Addition of Mexico to the List of Countries Eligible to Export Poultry Products into the United States

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 381

[Docket No. 97-006F]

RIN 0583-AC33

Addition of Mexico to the List of Countries Eligible to Export

Poultry Products into the United States

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is adding Mexico

to the list of countries eligible to export poultry products to the

United States. Reviews of Mexico's laws, regulations, and other

materials show that the requirements of its poultry processing system

are equivalent to relevant provisions in the Poultry Products

Inspection Act (PPIA) and its implementing regulations.

Only products processed from poultry slaughtered in federally

inspected establishments in the United States or in establishments in

other countries eligible to export poultry from certified slaughter

establishments to the United States may be imported into the United

States after processing in certified Mexican establishments. FSIS

inspectors will reinspect poultry products exported from Mexico to the

United States at U.S. ports of entry. This action enables certified

poultry processing establishments in Mexico to export processed poultry

products to the United States.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 14, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mark Manis, Director,

International Policy Development Division, Office of Policy, Program

Development and Evaluation; (202) 720-6400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 49641]]

Background

On November 28, 1997, FSIS published a proposal in the Federal

Register (62 FR 63284) to add Mexico to the list of countries eligible

to export poultry products to the United States. In the proposal, FSIS

reported that Mexico had met the certification requirements imposed in

the U.S.' poultry products inspection regulations, that its poultry

processing inspection system is equivalent to that of the United

States, and that its official residue control laboratory is fully

capable of testing poultry products. Therefore, FSIS proposed to permit

Mexico to export processed poultry products to the United States,

provided the poultry processed in Mexican establishments approved for

export to the United States is slaughtered in the United States under

USDA inspection or in establishments certified by countries that are

eligible to export slaughtered poultry and poultry products to the

United States.

Comments

FSIS received six comments on the proposed rule. Three were from

American poultry products companies, two from Mexican poultry products

companies, and one from a trade association. Five commenters fully

supported finalizing the rule as proposed; one commenter supported the

proposed rule provided FSIS ensures that the Mexican poultry processing

system is equivalent to the U.S. poultry processing system before any

Mexican establishments are certified to export processed poultry

products to the United States.

All commenters support free and open trade between Mexico and the

United States. Many noted that the proposal would help both countries

compete in the global economy. According to three commenters, allowing

Mexico to export processed poultry products to the United States would

support the North American Free Trade Agreement. A fourth commenter

noted that allowing such imports is consistent with U.S. obligations

under the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary

Measures.

Three commenters mentioned that both the Mexican and U.S. poultry

industries will benefit if the proposed rule is finalized. One

commenter, a Mexican corporation, said that besides the increased sales

to be reaped by U.S. poultry producers, U.S. producers of other

products will benefit as well, including producers of packaging

materials, brokers, and distributors. The commenter went on to say that

there is little or no possibility of Mexican poultry-based processed

foods displacing sales by U.S. processed food suppliers, at least by

the corporation's poultry-based products, because those products

consist primarily of distinctive Mexican foods that will not compete

directly with the products marketed by U.S. suppliers.

The second commenter of these three commenters pointed out that not

only will the proposed rule benefit the economy of Mexico, in that more

jobs will be created for Mexican citizens, but that the U.S. economy

will also benefit because of the increase in poultry exports. This

commenter also pointed out that consumers will benefit from the

proposed rule because they will have additional choices as to the

processed poultry products they buy and possibly lower prices for those

products. Another commenter echoed this idea by stating that the

proposal would keep jobs in the United States, since Mexican

establishments will only be able to process poultry that has been

slaughtered in establishments certified by countries that are eligible

to export to the U.S.

One commenter supported the proposal, provided certain conditions

are met. First, FSIS must ensure that the Mexican system continues to

comply with the requirements of 9 CFR 381.196, specifically, that the

foreign system is equivalent to the U.S. system. The commenter

indicated that its support is conditioned upon FSIS review and

determination that the Mexican establishments certified to export

processed poultry products to the United States meet equivalent

requirements for Sanitation Standard Operating procedures (SSOPs) and

the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points System (HACCP). Second,

the commenter continued, FSIS should issue a schedule of the on-site

reviews of the Mexican establishments, in operation, at the time any

final rule is published. Finally, the commenter stated that Mexico must

develop a program to ensure that the limitations on the approval to

export poultry products to the United States are followed, and that

FSIS must find the program satisfactory, before a final rule is issued.

To ensure that all foreign establishments certified to export to

the U.S. comply with all relevant FSIS laws and regulations, including

SSOPs and HACCP, FSIS conducts periodic on-site audits of each eligible

foreign country's inspection system to verify that its regulatory

authority is implementing the system as described in the country's

application to export poultry to the U.S. No Mexican establishment may

begin exporting processed poultry products to the United States until

Mexico has certified that (1) the establishment is eligible to export

processed poultry products to the United States, (2) establishments

randomly selected for review during the on-site audit by FSIS operate

in a way that shows FSIS that the country's inspection system is

working as described, and (3) the country has been added to the poultry

products inspection regulations as a country eligible to export poultry

products to the United States.

Since publication of the proposed rule, FSIS has conducted an on-

site audit of Mexico's inspection system. As part of that audit, FSIS

has verified that Mexico will enforce the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP

final rule in establishments that will be certified to export to the

U.S. by the required date (January 1999 for establishments with less

than 500 employees), including the SSOPs, and Salmonella testing

requirements. At the same time, FSIS also reviewed the program Mexico

has developed to ensure that only poultry from eligible countries and

establishments is used in poultry products processed in Mexico destined

for the United States. FSIS is satisfied that the program does so and

that it has been satisfactorily implemented.

After reviewing all of the documents submitted by Mexico and

evaluating the findings of the on-site audits and subsequent written

assurances of government officials, FSIS has determined that the

government of Mexico will enforce the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP rule in

establishments it has certified as eligible to prepare processed

poultry products for export to the United States, and that reliance can

be placed upon the certificates from the authorities of Mexico that are

required under the PPIA.

Accordingly, FSIS is amending Sec. 381.196 of the poultry products

inspection regulations to add Mexico as a country eligible to export

processed poultry products to the United States. As a country eligible

to export such products to the United States, the government of Mexico

will certify to FSIS which establishments are operating in accordance

with U.S. requirements. FSIS retains the right to verify that

establishments certified by the Mexican government are meeting U.S.

requirements.

Although a foreign country may be listed as eligible to export

processed poultry products, those processed products must also comply

with other U.S. requirements, including

[[Page 49642]]

restrictions under Title 9, Part 94 of the Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service's regulations (9 CFR Part 94) relating to the

importation of processed poultry products from foreign countries into

the United States.

Executive Order 12988

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,

Civil Justice Reform. This final rule: (1) Preempts all state and local

laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

Executive Order 12866

This final rule has been determined to be significant and,

therefore, has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget

under Executive Order 12866. This Order requires FSIS to identify, and

if possible, quantify and monetize potential incremental benefits and

costs associated with this rule. This section provides such an

analysis.

In 1995, Mexico requested a determination of eligibility to export

poultry and poultry products to the United States. From October 1995 to

June 1996, FSIS conducted a study to evaluate the equivalence of the

Mexican poultry inspection system with that of the United States. After

completing that study, FSIS concluded that the Mexican poultry

processing system is equivalent to that of the United States and

therefore began developing this rule.

This rule will allow U.S. poultry establishments to export

slaughtered birds to Mexico, have the birds processed in Mexico, import

the processed poultry products back into the U.S., and then sell those

products to U.S. consumers.

To determine Mexico's potential exports of poultry products, FSIS

requested the Office of Agricultural Affairs of the U.S. Embassy in

Mexico to collect information from Mexican exporters. FSIS has learned

that, at this time, there are only two plants that plan to export

processed poultry products to the U.S. These establishments intend to

export cut-up chicken, cooked chicken, and chicken products. The total

quantity of these exports is estimated to be 6 million pounds or 2,727

metric tons (MT). The most likely initial volume of exports to the

U.S., therefore, will be no more than 3,000 MT.

Because only two Mexican establishments have expressed an interest

in exporting processed poultry products to the U.S., and because their

anticipated export volume is less than 3,000 MT, FSIS does not believe

that the volume of processed poultry products exported to the U.S. will

exceed 5,000 MT in the near future. Mexico has not had yearly world

exports of poultry meat and poultry products in excess of this number

in over 30 years. FSIS does believe, however, that the potential growth

of Mexican exports of processed poultry products to the U.S. is

significant. Unfortunately, FSIS has no way of assessing the future

interest of Mexican establishments in processing U.S. poultry for

export back to the U.S.

Between 1993 and 1997, U.S. exports of cut-up broilers to Mexico

increased almost 40 percent, from 77,909 MT in 1993 to 108,364 MT in

1997. The value of U.S. exports of cut-up broilers increased 32.6

percent during this period. At the same time, U.S. exports of whole

broilers fell almost 62 percent, from 7,765 MT in 1993 to 2,995 MT in

1997, while the corresponding value of whole broilers fell by 60.5

percent. However, the estimated price of cut-up broilers fell by nearly

5 percent, while the estimated price of whole broilers rose 3.5 percent

(See Table 1).

Table 1.--Trends in U.S. Exports of Broilers to Mexico, 1993-1997

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cut-up Whole

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quantity Average Quantity Average

Calendar year metric tons Value $000 price $/mt metric tons Value $000 price $/mt

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1993.............................. 77,909 63,384 810 7,765 8,911 1,150

1994.............................. 93,963 74,404 790 6,252 7,672 1,230

1995.............................. 87,208 70,999 810 5,519 4,618 890

1996.............................. 96,622 87,483 900 2,353 2,764 1,170

1997.............................. 108,364 84,060 770 2,995 3,521 1,190

Average........................... 92,813 76,066 816 4,977 5,497 1,126

Change (97 minus 93).............. 30,455 20,676 -40 4,770 -5,390 40

Percent Change.................... 39.09 32.62 -4.93 -61.43 -60.49 3.48

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service

Note: 1 Metric Ton = 2,204 pounds

Table 2 shows U.S. exports of turkey to Mexico, classified into

cut-up and whole products, over the last five calendar years. Similar

to exports of cut-up broilers, the quantity and value of cut-up turkey

exported between 1993 and 1997 rose 28.6 percent and 27.4 percent,

respectively. Also, the quantity of whole turkeys exported to Mexico

increased 3.6 percent. However, the value of whole turkeys exported to

Mexico during that period decreased 4.9 percent. The price for both

cut-up and whole turkeys fell: the price for cut-up turkey fell by 1.4

percent, while the price for whole turkeys fell more than 8 percent.

Table 2.--Trends in U.S. Exports of Turkey to Mexico, 1993-1997

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cut-up Whole

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quanity Average Quantity Average

Calendar year metric tons Value $000 price $/MT metric tons Value $000 price $/MT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1993.............................. 63,205 89,926 1,420 1,803 3,059 1,690

1994.............................. 62,829 97,292 1,550 3,903 6,445 1,650

1995.............................. 54,543 69,618 1,270 689 1,165 1,690

1996.............................. 67,880 93,782 1,380 2,583 4,223 1,630

1997.............................. 81,271 114,579 1,400 1,868 2,910 1,550

[[Page 49643]]

Average........................... 65,945 93,039 1,404 2,169 3,560 1,642

Change (97 minus 93).............. 18,066 24,653 -20 65 -149 -140

Percent Change.................... 28.58 27.41 -1.41 3.61 -4.87 -8.28

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service

Note: 1 Metric Ton = 2,204 pounds

Adoption of this rule will stimulate increased exports of whole and

partial birds from the U.S. to Mexico for processing for various

reasons. Poultry processing is labor intensive. Therefore, the U.S.

poultry industry will most likely attempt to reduce its processing

costs by shifting that activity to Mexico, where labor is relatively

less costly. U.S. companies will be able to import the products that

have been processed in Mexico and still save money over the cost of

doing the processing in the U.S. This will result in employment

increases in the poultry processing industry in Mexico and earnings

increases in U.S. poultry slaughter establishments.

Poultry exports to Mexico from the U.S. will also increase because

Mexican establishments will, for the first time, be able to export

processed poultry products to the U.S. At the present time, poultry

processed in Mexico may not be exported to the U.S., even if the birds

were produced and slaughtered in the U.S. The fact that Mexican

establishments will be able to process only birds that have been

slaughtered in the U.S. (or in countries eligible to export poultry to

the U.S.) will also limit the market from which Mexican establishments

can obtain birds to process. (Realistically, the great majority, if not

all of the carcasses, will come from the U.S.)

The expected lower prices of poultry products processed in Mexico

will increase the quantity demanded in the U.S., but the change should

be insignificant. This is because the U.S. demand for poultry and

poultry products is relatively inelastic, i.e., insensitive to price.

Price elasticity of demand is the percent change in demand associated

with a 1 percent change in price. A review of 11 economic studies of

the demand for poultry shows that the elasticity ranges from (-0.1) to

(-0.94). In other words, a decrease in the price of poultry by 1

percent would be associated with an increase in demand of 0.1 to 0.94

percent (see Table 3). Table 3 also shows that the estimated

elasticities vary with the time periods for which the data were

analyzed and the types of models employed by the analysts.

Since the estimated elasticities are pure numbers, FSIS calculated

an average elasticity. It is (-0.46). Therefore, an average decrease in

price of poultry by 1 percent would be associated with an increase in

demand of poultry by approximately only -0.5 percent. As a result, any

decrease in price due to imports from Mexico is unlikely to increase

demand for poultry significantly in the U.S. Therefore, U.S. processors

of poultry products are unlikely to lose their market shares as a

result of imports from Mexico, and employment decreases will be small.

Table 3.--Price Elasticity of Demand for Poultry

[A Review of Economic Studies]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Price

Study No. Author(s) elasticity Time period Model

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1..................... Alston & Chalfont (1993) -0.94 1967-1988 Quarterly.... Rotterdam.

2..................... Brester & Wohlgenant -0.296 1962-1989 Annual....... Interrelated demand.

(1991).

3..................... Capps et al. (1994)..... -0.893 January 1986 to June Retail Demand

1987 Weekly. Functions.

4..................... Eales, J. (1994)........ -0.63 1966-1992 Quarterly.... Inverse Lewbel Demands.

5..................... Eales & Unnevehr (1993). -0.233 1966-1988 Quarterly.... Simultaneity &

Structural Change.

6..................... Gao & Shankwiler (1993). -0.47 1956-1987 Annual....... Taste Change.

7..................... Hahn, W. (1994)......... -0.299 1981-1992 Monthly...... Random Coefficient.

8..................... Hahn, W. (1988)......... -0.14 1960-1987 Quarterly.... Income Differences.

9..................... Moschini & Meilke (1989) -0.10 1967-1987 Quarterly.... Structural Change.

10.................... Thurman (1987).......... -0.64 1955-1981 Annual....... Demand Stability.

11.................... Wohlgenant (1989)....... -0.42 1956-1983 Annual....... Complete System.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

The Administrator has determined that this rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Data from the 1994 Survey of Industries suggest that the poultry

slaughtering and processing industry in the U.S. is highly competitive,

with 332 firms owning 567 establishments. The industry consists of

relatively large size (employment of 500 or more) establishments. For

example, in 1994, almost 51 percent of all establishments were

classified as large according to the definition of employment used by

the U.S. Small Business Administration. In 1994, this industry employed

207,875 workers, with a payroll of $3.5 billion. The estimated revenue

of this industry amounted to $27.1 billion in 1994.

The effects of the importation of processed poultry products from

Mexico on national, regional and local poultry producers are dependent

on many factors, such as where the products would enter U.S. marketing

and distribution channels, and where they would ultimately be consumed.

Transporting whole birds is relatively costly. Therefore, to save

transportation costs, it is likely that export of whole

[[Page 49644]]

birds to Mexico and import of cut-up products to the U.S. would be by

truck and concentrated in border areas of the U.S., including the

States of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas.

If a local retail chain or wholesaler purchases processed poultry

products from Mexico, they are likely to be consumed regionally. If a

national wholesaler purchases them, they could be consumed anywhere in

the U.S. The effect on small producers would be more pronounced if the

imports affect only Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas.

Because exports of whole birds and imports of cut-up products are

likely to be confined to states bordering Mexico due to transport costs

from other states in the U.S. to Mexico, FSIS analyzed data for four

border states: Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas. The U.S.

Bureau of the Census collected these data for the Survey of Industries,

1994. These data do not separate statistics of slaughtering

establishments from those of processing establishments. There are no

poultry slaughtering/processing establishments in Arizona and only one

in New Mexico. There are 37 slaughtering/processing establishments in

California and 22 in Texas.

The ``very small'' size establishments are defined, as in FSIS's

Pathogen Reduction/HACCP final rule, as having less than 10 employees.

The ``small'' and ``large'' size establishments are defined, according

to the Small Business Administration's definition of employment, as

having 500 or less employees, and more than 500 employees,

respectively.

Some of the establishments in California (11 out of 37, or 34

percent) are very small. In Texas, 6 out of 22 (27 percent)

establishments are very small. No data were available for New Mexico.

In 1997, California's total broiler production was 107,532 MT, while

Texas produced 206,443 MT. California also produced 9,528 MT of turkey.

If processed poultry products enter national distribution channels,

and, therefore, economic effects are shared by all U.S. producers,

there would not be a significant economic impact on small entities no

matter the volume (low (100 MT), medium (1,000 MT) or high (5,000 MT))

of imports assumed.\1\ Even under a high-volume scenario, where Mexico

exports approximately 5,000 MT (2,000 MT more than the most likely

amount anticipated) of poultry products to the U.S., to be consumed

locally in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas, there likely will

not be a significant economic impact on small entities in the U.S.

Combined, California and Texas produced 323,503 MT of poultry products

in 1997. If Mexico exports 5,000 MT of poultry, it will be only .02

percent of California's and Texas' combined annual poultry production.

Adding New Mexico's poultry production numbers to the equation (data

unavailable) will make this percentage fall even lower.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ These volumes (low-100 MT per year, medium-1,000 MT per year

and high-5,000 MT per year) were chosen because they reflect the

range of Mexican worldwide exports of broilers since 1990. Mexico

had yearly world exports of 5,000 MT of poulty and products in 1990,

1991 and 1992. However, in 1993, 1994 and 1995, Mexico exported no

poultry and other poultry products, and, since 1996, has exported

less than 1,000 MT of poultry and other poultry products annually.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Production, Supply, and Distribution

database.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Civil Rights Impact Analysis

Pursuant to Departmental Regulation 4300-4, ``Civil Rights Impact

Analysis,'' dated September 22, 1993, FSIS has considered the potential

civil rights impacts of this final rule on minorities, women, and

persons with disabilities.

This final rule will add Mexico to the list of countries eligible

to export poultry products to the U.S. Only products processed from

poultry slaughtered in federally inspected establishments in the U.S.

or in establishments in other countries eligible to export poultry from

certified slaughter establishments to the U.S. may be imported into the

U.S. after processing in certified Mexican establishments. This action

will enable certified poultry processing establishments in Mexico to

export processed poultry products to the U.S.

With the possibility of U.S. poultry establishments exporting

slaughtered poultry to Mexico for further processing, there is the

potential for an adverse impact on minorities, women, and persons with

disabilities. One such impact might be the potential loss of employment

as a result of the processing work being done in Mexico, rather than

the U.S. However, further processing in Mexico may improve the

competitiveness of poultry relative to other foods and expand

production and consequently employment elsewhere in the poultry

industry. While there may be an adverse impact on hiring or loss of

jobs, FSIS has no data on poultry processing establishments and their

employment rates, nor does FSIS have data on the race, sex, national

origin, and disabilities of employees hired by such establishments.

As the rule points out, however, if poultry products further

processed in Mexico enter national distribution chains in the U.S.,

and, therefore, all U.S. producers share economic effects, there will

not be a significant negative economic impact on small entities, no

matter the volume of imports assumed. If U.S. producers do not suffer a

negative economic impact, there should be no adverse impact on hiring

or loss of jobs by minorities, women, and persons with disabilities.

Between 1973 and 1991, the poultry dressing and processing industry

showed a 3.9 percent increase in productivity gains. This was the

largest such gain for a manufacturing industry (with employment in 1992

of more than 100,000) during that time period. Poultry employment had a

4 percent annual growth rate from 1980 to 1992, due to new product

innovations and markets, for a total 96 percent increase over the

period. While productivity gains slowed after 1992, the poultry

dressing and processing industry still showed a 0.1 percent increase in

productivity in 1994. (Compare this to meat packing plants, where

productivity in 1994 dropped 3.7 percent.)

Poultry production is expected to remain strong in the year 2000.

Broiler production is expected to increase between 5 and 6 percent in

the year 2000. Stronger production increases might be realized if

exports strengthen between now and then. Turkey production is expected

to increase about 2 percent in the year 2000. As with broilers,

strengthening of the export market should provide a boost for turkey

production.

Continued productivity gains in the U.S. poultry dressing and

processing industry should result in continued and additional poultry

employment through and beyond the year 2000. As a result, FSIS

anticipates that there will be no adverse impact on hiring or loss of

jobs by minorities, women, and persons with disabilities.

Paperwork Requirements

FSIS has submitted a request for emergency approval for the

reinstatement of information collection package 0583-0094, which

includes burden associated with any recordkeeping requirements imposed

by this rulemaking. On November 19, 1998, FSIS announced, in the

Federal Register, its request for the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) to extend the approval of this package. The following is the

request as published in that notice.

FSIS has been delegated the authority to exercise the functions of

the Secretary as provided in the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21

U.S.C. 601 et

[[Page 49645]]

seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 451 et

seq.). These statutes mandate that FSIS protect the public by ensuring

that meat and poultry products are safe, wholesome, unadulterated, and

properly labeled and packaged. FSIS is requesting an extension and

revision to the information collection package addressing meat and

poultry paperwork and recordkeeping requirements regarding exportation,

transportation, and importation of meat and poultry products. FSIS

requires that meat and poultry establishments exporting product to

foreign countries complete an export certificate. Establishments must

supply the type, amount, and destination of product being exported. The

information required by this form does not duplicate any information

required by other Federal agencies. The form is necessary to certify to

the importing countries that FSIS inspectors have inspected the product

and have found it sound and wholesome. Additionally, FSIS uses the

information from the form in its annual Report to Congress as required

by sections 301(c)(4) and 20(e) of the FMIA and sections 27 and 5(c)(4)

of the PPIA.

Meat and poultry products not marked with the mark of inspection

and shipped from one official establishment to another for further

processing must be transported under FSIS seal to prevent such unmarked

product from entering into commerce. To track products shipped under

seal, FSIS requires shipping establishments to complete a form that

identifies the type, amount, and weight of the product.

A foreign country exporting meat or poultry products to the U.S.

must establish eligibility for importation of product into the U.S. and

annually certify that its inspection systems are equivalent to the U.S.

inspection system. To maintain eligibility, a representative of the

foreign inspection system must prepare a written report for each

establishment listed in the certification. Additionally, a health

certificate must accompany meat and poultry products intended for

import into the U.S. It must be signed by an official of the foreign

government and state that certified foreign establishments have

produced the products. Establishments or brokers wishing to import

product into the United States must complete a form that specifies the

type, amount, originating country, and destination of the meat and

poultry product. The amount of meat and poultry product imported into

the United States is included in FSIS's annual Report to Congress.

Additionally, FSIS has established procedures allowing establishments

importing product to stamp such product with the inspection legend

prior to FSIS inspection, if they receive FSIS prior approval.

Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden for this collection

of information is estimated to average .0773501 hours per response.

Respondents: Meat and poultry establishments.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 7,374

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 295.88866

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 168,769 hours

Copies of this information collection assessment and comments can

be obtained from Lee Puricelli, Paperwork Specialist, Food Safety and

Inspection Service, USDA, 300 12th Street SW, Room 109, Washington, DC

20250-3700, (202) 720-0346. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the

proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper

performance of FSIS's functions, including whether the information will

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of FSIS's estimate of the

burden of the proposed collection of information, including the

validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on

those who are to respond, including through use of appropriate

automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection

techniques, or other forms of information technology.

List of Subjects 9 CFR Part 381

Imports, Poultry and Poultry products.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 9 CFR part 381 is amended

as follows:

PART 381--POULTRY PRODUCTS INSPECTION REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 381 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 138f; 7 U.S.C. 450; 21 U.S.C. 451-470; 7 CFR

2.18, 2.53.

2. Section 381.196 is amended by adding ``Mexico 2'' in

alphabetical order to the list of countries in paragraph (b) to read as

follows:

Sec. 381.196 Eligibility of foreign countries for importation of

poultry products into the United States.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

Mexico.\2\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ May export to the United States only processed poultry

products slaughtered under Federal inspection in the United States

or in a country eligible to export slaughtered poultry products to

the United States.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Done at Washington, DC, on: September 2, 1999.

Thomas J. Billy,

Administrator.

Appendix 1--References

Note: This appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal

Regulations.

Alston, J.M. and J.A. Chalfant (1993). ``The Silence of the Lambdas:

A Test of the Almost Ideal and Rotterdam Models.'' American Journal

of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 75, No. 2, (May 1993), pp. 304-313.

Brester, G.W. and M.K. Wohlgenant (1993). ``Correcting for

Measurement Error in Food Demand Estimation.'' Review of Economics

and Statistics, Vol. 75, No. 2, (May 1993), pp. 352-356.

Capps, O., Jr., D.E. Farris, P.J. Byrune, J.C. Namken, and C.D.

Lambert (1994). ``Determinants of Wholesale Beef-Cut Prices.''

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 26, No. 1 (July),

pp. 183-199.

Eales, J.S. (1994). ``The Inverse Lewbel Demand System.'' Journal of

Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 19, No. 1 (July), pp. 173-

182.

Eales, J.S. and L.J. Unnevehr (1993). ``Simultaneity and Structural

Change in a Model of U.S. Meat Demand.'' American Journal of

Agricultural Economics, Vol. 75, No. 2 (May), pp. 259-268.

Gao, X.M. and J.S. Shonkwiler (1993). ``Characterizing Taste Change

in a Model of U.S. Meat Demand: Correcting for Spurious Regression

and Measurement Errors.'' Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 15,

No. 2 (May), pp. 313-324.

Hahn, W.F. (1994). ``A Random Coefficient Meat Demand Model.''

Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, Vol. 45, No. 3 (Fall),

pp. 21-30.

Hahn, W.F. (1988). ``Effects of Income Distribution on Meat

Demand.'' Journal of Agricultural Economic Research, Vol. 40, No. 2

(Spring), pp. 19-24.

Moschini, G. and K.D. Meilke (1989). ``Modeling the Pattern of

Structural Change in U.S. Meat Demand.'' American Journal of

Agricultural Economics, Vol. 71, No. 2 (May), pp.253-261.

Thurman, W.N. (1987). ``The Poultry Market: Demand Stability and

Industry Structure.'' American Journal of Agricultural Economics,

Vol. 69, No. 1 (February), pp. 30-37.

Wohlgenant, M.K. (1989) ``Demand for Farm Output in a Complete

System of Demand Functions.'' American Journal of Agricultural

Economics, Vol. 71, No.2 (May), pp. 241-252.

[FR Doc. 99-23794 Filed 9-13-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P