[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 220 (Thursday, November 14, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68327-68331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27285]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 68327]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 94

[Docket No. APHIS-2008-0085]
RIN 0579-AD17


Importation of Ovine Meat From Uruguay

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations governing the importation of 
certain animals, meat, and other animal products to allow, under 
certain conditions, the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) ovine 
meat from Uruguay. A risk assessment that we have prepared indicates 
that fresh (chilled or frozen) ovine meat can safely be imported from 
Uruguay under these conditions. This action will allow the importation 
of fresh ovine meat from Uruguay into the United States while 
continuing to protect the United States against the introduction of 
foot-and-mouth disease.

DATES: Effective Date: November 29, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Silvia Kreindel, Senior Staff 
Veterinarian, Regionalization Evaluation Services Staff, VS, APHIS, 
4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-3313.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Under the Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA, 7 U.S.C. 8301 et 
seq.), the Secretary of Agriculture may prohibit or restrict the 
importation of any animal or article if the Secretary determines that 
the prohibition or restriction is necessary to prevent the introduction 
into or dissemination within the United States of any pest or disease 
of livestock.
    Pursuant to this Act, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
regulates the importation of animals and animal products into the 
United States to guard against the introduction of animal diseases not 
currently present or prevalent in this country. The regulations in 9 
CFR part 94 (referred to below as the regulations) prohibit or restrict 
the importation of specified animals and animal products to prevent the 
introduction into the United States of various animal diseases, 
including rinderpest and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). These are 
dangerous and destructive communicable diseases of ruminants and swine.
    Section 94.1 of the regulations contains criteria for APHIS 
recognition of foreign regions as free of rinderpest and FMD. Section 
94.11 restricts the importation of ruminants and swine and their meat 
and certain other products from regions that are declared free of 
rinderpest and FMD but that nonetheless present a disease risk because 
of the regions' proximity to or trading relationships with regions 
affected with rinderpest or FMD. Regions APHIS has declared free of FMD 
and/or rinderpest, and regions declared free of FMD and rinderpest that 
are subject to the restrictions in Sec.  94.11, are listed on the APHIS 
Web site at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/animals/animal_disease_status.shtml.
    Because vaccination for FMD may not provide complete protection to 
livestock, and because it can be difficult to quickly detect FMD in 
animals vaccinated for FMD, APHIS does not recognize regions that 
vaccinate animals for FMD as free of the disease. Uruguay vaccinates 
cattle for FMD. Therefore, although Uruguay has not had a case of FMD 
since 2001, APHIS does not recognize Uruguay as a region free of FMD. 
Based on a final rule effective and published in the Federal Register 
on May 29, 2003 (68 FR 31940-31949, Docket No. 02-109-3), however, 
APHIS allows the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) beef from 
Uruguay under certain conditions that mitigate the FMD risks associated 
with this product. The conditions are set out in Sec.  94.22 of the 
regulations.
    In a proposed rule \1\ published in the Federal Register on 
February 24, 2011 (76 FR 10266-10269, Docket No. APHIS-2008-0085), we 
proposed to also allow the importation of fresh ovine (sheep) meat from 
Uruguay under conditions identical to those currently required for the 
importation of fresh beef, except for one change noted below. The 
proposed conditions were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go 
to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2008-0085.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The meat is from animals that have been born, raised, and 
slaughtered in Uruguay.
     If FMD is detected anywhere in Uruguay, the export of beef 
and ovine meat from all of Uruguay to the United States is prohibited 
until at least 12 months have elapsed since the depopulation, cleaning, 
and disinfection of the last infected premises. [The current 
requirement for fresh beef is that FMD has not been diagnosed in 
Uruguay within the previous 12 months.]
     The meat came from animals that originated from premises 
where FMD has not been present during the lifetime of any animals 
slaughtered for the export of meat to the United States.
     The meat came from animals that were moved directly from 
the premises of origin to the slaughtering establishment without any 
contact with other animals.
     The meat came from animals that received ante-mortem and 
post-mortem veterinary inspections, paying particular attention to the 
head and feet, at the slaughtering establishment, with no evidence 
found of vesicular disease.
     The meat consists only of parts of the animal's carcass 
that are, by standard practice, placed in a chiller for maturation 
after slaughter. No part of the animal's heads, feet, hooves, or 
internal organs may be exported (and for bovines, the hump is also 
excluded).
     All bone and visually identifiable blood clots and 
lymphoid tissue have been removed from the meat.
     The meat has not been in contact with meat from regions 
other than those APHIS recognizes as free of FMD.
     The meat came from carcasses that were allowed to maturate 
at 40 to 50 [deg]F (4 to 10 [deg]C) for a minimum of 36 hours after 
slaughter and that reached a pH of 5.8 or less in the loin muscle at 
the end

[[Page 68328]]

of the maturation period. Measurements for pH must be taken at the 
middle of both longissimus dorsi muscles. Any carcass in which the pH 
does not reach 5.8 or less may be allowed to maturate an additional 24 
hours and be retested, and, if the carcass still has not reached a pH 
of 5.8 or less after 60 hours, the meat from the carcass may not be 
exported to the United States.
     An authorized veterinary official of the Government of 
Uruguay certifies on the foreign meat inspection certificate that the 
above conditions have been met.
     The establishment in which the animals are slaughtered 
allows periodic on-site evaluation and subsequent inspection of its 
facilities, records, and operations by an APHIS representative.
    We solicited comments concerning the proposed rule for 60 days 
ending April 25, 2011. We received 10 comments by that date. They were 
from organizations representing Uruguayan meat packers, meat exporters, 
and sheep producers; Uruguay's Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture, and 
Fisheries (MGAP); organizations representing meat importers within the 
United States and the U.S. sheep industry; and several private 
citizens.
    Four of the commenters supported the rule as written. Two 
commenters objected to the proposal. The remaining commenters favored 
the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) ovine meat from Uruguay 
but requested clarifications or modifications to the rule or its 
supporting documents. The issues raised by commenters are discussed 
below, by topic.

The Risk Assessment

    One commenter requested that we reexamine our risk assessment that 
we prepared regarding the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) 
ovine meat from Uruguay. The same commenter and one other requested 
that we conduct an additional site visit. They expressed concern that 
changes may have occurred in Uruguay's risk factors for FMD and in 
Uruguay's ability to prevent and mitigate FMD risk since we completed 
the risk assessment. Neither commenter mentioned any specific changes 
that should be investigated. One commenter also urged APHIS to specify 
a schedule requiring follow-up and ongoing reporting from Uruguay on 
FMD risk and the implementation of risk mitigation measures.
    We have reevaluated the information in the assessment and have 
determined that it still provides an appropriate basis for our 
conclusion that the FMD risk from importing fresh (chilled or frozen) 
maturated and deboned ovine meat from Uruguay is low and that such meat 
may be safely imported into the United States. Based on our review of 
the assessment, we do not think an additional site visit is warranted 
prior to finalizing the proposed rule.
    Regarding the need for ongoing reporting from Uruguay, as part of 
the implementation of this final rule, we will require MGAP to submit 
an operational workplan, subject to APHIS' approval, that details 
activities that MGAP will carry out to meet the requirements of the 
regulations. Additionally, paragraph (k) of Sec.  94.22 requires the 
establishment in Uruguay in which the bovines and sheep are slaughtered 
to allow an APHIS representative to make periodic on-site evaluations 
and subsequent inspections of its facilities, records, and operations. 
MGAP's operational workplan will have to specifically authorize the on-
site evaluations and inspections of facilities, records, and 
operations. APHIS regulations in 9 CFR part 92 also address the 
potential need for APHIS to obtain additional information from a region 
after APHIS has granted the region animal health status. In particular, 
under Sec.  92.2(g), a region may be required to submit additional 
information pertaining to animal health status or allow APHIS to 
conduct additional information collection activities in order for that 
region to maintain its animal health status. We believe these 
provisions, collectively, will enable APHIS to satisfactorily monitor 
the fresh meat import program.

Prohibitions on the Importation of Meat Following an FMD Outbreak

    One commenter stated that the proposed prohibition on the export of 
fresh beef or ovine meat to the United States until 12 months after 
depopulation, cleaning, and disinfection of the last premises involved 
in an FMD outbreak does not merely clarify existing policy, as APHIS 
stated in its proposed rule. Rather, since the current requirement for 
fresh beef from Uruguay is 12 months following the last diagnosis of 
FMD, the proposed change would impose new, more stringent requirements 
for the importation of beef from Uruguay. The commenter also stated 
that, to be consistent with standards of the World Organization for 
Animal Health (OIE) and the principle of regionalization, the 
prohibition on exports should be limited to 6 months and apply only to 
exports from restricted zones for FMD that would be established by MGAP 
in response to a limited outbreak in Uruguay, rather than to exports 
from anywhere in the country.
    FMD is a significant disease of livestock, and its introduction 
into the United States could have a lasting deleterious effect on the 
U.S. agricultural economy. In regions that vaccinate animals for FMD, 
it can be difficult to detect the disease, and APHIS believes that 
sufficient time must pass to ensure that ruminant products exported 
from the region will not be a vector of the FMD virus. Depopulation, 
cleaning, and disinfection of infected premises are standard practices 
in stamping out FMD. After considering this comment, though, we have 
decided that there is no need to build this language into the rule. If 
a country experiences an outbreak of FMD and there is no diagnosis of 
the disease in a 12-month period following the last case, APHIS 
considers this to be sufficient reason to conclude that the disease did 
not spread. Therefore, we will leave the provision as it is currently 
worded in the provisions for fresh beef: Foot-and-mouth disease has not 
been diagnosed in Uruguay within the previous 12 months.
    Consistent with the OIE principle of regionalization, APHIS 
regulations in 9 CFR part 92 explain how a country may request APHIS 
recognition of regions within its borders. In requesting to export 
fresh (chilled or frozen) ovine meat to the United States, Uruguay did 
not ask APHIS to recognize restricted zones as regions in the event of 
an FMD outbreak, or provide sufficient information for us to evaluate 
the risk of disease spread from such zones in order to allow for 
regionalization at that level.

The Maturation Process

    One commenter questioned the need for a minimum 36-hour maturation 
period. Noting that the key indicator for ensuring deactivation of the 
FMD virus is a pH of 6.0 or lower, the commenter stated that if a pH of 
5.8 is reached within 24 hours, then the virus will be deactivated and 
there is no need for an additional holding period. The commenter stated 
that the 36-hour holding period creates logistical problems for the 
packinghouses, which must hold carcasses in chillers, and is 
inconsistent with the requirements of other countries that apply a pH 
requirement of either 5.8 or 6.0, with a required holding period of 24 
hours, for the export of Uruguayan meat to their markets. The commenter 
urged to require a minimum holding period of 24 hours.
    We agree with the commenter that the acidification necessary to 
inactivate the FMD virus can be achieved within 24 hours and are 
modifying Sec.  94.22(i) in this final rule accordingly. Twenty-four

[[Page 68329]]

hours will be the minimum time required for maturation. If the required 
pH is not achieved during 24 hours, the meat may continue to maturate 
for up to an additional 24 hours (48 hours total). Any meat that has 
not achieved the required pH level in that amount of time may not be 
exported to the United States.
    We have also determined that a pH lower than 6.0 in the longissimus 
dorsi, in conjunction with other conditions included in this final 
rule, is a good indicator of FMD virus inactivation. Our review of the 
literature revealed that acidification at that level is sufficient to 
inactivate FMD virus in muscle tissue of viremic cattle. Furthermore, 
over 30 years of epidemiological data show that there is no evidence 
that importation of fresh beef that reached a pH of less than 6.0 under 
conditions that are already incorporated into the regulations and that 
are analogous to those contained in this final rule (e.g., antemortem 
and postmortem inspection, lymph node removal, deboning, and 
maturation) have been associated with outbreaks of FMD. Therefore, in 
Sec.  94.22(i) of this final rule, the meat will be required to reach a 
pH of less than 6.0, rather than 5.8 or less, as we had originally 
proposed.

Removal of Bones

    One commenter stated that there is no basis for limiting approval 
for export of ovine meat to boneless products because there has been no 
evidence of FMD in sheep in Uruguay since the country requested access 
for fresh beef exports in 2003.
    We proposed to require that all bone, as well as visually 
identifiable blood clots and lymphoid tissue, be removed from fresh 
ovine meat prior to export to the United States from Uruguay. The same 
requirement has been in place for fresh beef exported from Uruguay.
    As we noted in both our risk assessment and in the proposed rule, 
although the last case of FMD in Uruguay was in 2001, FMD is endemic in 
areas of South America surrounding Uruguay, and there is, accordingly, 
a risk that FMD will be reintroduced into the country. Uruguay 
vaccinates cattle for FMD in recognition of that risk. Each of the 
conditions we proposed, including this one, addresses a critical point 
in the pre-export process, from selection of an animal for slaughter to 
carcass processing and maturation, where FMD risk can be mitigated. The 
conditions were selected based on known modes of transmission and 
physical characteristics of the FMD virus. Maturation of the meat 
addresses the risk, however small, of FMD virus being present in the 
animal at slaughter. The removal of bones and visually identifiable 
blood clots and lymphoid tissue is necessary because any FMD virus 
these parts might potentially harbor may not be inactivated by the 
maturation process.

Certification by Veterinary Officials in Uruguay

    One commenter expressed concern about our proposed requirement that 
an authorized veterinary official of the Government of Uruguay certify 
that all conditions for the importation of beef and ovine meat have 
been met. The commenter stated that veterinary officials could be 
bribed or otherwise induced to falsely certify meat as meeting the 
conditions for importation, which could pose a risk of introducing FMD 
into the United States.
    As explained in response to another comment, APHIS will be 
monitoring the fresh meat export program. If we determine that 
inspection certificates are being deliberately falsified, we may take 
measures pursuant to our authority under the AHPA to ensure that beef 
or ovine meat from Uruguay does not present a risk of introducing FMD 
into the United States. Such measures may include prohibiting the 
importation of fresh beef and ovine meat from Uruguay.

Labeling of Ovine Meat

    One commenter asked whether ovine meat imported as proposed would 
be labeled and marketed in the United States as ``fresh.'' The 
commenter stated that, because the product would have been chilled or 
frozen, it would not meet the average U.S. consumer's definition of 
``fresh'' and should not be marketed as such. The commenter also asked 
whether ovine meat imported from Uruguay into the United States would 
be subject to country-of-origin labeling.
    As used in the regulations, the term ``fresh'' simply means that 
the meat is imported without having been cooked or cured as otherwise 
required of beef or ovine meat from regions not recognized as free of 
FMD. APHIS does not regulate the marketing of meat in the United 
States. Regarding country-of-origin labeling, the Country of Origin 
Labeling (COOL) law requires retailers to notify their customers of the 
country of origin for all commodities covered under this law. Muscle 
cuts of beef and lamb, as well as ground beef and ground lamb, are 
covered. The COOL law is enforced by USDA's Agricultural Marketing 
Service and Food Safety and Inspection Service. The COOL law is not 
related to animal health, but rather, is a consumer information 
program, and thus has no bearing on this rulemaking.

Goat Meat

    One commenter expressed concern that inspectors may not know the 
difference between a goat kid carcass and a lamb kid carcass.
    Establishments in Uruguay that prepare ovine meat for export 
slaughter the sheep. Live sheep are easily distinguishable from live 
goats. It is unlikely that a facility would slaughter a goat and 
present its meat as ovine meat. As discussed previously, APHIS will be 
monitoring the fresh meat export program, including through on-site 
evaluations and inspections of facilities, records, and operations.

Chronic Wasting Disease

    One commenter objected to the lack of inspection for chronic 
wasting disease.
    Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is a transmissible spongiform 
encephalopathy of cervids (members of Cervidae, the deer family). 
Species known to be susceptible to CWD via natural routes of 
transmission include Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, 
black-tailed deer, and moose. There is no evidence that CWD is 
transmissible under natural conditions to any other ruminant species, 
including cattle and sheep, and, therefore, no need for any CWD-related 
safeguards.

Miscellaneous

    We have made minor editorial changes to the regulatory text in 
Sec.  94.22 for clarity. These include replacing ``and'' with ``or'' in 
the following phrases: ``beef and ovine meat,'' ``bovines and sheep,'' 
and ``bovine parts and ovine parts,'' and changing ``infected 
premises'' to ``affected premises.''
    Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this 
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with the 
changes discussed in this document.

Effective Date

    This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant 
to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30 
days after publication in the Federal Register. This rule will allow 
the importation of fresh ovine meat from Uruguay into the United States 
under conditions that will continue to protect the United States 
against the introduction of FMD. We have determined that approximately 
2 weeks are needed to ensure that APHIS and Department of Homeland 
Security, Bureau of Customs and Border

[[Page 68330]]

Protection, personnel at ports of entry receive official notice of this 
change in the regulations. Therefore, the Administrator of the Animal 
and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule 
should be effective 15 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed 
by the Office of Management and Budget.
    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have analyzed 
the potential economic effects of this action on small entities. The 
analysis is summarized below. Copies of the full analysis are available 
on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1 in this document for a 
link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    This rule will allow the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) 
lamb and mutton from Uruguay under certain conditions. U.S. entities 
potentially affected by the rule would be sheep farmers and 
establishments primarily engaged in processing meat and meat products 
from purchased meat, most of which are small entities under Small 
Business Administration standards.
    U.S. production of lamb and mutton averaged 79,561 metric tons (MT) 
over the 5 years, 2006-2010. Over this same period, imports averaged 
almost 75,100 MT (equivalent to about 94 percent of U.S. production). 
Uruguay expects its annual lamb and mutton exports to the United States 
not to exceed 2,000 MT. This quantity is equivalent to less than 3 
percent of U.S. lamb and mutton imports and less than 2 percent of U.S. 
domestic supply of these commodities. A percentage of the imports from 
Uruguay are likely to displace some of the lamb and mutton imported 
from existing foreign suppliers, further dampening any possible effects 
for U.S. businesses.
    Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Executive Order 12988

    This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 
Civil Justice Reform. This 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.

National Environmental Policy Act

    An environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
have been prepared for this final rule. The environmental assessment 
provides a basis for the conclusion that the importation of ovine meat 
from Uruguay under the conditions specified in the rule will not have a 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Based on 
the finding of no significant impact, the Administrator of the Animal 
and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that an 
environmental impact statement need not be prepared.
    The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
were prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) 
regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing 
the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA 
regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA 
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
    The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site.\2\ Copies of the 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact are also 
available for public inspection at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 
14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. 
and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing 
to inspect copies are requested to call ahead on (202) 799-7039 to 
facilitate entry into the reading room. In addition, copies may be 
obtained by writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-
2008-0085. The environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact will appear in the resulting list of documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements 
included in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) under OMB control number 0579-0372.

E-Government Act Compliance

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to 
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet 
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities 
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for 
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act 
compliance related to this rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, 
APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2908.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94

    Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Meat and meat products, Milk, 
Poultry and poultry products, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR part 94 as follows:

PART 94--RINDERPEST, FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE, NEWCASTLE DISEASE, 
HIGHLY PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, CLASSICAL 
SWINE FEVER, SWINE VESICULAR DISEASE, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM 
ENCEPHALOPATHY: PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 94 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, 7781-7786, and 8301-8317; 21 
U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.


0
2. Section 94.1 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4) and the 
introductory text of paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  94.1  Regions where rinderpest or foot-and-mouth disease exists; 
importations prohibited.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Except as provided in Sec.  94.22 for fresh (chilled or frozen) 
beef and ovine meat from Uruguay.
* * * * *
    (d) Except as otherwise provided in this part, fresh (chilled or 
frozen) meat of ruminants or swine raised and slaughtered in a region 
free of foot-and-mouth disease and rinderpest, as designated in 
paragraph (a) of this section, and fresh (chilled or frozen) beef and 
ovine meat exported from Uruguay in accordance with Sec.  94.22, which 
during shipment to the United States enters a port or otherwise 
transits a region where rinderpest or foot-and-mouth disease exists, 
may be imported provided that all of the following conditions are met:
* * * * *

0
3. Section 94.22 is revised to read as follows:

[[Page 68331]]

Sec.  94.22  Restrictions on importation of beef and ovine meat from 
Uruguay.

    Notwithstanding any other provisions of this part, fresh (chilled 
or frozen) beef and ovine meat from Uruguay may be exported to the 
United States under the following conditions:
    (a) The meat is beef or ovine meat from animals that have been 
born, raised, and slaughtered in Uruguay.
    (b) Foot-and-mouth disease has not been diagnosed in Uruguay within 
the previous 12 months.
    (c) The meat comes from bovines or sheep that originate from 
premises where foot-and-mouth disease has not been present during the 
lifetime of any bovines and sheep slaughtered for the export of beef 
and ovine meat to the United States.
    (d) The meat comes from bovines or sheep that were moved directly 
from the premises of origin to the slaughtering establishment without 
any contact with other animals.
    (e) The meat comes from bovines or sheep that received ante-mortem 
and post-mortem veterinary inspections, paying particular attention to 
the head and feet, at the slaughtering establishment, with no evidence 
found of vesicular disease.
    (f) The meat consists only of bovine parts or ovine parts that are, 
by standard practice, part of the animal's carcass that is placed in a 
chiller for maturation after slaughter. The bovine and ovine parts that 
may not be imported include all parts of the head, feet, hump, hooves, 
and internal organs.
    (g) All bone and visually identifiable blood clots and lymphoid 
tissue have been removed from the meat.
    (h) The meat has not been in contact with meat from regions other 
than those listed as free of foot-and-mouth disease and rinderpest 
under Sec.  94.1(a).
    (i) The meat comes from carcasses that were allowed to maturate at 
40 to 50 [deg]F (4 to 10 [deg]C) for a minimum of 24 hours after 
slaughter and that reached a pH below 6.0 in the loin muscle at the end 
of the maturation period. Measurements for pH must be taken at the 
middle of both longissimus dorsi muscles. Any carcass in which the pH 
does not reach less than 6.0 may be allowed to maturate an additional 
24 hours and be retested, and, if the carcass still has not reached a 
pH of less than 6.0 after 48 hours, the meat from the carcass may not 
be exported to the United States.
    (j) An authorized veterinary official of the Government of Uruguay 
certifies on the foreign meat inspection certificate that the above 
conditions have been met.
    (k) The establishment in which the bovines and sheep are 
slaughtered allows periodic on-site evaluation and subsequent 
inspection of its facilities, records, and operations by an APHIS 
representative.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
number 0579-0372)

    Done in Washington, DC, this 7th day of November 2013.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-27285 Filed 11-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P