The U.S. Department of Agricultures (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administrations (GIPSA) should withdrawal GIPSAs interim final rule on competitive injuries, the nation’s Chicken Council (NCC) reiterated in comments posted right now to the company.
USDA announced on April 11 it had become extending the implementation date 180 days because of its interim final rule on competitive injuries, that was scheduled to enter impact on April 22, by having an additional public comment period that closes today.
With the extension notice, it had been obvious the administration recognized this can be a complicated and questionable problem with deep economic effects for American chicken and animals producers, stated NCC President Mike Brown in April. The comments filed clearly had an effect, so we thank the department for postponing the effective date to match a far more thorough and significant review.
In new comments posted today, Brown noted that, Even by GIPSAs own estimates, which we feel understate costs, the interim final rule offers to cause roughly $1 billion in economic harm around the meat and chicken industries, without any quantifiable benefit. GIPSA has unsuccessful to supply a sufficient justification for imposing such troublesome, costly changes towards the chicken industry and doesn’t explain the related benefits this rulemaking provides to cancel out the vast amounts of dollars of harmful effects this rule may have around the U.S. economy. Furthermore, the company does not think about the negative effects this rule may have on consumers and competition. And also the IFR would cause this harm despite uniform and contradictory court precedent rejecting the interpretation from the Packers and Stockyards Act embodied within the interim final rule.
Particularly, NCCs comments concentrate on:
-The way the interim final rule is GIPSAs make an effort to put aside decades price of settled law and achieve via rulemaking what it couldn’t accomplish within the courts-eliminating the necessity to show a probability of competitive injuries to determine a breach of Sections 202(a) and (b) from the Packers and Stockyards Act
-How this rulemaking is incompatible using the presidents regulatory reform agenda. Not just has GIPSA unsuccessful to recognize rules for repeal to make sure a internet zero total price increase in the interim final rule, however the interim final rule can also be essentially irreconcilable using the administrations efforts to get rid of troublesome rules on industry and just promulgate rules whose benefits over-shadow their costs and
-Why GIPSAs other suggested dispositions from the interim final rule aren’t the right action for that agency to consider. Any disposition from the rule apart from withdrawing the rule would only actually perpetuate uncertainty in the market without resolving the core difficulties with the interim final rule.
For these reasons, we urge GIPSA to pursue Option 4 and withdraw the interim final rule for good, Brown concluded. Furthermore, since the interim final rule is inextricably associated with GIPSAs two suggested rules on chicken grower ranking systems and unfair practices and undue preferences, we request the company withdraw both of these suggested rules too.To
Source – National Chicken Council
WebReadyTM Operated by WireReady® NSI
Top Farming News
The Role of the Farm Broadcaster: Ron Hays
Comments are closed here.