Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

Federal RegisterDec 22, 2014

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

REGULATORY INFORMATION SERVICE CENTER

Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

AGENCY:

Regulatory Information Service Center.

ACTION:

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions.

SUMMARY:

The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies publish semiannual regulatory agendas in the

Federal Register

describing regulatory actions they are developing that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Executive Order 12866 “Regulatory Planning and Review,” signed September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51735), and incorporated in Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review” issued on January 18, 2011 (76 FR 3821) establish guidelines and procedures for agencies' agendas, including specific types of information for each entry.

The

Unified Agenda of Federal Regulator and Deregulatory Actions

(Unified Agenda) helps agencies fulfill these requirements. All Federal regulatory agencies have chosen to publish their regulatory agendas as part of the Unified Agenda. The complete 2014 Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan, which contains the regulatory agendas for Federal agencies, is available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov

The fall 2014 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the

Federal Register

consists of

The Regulatory Plan

and agency regulatory flexibility agendas, in accordance with the publication requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Agency regulatory flexibility agendas contain only those Agenda entries for rules that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and entries that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The complete fall 2014 Unified Agenda contains the Regulatory Plans of 30 Federal agencies and the regulatory agendas of 31 other Federal agencies.

ADDRESSES:

Regulatory Information Service Center (MVE), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., 2219F, Washington, DC 20405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information about specific regulatory actions, please refer to the agency contact listed for each entry.

To provide comment on or to obtain further information about this publication, contact: John C. Thomas, Executive Director, Regulatory Information Service Center (MVE), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., 2219F, Washington, DC 20405, (202) 482-7340. You may also send comments to us by email at:

risc@gsa.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

I. What are The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda?

II. Why are The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda published?

III. How are The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda organized?

IV. What Information appears for each entry?

V. Abbreviations

VI. How can users get copies of the Plan and the Agenda?

Introduction to the Fall 2014 Regulatory Plan

AGENCY REGULATORY PLANS

Cabinet Departments

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Education

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of Transportation

Department of the Treasury

Department of Veterans Affairs

Other Executive Agencies

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Environmental Protection Agency

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

General Services Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Archives and Records Administration

Office of Personnel Management

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

Small Business Administration

Social Security Administration

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Federal Trade Commission

National Indian Gaming Commission

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

AGENCY AGENDAS

Cabinet Departments

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Education

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of Transportation

Other Executive Agencies

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Small Business Administration

Joint Authority

Department of Defense/General Services Administration/National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Federal Acquisition Regulation)

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Federal Communications Commission

Federal Reserve System

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Securities and Exchange Commission

Surface Transportation Board

INTRODUCTION TO THE REGULATORY PLAN AND THE UNIFIED AGENDA OF FEDERAL REGULATORY AND DEREGULATORY ACTIONS

I. What are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda?

The Regulatory Plan

serves as a defining statement of the Administration's regulatory and deregulatory policies and priorities. The Plan is part of the fall edition of the Unified Agenda. Each participating agency's regulatory plan contains: (1) A narrative statement of the agency's regulatory and deregulatory priorities, and, for the most part, (2) a description of the most important significant regulatory and deregulatory actions that the agency reasonably expects to issue in proposed or final form during the upcoming fiscal year. This edition includes the regulatory plans of 30 agencies.

The Unified Agenda provides information about regulations that the Government is considering or reviewing. The Unified Agenda has appeared in the

Federal Register

twice each year since 1983 and has been available online since 1995. The complete Unified Agenda is available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov

. The online Unified Agenda offers flexible search tools and access to the historic Unified Agenda database to 1995.

The fall 2014 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the

Federal Register

consists of

The Regulatory Plan

and agency regulatory flexibility

agendas, in accordance with the publication requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Agency regulatory flexibility agendas contain only those Agenda entries for rules that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and entries that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Printed entries display only the fields required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Complete agenda information for those entries appears, in a uniform format, in the online Unified Agenda at

http://reginfo.gov

These publication formats meet the publication mandates of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866 (incorporated in Executive Order 13563), as well as moved the Agenda process to the goal of online availability, resulting in a reduced cost in printing. The current online format does not reduce the amount of information available to the public. The complete online edition of the Unified Agenda includes regulatory agendas from 61 Federal agencies. Agencies of the United States Congress are not included.

The following agencies have no entries identified for inclusion in the printed regulatory flexibility agenda. An asterisk (*) indicates agencies that appear in

The Regulatory Plan

. The regulatory agendas of these agencies are available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov

Department of Housing and Urban Development*

Department of State

Department of Treasury*

Department of Veterans Affairs*

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

Agency for International Development

Commission on Civil Rights

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled

Corporation for National and Community Service

Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission*

Institute of Museum and Library Services

National Archives and Records Administration*

National Endowment for the Arts

National Endowment for the Humanities

National Science Foundation

Office of Government Ethics

Office of Management and Budget

Office of Personnel Management*

Peace Corps

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation*

Railroad Retirement Board

Social Security Administration*

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau*

Consumer Product Safety Commission*

Farm Credit Administration

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Federal Housing Finance Agency

Federal Maritime Commission

Federal Trade Commission*

Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration CouncilNational Credit Union Administration

National Credit Union Administration

National Indian Gaming Commission*

National Labor Relations Board

National Transportation Safety Board

Postal Regulatory Commission

Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board

The Regulatory Information Service Center compiles the Unified Agenda for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), part of the Office of Management and Budget. OIRA is responsible for overseeing the Federal Government's regulatory, paperwork, and information resource management activities, including implementation of Executive Order 12866 (incorporated in Executive Order 13563). The Center also provides information about Federal regulatory activity to the President and his Executive Office, the Congress, agency officials, and the public.

The activities included in the Agenda are, in general, those that will have a regulatory action within the next 12 months. Agencies may choose to include activities that will have a longer timeframe than 12 months. Agency agendas also show actions or reviews completed or withdrawn since the last Unified Agenda. Executive Order 12866 does not require agencies to include regulations concerning military or foreign affairs functions or regulations related to agency organization, management, or personnel matters.

Agencies prepared entries for this publication to give the public notice of their plans to review, propose, and issue regulations. They have tried to predict their activities over the next 12 months as accurately as possible, but dates and schedules are subject to change. Agencies may withdraw some of the regulations now under development, and they may issue or propose other regulations not included in their agendas. Agency actions in the rulemaking process may occur before or after the dates they have listed. The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda do not create a legal obligation on agencies to adhere to schedules in this publication or to confine their regulatory activities to those regulations that appear within it.

II. Why Are The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda published?

The Regulatory Plan

and the Unified Agenda helps agencies comply with their obligations under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and various Executive orders and other statutes.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The

Regulatory Flexibility Act

requires agencies to identify those rules that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Agencies meet that requirement by including the information in their submissions for the Unified Agenda. Agencies may also indicate those regulations that they are reviewing as part of their periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610). Executive Order 13272 entitled “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,” signed August 13, 2002 (67 FR 53461), provides additional guidance on compliance with the Act.

Executive Order 12866

entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review,” signed September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51735), requires covered agencies to prepare an agenda of all regulations under development or review. The Order also requires that certain agencies prepare annually a regulatory plan of their “most important significant regulatory actions,” which appears as part of the fall Unified Agenda. Executive Order 13497, signed January 30, 2009 (74 FR 6113), revoked the amendments to Executive Order 12866 that were contained in Executive Order 13258 and Executive Order 13422.

Executive Order 13563

Executive Order 13563 entitled “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” issued on January 18, 2011, supplements and reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing contemporary regulatory review that were established in Executive Order 12866, which includes the general principles of regulation and public participation, and orders integration and innovation in coordination across agencies; flexible approaches where relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory approaches; scientific integrity in any scientific or technological information and processes used to support the agencies' regulatory actions; and retrospective analysis of existing regulations.

Executive Order 13132

entitled “Federalism,” signed August 4, 1999 (64 FR 43255), directs agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have “federalism implications” as defined in the Order. Under the Order, an agency that is proposing a regulation with federalism implications, which either preempt State law or impose non-statutory unfunded substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments, must consult with State and local officials early in the process of developing the regulation. In addition, the agency must provide to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a federalism summary impact statement for such a regulation, which consists of a description of the extent of the agency's prior consultation with State and local officials, a summary of their concerns and the agency's position supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the extent to which those concerns have been met. As part of this effort, agencies include in their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether their regulatory actions may have an effect on the various levels of government and whether those actions have federalism implications.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Pub. L. 104-4, title II) requires agencies to prepare written assessments of the costs and benefits of significant regulatory actions “that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more . . . in any 1 year . . . . ” The requirement does not apply to independent regulatory agencies, nor does it apply to certain subject areas excluded by section 4 of the Act. Affected agencies identify in the Unified Agenda those regulatory actions they believe are subject to title II of the Act.

Executive Order 13211

entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” signed May 18, 2001 (66 FR 28355), directs agencies to provide, to the extent possible, information regarding the adverse effects that agency actions may have on the supply, distribution, and use of energy. Under the Order, the agency must prepare and submit a Statement of Energy Effects to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, for “those matters identified as significant energy actions.” As part of this effort, agencies may optionally include in their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether they have prepared or plan to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for their regulatory actions.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

The

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

(Pub. L. 104-121, title II) established a procedure for congressional review of rules (5 U.S.C. 801

et seq.

), which defers, unless exempted, the effective date of a “major” rule for at least 60 days from the publication of the final rule in the

Federal Register

. The Act specifies that a rule is “major” if it has resulted, or is likely to result, in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of OIRA will make the final determination as to whether a rule is major.

III. How Are The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda organized?

The Regulatory Plan

appears in part II in a daily edition of the

Federal Register

. The Plan is a single document beginning with an introduction, followed by a table of contents, followed by each agency's section of the Plan. Following the Plan in the

Federal Register

, as separate parts, are the regulatory flexibility agendas for each agency whose agenda includes entries for rules which are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities or rules that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Each printed agenda appears as a separate part. The sections of the Plan and the parts of the Unified Agenda are organized alphabetically in four groups: Cabinet departments; other executive agencies; the Federal Acquisition Regulation, a joint authority (Agenda only); and independent regulatory agencies. Agencies may in turn be divided into subagencies. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing the agency's printed entries that follow. Each agency's part of the Agenda contains a preamble providing information specific to that agency. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing the agency's printed entries that follow.

Each agency's section of the Plan contains a narrative statement of regulatory priorities and, for most agencies, a description of the agency's most important significant regulatory and deregulatory actions. Each agency's part of the Agenda contains a preamble providing information specific to that agency plus descriptions of the agency's regulatory and deregulatory actions.

The online, complete Unified Agenda contains the preambles of all participating agencies. Unlike the printed edition, the online Agenda has no fixed ordering. In the online Agenda, users can select the particular agencies whose agendas they want to see. Users have broad flexibility to specify the characteristics of the entries of interest to them by choosing the desired responses to individual data fields. To see a listing of all of an agency's entries, a user can select the agency without specifying any particular characteristics of entries.

Each entry in the Agenda is associated with one of five rulemaking stages. The rulemaking stages are:

Prerule Stage

—actions agencies will undertake to determine whether or how to initiate rulemaking. Such actions occur prior to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and may include Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs) and reviews of existing regulations.

Proposed Rule Stage

—actions for which agencies plan to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking as the next step in their rulemaking process or for which the closing date of the NPRM Comment Period is the next step.

Final Rule Stage

—actions for which agencies plan to publish a final rule or an interim final rule or to take other final action as the next step.

Long-Term Actions

—items under development but for which the agency does not expect to have a regulatory action within the 12 months after publication of this edition of the Unified Agenda. Some of the entries in this section may contain abbreviated information.

Completed Actions

—actions or reviews the agency has completed or withdrawn since publishing its last agenda. This section also includes items the agency began and completed between issues of the Agenda.

Long-Term Actions are rulemakings reported during the publication cycle that are outside of the required 12-month reporting period for which the Agenda was intended. Completed Actions in the publication cycle are rulemakings that are ending their lifecycle either by Withdrawal or completion of the rulemaking process. Therefore, the Long-Term and Completed RINs do not represent the

ongoing, forward-looking nature intended for reporting developing rulemakings in the Agenda pursuant to Executive Order 12866, section 4(b) and 4(c). To further differentiate these two stages of rulemaking in the Unified Agenda from active rulemakings, Long-Term and Completed Actions are reported separately from active rulemakings, which can be any of the first three stages of rulemaking listed above. A separate search function is provided on

http://reginfo.gov

to search for Completed and Long-Term Actions apart from each other and active RINs.

A bullet (•) preceding the title of an entry indicates that the entry is appearing in the Unified Agenda for the first time.

In the printed edition, all entries are numbered sequentially from the beginning to the end of the publication. The sequence number preceding the title of each entry identifies the location of the entry in this edition. The sequence number is used as the reference in the printed table of contents. Sequence numbers are not used in the online Unified Agenda because the unique Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) is able to provide this cross-reference capability.

Editions of the Unified Agenda prior to fall 2007 contained several indexes, which identified entries with various characteristics. These included regulatory actions for which agencies believe that the Regulatory Flexibility Act may require a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, actions selected for periodic review under section 610(c) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and actions that may have federalism implications as defined in Executive Order 13132 or other effects on levels of government. These indexes are no longer compiled, because users of the online Unified Agenda have the flexibility to search for entries with any combination of desired characteristics. The online edition retains the Unified Agenda's subject index based on the

Federal Register

Thesaurus of Indexing Terms. In addition, online users have the option of searching Agenda text fields for words or phrases.

IV. What information appears for each entry?

All entries in the online Unified Agenda contain uniform data elements including, at a minimum, the following information:

Title of the Regulation

—a brief description of the subject of the regulation. In the printed edition, the notation “Section 610 Review” following the title indicates that the agency has selected the rule for its periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610(c)). Some agencies have indicated completions of section 610 reviews or rulemaking actions resulting from completed section 610 reviews. In the online edition, these notations appear in a separate field.

Priority

—an indication of the significance of the regulation. Agencies assign each entry to one of the following five categories of significance.

(1) Economically Significant

As defined in Executive Order 12866, a rulemaking action that will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or will adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities. The definition of an “economically significant” rule is similar but not identical to the definition of a “major” rule under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121). (See below.)

(2) Other Significant

A rulemaking that is not Economically Significant but is considered Significant by the agency. This category includes rules that the agency anticipates will be reviewed under Executive Order 12866 or rules that are a priority of the agency head. These rules may or may not be included in the agency's regulatory plan.

(3) Substantive, Nonsignificant

A rulemaking that has substantive impacts but is neither Significant, nor Routine and Frequent, nor Informational/Administrative/Other.

(4) Routine and Frequent

A rulemaking that is a specific case of a multiple recurring application of a regulatory program in the Code of Federal Regulations and that does not alter the body of the regulation.

(5) Informational/Administrative/Other

A rulemaking that is primarily informational or pertains to agency matters not central to accomplishing the agency's regulatory mandate but that the agency places in the Unified Agenda to inform the public of the activity.

Major

—whether the rule is “major” under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121) because it has resulted or is likely to result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will make the final determination as to whether a rule is major.

Unfunded Mandates

—whether the rule is covered by section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). The Act requires that, before issuing an NPRM likely to result in a mandate that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of more than $100 million in 1 year, agencies, other than independent regulatory agencies, shall prepare a written statement containing an assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal mandate.

Legal Authority

—the section(s) of the United States Code (U.S.C.) or Public Law (Pub. L.) or the Executive order (E.O.) that authorize(s) the regulatory action. Agencies may provide popular name references to laws in addition to these citations.

CFR Citation

—the section(s) of the Code of Federal Regulations that will be affected by the action.

Legal Deadline

—whether the action is subject to a statutory or judicial deadline, the date of that deadline, and whether the deadline pertains to an NPRM, a Final Action, or some other action.

Abstract

—a brief description of the problem the regulation will address; the need for a Federal solution; to the extent available, alternatives that the agency is considering to address the problem; and potential costs and benefits of the action.

Timetable

—the dates and citations (if available) for all past steps and a projected date for at least the next step for the regulatory action. A date displayed in the form 12/00/14 means the agency is predicting the month and year the action will take place but not the day it will occur. In some instances, agencies may indicate what the next action will be, but the date of that action is “To Be Determined.” “Next Action Undetermined” indicates the agency does not know what action it will take next.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

—whether an analysis is required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

) because the rulemaking action is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the Act.

Small Entities Affected

—the types of small entities (businesses, governmental jurisdictions, or organizations) on which the rulemaking action is likely to have an impact as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Some agencies have chosen to indicate likely effects on small entities even though they believe

that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis will not be required.

Government Levels Affected

—whether the action is expected to affect levels of government and, if so, whether the governments are State, local, tribal, or Federal.

International Impacts

—whether the regulation is expected to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise may be of interest to the Nation's international trading partners.

Federalism

—whether the action has “federalism implications” as defined in Executive Order 13132. This term refers to actions “that have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” Independent regulatory agencies are not required to supply this information.

Included in the Regulatory Plan

—whether the rulemaking was included in the agency's current regulatory plan published in fall 2014.

Agency Contact

—the name and phone number of at least one person in the agency who is knowledgeable about the rulemaking action. The agency may also provide the title, address, fax number, email address, and TDD for each agency contact.

Some agencies have provided the following optional information:

RIN Information URL

—the Internet address of a site that provides more information about the entry.

Public Comment URL

—the Internet address of a site that will accept public comments on the entry. Alternatively, timely public comments may be submitted at the Governmentwide e-rulemaking site,

http://www.regulations.gov

Additional Information

—any information an agency wishes to include that does not have a specific corresponding data element.

Compliance Cost to the Public

—the estimated gross compliance cost of the action.

Affected Sectors

—the industrial sectors that the action may most affect, either directly or indirectly. Affected sectors are identified by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes.

Energy Effects

—an indication of whether the agency has prepared or plans to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for the action, as required by Executive Order 13211 “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” signed May 18, 2001 (66 FR 28355).

Related RINs

—one or more past or current RIN(s) associated with activity related to this action, such as merged RINs, split RINs, new activity for previously completed RINs, or duplicate RINs.

Statement of Need

—a description of the need for the regulatory action.

Summary of the Legal Basis

—a description of the legal basis for the action, including whether any aspect of the action is required by statute or court order.

Alternatives

—a description of the alternatives the agency has considered or will consider as required by section 4(c)(1)(B) of Executive Order 12866.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits

—a description of preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits of the action.

Risks

—a description of the magnitude of the risk the action addresses, the amount by which the agency expects the action to reduce this risk, and the relation of the risk and this risk reduction effort to other risks and risk reduction efforts within the agency's jurisdiction.

V. Abbreviations

The following abbreviations appear throughout this publication:

ANPRM

—An Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is a preliminary notice, published in the

Federal Register

, announcing that an agency is considering a regulatory action. An agency may issue an ANPRM before it develops a detailed proposed rule. An ANPRM describes the general area that may be subject to regulation and usually asks for public comment on the issues and options being discussed. An ANPRM is issued only when an agency believes it needs to gather more information before proceeding to a notice of proposed rulemaking.

CFR

—The Code of Federal Regulations is an annual codification of the general and permanent regulations published in the

Federal Register

by the agencies of the Federal Government. The Code is divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area subject to Federal regulation. The CFR is keyed to and kept up to date by the daily issues of the

Federal Register

—An Executive order is a directive from the President to Executive agencies, issued under constitutional or statutory authority. Executive orders are published in the

Federal Register

and in title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

—The

Federal Register

is a daily Federal Government publication that provides a uniform system for publishing Presidential documents, all proposed and final regulations, notices of meetings, and other official documents issued by Federal agencies.

—The Federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.

NPRM

—A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is the document an agency issues and publishes in the

Federal Register

that describes and solicits public comments on a proposed regulatory action. Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), an NPRM must include, at a minimum:

• A statement of the time, place, and nature of the public rulemaking proceeding;

• a reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed; and

• either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.

Public Law (or Pub. L.)

—A public law is a law passed by Congress and signed by the President or enacted over his veto. It has general applicability, unlike a private law that applies only to those persons or entities specifically designated. Public laws are numbered in sequence throughout the 2-year life of each Congress; for example, Pub. L. 112-4 is the fourth public law of the 112th Congress.

RFA

—A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is a description and analysis of the impact of a rule on small entities, including small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and certain small not-for-profit organizations. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

) requires each agency to prepare an initial RFA for public comment when it is required to publish an NPRM and to make available a final RFA when the final rule is published, unless the agency head certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

RIN

—The Regulation Identifier Number is assigned by the Regulatory Information Service Center to identify each regulatory action listed in the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda, as directed by Executive Order 12866 (section 4(b)). Additionally, OMB has asked agencies to include RINs in the headings of their Rule and Proposed Rule documents when publishing them in the

Federal Register

, to make it easier for the public and agency officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions throughout their development.

Seq. No.

—The sequence number identifies the location of an entry in the printed edition of the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda. Note that a specific regulatory action will have the

same RIN throughout its development but will generally have different sequence numbers if it appears in different printed editions of the Unified Agenda. Sequence numbers are not used in the online Unified Agenda.

U.S.C.

—The United States Code is a consolidation and codification of all general and permanent laws of the United States. The U.S.C. is divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area of Federal law.

VI. How can users get copies of the plan and the agenda?

Copies of the

Federal Register

issue containing the printed edition of

The Regulatory Plan

and the Unified Agenda (agency regulatory flexibility agendas) are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. Telephone: (202) 512-1800 or 1-866-512-1800 (toll-free).

Copies of individual agency materials may be available directly from the agency or may be found on the agency's Web site. Please contact the particular agency for further information.

All editions of

The Regulatory Plan

and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions since fall 1995 are available in electronic form at

http://reginfo.gov

, along with flexible search tools.

The Government Printing Office's GPO FDsys Web site contains copies of the Agendas and Regulatory Plans that have been printed in the

Federal Register

. These documents are available at

http://www.fdsys.gov

Dated: September 19, 2014.

John C. Thomas,

Executive Director.

INTRODUCTION TO THE 2014 REGULATORY PLAN

Executive Order 12866, issued in 1993, requires the production of a Unified Regulatory Agenda and Regulatory Plan. Executive Order 13563, issued in 2011, reaffirmed the requirements of Executive Order 12866.

Consistent with these Executive Orders, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is providing the 2014 Unified Regulatory Agenda (Agenda) and the Regulatory Plan (Plan) for public review. The Agenda and Plan are preliminary statements of regulatory and deregulatory policies and priorities under consideration. The Agenda and Plan include “active rulemakings” that agencies could possibly conclude over the next year. As in previous years, however, this list may also include some rules that agencies will not end up issuing in the coming year.

The Plan provides a list of important regulatory actions that agencies are considering for issuance in proposed or final form during the 2015 fiscal year. In contrast, the Agenda is a more inclusive list, including numerous ministerial actions and routine rulemakings, as well as long-term initiatives that agencies do not plan to complete in the coming year but on which they are actively working.

A central purpose of the Agenda is to involve the public, including State, local, and tribal officials, in federal regulatory planning. The public examination of the Agenda and Plan will facilitate public participation in a regulatory system that, in the words of Executive Order 13563, protects “public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.” We emphasize that rules listed on the Agenda must still undergo significant development and review before they are issued. No regulatory action can become effective until it has gone through the legally required processes, which generally include public notice and comment. Any proposed or final action must also satisfy the requirements of relevant statutes, Executive Orders, and Presidential Memoranda. Those requirements, public comments, and new information may or may not lead an agency to go forward with an action that is currently under contemplation.

Among other information, the Agenda also provides an initial classification of whether a rulemaking is “significant” or “economically significant” under the terms of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. Whether a regulation is listed on the Agenda as “economically significant” within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 (generally, having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more) does not necessarily indicate whether it imposes high costs on the private sector. Economically significant actions may impose small costs or even no costs.

Regulations may count as economically significant because they confer large benefits or remove significant burdens. For example, the Department of Health and Human Services issues regulations on an annual basis, pursuant to statute, to govern annual changes in Medicare payments. These payment regulations effectively authorize transfers of billions of dollars to hospitals and other health care providers each year. Regulations might therefore count as economically significant not because they impose significant regulatory costs on the private sector, but because they involve transfer payments as required or authorized by law.

EOs 13563 and 13610: The Retrospective Review of Regulation

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions in Executive Order 12866, which has long governed regulatory review. Executive Order 13563 explicitly points to the need for predictability and certainty, as well as for use of the least burdensome means to achieving regulatory ends. These Executive Orders include the requirement that, to the extent permitted by law, agencies should not proceed with rulemaking in the absence of a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs; they establish public participation, integration and innovation, flexible approaches, scientific integrity, and retrospective review as areas of emphasis in regulation. In particular, Executive Order 13563 explicitly draws attention to the need to measure and to improve “the actual results of regulatory requirements”—a clear reference to the importance of retrospective evaluation.

Executive Order 13563 addresses new regulations that are under development as well as retrospective review of existing regulations that are already in place. With respect to agencies' review of existing regulations, the Executive Order calls for careful reassessment based on empirical analysis. The prospective analysis required by Executive Order 13563 may depend on a degree of prediction and speculation about a rule's likely impacts, and the actual costs and benefits of a regulation may be lower or higher than what was anticipated when the rule was originally developed.

Executive Order 13610,

Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens

, issued in 2012, institutionalizes the retrospective or lookback mechanism set out in Executive Order 13563 by requiring agencies to report to OMB and the public twice each year (January and July) on the status of their retrospective review efforts, to “describe progress, anticipated accomplishments, and proposed timelines for relevant actions.”

Executive Orders 13563 and 13610 recognize that circumstances may change in a way that requires reconsideration of regulatory requirements. Lookback analysis allows agencies to reevaluate existing rules and to streamline, modify, or eliminate those regulations that do not make sense in their current form. The agencies' lookback efforts so far during this Administration have yielded nearly $20 billion in near term savings for the

American public, with significantly more to come.

The Administration is continuing to work with agencies to institutionalize retrospective review so that agencies regularly review existing rules on the books to ensure they remain effective, cost-justified, and based on the best available science. By institutionalizing retrospective review of regulations, the Administration will continue to examine what is working and what is not, and eliminate unjustified and outdated regulations.

Regulatory lookback is an ongoing exercise, and continues to be a high priority for the Administration. As part of that prioritization, the Administration requires that agencies regularly report about recent progress and coming initiatives. In accordance with Executive Order 13610 and Executive Order 13563, in July 2014, agencies submitted to OIRA the latest updates of their retrospective review plans. Federal agencies will again update their retrospective review plans this winter. We have also asked agencies to continue to emphasize regulatory lookbacks in their latest Regulatory Plans.

Reflecting that focus, the current agenda lists 83 rules that are characterized as retroactively reviewing existing programs. Below are some examples of agency plans to reevaluate current practices, in accordance with Executive Orders 13563 and 13610:

—The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is working on a rule to revise the requirements that Long-Term Care facilities must meet to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. These proposed changes are necessary to reflect the substantial advances that have been made over the past several years in the theory and practice of service delivery and safety. These proposals are also an integral part of HHS's efforts to achieve broad-based improvements both in the quality of health care furnished through Federal programs, and in patient safety, while at the same time reducing procedural burdens on providers.

—The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is working on a final rule to streamline the inspection and home warranty requirements for Federal Housing Administration (FHA) single family mortgage insurance and, in doing so, would increase choice and lower the costs for FHA borrowers. First, HUD would remove regulations that require the use of an inspector from the FHA Inspector Roster as a condition for FHA mortgage insurance. This change is based on the recognition of the sufficiency and quality of inspections carried out by local jurisdictions, and HUD expects the rule will increase competition and choice of inspectors among lenders. Second, this rule would also remove the regulations requiring homeowners to purchase 10-year protection plans from FHA-approved warranty issuers in order to qualify for high loan-to-value FHA-insured mortgages. This change is based on the increased quality of construction materials and the standardization of building codes and building code enforcement, and HUD expects the rule will reduce burden on homeowners that do not want to purchase warranties and increase choice for the homeowners that still want to purchase warranties. In total, HUD estimates up to $29 million in warranty expenditures avoided, $100,000 in paperwork burden savings for the public, and $50,000 in administrative cost savings for HUD.

—The Department of Labor is working to revise existing Sex Discrimination Guidelines, which have not been substantively updated since 1973, and to replace them with regulations that align with current law and legal principles in order to address their application to current workplace practices and issues.

E.O. 13609: International Regulatory Cooperation

In addition to using regulatory lookback as a tool to make our regulatory system more efficient, the Administration has been focused on promoting international regulatory cooperation. International regulatory cooperation supports economic growth, job creation, innovation, trade and investment, while also protecting public health, safety, and welfare. In May 2012 President Obama issued Executive Order 13609,

Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation

, which emphasizes the importance of these efforts as a key tool for eliminating unnecessary differences in regulation between the United States and its major trading partners. Additionally, as part of the regulatory lookback initiative, Executive Order 13609 requires agencies to “consider reforms to existing significant regulations that address unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United States and its major trading partners . . . when stakeholders provide adequate information to the agency establishing that the differences are unnecessary.”

Executive Order 13609 also directed agencies to submit a Regulatory Plan that includes “a summary of its international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, with an explanation of how these activities advance the purposes of Executive Order 13563,” and Executive Order 13609. Further, Executive Order 13609 requires agencies to “ensure that significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts are designated as such” in the Regulatory Agenda. In furtherance of this focus on international regulatory cooperation, this summer, the Administration and Canada released the U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Joint Forward Plan.

The Forward Plan represents a significant pivot point for the Administration's regulatory cooperation relationships with Canada, and outlines new Federal agency-level partnership arrangements to help institutionalize the way our regulators work together. The Forward Plan will help remove duplicative requirements, develop common standards, and identify potential areas where future regulation may unnecessarily differ. This kind of international cooperation on regulations between the United States and Canada will help eliminate barriers to doing business in the United States or with U.S. companies, grow the economy, and create jobs. The Forward Plan identifies 24 areas of cooperation where the United States and Canada will work together to implement over the next three to five years in order to modernize our thinking around international regulatory cooperation and develop a toolbox of strategies to address international regulatory issues as they arise. We expect that future Agendas will reflect strong evidence of this partnership.

Available at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/oira/irc/us-canada-rcc-joint-forward-plan.pdf

The Administration continues to foster a regulatory system that emphasizes that careful consideration of costs and benefits, public participation, integration and innovation, flexible approaches, and science. These requirements are meant to produce a regulatory system that draws on recent learning, that is driven by evidence, and that is suited to the distinctive circumstances of the twenty-first century.

Department of Agriculture

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

National Organic Program, Origin of Livestock, NOP-11-0009

0581-AD08

Proposed Rule Stage.

National Organic Program, Organic Pet Food Standards

0581-AD20

Proposed Rule Stage.

National Organic Program, Organic Apiculture Practice Standard, NOP-12-0063

0581-AD31

Proposed Rule Stage.

National Organic Program—Organic Aquaculture Standards

0581-AD34

Proposed Rule Stage.

Exemption of Producers and Handlers of Organic Products From Assessment Under a Commodity Promotion Law

0581-AD37

Proposed Rule Stage.

Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program

0560-AI20

Final Rule Stage.

Conservation Compliance

0560-AI26

Final Rule Stage.

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)

0560-AI30

Final Rule Stage.

Brucellosis and Bovine Tuberculosis; Update of General Provisions

0579-AD65

Proposed Rule Stage.

Establishing a Performance Standard for Authorizing the Importation and Interstate Movement of Fruits and Vegetables

0579-AD71

Proposed Rule Stage.

Viruses, Serums, Toxins, and Analogous Products; Single Label Claim for Veterinary Biological Products

0579-AD64

Final Rule Stage.

User Fees for Agricultural Quarantine and Inspection Services

0579-AD77

Final Rule Stage.

Emergency Supplemental Nutrition Assistance for Victims of Disasters Procedures

0584-AE00

Proposed Rule Stage.

Child Nutrition Program Integrity

0584-AE08

Proposed Rule Stage.

Child and Adult Care Food Program: Meal Pattern Revisions Related to the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010

0584-AE18

Proposed Rule Stage.

Enhancing Retailer Eligibility Standards in SNAP

0584-AE27

Proposed Rule Stage.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Farm Bill of 2008 Retailer Sanctions

0584-AD88

Final Rule Stage.

Child Nutrition Programs: Local School Wellness Policy Implementation Under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010

0584-AE25

Final Rule Stage.

SNAP: Employment and Training (E&T) Performance Measurement, Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

0584-AE33

Final Rule Stage.

Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Disabled Veal Calves

0583-AD54

Proposed Rule Stage.

Mandatory Inspection of Fish of the order Siluriformes and Products Derived From Such Fish

0583-AD36

Final Rule Stage.

Electronic Export Application and Certification as a Reimbursable Service and Flexibility in the Requirements for Official Export Inspection Marks, Devices, and Certificates

0583-AD41

Final Rule Stage.

Descriptive Designation for Needle- or Blade-Tenderized (Mechanically Tenderized) Beef Products

0583-AD45

Final Rule Stage.

Records to be Kept by Official Establishments and Retail Stores That Grind Raw Beef Products

0583-AD46

Final Rule Stage.

Forest Service Manual 2020—Ecological Restoration and Resilience Policy

0596-AC82

Final Rule Stage.

Land Management Planning Rule Policy

0596-AD06

Final Rule Stage.

Rural Energy for America Program

0570-AA76

Final Rule Stage.

Business and Industry (B&I) Guaranteed Loan Program

0570-AA85

Final Rule Stage.

Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Product Manufacturing Assistance Program

0570-AA93

Final Rule Stage.

Agricultural Conservation Easement Program

0578-AA61

Final Rule Stage.

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) Interim Rule

0578-AA62

Final Rule Stage.

Conservation Stewardship Program Interim Rule

0578-AA63

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Commerce

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Requirements for Importation of Fish and Fish Product under the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act

0648-AY15

Proposed Rule Stage.

Designation of Critical Habitat for the North Atlantic Right Whale

0648-AY54

Proposed Rule Stage.

Revision of Hawaiian Monk Seal Critical Habitat

0648-BA81

Proposed Rule Stage.

Revision of the National Standard 1 Guidelines

0648-BB92

Proposed Rule Stage.

Fishery Management Plan for Regulating Offshore Marine Aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico

0648-AS65

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Defense

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Limitations on Terms of Consumer Credit Extended to Service Members and Dependents

0790-AJ10

Proposed Rule Stage.

Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cyber Security/Information Assurance (CS/IA) Activities: Amendment

0790-AJ14

Proposed Rule Stage.

Service Academies

0790-AI19

Final Rule Stage.

Foreign Commercial Satellite Services (DFARS Case 2014-D010)

0750-AI32

Final Rule Stage.

CHAMPUS/TRICARE: Pilot Program for Refills of Maintenance Medications for TRICARE For Life Beneficiaries Through the TRICARE Mail Order Program

0720-AB60

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Education

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Pay As You Earn

1840-AD18

Proposed Rule Stage.

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act

1830-AA21

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Energy

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Energy Conservation Standards for General Service Lamps

1904-AD09

Prerule Stage.

Energy Efficiency Standards for Manufactured Housing

1904-AC11

Proposed Rule Stage.

Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Non-weatherized Gas Furnaces

1904-AD20

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Health and Human Services

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals

0910-AG10

Proposed Rule Stage.

Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption

0910-AG35

Proposed Rule Stage.

Current Good Manufacturing and Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food

0910-AG36

Proposed Rule Stage.

Reports of Distribution and Sales Information for Antimicrobial Active Ingredients Used in Food-Producing Animals

0910-AG45

Proposed Rule Stage.

Foreign Supplier Verification Program

0910-AG64

Proposed Rule Stage.

“Tobacco Products” Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act

0910-AG38

Final Rule Stage.

Food Labeling: Calorie Labeling of Articles of Food Sold in Vending Machines

0910-AG56

Final Rule Stage.

Food Labeling: Nutrition Labeling of Standard Menu Items in Restaurants and Similar Retail Food Establishments

0910-AG57

Final Rule Stage.

Accreditation of Third-Party Auditors/Certification Bodies to Conduct Food Safety Audits and to Issue Certifications

0910-AG66

Final Rule Stage.

Revision of Postmarketing Reporting Requirements Discontinuance or Interruption in Supply of Certain Products (Drug Shortages)

0910-AG88

Final Rule Stage.

Supplemental Applications Proposing Labeling Changes for Approved Drugs and Biological Products

0910-AG94

Final Rule Stage.

Veterinary Feed Directive

0910-AG95

Final Rule Stage.

Reform of Requirements for Long-Term Care Facilities (CMS-3260-P)

0938-AR61

Proposed Rule Stage.

Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008; the Application to Medicaid Managed Care, CHIP, and Alternative Benefit Plans (CMS-2333-P)

0938-AS24

Proposed Rule Stage.

Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs—Stage 3 (CMS-3310-P)

0938-AS26

Proposed Rule Stage.

CY 2016 Revisions to Payment Policies under the Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to Medicare Part B (CMS-1631-P)

0938-AS40

Proposed Rule Stage.

Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System for Acute Care Hospitals and the Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System and FY 2016 Rates (CMS-1632-P)

0938-AS41

Proposed Rule Stage.

CY 2016 Hospital Outpatient PPS Policy Changes and Payment Rates and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment System Policy Changes and Payment Rates (CMS-1633-P)

0938-AS42

Proposed Rule Stage.

Eligibility Notices, Fair Hearing and Appeal Processes for Medicaid and Exchange Eligibility Appeals, and Other Eligibility and Enrollment Provisions (CMS-2334-F2)

0938-AS27

Final Rule Stage.

Child Care and Development Fund Reforms to Support Child Development and Working Families

0970-AC53

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Homeland Security

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Ammonium Nitrate Security Program

1601-AA52

Final Rule Stage.

Asylum and Withholding Definitions

1615-AA41

Proposed Rule Stage.

New Classification for Victims of Criminal Activity; Eligibility for the U Nonimmigrant Status

1615-AA67

Proposed Rule Stage.

Exception to the Persecution Bar for Asylum, Refugee, and Temporary Protected Status, and Withholding of Removal

1615-AB89

Proposed Rule Stage.

Administrative Appeals Office: Procedural Reforms to Improve Efficiency

1615-AB98

Proposed Rule Stage.

Classification for Victims of Severe Forms of Trafficking in Persons; Eligibility for T Nonimmigrant Status

1615-AA59

Final Rule Stage.

Application of Immigration Regulations to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

1615-AB77

Final Rule Stage.

Special Immigrant Juvenile Petitions

1615-AB81

Final Rule Stage.

Employment Authorization for Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses

1615-AB92

Final Rule Stage.

Enhancing Opportunities for H-1B1, CW-1, and E-3 Nonimmigrants and EB-1 Immigrants

1615-AC00

Final Rule Stage.

Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and Automatic Identification System

1625-AA99

Final Rule Stage.

Inspection of Towing Vessels

1625-AB06

Final Rule Stage.

Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC); Card Reader Requirements

1625-AB21

Final Rule Stage.

Amendments to Importer Security Filing and Additional Carrier Requirements

1651-AA98

Proposed Rule Stage.

Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS)

1651-AB04

Proposed Rule Stage.

Changes to the Visa Waiver Program To Implement the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) Program

1651-AA72

Final Rule Stage.

Implementation of the Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program

1651-AA77

Final Rule Stage.

Definition of Form I-94 to Include Electronic Format

1651-AA96

Final Rule Stage.

Security Training for Surface Mode Employees

1652-AA55

Proposed Rule Stage.

Standardized Vetting, Adjudication, and Redress Services

1652-AA61

Proposed Rule Stage.

Passenger Screening Using Advanced Imaging Technology

1652-AA67

Final Rule Stage.

Adjustments to Limitations on Designated School Official Assignment and Study By F-2 and M-2 Nonimmigrants

1653-AA63

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Economic Opportunities for Low- and Very Low-Income Persons (FR-4893)

2529-AA91

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Justice

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Implementation of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973)

1190-AA60

Proposed Rule Stage.

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of Public Accommodations

1190-AA61

Proposed Rule Stage.

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Movie Captioning and Audio Description

1190-AA63

Proposed Rule Stage.

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability: Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Governments

1190-AA65

Proposed Rule Stage.

Implementation of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (Title II and Title III of the ADA)

1190-AA59

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Labor

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act

1205-AB73

Proposed Rule Stage.

Respirable Crystalline Silica

1219-AB36

Proposed Rule Stage.

Criteria and Procedures for Proposed Assessment of Civil Penalties

1219-AB72

Proposed Rule Stage.

Proximity Detection Systems for Mobile Machines in Underground Mines

1219-AB78

Proposed Rule Stage.

100

Proximity Detection Systems for Continuous Mining Machines in Underground Coal Mines

1219-AB65

Final Rule Stage.

101

Infectious Diseases

1218-AC46

Prerule Stage.

102

Occupational Exposure to Crystalline Silica

1218-AB70

Proposed Rule Stage.

103

Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses

1218-AC49

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Transportation

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

104

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS)

2120-AJ60

Proposed Rule Stage.

105

Slot Management and Transparency for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport

2120-AJ89

Proposed Rule Stage.

106

Drug and Alcohol Testing of Certain Maintenance Provider Employees Located Outside of the United States

2120-AK09

Proposed Rule Stage.

107

Pilot Records Database (HR 5900)

2120-AK31

Proposed Rule Stage.

108

Safety Management Systems for Certificate Holders

2120-AJ86

Final Rule Stage.

109

National Goals and Performance Management Measures (MAP-21)

2125-AF53

Proposed Rule Stage.

110

National Goals and Performance Management Measures (MAP-21)

2125-AF54

Proposed Rule Stage.

111

Carrier Safety Fitness Determination

2126-AB11

Proposed Rule Stage.

112

Electronic Logging Devices and Hours of Service Supporting Documents (MAP-21)

2126-AB20

Proposed Rule Stage.

113

Commercial Driver's License Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse (MAP-21)

2126-AB18

Final Rule Stage.

114

Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Work Trucks: Phase 2

2127-AL52

Proposed Rule Stage.

115

Sound for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles

2127-AK93

Final Rule Stage.

116

Electronic Stability Control Systems for Heavy Vehicles (MAP-21)

2127-AK97

Final Rule Stage.

117

State Safety Oversight (MAP-21)

2132-AB19

Proposed Rule Stage.

118

Pipeline Safety: Safety of On-Shore Liquid Hazardous Pipelines

2137-AE66

Proposed Rule Stage.

119

Pipeline Safety: Gas Transmission (RRR)

2137-AE72

Proposed Rule Stage.

120

Hazardous Materials: Enhanced Tank Car Standards and Operational Controls for High-Hazard Flammable Trains

2137-AE91

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

121

Expedited Senior Executive Removal Authority

2900-AP30

Final Rule Stage.

Environmental Protection Agency

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

122

Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone

2060-AP38

Proposed Rule Stage.

123

Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead

2060-AQ44

Proposed Rule Stage.

124

Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: EGUs in Indian Country and U.S. Territories

2060-AR33

Proposed Rule Stage.

125

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2

2060-AS16

Proposed Rule Stage.

126

Renewable Fuel 2015 Volume Standards

2060-AS22

Proposed Rule Stage.

127

Pesticides; Certification of Pesticide Applicators

2070-AJ20

Proposed Rule Stage.

128

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Reassessment of Use Authorizations

2070-AJ38

Proposed Rule Stage.

129

Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program for Public and Commercial Buildings

2070-AJ56

Proposed Rule Stage.

130

Revisions to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; Subpart J Product Schedule Listing Requirements

2050-AE87

Proposed Rule Stage.

131

User Fee Schedule for Electronic Hazardous Waste Manifest

2050-AG80

Proposed Rule Stage.

132

Modernization of the Accidental Release Prevention Regulations Under Clean Air Act

2050-AG82

Proposed Rule Stage.

133

Petroleum Refinery Sector Risk and Technology Review and New Source Performance Standards

2060-AQ75

Final Rule Stage.

134

Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

2060-AQ91

Final Rule Stage.

135

Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements

2060-AR34

Final Rule Stage.

136

Carbon Pollution Standards for Modified and Reconstructed Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

2060-AR88

Final Rule Stage.

137

Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard Revisions

2070-AJ22

Final Rule Stage.

138

Formaldehyde; Third-Party Certification Framework for the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products

2070-AJ44

Final Rule Stage.

139

Formaldehyde Emissions Standards for Composite Wood Products

2070-AJ92

Final Rule Stage.

140

Standards for the Management of Coal Combustion Residuals Generated by Commercial Electric Power Producers

2050-AE81

Final Rule Stage.

141

Revising Underground Storage Tank Regulations—Revisions to Existing Requirements and New Requirements for Secondary Containment and Operator Training

2050-AG46

Final Rule Stage.

142

Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category

2040-AF14

Final Rule Stage.

143

Water Quality Standards Regulatory Revisions

2040-AF16

Final Rule Stage.

144

Definition of “Waters of the United States” Under the Clean Water Act

2040-AF30

Final Rule Stage.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

145

Federal Sector Equal Employment Opportunity Process

3046-AB00

Prerule Stage.

146

The Federal Sector's Obligation To Be a Model Employer of Individuals With Disabilities

3046-AA94

Proposed Rule Stage.

147

Amendments to Regulations Under the Americans With Disabilities Act

3046-AB01

Proposed Rule Stage.

148

Amendments to Regulations Under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

3046-AB02

Proposed Rule Stage.

Social Security Administration

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

149

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Digestive Disorders (3441P)

0960-AG65

Proposed Rule Stage.

150

Revisions to Representative Code of Conduct (3835P)

0960-AH63

Proposed Rule Stage.

151

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Neurological Impairments (806F)

0960-AF35

Final Rule Stage.

152

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Hematological Disorders (974F)

0960-AF88

Final Rule Stage.

153

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Growth Disorders and Weight Loss in Children (3163F)

0960-AG28

Final Rule Stage.

154

Use of Date of Written Statement as Filing Date (3431F)

0960-AG58

Final Rule Stage.

155

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Immune (HIV) System Disorders (3466F)

0960-AG71

Final Rule Stage.

156

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Cancer (Malignant Neoplastic Diseases) (3757F)

0960-AH43

Final Rule Stage.

157

Submission of Evidence in Disability Claims (3802F)

0960-AH53

Final Rule Stage.

158

Social Security Number Card Applications (3855I)

0960-AH68

Final Rule Stage.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

159

Revision of Fee Schedules: Fee Recovery for FY 2015 [NRC-2014-0200]

3150-AJ44

Proposed Rule Stage.

BILLING CODE 6820-27-P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)

Statement of Regulatory Priorities

In FY 2015, USDA will focus on a number of high-priority regulations necessary to implement the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Farm Bill). This legislation, which was signed into law on February 7, 2014, provides authorization for services and programs that impact every American and millions of people around the world. The new Farm Bill builds on historic economic gains in rural America over the past five years, while achieving meaningful reform and billions of dollars in savings for the taxpayer. The new Farm Bill will allow USDA to continue record accomplishments on behalf of the American people, while providing new opportunity and creating jobs across rural America. It will enable USDA to further expand markets for agricultural products at home and abroad, strengthen conservation efforts, create new opportunities for local and regional food systems and grow the biobased economy. It will provide a dependable safety net for America's farmers, ranchers and growers. It will maintain important agricultural research and ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all Americans. USDA's regulatory efforts in the coming year will modify existing regulations and introduce new regulatory actions necessary to implement the 2014 Farm Bill and to achieve the following goals identified in the Department's Strategic Plan for 2010-2015:

•

Assist rural communities to create prosperity so they are self-sustaining, re-populating, and economically thriving.

USDA is the leading advocate for rural America. The Department supports rural communities and enhances quality of life for rural residents by improving

their economic opportunities, community infrastructure, environmental health, and the sustainability of agricultural production. The common goal is to help create thriving rural communities with good jobs where people want to live and raise families where children have economic opportunities and a bright future.

•

Ensure our national forests and private working lands are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water resources.

America's prosperity is inextricably linked to the health of our lands and natural resources. Forests, farms, ranches, and grasslands offer enormous environmental benefits as a source of clean air, clean and abundant water, and wildlife habitat. These lands generate economic value by supporting the vital agriculture and forestry sectors, attracting tourism and recreational visitors, sustaining green jobs, and producing ecosystem services, food, fiber, timber and non-timber products. They are also of immense social importance, enhancing rural quality of life, sustaining scenic and culturally important landscapes, and providing opportunities to engage in outdoor activity and reconnect with the land.

•

Help America promote agricultural production and biotechnology exports as America works to increase food security.

A productive agricultural sector is critical to increasing global food security. For many crops, a substantial portion of domestic production is bound for overseas markets. USDA helps American farmers and ranchers use efficient and sustainable production, biotechnology, and other emergent technologies to enhance food security around the world and find export markets for their products.

•

Ensure that all of America's children have access to safe, nutritious, and balanced meals.

A plentiful supply of safe and nutritious food is essential to the well-being of every family and the healthy development of every child in America. USDA provides nutrition assistance to children and low-income people who need it and works to improve the healthy eating habits of all Americans, especially children. In addition, the Department safeguards the quality and wholesomeness of meat, poultry, and processed egg products, and it addresses and prevents loss or damage from pests and disease outbreaks.

Important regulatory activities supporting the accomplishment of these goals in 2015 will include the following:

•

Strengthening Food Safety Inspection.

USDA will continue to develop science-based regulations that improve the safety of meat, poultry, and processed egg products in the least burdensome and most cost-effective manner. Existing regulations will be revised to address emerging food safety challenges, streamlined to remove excessively prescriptive requirements, and updated to be made consistent with Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point principles. Among other actions, USDA will amend regulations so that information presented on food packaging is useful in assisting consumers with purchasing and preparation decisions. The agency will also use technology to streamline and improve the integrity of export certificates. To help small businesses comply with food safety regulatory requirements, FSIS will continue its collaboration with other USDA and State partners in its small business outreach program.

Improving Access to Nutrition Assistance and Dietary Behaviors.

As changes are made to the nutrition assistance programs, USDA will work to ensure access to program benefits, strengthen program integrity, improve diets and healthy eating, and promote physical activity consistent with the national effort to reduce obesity. In support of these activities in 2014, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) plans to publish a proposed rule updating meal pattern revisions for the Child and Adult Care Food Program, as well as a proposal to enhance the eligibility standards for SNAP retailers to increase access to more healthful foods. FNS will continue to work to implement rules that minimize participant and vendor fraud in its nutrition assistance programs.

•

Collaborating with Producers to Conserve Natural Resources.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is amending the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) regulations to incorporate programmatic changes as authorized by the Farm Bill. CSP promotes consultation at the local level to identify priority resource concerns in geographic areas within a State. CSP encourages producers to address environmental concerns while improving and conserving the quality and condition of natural resources in a comprehensive manner. EQIP provides assistance to landowners to address natural resource issues that impact soil, water and related natural resources, including grazing lands, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. The Farm Bill folded the former Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) into EQIP.

•

Promoting Innovation through Partnerships.

NRCS has a long history of providing science-based, technically sound, and proven conservation practices, advice, and alternatives to America's farmers and ranchers. Traditionally, NRCS has worked with USDA agencies, universities, and other nongovernmental organizations to identify and refine new cutting-edge technology through on-farm trials and research. Using this approach, NRCS continually reviews and revises conservation practices based on new research or changes in technology.

Through the Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG) component of EQIP, NRCS involves additional partners in identifying and demonstrating new approaches for possible NRCS adoption. CIG's purpose is to stimulate the adoption of innovative conservation approaches and technologies in agricultural production and leverage additional investments in conservation. Partners assist NRCS with meeting the CIG goals of identifying new conservation technologies and practices, conducting demonstrations and field tests, and integrating widely applicable technologies and practices into NRCS' toolkit of practices and activities to help agricultural producers better address natural resource concerns. NRCS is updating the CIG section of the EQIP regulation to be consistent with Farm Bill amendments.

•

Protecting Productive Agricultural Lands and Wetlands.

The Farm Bill combined several NRCS easement programs, including the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program (FRPP), and the Grassland Reserve Program (GRP) into the new Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP). ACEP will require its own regulation to replace those of the repealed WRP, FRPP, and GRP programs. ACEP will have two components: an agricultural land easement component under which NRCS assists eligible entities to protect agricultural land by limiting non-agricultural land uses and a wetland reserve easement component under which NRCS provides technical and financial assistance directly to landowners to restore, protect and enhance wetlands through the purchase of wetlands reserve easements. NRCS will maintain the existing easements and contracts formed under the previous programs; however, they will all be considered part of ACEP enrollment.

•

Addressing Conservation Concerns on a Regional Level.

The Farm Bill established the Regional Conservation

Partnership Program (RCPP) to promote the implementation of conservation activities through providing support for agreements between producers and partner groups. Producers receive technical and financial assistance through RCPP while NRCS and its partners help producers install and maintain conservation activities. These projects may focus on water quality and quantity, soil erosion, wildlife habitat, drought mitigation, flood control, and other regional priorities. Partners include producer associations, State or local governments, Indian tribes, non-governmental organizations, and institutions of higher education. RCPP projects affect multiple agricultural or nonindustrial private forest operations on a local, regional, State, or multistate level. The Farm Bill combined several regional conservation initiatives into this program. RCPP is implemented through an announcement of program funding through Grants.gov; however, NRCS is publishing updates in the CSP, EQIP and ACEP regulations to indicate that these are covered programs through which RCPP can operate.

•

Establish Framework for Managing our Nation's Forests and Grasslands.

The Forest Service will publish proposed guidance for implementation of the 2012 Land Management Planning Rule. This guidance will provide the detailed monitoring, assessment, and documentation requirements that the managers of our national forests and grasslands require to begin revising their land management plans under the 2012 Planning Rule. Currently 70 of the 120 Forest Service's Land Management Plans are expired and in need of revision.

•

Making Marketing and Regulatory Programs More Focused.

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) plans to amend its veterinary biologics regulations to provide for the use of a simpler, uniform label format to better meet the needs of veterinary biologics consumers. APHIS also plans to revise tuberculosis and brucellosis regulations to better reflect the distribution of these diseases and thereby minimize the impacts on livestock producers while continuing to address these livestock diseases. In the area of plant health, APHIS proposes to expand the streamlined method of considering the importation and interstate movement of fruits and vegetables. The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) will support the organic sector by updating the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances as advised by the National Organic Standards Board, streamlining organic regulatory enforcement actions, developing organic pet food standards, and proposing that all existing and replacement dairy animals from which milk or milk products are intended to be sold as organic must be managed organically from the last third of gestation.

•

Promoting Biobased Products.

USDA will continue to promote sustainable economic opportunities to create jobs in rural communities through the purchase and use of biobased products through the BioPreferred® program. USDA will finalize regulations to revise the BioPreferred® program guidelines to continue adding designated product categories to the preferred procurement program, including intermediates and feedstocks and finished products made of intermediates and feedstocks. The Federal preferred procurement and the certified label parts of the program are voluntary; both are designed to assist biobased businesses in securing additional sales.

Retrospective Review of Existing Regulations

Pursuant to section 6 of Executive Order 13563 “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (Jan. 18, 2011), the following initiatives are identified in the Department's Final Plan for Retrospective Analysis. The final agency plans, as well as periodic status updates for each initiative, are available online at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/21stcenturygov/actions/21st-century-regulatory-system

RIN

Title

Significantly reduce burdens on

small businesses

0583-AC59

Prior Labeling Approval System: Generic Label Approval

Yes.

0583-AD41

Electronic Export Application and Certification Fee

Yes.

0583-AD32

Modernization of Poultry Slaughter Inspection

Yes.

0570-AA76

Rural Energy America Program

Yes.

0570-AA85

Business and Industry Loan Guaranteed Program

Yes.

0575-AC91

Community Facilities Loan and Grants

Yes.

0596-AD01

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Efficiencies

Yes.

Subsequent to EO 13563 and consistent with its goals as well as the importance of public participation, President Obama issued Executive Order 13610 on Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens in May 2012. Executive Order 13610 directs agencies, in part, to give priority consideration to those initiatives that will produce cost savings or significant reductions in paperwork burdens. Accordingly, reducing the regulatory burden on the American people and our trading partners is a priority for USDA, and we will continually work to improve the effectiveness of our existing regulations. As a result of our ongoing regulatory review and burden reduction efforts, USDA has identified the following burden-reducing initiatives:

•

Increase Use of Generic Approval and Regulations Consolidation.

FSIS is finalizing a rule that will expand the circumstances in which the labels of meat and poultry products will be deemed to be generically approved by FSIS. The rule will reduce regulatory burdens and generate a discounted Agency cost savings of $3.3 million over 10 years (discounted at 7 percent).

•

Implement Electronic Export Application for Meat and Poultry Products.

FSIS is finalizing a rule to provide exporters a fee-based option for transmitting U.S. certifications to foreign importers and governments electronically. Automating the export application and certification process will facilitate the export of U.S. meat, poultry, and egg products by streamlining the processes that are used while ensuring that foreign regulatory requirements are met.

•

Streamline Forest Service National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance.

The Forest Service, in cooperation with the Council on Environmental Quality, is promulgating rulemaking to establish three new Categorical Exclusions for simple restoration activities. These Categorical Exclusions will improve and streamline the NEPA process and reduce the paperwork burden, as it applies to Forest Service projects without reducing environmental protection.

•

Increase Accessibility to the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP).

•

Reduced Duplication in Farm Programs.

The Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services (FFAS) mission area is reducing the paperwork burden on program participants by consolidating the information collections required to participate in farm programs administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and the Federal crop insurance program administered by the Risk Management Agency (RMA). As a result, producers will be able to spend less time reporting information to USDA. Additionally, FSA and RMA will be better able to share information, thus improving operational efficiency. FFAS is simplifying and standardizing, to the extent practical, acreage reporting processes, program dates, and data definitions across the various USDA programs and agencies. FFAS is making improvements to allow producers to use information from their farm-management and precision agriculture systems for reporting production, planted and harvested acreage, and other key information needed to participate in USDA programs. FFAS is also streamlining the collection of producer information by FSA and RMA with the agricultural production information collected by the National Agricultural Statistics Service. These process changes allow for program data that is common across agencies to be collected once and utilized or redistributed to agency programs in which the producer chooses to participate. FFAS will conduct a pilot project in spring 2015 to test the ability of FSA county offices to receive electronic acreage reports through a third-party service provider; the pilot will add additional States following the 2014 small “proof-of-concept” in Illinois.

Periodic status updates for these burden-reducing initiatives can be found online at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/21stcenturygov/actions/21st-century-regulatory-system

In addition to regulatory review initiatives identified under Executive Order 13563 and the paper work burden reduction initiatives identified under the Executive Order 13610, USDA has plans to initiate the following additional streamlining initiatives in 2015.

•

Simplify FSA NEPA Compliance.

FSA proposed revisions to its regulations that implement NEPA to update, improve, and clarify requirements. It also proposed new categorical exclusions and removing obsolete provisions. FSA will revise the regulations with any additional improvements being made based on public comments to the proposed rule. Annual cost savings to FSA as a result of this rule could be $345,000 from conducting 314 fewer environmental assessments per year, while retaining strong environmental protection.

•

Simplify Equipment Contracts for Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Loans.

RUS is proposing a rule that would result in a new standard Equipment Contract Form for use by Telecommunications Program borrowers. This new standardized contract would ensure that certain standards and specifications are met, and this new form would replace the current process that requires all construction providers to use their own resources to develop a contract for each project.

•

Consolidate Community Facilities Programs Loan and Grant Requirements.

The Rural Housing Service (RHS) is proposing to consolidate seven of the regulations used to service Community Facilities direct loans and grants into one streamlined regulation. This rule will reduce the time burden on RHS staff and provide the public with a single document that clearly outlines the requirements for servicing Community Facilities direct loans and grants.

•

Update Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Programs.

Given the success USDA has had in nearly eradicating tuberculosis and brucellosis in ruminants, APHIS will propose rulemaking to update and consolidate its regulations regarding these diseases to better reflect the current distribution of these diseases and the changes in which cattle, bison, and captive cervid are produced in the United States.

Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation Under Executive Order 13609:

President Obama issued Executive Order 13609 on promoting international regulatory cooperation in May 2012. The Executive order charges the Regulatory Working Group, an interagency working group chaired by the Administrator of Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), with examining appropriate strategies and best practices for international regulatory cooperation. The Executive order also directs agencies to identify factors that should be taken into account in evaluating the effectiveness of regulatory approaches used by trading partners with whom the U.S. is engaged in regulatory cooperation. At this time, USDA is identifying international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, while working closely with the Administration to refine the guidelines implementing the Executive order. Apart from international regulatory cooperation, the Department has continued to identify regulations with international impacts, as it has done in the past. Such regulations are those that are expected to have international trade and investment effects or otherwise may be of interest to our international trading partners.

USDA is diligently working to carry out the President's Executive order mandate with regard to regulatory cooperation as new regulations are developed. Several agencies within the Department are also actively engaged in interagency and Departmental regulatory cooperation initiatives being pursued as part of the U.S.-Mexico High Level Regulatory Cooperation Council (HLRCC) and the U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC), as well as other fora. Specific projects are being pursued by USDA agencies such as AMS, APHIS, and FSIS and address a variety of regulatory oversight processes and requirements related to meat, poultry, and animal and plant health. Projects related to electronic certification, equivalence, meat nomenclature, and the efficient and safe flow of plants, animals and food across our shared borders are all regulatory cooperation pursuits these agencies are undertaking in order to secure better alignment among our countries without compromising the high standards of safety we have in place in the U.S. relative to food safety and public health, as well as plant and animal health, that are so critical to American agriculture.

Major Regulatory Priorities

This following represents summary information on prospective priority regulations as called for in Executive Orders 12866 and 13563:

Food and Nutrition Service

Mission: FNS works to end hunger and obesity through the administration of federal nutrition assistance programs including WIC, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and school meals.

Priorities: In addition to responding to provisions of legislation authorizing and modifying Federal nutrition assistance programs, FNS's 2015 regulatory plan supports USDA's Strategic Goal to “ensure that all of America's children have access to safe, nutritious and balanced meals” and its related objectives:

•

Increase Access to Nutritious Food.

This objective represents FNS's efforts to improve nutrition by providing access to program benefits (food consumed at home, school meals, commodities) and distributing State administrative funds to support program operations. To advance this objective, FNS plans to publish a final rule implementing the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010's Community Eligibility Provision, which eliminates the burden of household applications and increases access to free school lunches and breakfasts for children in eligible high-poverty schools. FNS will also publish a proposed rule to codify procedures for providing temporary SNAP benefits during emergencies for victims of disasters.

•

Improve Program Integrity.

FNS also plans to publish a number of rules to increase efficiency, reduce the burden of program operations, and further reduce improper payments. Program integrity provisions will continue to be strengthened in the SNAP and Child Nutrition programs to ensure Federal taxpayer dollars are spent effectively. To support this objective, FNS plans to publish a final rule from the 2008 Farm Bill that increases the penalty for SNAP authorized stores that are involved in the trafficking of Program benefits. Additionally, FNS plans to publish a proposed rule to establish consistent, outcome-focused performance measures for the SNAP Employment and Training Program. For Child Nutrition, FNS plans to publish a proposed rule to strengthen oversight requirements and institution disqualification procedures, allow the imposition of fines by USDA or State agencies for egregious and/or repeated program violations, and address several deficiencies identified through program audits and reviews.

•

Promote Healthy Diet and Physical Activity Behaviors.

This objective represents FNS's efforts to ensure that program benefits meet appropriate standards to effectively improve nutrition for program participants, to improve the diets of its clients through nutrition education, and to support the national effort to reduce obesity by promoting healthy eating and physical activity. To implement provisions included in the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. FNS plans to publish a proposed rule that updates the meal patterns for the Child and Adult Care Food Program to align them with the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans and final rules that establish professional standards for school food service and State child nutrition program directors, require schools to develop local wellness policies that promote the health of students and address the growing problem of childhood obesity. Additionally, FNS plans to publish a proposed rule to implement the 2014 Farm Bill governing the eligibility of retail food stores participating in SNAP that will improve SNAP participants' access to healthy food options.

Food Safety and Inspection Service

Mission: FSIS is responsible for ensuring that meat, poultry, and processed egg products in interstate and foreign commerce are wholesome, not adulterated, and are properly marked, labeled, and packaged.

Priorities: FSIS is committed to developing and issuing science-based regulations intended to ensure that meat, poultry, and processed egg products are wholesome and not adulterated or misbranded. FSIS regulatory actions support the objective to protect public health by ensuring that food is safe under USDA's goal to ensure access to safe food. To reduce the number of foodborne illnesses and increase program efficiencies, FSIS will continue to review its existing authorities and regulations to ensure that it can address emerging food safety challenges, to streamline excessively prescriptive regulations, and to revise or remove regulations that are inconsistent with the FSIS's Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) regulations. FSIS is also working with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to improve coordination and increase the effectiveness of inspection activities. FSIS's priority initiatives are as follows:

•

Implement Inspection of Certain Fish, Including Catfish and Catfish Products.

FSIS plans to issue a final rule to implement a new inspection system for all fish of the order Siluriformes, as required by the 2014 Farm Bill. The rule will define inspection requirements for this type of fish and will take into account the conditions under which the fish is raised and transported to a processing establishment.

•

Streamline Export Application Processes through the Public Health Information System (PHIS).

To support its food safety inspection activities, FSIS is continuing to implement PHIS, a user-friendly and Web-based system that automates many of the Agency's business processes. PHIS also enables greater exchange of information between FSIS and other Federal agencies, such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which is involved alongside FSIS in tracking cross-border movement of import and export shipments of meat, poultry, and processed egg products. To facilitate the implementation of some PHIS components, FSIS is finalizing regulations to provide for electronic export application and certification processes.

•

Update Nutrition Facts Panels for Meat and Poultry Products.

FSIS will propose to amend its regulations so that the nutrition labeling requirements for meat and poultry products reflect recent scientific research and dietary recommendations and to improve the presentation of nutrition information to assist consumers in maintaining healthy dietary practices. These revisions will be consistent with the recent changes that the Food and Drug Administration proposed for conventional foods and will ensure that there is consistency in how nutrition information is presented across the food supply.

•

Ensure Accurate Labeling of Mechanically Tenderized Beef.

FSIS has concluded that without proper labeling, raw or partially cooked mechanically tenderized beef products could be mistakenly perceived by consumers to be whole, intact muscle cuts. The fact that a cut of beef has been needle or blade-tenderized is a characterizing feature of the product and, as such, is a material fact likely to affect consumers' purchase decisions and should affect their preparation of the product. FSIS has also concluded that the addition of validated cooking instruction is required to ensure that potential pathogens throughout the product are destroyed. Without thorough cooking, pathogens that may have been introduced to the interior of the product during the tenderization process may remain in the product. The Agency will finalize regulations requiring that raw, mechanically tenderized (needle or blade) beef products be labeled to indicate that they are “mechanically tenderized.”

•

Improve the Efficiency of Product Recalls.

FSIS is developing a final rule that will amend recordkeeping regulations to specify that all official establishments and retail stores that grind or chop raw beef products for sale in commerce must keep records that disclose the identity of the supplier of all source materials that they use in the preparation of each lot of raw ground or chopped product and identify the names of those source materials. FSIS

investigators and public health officials frequently use records kept by all levels of the food distribution chain, including the retail level, to identify and trace back product that is the source of the illness to the suppliers that produced the source material for the product. Access to this information will improve FSIS's ability to conduct timely and effective consumer foodborne illness investigations and other public health activities throughout the stream of commerce.

•

Improve Compliance with the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.

FSIS has concluded that prohibiting the slaughter of all non-ambulatory disabled veal calves will improve compliance with the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 1901

et seq.

) and will also improve the Agency's inspection efficiency by eliminating the time that FSIS inspection program personnel spend re-inspecting non-ambulatory disabled veal calves. FSIS plans to propose to amend its regulations on ante-mortem inspection to remove a provision that permits establishments to set apart and hold for treatment veal calves that are unable to rise from a recumbent position and walk because they are tired or cold (9 CFR 309.13(b)). Under the proposed rule, non-ambulatory disabled veal calves that are offered for slaughter will be condemned and promptly euthanized.

•

FSIS Small Business Implications.

The great majority of businesses regulated by FSIS are small businesses. FSIS conducts a small business outreach program that provides critical training, access to food safety experts, and information resources, such as compliance guidance and questions and answers on various topics, in forms that are uniform, easily comprehended, and consistent. FSIS collaborates in this effort with other USDA agencies and cooperating State partners. For example, FSIS makes plant owners and operators aware of loan programs available through USDA's Rural Business and Cooperative programs to help them in upgrading their facilities. FSIS employees will meet with small and very small plant operators to learn more about their specific needs and explore how FSIS can tailor regulations to better meet the needs of small and very small establishments, while maintaining the highest level of food safety.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Mission: A major part of the mission of APHIS is to protect the health and value of American agricultural and natural resources. APHIS conducts programs to prevent the introduction of exotic pests and diseases into the United States and conducts surveillance, monitoring, control, and eradication programs for pests and diseases in this country. These activities enhance agricultural productivity and competitiveness and contribute to the national economy and the public health. APHIS also conducts programs to ensure the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of animals under the Animal Welfare Act.

Priorities: APHIS continues to pursue initiatives to update its regulations to make them more flexible and performance-based. For example, in the area of animal health, APHIS is preparing a final rule to amend its veterinary biologics regulations to provide for the use of a simpler, uniform label format that would allow biologics licensees and permittees to more clearly communicate product performance information to the end user. In addition, the rule would simplify the evaluation of efficacy studies and reduce the amount of time required by APHIS to evaluate study data, thus allowing manufacturers to market their products sooner. APHIS has also prepared a proposed rule that would revise and consolidate its regulations regarding bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis to better reflect the distribution of these diseases and the current nature of cattle, bison, and captive cervid production in the United States. In the area of plant health, APHIS has prepared a proposed rule that would establish performance standards and a notice-based process for approving the interstate movement of fruits and vegetables from Hawaii and the U.S. Territories and the importation of those articles from other countries. In addition, APHIS will revise agricultural quarantine and inspection user fees so that fees collected are commensurate with the cost of providing the activity.

Agricultural Marketing Service

Mission: AMS's mission is to facilitate the competitive and efficient marketing of agricultural products. AMS provides marketing services to producers, manufacturers, distributors, importers, exporters, and consumers of food products. AMS also manages the government's food purchases, supervises food quality grading, maintains food quality standards, supervises the Federal research and promotion programs, and oversees the country of origin labeling program as well as the National Organic Program (NOP).

Priorities: AMS intends to support the government's initiative to streamline regulatory actions by establishing a process to communicate fees for our voluntary user fee programs annually through publication of a

Federal Register

notice. AMS is also committed to ensuring the integrity of USDA organic products in the U.S. and throughout the world. In addition to its ongoing work to develop organic pet food, apiculture, and aquaculture standards, the Agency is moving forward with the following priority rulemakings that affect the organic industry:

•

Research and Promotion Programs Organic Exemption.

USDA intends to implement the 2014 Farm Bill provision to expand the organic exemption for research and promotion program assessments. This action would exempt organic operations with “100 percent organic” and “organic” products, including certain split operations, from paying research and promotion program assessments.

•

Transitioning Dairy Animals into Organic Production.

Members of the organic community, including dairy producers, organic interest groups, and the National Organic Standards Board have advocated for rulemaking on the allowance for transitioning dairy animals into organic production. Stakeholders have interpreted the current standard differently, creating inconsistencies across dairy producers. AMS has submitted a proposed rule for clearance on this issue. This proposed change to the organic standards is intended to level the playing field for organic dairy producers.

Farm Service Agency

Mission: FSA's mission is to deliver timely, effective programs and services to America's farmers and ranchers to support them in sustaining our Nation's vibrant agricultural economy, as well as to provide first-rate support for domestic and international food aid efforts. FSA has successfully expedited the implementation of several major regulatory priorities resulting from the 2014 Farm Bill, including new programs such as the Agriculture Risk Coverage Program, Price Loss Coverage Program, Margin Protection Program for Dairy, Dairy Product Donation Program, Cotton Transition Assistance Program, and improvements to existing programs such as disaster assistance programs, entity eligibility for Farm Loan Programs, and Microloans. FSA supports USDA's strategic goals by stabilizing farm income, providing credit to new or existing farmers and ranchers who are temporarily unable to obtain credit from commercial sources, and helping farm operations recover from the effects of disaster. FSA administers several conservation programs directed toward

agricultural producers. The largest program is the Conservation Reserve Program, which protects up to 32 million acres of environmentally sensitive land.

Priorities: FSA is focused on continuing to implement the 2014 Farm Bill while providing the best possible service to producers while protecting the environment by updating and streamlining environmental compliance. FSA's priority initiatives are as follows:

•

Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP).

FSA will revise its NAP regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes. The 2014 Farm Bill changes include enhanced protection under NAP, which is also known as NAP buy-up to allow producers to buy additional NAP coverage for an additional premium; revised NAP eligibility requirements for coverage on tilled native sod; added coverage for sweet sorghum and biomass sorghum; service fee waivers for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers.

•

Conservation Compliance.

FSA, working in coordination with NRCS and RMA, will revise the USDA conservation compliance regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes. The 2014 Farm Bill changes linking eligibility for any premium subsidy paid by FCIC on a policy or plan of federally reinsured crop insurance to be in compliance with Highly Erodible Land Conservation and Wetlands Conservation provisions. Since enactment of the 1985 Farm Bill, eligibility for most commodity, disaster, and conservation programs has been linked to compliance with the Highly Erodible Land Conservation and Wetland Conservation provisions. The 2014 Farm Bill continues the requirement that producers adhere to conservation compliance guidelines to be eligible for most programs administered by FSA and NRCS.

•

Marketing Assistance Loans (MAL) and Loan Deficiency Payments (LDP).

FSA will revise its MAL and LDP regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes. The 2014 Farm Bill changes reauthorize MAL and LDP for all eligible commodities including cotton, honey, and sugar loans, for the 2014 through 2018 crop years. The MAL and LDP Programs allow producers to receive short-term loans against their crops so that producers can market their crops at a time that is convenient for them, rather than being forced to sell immediately after harvest to pay the bills. The MAL and LDP programs are continued with no changes to the loan rates except for cotton, and there are no other changes to the basic structure of the programs. The changes extend the program years and add clarity to the regulations. MALs, LDPs and sugar loans are Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) programs administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA).

•

Farm Loan Programs (FLP) changes.

FSA will revise its FLP regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes. The 2014 Farm Bill changes include expanding lending opportunities for thousands of farmers and ranchers to begin and continue operations, including greater flexibility in determining eligibility, raising loan limits, and emphasizing beginning and socially disadvantaged producers. Specific changes include: Eliminating loan term limits for guaranteed operating loans, modifying the definition of beginning farmers, allowing debt forgiveness on youth loans, increasing the guaranteed amount on conservation loans from 75 to 80 percent and 90 percent for beginning farmers and socially disadvantaged producers, changing the interest rate on Direct Farm Ownership loans that are made in conjunction with other lenders, and increasing the maximum loan amount for the down payment loan program from $225,000 to $300,000.

•

Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP).

FSA will revise its BCAP regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes. The 2014 Farm Bill changes include extending BCAP through 2018 and revising BCAP to add some new payment amounts and eligibility restrictions. Specific changes include: revising eligible materials to remove bagasse, add materials used for research material, and require that all woody biomass be harvested directly from the land and reducing the payment for collection, harvest, storage, and transportation matching payments to $20 per dry ton. BCAP provides financial assistance to producers who establish and harvest biomass crops and requires at least 10 percent of payments to be matching payments.

•

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).

FSA will revise its CRP regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes. The 2014 Farm Bill changes include extending the authority to enroll acreage in CRP through September 30, 2018, and requiring enrollment to be no more than 24 million acres beginning October 1, 2016. There are 25.6 million acres enrolled in CRP, of which 2 million expired on September 30, 2014.

•

Streamline Environmental Compliance (NEPA).

FSA will revise its regulations that implement NEPA. The changes improve the efficiency, transparency, and consistency of NEPA implementation. Changes include aligning the regulations to NEPA regulations and guidance from the President's Council on Environmental Quality, providing a single set of regulations that reflect the Agency's current structure, clarifying the types of actions that require an Environmental Assessment (EA), and adding to the list of actions that are categorically excluded from further environmental review because they have no significant effect on the human environment. FSA will develop any additional changes resulting from public comments to the proposed rule.

Forest Service

Mission: FS's mission is to sustain the health, productivity, and diversity of the Nation's forests and rangelands to meet the needs of present and future generations. This includes protecting and managing National Forest System lands; providing technical and financial assistance to States, communities, and private forest landowners, plus developing and providing scientific and technical assistance; and the exchange of scientific information to support international forest and range conservation. FS regulatory priorities support the Department's goal to ensure our National forests are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water resources.

Priorities: FS is committed to developing and issuing science-based regulations intended to ensure public participation in the management of our Nation's national forests and grasslands, while also moving forward the Agency's ability to plan and conduct restoration projects on National Forest System lands. FS will continue to review its existing authorities and regulations to ensure that it can address emerging challenges, to streamline excessively burdensome business practices, and to revise or remove regulations that are inconsistent with the USDA's vision for restoring the health and function of the lands it is charged with managing. FS's priority initiatives are as follows:

•

Implement Land Management Planning Framework.

The Forest Service promulgated a new Land Management Planning Rule at 36 CFR part 219 in April 2012 that sets out the requirements for developing, amending, and revising land management plans for units of the National Forest System. The planning directives, once finalized, will be used to implement the planning framework which fosters collaboration with the public during land management planning, is science-based and responsive to change and promotes

social, economic, and ecological sustainability.

•

Strengthen Ecological Restoration Policies.

This policy would recognize the adaptive capacity of ecosystems and includes the role of natural disturbances and uncertainty related to climate and other environmental change. The need for ecological restoration of National Forest System lands is widely recognized, and the Forest Service has conducted restoration-related activities across many programs for decades. “Restoration” is a common way of describing much of the Agency's work, and the concept is threaded throughout existing authorities, program directives, and collaborative efforts such as the National Fire Plan, a 10-Year comprehensive strategy and implementation plan, and the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. However, the Agency did not have a definition of “restoration” established in policy. The lack of a definition was identified as a barrier to collaborating with the public and partners to plan and accomplish restoration work.

Rural Development

Mission: Rural Development (RD) promotes a dynamic business environment in rural America that creates jobs, community infrastructure, and housing opportunities in partnership with the private sector and community-based organizations by providing financial assistance and business planning services and supporting projects that create or preserve quality jobs, advance energy efficiency and the bioeconomy, and strengthen local and regional food systems while focusing on the development of single- and multi-family housing and community infrastructure. RD financial resources are often leveraged with those of other public and private credit source lenders to meet business and credit needs in under-served areas. Recipients of these programs may include individuals, corporations, partnerships, cooperatives, public bodies, nonprofit corporations, Indian tribes, and private companies.

Priorities: RD regulatory priorities will facilitate sustainable renewable energy development and enhance the opportunities necessary for rural families to thrive economically. RD's rules will minimize program complexity and the related burden on the public while enhancing program delivery and Rural Business-Cooperative Service oversight.

•

Increase Accessibility to the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP).

Under REAP, Rural Development provides guaranteed loans and grants to support the purchase, construction, or retrofitting of a renewable energy system. This rulemaking will streamline the application process for grants, lessening the burden to the customer. The rulemaking is expected to reduce the information collection. REAP will also be revised to ensure a larger number of applicants will be made available through the issuing of smaller grants. As a result, funding will be distributed evenly across the applicant pool and encourage greater development of renewable energy.

•

Broadband Access Loans.

Increasing access to broadband service is a critical factor in improving the quality of life in rural America and in providing the foundation needed for creating jobs. The A 2014 Farm Bill revises program provisions particularly with regard to broadband speed and application priority. Revised regulations for the Broadband Access Loan Program are anticipated to be published in the

Federal Register

in the spring of 2015.

•

Modify review of Single Family Housing Direct Loans.

RD will publish the certified loan packager regulation to streamline oversight of the agency's vast network of committed Agency-certified packagers. This action will help low- and very low-income people become homeowners. It will also reduce the burden on program staff, enabling them to focus on implementation and delivery, and will ensure specialized support is available to them to complete the application for assistance, improving the quality of loan application packages.

Departmental Management

Mission: Departmental Management's mission is to provide management leadership to ensure that USDA administrative programs, policies, advice and counsel meet the needs of USDA programs, consistent with laws and mandates, and provide safe and efficient facilities and services to customers.

Priorities:

•

Promote Biobased Products:

In support of the Department's goal to increase prosperity in rural areas, USDA's Departmental Management plans to publish regulations to implement the requirement in the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Farm Bill) to establish eligibility criteria for forest and other traditional biobased products in the BioPreferred® program.

Aggregate Costs and Benefits

USDA will ensure that its regulations provide benefits that exceed costs, but are unable to provide an estimate of the aggregated impacts of its regulations. Problems with aggregation arise due to differing baselines, data gaps, and inconsistencies in methodology and the type of regulatory costs and benefits considered. Some benefits and costs associated with rules listed in the regulatory plan cannot currently be quantified as the rules are still being formulated. For 2015, USDA's focus will be to implement the changes to programs in such a way as to provide benefits while minimizing program complexity and regulatory burden for program participants.

USDA—Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

Proposed Rule Stage

1. National Organic Program, Origin of Livestock, NOP-11-0009

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 6501

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 205.

Legal Deadline:

NPRM, Statutory, December 31, 2014.

The proposed action would eliminate the two-track system and require that upon transition, all existing and replacement dairy animals from which milk or milk products are intended to be sold, labeled, or represented as organic, must be managed organically from the last third of gestation.

Abstract:

The current regulations provide two tracks for replacing dairy animals which are tied to how dairy farmers transition to organic production. Farmers who transition an entire distinct herd must thereafter replace dairy animals with livestock that has been under organic management from the last third of gestation. Farmers who do not transition an entire distinct herd may perpetually obtain replacement animals that have been managed organically for 12 months prior to marketing milk or milk products as organic. The proposed action would eliminate the two-track system and require that upon transition, all existing and replacement dairy animals from which milk or milk products are intended to be sold, labeled, or represented as organic must be managed organically from the last third of gestation.

Statement of Need:

This action is being taken because of concerns raised by various parties, including the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), about the dual tracks for dairy replacement animals. The proposed action would institute the same requirements across all producers.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The National Organic Program regulations stipulate the requirements for dairy replacement animals in section 205.236(a)(2) Origin of Livestock. In addition, in response to the final ruling in the 2005 case, Harvey v. Johanns, the USDA committed to rulemaking to address the concerns about dairy replacement animals.

Alternatives:

The program considered initiating the rulemaking with an ANPRM. It was determined that there is sufficient awareness of the expectations of the organic community to proceed with a proposed rule. As alternatives, we considered the status quo, however, this would continue the disparity between producers who can continually transition conventional dairy animals into organic production and producers who source dairy animals that are organic from the last third of gestation. We also considered an action that would restrict the source of breeder stock and movement of breeder stock after they are brought onto an organic operation; however, this would minimize the flexibility of producers to purchase breeder stock from any source as specified under the Organic Foods Production Act.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Risks:

Continuation of the two-track system jeopardizes the viability of the market for organic heifers. A potential risk associated with the rulemaking would be a temporary supply shortage of dairy replacement animals due to the increased demand.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

12/00/14

Final Action

05/00/16

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses, Organizations.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Agency Contact:

Melissa R. Bailey, Director, Standards Division, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 14th & Independence Avenue SW., Room 2646-South Building, Washington, DC 20250,

Phone:

202 720-3252,

Fax:

202 205-7808,

Email:

melissa.bailey@usda.gov.

RIN:

0581-AD08

USDA—AMS

2. National Organic Program, Organic Pet Food Standards

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 6501.

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 205.

Legal Deadline:

NPRM, Statutory, April 30, 2015.

The National Organic Program (NOP) is establishing national standards governing the marketing of organically produced agricultural products.

Abstract:

The National Organic Program (NOP) is establishing national standards governing the marketing of organically produced agricultural products. In 2004, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) initiated the development of organic pet food standards, which had not been incorporated into the NOP regulations, by forming a task force which included pet food manufacturers, organic consultants, etc. Collectively, these experts drafted organic pet food standards consistent with the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, Food and Drug Administration requirements, and the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) Model Regulations for Pet and Specialty Pet Food. The AAFCO regulations are scientifically based regulations for voluntary adoption by State jurisdictions to ensure the safety, quality, and effectiveness of feed. In November 2008, the NOSB approved a final recommendation for organic pet food standards incorporating the provisions drafted by the pet food task force.

Statement of Need:

This action is necessary to ensure consistency in the composition and labeling of pet food products bearing organic claims. While the NOP has maintained that pet food may be certified in accordance with the existing USDA organic regulations, the requirements for processed products are intended for human foods and are not entirely applicable to pet food. The uncertainty about pet food composition and labeling requirements causes confusion in the marketplace with potentially negative impacts for the credibility of the organic label in general. This action responds to a 2008 recommendation of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) and industry requests for organic pet food standards.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to establish an organic certification program for producers and handlers of agricultural products that have been produced using organic methods (7 U.S.C. 6503(a)). The OFPA also authorizes the NOSB to provide recommendations to the Secretary regarding the implementation of the National Organic Program (7 U.S.C. 6518(k)(1)).

Alternatives:

AMS has considered the implications of developing specific composition and labeling standards for organic pet food versus maintaining the status quo and not pursuing regulatory action. In addition, AMS is examining options regarding potential implementation periods. Finally, AMS considered the viability of composition requirements that vary from those recommended by the NOSB.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

This proposed rule would facilitate the marketing of organic pet food by establishing clear, enforceable requirements for the composition and labeling of these products. This action will clarify how pet food may be produced, certified, and marketed as organic and the significance of organic claims on pet food. That standardization would provide certainty to pet food handlers and certifying agents for manufacturing and certifying pet foods, respectively, and bolster consumer confidence. AMS does not expect this action to result in significant costs for the $109 million organic pet food sector (2012 sales). This action may be an incentive for some handlers that are using organic claims on noncertified pet food products to pursue certification. AMS intends to solicit specific public comments to validate this expectation.

Risks:

AMS does not anticipate risks to be associated with this action. The NOSB and industry participated in the development of organic pet food standards and have strongly encouraged their adoption since 2008. This action may provoke questions about the Agency's intent with regard to a separate 2013 NOSB recommendation that would, in effect, prohibit the use of certain amino acids in organic pet food. AMS is evaluating the impact of that action; however, that recent recommendation is not expected to affect this rulemaking.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

04/00/15

Final Action

08/00/16

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses, Organizations.

Government Levels Affected:

Federal, Local, Tribal.

Agency Contact:

Melissa R. Bailey, Director, Standards Division, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 14th & Independence Avenue SW., Room 2646-South Building, Washington, DC 20250,

Phone

: 202 720-3252,

Fax

: 202 205-7808,

melissa.bailey@usda.gov.

RIN:

0581-AD20

USDA—AMS

3. National Organic Program, Organic Apiculture Practices Standard, NOP-12-0063

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 6501.

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 205.

Legal Deadline:

NPRM, Statutory, July 31, 2015.

This action proposes to amend the USDA organic regulations to reflect an October 2010 recommendation submitted to the Secretary by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) concerning the production of organic apicultural (

i.e.

beekeeping) products.

Abstract:

i.e.

beekeeping) products. Instead of continuing to allow certifying agents to certify apiculture to the organic livestock standards, this action would establish certification standards specifically for organic bees and bee products.

Statement of Need:

This action is necessary to establish uniform standards for certification of organic apiculture operations. Currently, certifying agents adapt the organic livestock standards to certify organic apiaries. This action is necessary to distinguish apiculture as a unique production system that merits separate organic standards and would address practices that are not covered in the general organic livestock requirements. This action is needed to ensure consistency across certifying agents in the inspection and certification of apiculture operations.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Bees are regarded as “nonplant life” under definitions in the current Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) and implementing regulations. Based on these definitions, apicultural products (bees and bee products) may currently be certified under the livestock provisions of the USDA organic regulations (7 CFR part 205).

Alternatives:

AMS is considering variations in the implementation period needed for any existing organic honey producers to comply with a new proposed forage zone requirement. The agency is also considering an alternative to align with Canadian and EU apiculture which require land within the forage zone to be “organically managed,” rather than certified as crop or wild crop.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Issuing standards for management of bees and bee products will benefit the industry by bringing greater consistency across certifiers. The introduction of formal standards will encourage new producers to enter the market and increase consumer confidence in apiculture products marketed under the USDA organic seal. In terms of costs, accredited certifying agents that currently certify apiculture operations as livestock would be required to request to extend the scope (current possible scopes of accreditation are crops, livestock, handling, and wild crop) of their accreditation to include apiculture. AMS is currently evaluating how the new rule would impact the costs to existing organic producers.

Risks:

AMS does not expect controversy as a result of this action. One provision that AMS anticipates public comment on during rulemaking pertains to a 1.8 mile forage zone radius around bee hives. Under the proposed standard, this forage zone would need to be comprised of certified organic cropland and/or certified wild crop harvest area. This provision may limit new producers in some parts of the world from entering the market. However, there is widespread recognition of the proposed requirements among certified operations, as many certifiers have started using the 2010 NOSB recommendation as guidance for certification of apiculture operations.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

07/00/15

Final Action

12/00/16

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations.

Government Levels Affected:

Federal, Local, State, Tribal.

Agency Contact:

Melissa R. Bailey, Director, Standards Division, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 14th & Independence Avenue SW., Room 2646-South Building, Washington, DC 20250,

Phone

: 202 720-3252,

Fax

: 202 205-7808,

melissa.bailey@usda.gov

RIN:

0581-AD31

USDA—AMS

4. • National Organic Program—Organic Aquaculture Standards

Priority:

Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.

Unfunded Mandates:

Undetermined.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 6501 to 6522

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 205.

Legal Deadline

: NPRM, Statutory, February 28, 2015.

This action will establish standards for organic farmed aquatic animals and their products to allow U.S. producers to compete in the organic seafood market. The Organic Foods Production Act authorizes the NOP to regulate organic claims on fish used for food. The USDA organic regulations do not include organic aquaculture standards. This action will open the market for U.S. organic aquaculture production and ensure that organic aquatic animal products sold in the U.S. meet a consistent standard.

Abstract

: This action proposes to establish standards for organic production and certification of farmed aquatic animals and their products in the USDA organic regulations. This action would also add aquatic animals as a scope of certification and accreditation under the National Organic Program. This action is necessary to establish standards for organic farmed aquatic animals and their products which would allow U.S. producers to compete in the organic seafood market. This action is also necessary to address multiple recommendations provided by USDA by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). In 2007 through 2009, the NOSB made five recommendations to establish standards for the certification of organic farmed aquatic animals and their products. Finally, the U.S. currently has organic standards equivalence arrangements with Canada and the European Union (EU). Both Canada and the EU have recently established standards for organic aquaculture products. Because the U.S. does not have organic aquaculture standards, the U.S. is unable to include aquaculture in the scope of these arrangements. Establishing U.S. organic aquaculture may provide a basis for expanding those trade partnerships.

Statement of Need

: In 2005, The Secretary of Agriculture appointed an Aquaculture Working Group to advise the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) on drafting a recommendation on the production of organic farmed aquatic animals. The NOSB considered the Aquaculture Working Group's draft recommendations and provided USDA with a series of five recommendations

from 2007-2009 for technical standards for the production and certification of organic farmed aquatic animals. Based on the NOSB recommendations, this action proposed to establish standards for organic production and certification of farmed aquatic animals and their products in the USDA organic regulations. This action would also add aquatic animals as an area of certification and accreditation under NOP.

Summary of Legal Basis

: The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) National Organic Program (NOP) is authorized by the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) to establish national standards governing the marketing of organically produced agricultural products (7 U.S.C. 6501-6522). The USDA organic regulations set the requirements for the organic certification of agricultural products (7 CFR Part 205). Participation under the NOP is voluntary. However, if organic producers or handlers choose to sell, represent, or label more than $5,000 in organic products, certification under the USDA organic regulations is required.

Alternatives

: An alternative to providing organic aquatic animal standards would be to not publish such standards and allow aquatic animal products to continue to be sold as organic based on private standards or other countries standards. Organic seafood producers have expressed a strong interest in having USDA organic standards for fish and other aquatic animal products. U.S. aquaculture operations are generally hesitant to invest in organic aquaculture without published standards for organic aquatic animals and their products. Selecting such an alternative could result in failure for this sector of organic agriculture to develop in the United States.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits

: The cost for existing conventional aquaculture operations to convert and participate in this voluntary marketing program will generally be incurred in the cost of changing management practices, increased feed costs, and obtaining organic certification. There will also be some costs to certifying agents who would need to add aquaculture to their areas of accreditation under the USDA organic regulations. These costs include application fees and expanded audits to ensure certifying agents meet the accreditation requirements needed for providing certification services to aquaculture operations. Certification of organic operations under the NOP is provided as a user-fee service by AMS-accredited private sector certifying agents and State agencies. AMS provides accreditation services to private and State agency certifiers on a cost-recovery, user-fee basis. AMS will not require additional appropriated funds to implement this program. By providing organic standards for organic aquatic animal products, producers will be able to sell certified organic aquatic animal products for up to 75-100 percent above the price of conventionally produced seafood. In addition, organic aquatic animal products imported into the U.S. from other countries will be required to meet a consistent, enforced standard. Organic consumers will be assured that organic aquatic animal products comply with the USDA organic regulations. The new standards will also provide the basis for expanding our organic standards equivalency agreements to include this additional area of organic products.

Risks

: There are no known risks to providing these additional standards for certification of organic products.

Timetable

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

02/00/15

Final Action

07/00/16

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected

: Businesses, Organizations.

Government Levels Affected

: Federal.

Federalism

: This action may have federalism implications as defined in EO 13132.

Agency Contact

: Melissa R. Bailey, Director, Standards Division, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 14th & Independence Avenue SW., Room 2646-South Building, Washington, DC 20250, Phone: 202 720-3252,

Fax:

202 205-7808,

Email:

melissa.bailey@usda.gov

RIN:

0581-AD34

USDA—AMS

5. • Exemption of Producers and Handlers of Organic Products From Assessment Under a Commodity Promotion Law

Priority

: Other Significant.

Unfunded Mandates

: Undetermined.

Legal Authority

: 7 U.S.C. 7401; Pub. L. 113-79.

CFR Citation

: 7 CFR 900.

Legal Deadline

: NPRM, Statutory, November 30, 2014.

This action would amend the general regulations that apply to the 29 marketing orders for fruits, vegetables, and specialty crops and the orders and/or rules and regulations of the 22 research and promotion programs under AMS oversight.

Abstract

: As a result of this action, certified “organic” commodities (those comprising at least 95 percent organic components) would no longer be subject to assessment for promotion activities conducted under marketing order or research and promotion programs. In addition, certified organic commodities that are produced, handled, marketed, or imported by operations that also deal in conventional products would be eligible for exemptions. Currently, only products that are certified “100 percent organic” and that are produced and handled by entities that deal exclusively with organic products are exempt from assessments. This action is expected to reduce the assessment obligation for organic industry operators by as much as $13.7 million. Conversely, the impact on the marketing programs will be a loss of approximately $13.7 million in funds for generic commodity promotions.

Statement of Need

: Section 501 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7401) (FAIR Act), as amended, currently exempts entities that produce and market solely 100 percent organic products from payment of assessments under commodity promotion laws. Section 10004 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79) (Farm Bill) further amended the FAIR Act to provide exemptions for all certified organic products, including those produced and handled by operators that also deal in conventional products. This action is needed to bring existing Federal regulations governing commodity promotion activities into compliance with the FAIR Act, as amended by the Farm Bill.

Summary of Legal Basis

: Section 10004 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79) (Farm Bill) further amended the FAIR Act to provide exemptions for all certified organic products, including those produced and handled by operators that also deal in conventional products. This action is needed to bring existing Federal regulations governing commodity promotion activities into compliance with the FAIR Act, as amended by the Farm Bill.

Alternatives

: Currently, only products that are certified “100 percent organic” and that are produced and handled by entities that deal exclusively with organic products are exempt from assessments. So the alternative, would be to continue in this manner.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits

: This action is expected to reduce the assessment obligation for organic

industry operators by as much as $13.7 million.

Risks

: Conversely, the impact on the marketing programs will be a loss of approximately $13.7 million in funds for generic commodity promotions.

Timetable

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

11/00/14

Final Action

07/00/15

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

: Yes.

Small Entities Affected

: Governmental Jurisdictions.

Government Levels Affected

: Undetermined.

Agency Contact

: Michael V. Durando, Chief, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237, Phone: 202 720-2491,

Fax:

202 720-8938.

RIN

: 0581-AD37

USDA—Farm Service Agency (FSA)

Final Rule Stage

6. Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program

Priority

: Other Significant.

Legal Authority

: 7 U.S.C. 7333.

CFR Citation

: 7 CFR 1437.

Legal Deadline

: None.

Abstract

: The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is amending regulations for the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP). NAP is administered for CCC by the Farm Service Agency (FSA). NAP provides producers of crops that are not eligible for crop insurance with a basic level of risk management coverage. NAP provides financial assistance to producers of non-insurable crops when low yield, loss of inventory, or prevented plantings occur due to a natural disaster. The rule includes changes to NAP required by the 2014 Farm Bill. The changes include revised NAP eligibility requirements for coverage on tilled native sod, and added coverage for sweet sorghum and biomass sorghum. Beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers will be eligible for service fee waivers. New “buy up” provisions will allow producers to buy additional NAP coverage for an additional premium. While the rule does not have a statutory deadline, the 2014 Farm Bill requires changes to the NAP program beginning with the 2015 coverage year, which begins as early as May 2014. In addition to the 2014 Farm Bill changes, the rule also makes the following changes:

• Adds NAP coverage for organic crops.

• Expands NAP coverage for mollusks, a common aquaculture crop. Specifically, it removes the current requirement that eligible mollusk inventory be seeded and raised in containers or similar devices designed to protect the aquaculture species.

Statement of Need

: This rule is needed to update the FSA regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes.

Summary of Legal Basis

: The Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79).

Alternatives

: There are no alternatives to this rule, the changes are legislatively mandated.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits

: A cost benefit analysis was prepared for this rule and will be made available when the rule is published.

Risks

: None.

Timetable

Action

Date

FR Cite

Interim Final Rule

12/00/14

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Government Levels Affected

: None.

URL For Public Comments

regulations.gov

Agency Contact

: Deirdre Holder, Director, Regulatory Review Group, Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-0572, Phone: 202 205-5851,

Fax:

202 720-5233,

Email:

deirdre.holder@wdc.usda.gov

RIN:

0560-AI20

USDA—FSA

7. • Conservation Compliance

Priority

: Other Significant.

Legal Authority

: 7 U.S.C. 1501

et seq.;

16 U.S.C. 3811 and 3812; 16 U.S.C. 3821 and 3822.

CFR Citation

: 7 CFR 12.

Legal Deadline

: None.

Abstract

: The interim rule implements mandatory changes to the conservation compliance regulations in 7 CFR part 12 as required by the Agricultural Act of 2014 (the 2014 Farm Bill). The current regulations require participants in most USDA programs to comply with conservation compliance measures on any land that is highly erodible or that is considered a wetland. The 2014 Farm Bill expands current conservation compliance requirements to apply to producers who obtain subsidized Federal crop insurance under the Federal Crop Insurance Act. It also slightly modifies the existing wetlands “Mitigation Banking” program to remove the requirement that USDA hold easements in the mitigation program.

Statement of Need

: This rule is needed to update the FSA regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes.

Summary of Legal Basis

: The Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79).

Alternatives

: There are no alternatives to this rule; the changes are legislatively mandated.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits

: A cost benefit analysis was prepared for this rule and will be made available when the rule is published.

Risks

: None.

Timetable

Action

Date

FR Cite

Interim Final Rule

02/00/15

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

: No.

Small Entities Affected

: Businesses.

Government Levels Affected

: None.

URL For Public Comments

: regulations.gov.

Agency Contact

: Deirdre Holder, Director, Regulatory Review Group, Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-0572, Phone: 202 205-5851,

Fax:

202 720-5233,

Email:

deirdre.holder@wdc.usda.gov

RIN:

0560-AI26

USDA—FSA

8. • Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)

Priority

: Other Significant.

Legal Authority

: 16 U.S.C. 3831 to 3835.

CFR Citation

: 7 CFR 1410.

Legal Deadline

: None.

Abstract

: The rule implements changes to CRP required by the 2014 Farm Bill. CRP assists producers in conserving and improving soil, water, and wildlife resources by converting highly erodible and other environmentally sensitive acreage to a long-term vegetative cover. The core scope of CRP will not change. The changes required by the 2014 Farm Bill include providing an “early out” for contract cancellations in 2015, removing the requirement for a payment reduction for emergency haying and grazing, and allowing non-cropland (grasslands) in CRP. CRP is a Commodity Credit

Corporation (CCC) program administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA).

Statement of Need

: This rule is needed to update the FSA regulations to implement the 2014 Farm Bill changes.

Summary of Legal Basis

: The Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79).

Alternatives

: There are no alternatives to the rule; the changes are legislatively mandated.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits

: A cost-benefit analysis will be prepared for the rule and will be made available when the rule is published.

Risks

: None.

Timetable

Action

Date

FR Cite

Interim Final Rule

04/00/15

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

: No.

Small Entities Affected

: Businesses.

Government Levels Affected

: None.

URL For Public Comments

: regulations.gov.

Agency Contact

: Deirdre Holder, Director, Regulatory Review Group, Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-0572, Phone: 202 205-5851,

Fax:

202 720-5233,

Email:

deirdre.holder@wdc.usda.gov

RIN:

0560-AI30

USDA—Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)

Proposed Rule Stage

9. Brucellosis and Bovine Tuberculosis; Update of General Provisions

Priority

: Other Significant.

Legal Authority

: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 7 U.S.C. 8301 to 8317; 15 U.S.C. 1828; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701.

CFR Citation

: 9 CFR 50 and 51; 9 CFR 71; 9 CFR 76 to 78; 9 CFR 86; 9 CFR 93; 9 CFR 161.

Legal Deadline

: None.

Abstract

: This rulemaking would consolidate the regulations governing bovine tuberculosis (TB), currently found in 9 CFR part 77, and those governing brucellosis, currently found in 9 CFR part 78. As part of this consolidation, we are proposing to transition the TB and brucellosis programs away from a State status system based on disease prevalence. Instead, States and tribes would implement an animal health plan that identifies sources of the diseases within the State or tribe and specifies mitigations to address the risk posed by these sources. The consolidated regulations would also set forth standards for surveillance, epidemiological investigations, and affected herd management that must be incorporated into each animal health plan, with certain limited exceptions; conditions for the interstate movement of cattle, bison, and captive cervids; and conditions for APHIS approval of tests for bovine TB or brucellosis. Finally, the rulemaking would revise the import requirements for cattle and bison to make these requirements clearer and ensure that they more effectively mitigate the risk of introduction of the diseases into the United States.

Statement of Need

: The current regulations were issued during a time when the prevalence rates for the disease in domestic, cattle, bison, and captive cervids were much higher than they are today. As a result, the regulations specify measures that are necessary to prevent these diseases from spreading through the interstate movement of infected animals. The regulations are effective in this regard, but do not address reservoirs of tuberculosis and brucellosis that exist in certain States. Moreover, the regulations presuppose one method of dealing with infected herds—whole-herd depopulation—and do not take into consideration the development of other methods, such as test-and-remove protocols, that are equally effective but less costly for APHIS and producers. Finally, our current regulations governing the importation of cattle and bison do not always address the risk that such animals may pose of spreading brucellosis or bovine tuberculosis, and need to be updated to allow APHIS to take appropriate measures when prevalence rates for bovine tuberculosis or brucellosis increase or decrease in foreign regions.

Summary of Legal Basis

: Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301

et seq.

), the Secretary of Agriculture has the authority to issue orders and promulgate regulations to prevent the introduction into the United States and the dissemination within the United States of any pest or disease of livestock.

Alternatives

: One alternative would be to leave the current regulations unchanged. As noted above, the current regulations are effective in preventing the interstate movement of infected animals, but do not address reservoirs of brucellosis and tuberculosis that exist in certain States and thus do not address the root cause of such infection. They also are written in a prescriptive manner which does not allow States to take into consideration scientific developments and other emerging information in determining how best to deal with infected animals and herds. Finally, APHIS' current regulations governing the importation of cattle and bison do not always address the risk that such animals may pose of spreading bovine tuberculosis or brucellosis.

A second alternative considered was to limit the scope of the regulatory changes to the Agency's domestic tuberculosis and brucellosis program. However, in recent years, when tuberculosis-affected animals have been discovered at slaughtering facilities within the United States, these animals have usually been of foreign origin. This has led us to reexamine the current import regulations. As a result of this reevaluation, we have determined that the import regulations need to be revised to assure that they more effectively mitigate the risk of introduction of these diseases into the United States.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits

: Certain additional costs may be incurred by producers as a result of this rule. For example, the proposed rule would impose new interstate movement restrictions on rodeo, event, and exhibited cattle and bison and impose additional costs for producers of such cattle and bison. These new testing requirements could cost, in aggregate, between $651,000 and $1 million. Also, the proposed additional restrictions for the movement of captive cervids could result in additional costs for producers. Adhering to these new requirements may have a total cost to the captive cervid industry of between about $157,000 and $485,000 annually. States and tribes would incur costs associated with this proposed rule, in particular in developing animal health plans for bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis. The proposed animal health plans for brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis would build significantly on existing operations with respect to these diseases. We anticipate that all 50 States and as many as 3 tribes would develop animal health plans. Based on our estimates of plan development costs, the total cost of the development of these 53 animal health plans could be between about $750,000 and $2.9 million. We expect that under current circumstances, four or five States are likely to develop recognized management area plans as proposed in this rule as part of their animal health plans. Based on our estimates of recognized management area plan development costs, the cost of developing recognized management area plans by these States could total

between $56,000 and $274,000. While direct effects of this proposed rule for producers should be small, whether the entity affected is small or large, consolidation of the brucellosis and bovine tuberculosis regulations is expected to benefit the affected livestock industries. Disease management would be more focused, flexible and responsive, reducing the number of producers incurring costs when disease concerns arise in an area. Also, the competitiveness of the United States in international markets depends on its reputation for producing healthy animals. The proposed rule would enhance this reputation through its comprehensive approach to the control of identified reservoirs of bovine tuberculosis or brucellosis in wildlife populations in certain parts of the United States and more stringent import regulations consistent with domestic restrictions. We expect that the benefits would justify the costs.

Risks

: If we do not issue this proposed rule, reservoirs of brucellosis and tuberculosis that exist in certain States will not be adequately evaluated and addressed. Additionally, our current regulations regarding the importation of cattle and bison do not always address the risk that such animals may pose of spreading brucellosis or bovine tuberculosis.

Timetable

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

01/00/15

NPRM Comment Period End

03/00/15

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

: Yes.

Small Entities Affected

: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions.

Government Levels Affected

: Local, State, Tribal.

Additional Information

: Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov

Agency Contact

: Langston Hull, National Center for Import and Export, VS, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737,

Phone:

301 851-3300.

C. William Hench, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Ruminant Health Programs, National Center for Animal Health Programs, VS, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 2150 Centre Avenue, Building B-3E20, Ft. Collins, CO 80526,

Phone:

970 494-7378.

RIN:

0579-AD65

USDA—APHIS

10. Establishing a Performance Standard for Authorizing the Importation and Interstate Movement of Fruits and Vegetables

Priority

: Other Significant.

Legal Authority

: 7 U.S.C. 450; 7 U.S.C. 7701 to 7772; 7 U.S.C. 7781 to 7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a.

CFR Citation

: 7 CFR 318 and 319.

Legal Deadline

: None.

Abstract

: This rulemaking would amend our regulations governing th

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.