Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2017-02-07 · Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA · Proposed Rules

Proposed Rules. Proposed rule: Extension of comment period

623 words·~3 min read·/register/2017/02/07/2017-02495·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Agency: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA
Action: Proposed rule: Extension of comment period
Citation: FR Doc. 2017-02495 · RIN 0580-AB27 · 9 CFR 201

Summary

Consistent with the memorandum of January 20, 2017, to the heads of executive departments and agencies from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” the Department of Agriculture's Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) is extending by 30 days the public comment period for this proposed rule, which was published on December 20, 2016. This proposed rule would clarify the conduct or action by packers, swine contractors, or live poultry dealers that GIPSA considers unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive and a violation of section 202(a) of the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented (P&S Act). This proposed rule would also identify criteria that the Secretary would consider in determining whether conduct or action by packers, swine contractors, or live poultry dealers constitutes an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage and a violation of section 202(b) of the P&S Act.

Dates

The comment period for the proposed rule published at 81 FR 92723 on December 20, 2016 is extended. Comments must be received on or before March 24, 2017.

Supplementary Information

Consistent with the memorandum of January 20, 2017, to the heads of executive departments and agencies from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” GIPSA is extending by 30 days the public comment period of the proposed rule entitled “Unfair Practices and Undue Preferences in Violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act” that was published in the Federal Register on December 20, 2016, (81 FR 92703). This proposed rule would make two changes to the regulation issued under P&S Act. The first clarifies the conduct or action by packers, swine contractors, or live poultry dealers that GIPSA considers unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive and a violation of section 202(a) of the P&S Act. The second provides criteria, in response to requirements of the 2008 Farm Bill, to consider in determining whether a packer, swine contractor, or live poultry dealer has engaged in conduct resulting in an undue preference or advantage to one or more livestock producers or poultry growers in violation of § 202(b) of the P&S Act. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 181-229c. Marianne Plaus, Acting Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration. [FR Doc. 2017-02495 Filed 2-6-17; 8:45 am]

Connections3 off-index
3 references not yet in our index
  • 9 CFR 201
  • 7 CFR 1.27(b)
  • 7 USC 181-229c
Citation graph
cites case law
Proposed Rules
Proposed rule: Extension of comment period
Cite9 CFR 201
Cite7 CFR 1.27(b)
Cite7 USC 181-229c
Cites 3Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.