[Federal Register: March 7, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 45)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11008-11009]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07mr03-18]
========================================================================
[[Page 11008]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
9 CFR Parts 317 and 327
[Docket No. 00-036W]
RIN 0583-AC85
Product Labeling: Defining United States Cattle and United States
Fresh Beef Products
AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is withdrawing
an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) entitled ``Product
Labeling: Defining United States Cattle and United States Fresh Beef
Products,'' which was published in the Federal Register on August 7,
2001. In the ANPR, the Agency requested comments on the need for
regulations to clarify the definition of ``United States cattle'' and
``United States fresh beef products,'' and whether such products should
bear labeling claims that are different from the claims that are
permitted under FSIS'' current policy. Under FSIS policy, beef products
that are made from animals that are documented to have been born,
raised, slaughtered, and prepared in the United States are permitted to
be labeled as USA products. The country-of-origin labeling provisions
(Section 10816) in the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002
(the Farm Bill) \1\ supplant the issues raised in the ANPR and,
therefore, FSIS is withdrawing the ANPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 107-171 (May 13, 2002).
ADDRESSES: Send an original and two copies of comments to the FSIS
Docket Clerk, Docket 00-036W, Room 102 Cotton Annex Building,
300 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700. Any comments will be
available for public inspection in the Docket Room from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Post, Ph.D., Director,
Labeling and Consumer Protection Staff, FSIS, by telephone at (202)
205-0279 or by fax at (202) 205-3625.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FSIS published the ANPR (66 FR 41160) in response to the Conference
Report accompanying the Agriculture Appropriations for 2000.\2\ The
report directed the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the
affected industries, to promulgate regulations to define which cattle
and fresh beef products are ``Products of the U.S.A.'' The report also
directed the Secretary to determine the terminology that would best
reflect in labeling that such beef products are, in fact, U.S.
products. The report stated that clarifying regulations would
facilitate the development of voluntary, value-added promotion programs
that benefit U.S. producers, business, industry, consumers, and
commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Agricultural, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act, 2000 (Public
Law 106-78 (October 23, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the mandate of the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601
et seq.), FSIS issues regulations to ensure that labeling statements
about the origin of a product are truthful, accurate, and not
misleading. Under FSIS regulations, producers and processors wishing to
make such labeling statements on the labels of products shipped from
Federal establishments must submit documentation that verifies that the
statements are truthful and accurate.
The Department's Agriculture Marketing Service (AMS) has the
authority to establish voluntary programs under the Agricultural
Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627) to verify/certify the origin
of animals, which can be reflected in labeling statements. However,
producers wishing to make such statements are not required to have
their production practices verified/certified by an AMS program. In
1998, AMS proposed program guidelines to certify that livestock, meat,
and meat products are eligible to be labeled as ``U.S. Beef'' because
they are derived from animals that were born, raised, slaughtered, and
prepared in the United States. There was to be a fee for this service,
however, and no firm took advantage of it.
Provisions in the 2002 Farm Bill
On May 13, 2002, the President signed the Farm Bill into law. The
new law amends the Agriculture Marketing Act of 1946 to require
retailers to inform consumers of the country-of-origin of covered
commodities at the point of final retail sale. The term ``covered
commodity'' is defined in the law as muscle cuts of beef (including
veal), lamb, and pork; ground beef, lamb, and pork; wild and farm-
raised fish and shellfish; perishable agricultural commodities (fresh
fruits and vegetables); and peanuts. The Act directs the Secretary,
through AMS, to implement the requirements by September 30, 2004.
On October 11, 2002, AMS published a notice in the Federal Register
(67 FR 63367) entitled ``Establishment of Guidelines for the Interim
Voluntary Country of Origin Labeling of Beef, Lamb, Pork, Fish,
Perishable Agricultural Commodities, and Peanuts Under the Authority of
the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946.'' In accordance with the
notice, during the interim period between the signing of the law and
its implementation date, compliance with the guidelines is voluntary.
One of the provisions of the Farm Bill is that a retailer of beef,
lamb, and pork may designate the covered meat commodity as having
originated in the United States only if it is ``exclusively born,
raised, and slaughtered in the United States.''
As a result of the enactment of the Farm Bill, FSIS is withdrawing
the ANPR and will not proceed with further regulatory action pursuant
to this rulemaking.
Summary of Comments on the ANPR
FSIS received 1,036 comments on the 2001 ANPR from trade
associations, consumer groups, farmers unions of various states, the
Canadian Government, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and citizens/
consumers. More than 900 comments were from write-in campaigns by
cattle producers/consumers who support the definition for labeling
purposes as ``born, raised, slaughtered, and processed (prepared) in
the United States.'' There was almost no support for any other labeling
terminology, no support for a petition
[[Page 11009]]
submitted by the beef industry that suggested that cattle born outside
the United States and finished in U.S. feedlots for at least 100 days
be allowed to be labeled as ``Product of the U.S.A.,'' and a strong
interest in maintaining the existing FSIS policy. According to one
respondent, any change in the existing policy of FSIS would be costly
and damaging to the industry, provide no real benefit for consumers,
and undermine U.S. efforts in international negotiations.
Many respondents opposed any change in FSIS' country-of-origin
labeling policy simply because no change was warranted. One commenter
said that there is no convincing evidence that there is a problem that
needs to be addressed by additional Federal regulation. The comment
went on to say that applying the current definition for ``USA Beef''
and ``Fresh American Beef'' more broadly to country-of-origin labels
such as ``Product of the USA'' is not necessary and would be
disruptive. It concluded that substantiation and verification of
``born, raised, slaughtered, and prepared in the United States'' would
be unreliable and expensive since there is no national tracking system
for cattle in this country.
A trade association director commented that the introduction of new
rules for a single product category would not be helpful or acceptable.
The comment stated that it would only add to the inconsistencies and
confusion for industry, regulatory, and U.S. Customs Service officials.
In addition, the commenter said such a change would set an undesirable
precedent for further processed and other types of products.
Although there was minimal support for a mandatory program, most
commenters strongly believed that a labeling program should be kept
voluntary. One commenter stated that mandatory labeling should be
restricted to protection of consumer health and safety. Others
cautioned that what is acceptable for a voluntary labeling program
would be unacceptable as a mandatory program. Voluntary labeling of
U.S. beef will be market driven in private sector retail and
foodservice channels, said the commenter. USDA should provide
certification and audit services for alternative U.S. labels and allow
competitive market forces to determine the merit of various labels in
the marketplace, the commenter concluded.
Many of the commenters discussed the inconsistency of USDA's
geographic labeling policies, the variety of the claims used to certify
U.S. origin, and the differences in regulations governing domestic and
foreign products. Some called the policy confusing but acceptable,
because it was consistent with international practices. Others
maintained that it was incumbent upon USDA to authorize a single,
universal term.
Several respondents who opposed the meat industry petition,
referred to above, mentioned a fear of Foot and Mouth Disease and
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy. One commenter said that it would be
devastating to the U.S. livestock industry and to consumer confidence
if an infected animal or product entered the United States and received
a ``Made in USA'' label.
As a result of Congress' action, FSIS is withdrawing the advance
notice of proposed rulemaking. Comments on ``country-of-origin''
labeling should be submitted in response to the AMS published notice
entitled ``Establishment of Guidelines for the Interim Voluntary
Country of Origin Labeling of Beef, Lamb, Pork, Fish, Perishable
Agricultural Commodities and Peanuts under the Authority of the
Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946.''
Additional Public Notification
Public involvement in all segments of rulemaking and policy
development is important. Consequently, in an effort to better ensure
that minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are aware of this
notice and informed about the mechanism for providing their comments,
FSIS will announce it and make copies of this Federal Register
publication through the FSIS Constituent Update. FSIS provides a weekly
FSIS Constituent Update, which is communicated via Listserv, a free e-
mail subscription service. In addition, the update is available online
through the FSIS Web page located at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.fsis.usda.gov. The
update is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies,
procedures, regulations, Federal Register notices, FSIS public
meetings, recalls, and any other types of information that could affect
or would be of interest to our constituents and stakeholders. The
constituent Listserv consists of industry, trade, and farm groups,
consumer interest groups, allied health professionals, scientific
professionals, and other individuals who have requested to be included.
Through the Listserv and Web page, FSIS is able to provide information
to a much broader, more diverse audience.
For more information, contact the Congressional and Public Affairs
Office, at (202) 720-9113. To be added to the free e-mail subscription
service (Listserv), go to the ``Constituent Update'' page on the FSIS
Web site at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oa/update/update.htm. Click on the
Web site at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=www.fsis.usda.gov/oa/update/update.htm. Click on the
``Subscribe to the Constituent Update Listserv'' link, then fill out
and submit the form.
Signed in Washington, DC on March 3, 2003.
Garry L. McKee,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-5363 Filed 3-6-03; 8:45 am]