docket No. 01-037-
1), we amended the regulations to prohibit the importation of used farm
equipment from regions affected with FMD unless the equipment was
steam-cleaned prior to export to the United States so that it is free
of exposed dirt and other particulate matter. Such equipment must also
be accompanied by an original certificate signed by an authorized
official of the national animal health service of the country of origin
stating that such cleaning was done. We also provided that cleaned
equipment that arrives at a U.S. port with the required certification
from the exporting region but is found upon Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) inspection to contain a minimal amount of
exposed dirt or other particulate matter may be cleaned at the port of
arrival should the APHIS inspector determine that there are adequate
facilities and personnel at the port to conduct such cleaning without
the risk of disease contamination.
Comments on the interim rule were required to be received on or
before July 12, 2002. We received two comments by that date, from a
farmer and a representative of a dairy industry organization. Both
commenters supported the interim rule but requested that additional
steps be taken to prevent the introduction of FMD into the United
States. One commenter asked APHIS to ensure that dirt or other
particulate matter trapped in large tires on farm equipment would be
adequately cleaned. We believe that the cleaning and inspection
requirements established by the interim rule will be adequate to ensure
that any such residue will be eliminated.
The second commenter supported the requirement for pre-export steam
cleaning, but suggested that if an APHIS inspector notes exposed dirt
on the equipment at the port of arrival and determines that the
equipment can be cleaned, APHIS should require not only that the
equipment be steam-cleaned but disinfected as well, using an approved
disinfectant. The interim rule provides that all used farm equipment
imported into the United States must be steam-cleaned free of all
exposed dirt and other particulate matter. If such equipment were to
arrive at the port of entry with more than a minimal amount of exposed
soil present, it would be clear to an inspector that the required
cleaning was not properly conducted and the equipment would be denied
entry. The inspector may only allow cleaning at the port of entry if
the amount of exposed soil is minimal enough to allow cleaning and
there are adequate facilities and personnel at the port to accomplish
the cleaning. Thus any cleaning that might take place at a port of
entry would be necessary to address the presence of only minimal
amounts of exposed soil. Steam-cleaning, whether conducted in the
equipment's country of origin or at a U.S. port, is sufficient to
disinfect the equipment. Therefore, we do not believe that it is
necessary to prescribe the use of a disinfectant in addition to the
cleaning that would be conducted.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the interim rule and in this
document, we are adopting the interim rule as a final rule without
change.
This action also affirms the information contained in the interim
rule concerning Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
Further, this action 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.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule affirms an interim rule that amended the regulations by
prohibiting the importation of used farm equipment from regions
affected with FMD unless the equipment is steam-cleaned prior to export
to the United States so that it is free of exposed dirt and other
particulate matter and the equipment is accompanied by an original
certificate from an authorized official of the national animal health
service of the region of origin stating that such cleaning was done.
The interim rule also provided that cleaned equipment that arrives at
the port of arrival with a minimal amount of exposed dirt may, under
certain conditions, be cleaned at the port of arrival.
The following analysis addresses the economic effect of the interim
rule on small entities, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
While the term ``farm equipment,'' as defined in Sec. 94.0 of the
regulations, refers to a variety of vehicles and machinery used in
agriculture, tractors are the one category of farm equipment for which
trade data are maintained on previously used items.\1\ Between 1996 and
2001, U.S. imports of used tractors were valued at about $62 million
annually, and comprised about 4 percent of the value of all U.S.
agricultural tractor imports (table 1). U.S. exports of used tractors
were worth a little more than half that amount, about $34 million per
year. Net imports of used tractors were thus worth about $28 million
per year, about 10 percent of the value of net imports of tractors.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Harmonized tariff code 8701901090: Tractors, suitable for
agricultural use, used, except track-laying type.
\2\ The term ``net imports'' refers to the total value of
tractor imports minus the total value of tractor exports.
[[Page 5804]]
Table 1.--Value of U.S. Imports and Exports of Tractors and Used Tractors Suitable for Agricultural Use, 6-Year
Averages (1996-2001)
[Tractor values are in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent used
New and used Used tractors tractors, by
tractors \1\ \2\ value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imports........................................................ $1,483.12 $62.01 4.2
Exports........................................................ 1,190.79 33.79 2.8
Net imports................................................ 292.33 28.22 9.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, as reported by the World Trade Atlas.
\1\ Harmonized tariff code 870190: Tractors, not elsewhere specified or included.
\2\ Harmonized tariff code 8701901090: Tractors, suitable for agricultural use, used, except track-laying type.
The United Kingdom is the largest supplier of used tractors to the
United States, followed by Japan and Germany (table 2). These three
countries have, on average, supplied nearly three-fourths of annual
used tractor imports by the United States over the past 6 years.
Canada, Netherlands, France, and Belgium supplied about 20 percent of
imports combined.
Table 2.--Value of Used Tractor Imports\1\ From the Leading Sources, 6-
Year Averages (1996-2001)
[Tractor values are in millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage
Country Average value of total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
United Kingdom............................ $18.766 30.3
Japan..................................... 13.875 22.4
Germany................................... 13.524 21.8
Canada.................................... 5.481 8.8
Netherlands............................... 3.411 5.5
France.................................... 1.960 3.2
Belgium................................... 1.509 2.4
Total from above sources.................. 58.526 94.3
Total from all sources................ 62.014 -
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, as reported
by the World Trade Atlas.
\1\ Harmonized tariff code 8701901090: Tractors, suitable for
agricultural use, used, except track-laying type.
Imports of used farm equipment from several of these countries have
already been restricted by the interim rule because of FMD outbreaks in
those countries after the rule became effective on March 31, 2001.
However, import levels suggest that the interim rule has had little
impact on trade volumes. For example, the value of used tractor imports
from the United Kingdom (Great Britain and Northern Ireland) during
2001--throughout which its FMD-free status was revoked, except for the
first 14 days of January--totaled $18.025 million. This amount compares
closely with its 1996-2001 annual average of $18.766 million. Used
tractor imports in the same year from Netherlands and France, both of
which had their FMD-free status revoked at different times during 2001,
were valued at $2.977 million and $1.800 million, respectively, amounts
not very different from their 1996-2001 annual averages of $3.411
million and $1.960 million. Finally, used tractor imports from Japan in
2001, which had its FMD-free status revoked throughout the year, were
valued at $15.071 million, an amount larger than its 1996-2001 annual
average of $13.875 million.
Used tractors entering the United States from regions affected with
FMD must be certified by the national animal health service of their
region of origin as having been steam-cleaned before being exported.
APHIS does not have information on steam-cleaning costs overseas, but
costs at U.S. ports provide a basis for assessing the impact of the
interim rule. The cost for steam-cleaning all the tractors shipped in a
40-foot container holding approximately 16 tractors with rotary tillers
is roughly $2,000.\3\ We expect the cost of certification would likely
be less than $50. The average price of imported used tractors is about
$4,940 each.\4\ Thus, the value of the tractors in a container would
total about $79,040, of which the $2,050 cost of cleaning and
certification represents about 2.6 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ APHIS cost estimates for the port of Long Beach, CA.
\4\ Six-year average, 1996-2001. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of the Census, as reported by the World Trade Atlas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The principal cost component in both cleaning and certification is
labor. It is expected, therefore, that cleaning and certification costs
would not be any higher overseas, and could well be lower, depending on
relative labor costs. The 2.6 percent may represent an upper bound of
the additional import expenses that would be attributable to the
interim rule.
The two groups that can be expected to incur some costs as a result
of the interim rule are importers of used farm equipment and farmers;
if passed along by the exporter, importers and farmers will likely
split the additional cost of the required cleaning and certification
depending on the demand elasticity in the market for used farm
equipment. Most importers likely employ fewer than 100 people, the
threshold the Small Business Administration has set for such firms to
be called small entities. Most farms earn $750,000 or less in annual
receipts, the corresponding threshold for agricultural operations to be
called small entities. Therefore, most businesses likely to be affected
by the interim rule are small entities. However, the data on used
tractors, currently the only data available on used farm equipment,
indicate that the effects will
[[Page 5805]]
not be large; cleaning and certification expenses will add less than 3
percent to the cost of imported used tractors.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94
Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Meat and meat products, Milk,
Poultry and poultry products, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
PART 94--RINDERPEST, FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE, FOWL PEST (FOWL
PLAGUE), EXOTIC NEWCASTLE DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, HOG
CHOLERA, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY: PROHIBITED AND
RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS
Accordingly, we are adopting as a final rule, without change, the
interim rule that amended 9 CFR part 94 and that was published at 67 FR
31935-31938 on May 13, 2002.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7711-7714, 7751, 7754, 8303, 8306,
8308, 8310, 8311, and 8315; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701;
42 U.S.C. 4331 and 4332; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
Done in Washington, DC, this 30th day of January 2003.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 03-2682 Filed 2-4-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P