← American Frozen Food Institute
APHISRulemakingAPHIS-2006-0096

Agricultural Inspection and AQI User Fees Along the U.S./Canada Border

RIN
—
Last modified
Sep 16, 2023
Comment window
closed 7186d ago
American Frozen Food Institute filings
1

Activity

American Frozen Food Institute filed 1 comment on this docket between Nov 22, 2006 and Nov 22, 2006. 65 other organizations filed here. The comment window closed 7186d ago.

What American Frozen Food Institute filed (1)

Nov 22, 2006· Comment from Leslie G Sarasin, American Frozen Food Institute· APHIS-2006-0096-0092

Dear Sir or Madam: The American Frozen Food Institute (AFFI) submits these comments in response to the interim rule removing both the exemptions from inspection for imported fruits and vegetables grown in Canada and the exemptions from user fees for commercial conveyances from Canada. AFFI is the national trade association representing frozen food manufacturers and their marketers and suppliers. AFFI?s more than 500 member companies are responsible for approximately 90 percent of the frozen food processed annually in the United States, valued at more than $60 billion. AFFI members are located throughout the country and are engaged in the manufacture, processing, transportation, distribution and sale of products nationally and internationally. Many AFFI members export and import products and ingredients across the Canadian/U.S. border daily. We are very concerned that the imposition of increased inspection and user fees by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will create new and significant delays at northern border points. It would also conflict with ongoing efficiency efforts. Furthermore, publication of an interim rule that would become effective immediately suggests that the agency has already decided the matter, in effect discouraging reasonable consideration and depriving stakeholders the opportunity to provide meaningful input or obtain clarity regarding the purpose and impact of the Rule. Finally, publication of an interim rule as an exception to notice and comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act cannot be legally justified. For these reasons and others discussed herein, AFFI requests that APHIS withdraw the interim rule. CONCERNS WITH THE INTERIM RULE Rule Imposes Unreasonable Costs and Delays, and Conflicts with Border Efficiency Efforts Facilitating fluid cross-border traffic is essential to ensure supply chain efficiency, which is a critical component of operational success. Canada is the United States? most important trading partner, exporting more than $28 billion in agriculture products to the U.S. in 2005. An estimated $1.2 billion in total trade crosses the border daily. Many AFFI member companies depend on multiple shipments each day from Canada to provide raw materials (often perishable agricultural commodities) for U.S. manufacturers. Therefore, additional delays caused by increased inspections and the collection of fees imposed by the interim rule will have a significant impact on industry operations. AHPIS has failed to accurately take into account these delays and the costs they will impose on business. While APHIS may not foresee the possibility of border delays, common sense and the experience of AFFI members suggests otherwise. In this regard, the cost benefit analysis conducted by APHIS does not seem realistic. In addition, APHIS has failed to provide information regarding the implementation of the interim rule. From an operation perspective, it is unclear how and when these fees are to be collected. Collection on a per cargo basis at the border points will increase processing time at the border and create backups and delays. No detailed information is included in the published notice to explain the intended collection mechanism, which is scheduled to take place immediately after the Thanksgiving holiday. APHIS should communicate more information to affected parties about how the fees will be assessed. More importantly, APHIS should have thoroughly evaluated these costs as result of the interim rule. Furthermore, APHPIS is taking an action that directly conflicts with other efforts designed at increasing border crossing efficiencies. Other U.S. agencies have recognized that efficiency at the border (especially the U.S./Canada border) is critical to national security and prosperity and have initiated programs intended to help achieve this goal. One example is the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), an initiat…

View on regulations.gov →

Abstract

No abstract recorded.

View on regulations.gov →

Co-filers (65)

See everyone who commented →