Jump to main content.

Change in Disease Status of the Republic of South Africa Because of Foot-and-Mouth Disease and Rinderpest

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 [Federal Register: April 17, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 74)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 20333-20337]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17ap00-1]

========================================================================
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.

========================================================================

[[Page 20333]]

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 94

[Docket No. 98-029-2]


Change in Disease Status of the Republic of South Africa Because
of Foot-and-Mouth Disease and Rinderpest

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are declaring the Republic of South Africa, except the
foot-and-mouth disease controlled area, which includes Kruger National
Park, free of foot-and-mouth disease. We are also declaring all of the
Republic of South Africa free of rinderpest. We are taking these
actions because there have been no outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease
in the Republic of South Africa, except in the foot-and-mouth disease
controlled area, since 1957, and there have been no outbreaks of
rinderpest in the Republic of South Africa since 1903. These actions
will relieve certain restrictions due to foot-and-mouth disease and
rinderpest on the importation into the United States of certain live
animals and animal products from all regions of the Republic of South
Africa, except the foot-and-mouth disease controlled area. However,
because we do not consider the Republic of South Africa to be free of
hog cholera, African swine fever, and swine vesicular disease, the
importation of live swine, and meat and other products from swine, into
the United States from the Republic of South Africa will continue to be
subject to certain restrictions.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Glen I. Garris, Supervisory Staff
Officer, Regionalization Evaluation Services Staff, National Center for
Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD
20737-1231; (301) 734-4356.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the
regulations) prohibit or restrict the importation of specified animals
and animal products into the United States to help prevent the
introduction of various diseases, including foot-and-mouth disease
(FMD) and rinderpest. FMD and rinderpest are highly contagious and
destructive diseases of ruminants and swine.
    Section 94.1(a) of the regulations provides that rinderpest or FMD
exists in all regions of the world except those listed in
Sec. 94.1(a)(2) as free of both of those diseases and those listed in
Sec. 94.1(a)(3) as free of rinderpest. The regulations in Sec. 94.1(b)
prohibit, with certain exceptions, the importation into the United
States of any ruminant or swine, or any fresh (chilled or frozen) meat
of any ruminant or swine, that originates from a region where
rinderpest or FMD exists, or that has entered a port in or otherwise
transited a region where rinderpest or FMD exists. Also, the
regulations in Sec. 94.2 restrict the importation of fresh (chilled or
frozen) products, other than meat, and milk and milk products of
ruminants or swine that originate in or transit a region where
rinderpest or FMD exists. Additionally, the importation of organs,
glands, extracts, and secretions of ruminants or swine originating in a
region where rinderpest or FMD exists is restricted under the
regulations in Sec. 94.3, and the importation of cured or cooked meat
from a region where rinderpest or FMD exists is restricted under the
regulations in Sec. 94.4. Finally, the regulations in 9 CFR part 98
restrict the importation of ruminant and swine embryos and animal semen
from a region where rinderpest or FMD exists.
    The Government of the Republic of South Africa has requested that
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recognize the Republic of
South Africa as free of rinderpest. It also has requested that USDA
recognize the Republic of South Africa, except the FMD-controlled area,
which includes Kruger National Park, as free of FMD.
    On February 17, 1999, we published in the Federal Register (64 FR
7816-7822, Docket No. 98-029-1) a proposal to amend the regulations by
declaring the Republic of South Africa, except the FMD-controlled area
(which extends from the Republic of South Africa's border with
Mozambique approximately 30 to 90 kilometers into the Republic of South
Africa to include Kruger National Park and surveillance and control
zones around the park, and elsewhere extends, from east to west,
approximately 10 to 20 kilometers into the Republic of South Africa
along its borders with Mozambique, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and
the southeast part of the border with Namibia), free of FMD. We also
proposed to declare all of the Republic of South Africa free of
rinderpest. In addition, we proposed to add the proposed FMD-free area
of the Republic of South Africa to the list of regions in Sec. 94.11(a)
that are declared free of rinderpest and FMD but are still subject to
some restrictions on the importation of their meat and other animal
products into the United States because they share land borders with or
trade freely with regions that we do not recognize as being free of
these diseases. We did not propose any changes to the restrictions we
have on importations of swine and swine products from the Republic of
South Africa because of hog cholera, African swine fever, and swine
vesicular disease because we do not recognize the Republic of South
Africa as being free of these diseases.
    We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
April 19, 1999. We received 17 comments by that date. They were from a
State agricultural experiment station, a veterinary association, the
Republic of South Africa, and private citizens. Three of the commenters
supported the proposal as written. Twelve commenters supported the
proposed rule, except with respect to the importation of animal semen
and embryos from the Republic of South Africa. One commenter expressed
concerns regarding various aspects of the docket, including how we
proposed to regulate animal semen and embryos. One commenter expressed
concerns about the effects that additional imports might have on the
domestic Boer goat

[[Page 20334]]

industry. All of the issues raised by the commenters are discussed
below.

Importation of Semen and Embryos

    In the proposal, we stated that the importation of ruminant and
swine embryos and semen from the Republic of South Africa would be
restricted as provided in subparts B and C of 9 CFR part 98 due to the
presence of other ruminant and swine diseases (meaning diseases other
than rinderpest and FMD). Thirteen commenters stated that the proposed
restrictions on the importation of animal embryos and semen from the
Republic of South Africa into the United States were unnecessarily
stringent. We agree. Our citation to subpart B of 9 CFR part 98 was
incorrect; we should have cited subpart A. Subpart B pertains to the
importation of ruminant and swine embryos from regions where rinderpest
or FMD exists. Under this final rule, ruminant and swine embryos from
the Republic of South Africa, except the FMD-controlled area, may be
imported in accordance with subpart A of 9 CFR part 98, which, among
other things, sets forth the requirements for the importation of
ruminant and swine embryos from regions free of rinderpest and FMD. The
requirements in subpart A are less stringent than those in subpart B.
In addition, the importation of ruminant and swine semen into the
United States from the Republic of South Africa, except the FMD-
controlled area, would be allowed as provided in subpart C of 9 CFR
part 98 for animal semen from regions where rinderpest and FMD do not
exist. Both subparts A and C include provisions for ensuring that other
diseases that may be present in the Republic of South Africa are not
introduced into the United States.

Swine Diseases

    We stated in our proposed rule that the importation of swine and
swine products from the Republic of South Africa would continue to be
restricted because of hog cholera, swine vesicular disease (SVD), and
African swine fever (ASF). One commenter objected. He stated that the
Republic of South Africa has been free of hog cholera since 1918, and
that SVD has never been diagnosed in the Republic of South Africa. In
addition, the commenter stated that the Republic of South Africa has an
ASF-controlled area and that the last outbreak of ASF in the free area,
in February 1996, was due to an illegal movement of pigs from the ASF-
controlled area. The commenter maintained that information regarding
hog cholera and SVD in the Republic of South Africa is supplied by the
Office International des Epizooties (OIE), which is the international
standard-setting body for animal health. The commenter stated that the
World Trade Organization Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary
Measures (WTO-SPS Agreement) requires us to provide a scientific basis
for deviations from international standards.
    The WTO-SPS Agreement requires that measures be scientifically
sound, guided by international standards, adapted to regional
conditions, transparent, risk-assessment based, taken in recognition
that equal levels of risk mitigation may be achieved by applying
differing sanitary measures, and be applied in a manner that is not
arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminating. Nations acting in
accordance with the principles of the WTO-SPS Agreement may impose
sanitary or phytosanitary requirements necessary to protect human,
animal, or plant life or health.
    The regulations in Secs. 94.8, 94.9(a), and 94.12(a) describe
regions in which ASF, hog cholera, and SVD, respectively, are
considered to exist, including the Republic of South Africa. If the
Republic of South Africa wishes to export live swine or meat and other
products of swine to the United States under less restrictive
conditions than currently apply and submits the request to us in
accordance with 9 CFR part 92, we will evaluate the request in
accordance with that part.
    One commenter stated that ASF is a swine disease and that ruminant
meat, embryos, and semen cannot be restricted based on the presence of
ASF in certain areas of the Republic of South Africa.
    We are not restricting the importation of ruminant meat, embryos,
or semen because of the presence of ASF in the Republic of South
Africa. Under this final rule, the importation of ruminant meat will
continue to be restricted under Sec. 94.11 because of the potential for
it to be commingled with meat imported into the Republic of South
Africa from regions where rinderpest or FMD exists. (See additional
discussion below under ``Trade Practices.'')
    Ruminant embryos and semen may be imported in accordance with 9 CFR
part 98, subparts A and C, respectively, and import conditions will not
be affected by the presence or absence of ASF because that disease does
not affect ruminants.

Trade Practices

    We proposed to add the Republic of South Africa to the list of
regions in Sec. 94.11 that are free of rinderpest and FMD but are still
subject to restrictions with respect to imports of meat and other
animal products into the United States because of their trade practices
with regions of higher risk for rinderpest and FMD.
    One commenter objected to our listing the Republic of South Africa
in Sec. 94.11. The commenter stated that the Republic of South Africa
was unaware of any international standard that allows a member country
to restrict trade in products from free regions because of importation
policies of those free regions. He stated that the Republic of South
Africa's importation policies have been effective for over 40 years in
preventing the introduction of FMD and rinderpest into the Republic of
South Africa and that we should recognize those measures as equivalent
in accordance with the WTO-SPS Agreement. The commenter further stated
that the Republic of South Africa should be able to recognize other
FMD- and rinderpest-free regions based on its own evaluation and should
not have to discriminate against animals imported from regions
recognized by the Republic of South Africa, but not by the United
States, as free of FMD and rinderpest. The commenter also stated that,
while the Republic of South Africa was willing to certify, as required
by Sec. 94.11, that slaughtered animals are from areas free of FMD and
rinderpest, the Republic of South Africa objects to certifying that
slaughtered animals were born and raised in the FMD-free area of the
Republic of South Africa. The commenter specifically mentioned Namibia
and Botswana as having FMD-free zones recognized by the OIE and said
that the United States should recognize them as well. The commenter
requested a copy of our risk assessment supporting our restrictions on
ruminant and swine meat from the Republic of South Africa. The
commenter also objected to the requirement in Sec. 94.11 that
certifications under that section must be made by a full-time salaried
veterinary official of the national government.
    The WTO-SPS Agreement obliges member countries to be transparent in
developing SPS measures. The measures developed should be based on
sound scientific principles, risk assessments, guided by relevant
international standards, and applied without arbitrarily or
unjustifiably discriminating. The principles of equivalence and
adaptation to regional conditions should be encompassed within the
measures. APHIS published its policy for applying these concepts to the
importation of animals and animal products in the Federal Register on

[[Page 20335]]

October 28, 1997 (see 62 FR 56027-56033, Docket No. 94-106-8.) As noted
in that document, regions classified as ``free'' of a certain disease
can present different levels of risk. Currently, Sec. 94.11 of the
regulations addresses this risk, with respect to rinderpest and FMD, by
imposing restrictions on the importation of meat from regions that are
``free'' of these diseases, but that present a higher disease risk due
to importation practices of these regions or their geographical
proximity to regions with a higher disease risk. Paragraph (a) of
Sec. 94.11 lists regions that are declared free of rinderpest and FMD
but are subject to restrictions on the importation of their meat and
animal products into the United States because they: (1) Supplement
their national meat supply by importing fresh (chilled or frozen) meat
of ruminants or swine from regions that are designated in Sec. 94.1(a)
as regions where rinderpest or FMD exists; or (2) have a common land
border with regions where rinderpest or FMD exists; or (3) import
ruminants or swine from regions where rinderpest or FMD exists under
conditions less restrictive than would be acceptable for importation
into the United States. As a result of these practices, the meat or
other products produced in the free region may be commingled with the
fresh (chilled or frozen) meat of animals from a region where
rinderpest or FMD exists, resulting in an undue risk of introducing
rinderpest or FMD into the United States if the free region is allowed
to export meat to the United States without restriction.
    Section 94.11 requires, among other things, that the meat or other
products imported into the United States from a region listed in
Sec. 94.11(a) be accompanied by a certificate that states, in part,
that the meat or other animal product covered by the certificate was
derived from animals born and raised in a region listed in Sec. 94.2(a)
of the regulations as free of rinderpest and FMD and has never been in
any region in which rinderpest or FMD existed. We believe this
certification is necessary to ensure that the meat imported into the
United States from the free region is from an animal that is free of
the disease and that the meat has not been commingled with meat from a
region where rinderpest or FMD exists.
    Section 94.11 requires this certification to be made by a full-time
salaried veterinary official of the agency in the national government
that is responsible for the health of the animals within that region.
Because of the seriousness of the diseases Sec. 94.11 addresses, we
believe it is appropriate for a full-time salaried veterinary official
to provide the required certification.
    The Republic of South Africa recognizes FMD-free areas of Botswana
and Namibia and imports ruminants and swine and ruminant and swine meat
and other products from those regions under conditions that are less
restrictive than would be acceptable for importation into the United
States. The United States does not recognize Botswana or Namibia as
being free of rinderpest or FMD, nor do we recognize FMD-free regions
within either country. Further, neither country has requested that we
evaluate its disease status with respect to rinderpest or FMD. As
explained in our 1997 policy statement, we will continue to apply
existing import requirements to countries listed in our regulations as
free or not free of certain diseases until we amend our regulations
based on a request to reevaluate a country's disease status or to
regionalize a country for a certain disease. The request must come from
the country wishing a change in status. The request must be made by a
representative of the national government of that country who has the
authority to request such a change, and the request must be accompanied
by specific information about the region to be considered, in
accordance with 9 CFR part 92. We will consider a region's listing by
OIE in our assessment, but this will not be our sole criterion.
    Our policy does not interfere with the Republic of South Africa's
right to trade with any region or to independently assess the disease
status of a particular region based on its own criteria or regulations,
just as the United States does.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    One commenter stated that there is interest in the importation of
cattle and small stock embryos from the Republic of South Africa into
the United States. The commenter further stated that the volume of
trade in embryos between the Republic of South Africa and the United
States may increase based on our acceptance of the Republic of South
Africa's disease status and certification procedure.
    The commenter did not identify the animals that he considered small
stock, but we assume that small stock includes goats and sheep. We
anticipate that there will be some imports of small stock semen and
embryos from the Republic of South Africa to improve the genetics of
some herds in the United States; however, we expect the amount to be
relatively low because the population of goats and sheep within the
United States is relatively small.

Other

    One commenter who breeds Boer goats requested the establishment of
another port of entry, in Houston, TX, for importation. However, the
commenter did not specify whether the port of entry should be for the
importation of goats or goat embryos and semen. One commenter
recommended requiring importers and owners of flocks that receive Boer
goats and Boer goat germ plasm from the Republic of South Africa to
meet certain requirements regarding domestic animal health, food
safety, and livestock trade. This commenter also suggested restricting
the rate of importation of Boer goats and Boer goat germ plasm from the
Republic of South Africa into the United States to protect U.S. meat
goat farmers and the U.S. Boer goat market.
    These comments are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
    Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, without
change.

Effective Date

    This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant
to the provisions of U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. This rule removes
certain restrictions on the importation into the United States of
certain animals and animal products from the Republic of South Africa,
except the FMD-controlled area. Therefore, the Administrator of the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this
rule should be made effective 15 days after publication in the Federal
Register.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. This 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.
    This rule recognizes all of the Republic of South Africa as free of
rinderpest and the Republic of South Africa, except the FMD-controlled
area, as free of FMD. This action will relieve certain restrictions on
the importation of animals and animal products into the United States
from the Republic of South Africa. However, the importation of swine
and pork and pork products will continue to be restricted because we do
not consider the Republic of South Africa to be free of hog cholera,
African swine fever, or swine vesicular disease.

[[Page 20336]]

    The following analysis examines the economic effects of this rule
on small entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The cattle industry in the Republic of South Africa is small
relative to the cattle industry in the United States. In 1997, there
were more than 101 million head of cattle in the United States,
compared to more than 13 million in the Republic of South Africa. Of
the 2 million head of cattle that were imported into the United States
in 1996, more than 99 percent were from Canada and Mexico, and most of
these were feeder and slaughter animals. Sheep and goat inventories in
the United States are relatively small. In 1997, there were more than 7
million sheep and goats in the United States, compared to more than 35
million in the Republic of South Africa. Of the sheep that the United
States imports, more than 99 percent are from Canada and Mexico
(``World Trade Atlas,'' June 1997). In 1995, the United States imported
460 goats and sheep from the Republic of South Africa; however, since
1995, the United States has not imported any live goats and sheep from
the Republic of South Africa. We do not believe that adoption of this
rule will lead to a significant number of live ruminants being imported
into the United States from the Republic of South Africa because of the
cost of transporting the animals.
    We also do not believe that adoption of this rule will result in a
significant amount of ruminant meat (beef, veal, mutton, and goat meat)
and meat products imported into the United States from the Republic of
South Africa. The Republic of South Africa's production of ruminant
meat in 1997 was 1,542 million pounds, compared to 26,089 million
pounds of ruminant meat produced in the United States. In 1997, the
Republic of South Africa imported 196 million pounds of ruminant meat
and exported 44 million pounds of ruminant meat. The Republic of South
Africa trades primarily with the European Union, the Middle East,
Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and neighboring African
countries. The United States obtains more than 85 percent of its
imports of ruminant meat and meat products from Australia, Canada, and
New Zealand. We anticipate that this rule's effect on domestic supplies
of ruminant meat and meat products will be negligible because we
believe that the Republic of South Africa is unlikely to redirect a
significant portion of its ruminant meat production for export
exclusively to the United States, given that restrictions will remain
in place for imports into the United States.
    The importation of dairy products from the Republic of South Africa
into the United States should also be minimally affected by this rule.
In 1998, U.S. exports and imports of dairy products were valued at more
than $914 million and $1,465 million, respectively. In 1998, the United
States exported more than $3.6 million worth of dairy products to the
Republic of South Africa and imported more than $3.4 million worth of
dairy products from the Republic of South Africa. We believe that it is
highly unlikely that the United States will import a significant amount
of dairy products from the Republic of South Africa because the United
States is a net exporter of those products to the Republic of South
Africa. Therefore, the effect on domestic dairy producers should be
minimal.
    The importation of ruminant embryos and semen from the Republic of
South Africa into the United States should also be minimally affected
by this rule. The United States is a net exporter of both bovine semen
and cattle embryos. In 1996, the value of U.S. bovine semen and cattle
embryo imports was $7.7 million and $701,000, respectively, while the
value of U.S. exports of bovine semen and cattle embryos was $63.1
million and $12.6 million, respectively (''World Trade Atlas,'' June
1997). Due to the trade balance and the size differences between the
cattle industries of the United States and the Republic of South
Africa, the amount of bovine semen and cattle embryos imported will
likely be minimal and have a minimal effect on small domestic cattle
producers.
    We believe that there will be a demand for the importation of Boer
goat germ plasm from the Republic of South Africa to the United States.
However, as previously stated, the goat industry within the United
States is relatively small. As a result, we do not believe that the
amount of germ plasm imported into the United States will be
significant.
    The entities most likely to be affected by this rule are those
entities engaged in the production of live ruminants and ruminant meat
and meat products. The Small Business Administration's (SBA's)
definition of a small cattle farm is one whose total sales is less than
$0.5 million annually. In 1997, 99.4 percent of cattle and calf farms
in the United States would have been considered small entities.
    The SBA's guidelines state that a small producer of products of
swine or ruminants (part of Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
2011 or 2013, meat packing plants) is one employing fewer than 500
workers. In 1997, 95 percent of the 1,393 meat packing establishments
in SIC 2011 were considered small entities. These small establishments
accounted for approximately 23.7 percent of the total value of
shipments of the industry, or $54.5 billion. In 1997, 98.1 percent of
the 1,297 establishments in SIC 2013 were considered small entities.
These producers accounted for 78.3 percent of the total value of
shipments of the industry, or $25 billion.
    Although the majority of the domestic entities potentially affected
by this rule are small, there should be only a minimal change in the
level of imports that may compete with the production of these small
entities, and thus there would be a minimal effect on any domestic
producer of these products, whether small or large.
    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 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 rule. The assessment provides a basis for
the conclusion that the importation of certain live animals and animal
products from all regions of the Republic of South Africa, except the
FMD-controlled area, will not present a significant risk of introducing
or disseminating FMD or rinderpest disease agents into the United
States and would 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, as amended (NEPA) (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

[[Page 20337]]

(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR
part 372).
    Copies of the environmental assessment and finding of no
significant impact are 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)690-2817 to facilitate entry into the reading room.
In addition, copies may be obtained by writing to the individual listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule contains no new information collection or recordkeeping
requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

List of Subjects in 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, FOWL PEST (FOWL
PLAGUE), EXOTIC NEWCASTLE DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, HOG
CHOLERA, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY: PROHIBITED AND
RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS

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

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 147a, 150ee, 161, 162, 450; 19 U.S.C. 1306;
21 U.S.C. 111, 114a, 134a, 134b, 134c, 134f, 136, and 136a; 31
U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4331 and 4332; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and
371.2(d).

Sec. 94.1  [Amended]

    2. Section 94.1 is amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a)(2), by adding the words ``Republic of South
Africa except the foot-and-mouth disease controlled area (which extends
from the Republic of South Africa's border with Mozambique
approximately 30 to 90 kilometers into the Republic of South Africa to
include Kruger National Park and surveillance and control zones around
the park, and elsewhere extends, from east to west, approximately 10 to
20 kilometers into the Republic of South Africa along its borders with
Mozambique, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and the southeast part of
the border with Namibia),'' immediately after ``Republic of Korea,''.
    b. In paragraph (a)(3), by adding the words ``and the Republic of
South Africa'' immediately after ``Greece''.
    c. In paragraph (b)(1), by removing the reference to ``part 92''
and adding in its place a reference to ``part 93''.

Sec. 94.11  [Amended]

    3. In Sec. 94.11, paragraph (a) is amended by adding, in the first
sentence, the words ``Republic of South Africa except the foot-and-
mouth disease controlled area (which extends from the Republic of South
Africa's border with Mozambique approximately 30 to 90 kilometers into
the Republic of South Africa to include Kruger National Park and
surveillance and control zones around the park, and elsewhere extends,
from east to west, approximately 10 to 20 kilometers into the Republic
of South Africa along its borders with Mozambique, Swaziland, Zimbabwe,
Botswana, and the southeast part of the border with Namibia),''
immediately after ``Republic of Korea,''.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 11th day of April 2000.
Bobby R. Acord,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 00-9491 Filed 4-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.