The final rule designating Kansas, Virginia, and Florida as cotton-producing states for purposes of representation on the Cotton Board was published in the Federal Register. This completes the implementation of section 14202 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, which amended the Cotton Research and Promotion Act.
The provision included in that ’08 farm law section provided that Kansas, Virginia and Florida, effective with the ’08 crop, be separate states in the definition of ‘‘cotton-producing state’’ so that they may have representatives on the Cotton Board. The regulation was issued following a hearing in Dec. ’08 and approval of the changes by a referendum conducted Oct. 13-Nov. 10, ’09. The USDA-AMS Cotton Division had reported that requests have been received from organizations in those states to become certified.
The evaluation of the requests will be completed and the organizations will be notified of certification prior to the announcement of the ’10 caucus schedule.
House, Senate Approve Haiti HELP Act
The House and Senate approved bipartisan legislation -- the Haiti Economic Lift Program (HELP) Act (H.R. 5160) -- expanding duty-free access to the US market for additional Haitian textile and apparel exports and extending existing trade preference programs for Haiti through ’20.
The legislation, expected to be signed by the President, is designed to help Haiti's economy recover from the devastating January earthquake.
Key HELP Act provisions would increase current tariff preference levels (TPLs) for certain knit and woven apparel products. TPLs allow use of third country yarn and fabric in apparel products which enter the United States duty-free. The legislation includes customs user fees to offset the costs.
The legislation was introduced on April 28 in the House and Senate by House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Levin (D-MI) and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Baucus (D-MT) with co-sponsors Reps. Camp (R-MI) and Rangel (D-NY) and Sen. Grassley (R-IA). During floor debate, reference was made to a letter cosigned by the American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition (AMTAC) and the National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO).
“While the bill provides Haiti with a path forward for long-term economic recovery in the wake of its devastating earthquake, it also takes into account various sensitivities from the perspective of the U.S. textile industry,” AMTAC and NCTO stated in the letter.
The letter noted that while the bill grants significant increases in duty-free treatment through a system of TPLs, it also institutes sub-limits on highly sensitive products that can be exported under the TPLs.
“The sub-limits were a key priority for the domestic industry and will prevent over concentration of exports in one or two key areas that could be particularly damaging to U.S. producers,” the organizations said.
The letter also indicated that the organizations consider the Haiti bill is a one-time deal, which cannot be expected to be duplicated in the future when Congress considers potential changes to US preference programs this year. The “devastating circumstances” in Haiti produced “an exceptional case” that motivated Congress to offer a quick response, the letters said. “We must stress, however, that this package does not set a precedent for any future trade preference legislation.”
The measure builds on the existing Haitian Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement (HOPE) program set to expire at the end of next year. The Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA) is currently slated for expiration on Sept. 30, ’10. Haiti receives unilateral preferences under the CBTPA.
Haiti is the 17th largest supplier of apparel to the United States, exporting more than $513 million worth of apparel to the United States in ’09, up 24.5% from ’08.
USDA’s ‘Know Your Farmer’ Program Criticized
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan have been promoting the Know Your Farmer program by sending the American public to www.usda.gov/knowyourfarmer to learn that food comes from real farmers, not from the grocery or convenience store. But the campaign has come under fire from Sen. McCain (R-AZ), Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Chambliss (R-GA) and House Agriculture Committee Member Roberts (R-KS).
A sharply worded letter to Secretary Vilsack from the three Republicans charges that, “While the concept of educating consumers about production agriculture is a worthwhile endeavor, we have serious misgivings about the direction of the ‘Know Your Farmer’ program.” The letter states that along with trying to link consumers to farmers, the initiative “also involves subsidizing the local niche markets.” The letter says that after spending $65 million this year, USDA “has pledged to deliver millions more in Fiscal Year 2011” on the program.
“Unfortunately, this spending doesn’t appear geared toward conventional farmers who produce the vast majority of our nation’s food supply, but is instead aimed at small, hobbyist and organic producers whose customers generally consist of affluent patrons at urban farmers markets.”
The letter also asks USDA to provide proof of Congressional authority to spend money for ‘Know Your Farmer’ purposes, along with a full accounting of all spending.
TSCA Reform Proposals Said to Broaden Scope
Proposals to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) would expand the number and type of companies required to provide chemical use, exposure and toxicity data to regulators and would broaden the data requirements to include more information on chemical identity. The Safe Chemicals Act (S. 3209) was introduced on April 15 by Sen. Lautenberg (D-NJ). A House "discussion draft" was released the same day by Rep. Waxman (D-CA). (See April 30, ’10, Cotton’s Week)
According to legal analysts, more companies would be required to provide EPA information because the proposals would expand the definition of “chemical substance.” The legislative language also would require information not only from chemical manufacturers, but from the downstream companies or "processors" that handle and sell chemicals or products made with those substances.
Analysts believe the scope of information that both legislative proposals would require is too broad. Both the Senate and House proposals would require information that would breach critical trade secrets that companies must maintain. The Senate bill (S. 3209) would define “chemical identity” to include the chemicals in a mixture and the proportions of those chemicals which are proprietary information. Beyond chemical identity, the declarations would require: the name and location of each facility under the control of the manufacturer or processor and a list of health and safety studies conducted or initiated by or on behalf of a processor, as well as studies that are known to the companies or studies they could reasonably obtain. It also would require "all other information" the manufacturer or processor has that has not previously been submitted to the agency.
To date, there has been no Senate action on this bill.
EPA Questioned Over Pending Pesticide Spraying Permit
As EPA prepares to send its draft pesticide spray permit to the White House for review, the agency is facing a host of questions from states concerned about its enforceability; who will be covered; who will be liable for spills; and whether they will have enough time to create state permits after EPA finalizes its general permit in December.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in NCC v. EPA vacated EPA's ’06 rule exempting certain pesticide users, state pest controllers and others from spraying pesticides "on or near" waters from needing to obtain a Clean Water Act (CWA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The Supreme Court last month declined an industry request to review the appellate ruling, clearing the way for EPA to issue its permit.
The ruling means that some applications are now considered discharges under the CWA, requiring a permit to avoid liability for unregulated discharges. The Sixth Circuit gave EPA until April 9, ’11 to develop a general permit for states and tribal lands that does not have delegated NPDES permitting authority. The agency's permit also will provide a model to those states with delegated programs. EPA has said previously that the general permit will cover about 365,000 applicators in an estimated 506 million applications every year.
EPA hopes to publicly propose the permit by May 26 and hold a series of public meetings and webcasts during a 30-day comment period. The forthcoming permit will cover spraying for four categories: aquatic weeds and algae; aquatic animals; forest canopy; and mosquitoes/other flying insects.
NPDES permits also require monitoring, IPM practices and record-keeping. States and some EPA staff are raising questions about how the general permit will be enforced.
Another unfinished aspect of the permit is how to handle Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements. The agency has been working with the Fish & Wildlife Service and other agencies to deal with biological evaluations and effects on discharge in the permit but has not come to any final results. Therefore, the draft permit will contain only a cursory mention of the ESA requirements in the permit.
EPA has received requests from the registrants to voluntarily cancel all product registrations containing methyl parathion, a restricted use organophosphate insecticide and acaricide used primarily on cotton, corn and rice, as well as other agricultural crops.
These requests would terminate the last methyl parathion products registered for use in the United States, effective on Dec. 31, ’12. End-use products will not be sold after Aug. 31, ’13, and end-use products cannot legally be used after Dec. 31, ’13. All end use product labels will be amended to reflect the last legal use date.
In an April 28, ’10, Federal Register notice, EPA is inviting comment on the voluntary cancellation requests until May 28, ’10. Additional information on methyl parathion and the voluntary cancellation requests is available in registration review docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0332 at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-9627.htm.
US Cotton Made Strides in Contamination Elimination
According to the “Cotton Contamination Survey 2009,” recently released by the International Textile Manufacturers Federation (ITMF), US raw cotton fared well compared to other countries’ growths.
In the bi-annual survey, 110 spinning mills located in 23 countries evaluated 63 different cotton growths.
The survey found that the level of cottons modestly or seriously contaminated as perceived by the spinning mills worldwide did not increase compared to the last survey in ’07, remaining constant at 22%. A closer look at the extent of the contamination shows that 6% (’07: 7%) of all cottons evaluated were seriously contaminated by some sort of foreign matter. In contrast, very clean raw cottons were produced in the United States (Texas High Plains, Memphis, Pima, Southeastern and California)and accounted for five out of the 10 growths from around the world where the degree of contamination was judged to be non-existent or insignificant.
Sticky cotton presence, as perceived by the spinning mills, fell in ’09 to 16%, the lowest level ever recorded (compared to 21% in ’07). Nevertheless, stickiness still remains a major challenge to the spinning industry. The US growths of California and the Southeast were judged asnot or hardly affected by stickiness.
The survey revealed that the appearance of seed-coat fragments in cotton growths remained an issue for spinners worldwide, with 31% claiming that they have encountered them in the cotton growths consumed. This is the lowest level since including a measurement of the level of seed-coat fragments in the survey in ’91. The US growths of Texas High Plains and California cotton were singled out as regions least affected by seed-coat fragments.
Positive Impact of International Market Development Revealed
A March ’10 cost-benefit analysis conducted by Global Insight, Inc., a respected private economic and financial analysis firm, showed that based on current funding levels, US agricultural exports will be $6.1 billion higher as a result of the increased investment by government and industry during ’02-09. It also revealed that the multi-year impact of the increase in market development expenditures during that period by both industry and government is equal to $35 in agricultural export gains for each dollar spent.
The report, sponsored by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service, evaluated the impacts of the USDA’s Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development Program (FMD) on US agricultural exports and updated a larger work completed in ’06.
The study dispels criticisms that the economic impact of MAP and FMD is unclear and unquantifiable. Based on the study’s analysis, if these market development programs suffered a 50% decrease (less $280 million) in government and industry spending, the overall loss in economic benefits is approximately 13.5 times greater than the savings that taxpayers would see from not funding the program.
Buyers Meet COTTON USA Suppliers in Bangladesh
A weeklong COTTON USA Supply Chain Marketing Buyers Tour to Bangladesh attracted buyers representing British, French, Italian, German, Japanese, Turkish and US brands and retailers. The tour enabled buyers to meet with leading Bangladeshi suppliers of US cotton-rich garments.
During the tour, consisting of a two-day trade fair followed by two days of mill visits, the buyers met individually with 17 COTTON USA licensees and visited six factories.
Bangladesh was chosen for the tour because of its growing use of US cotton and increasing interest among the buyer and retailer community. Bangladesh is the fourth largest apparel exporting country in the world, experiencing 91% growth from ’04-08. It is the largest exporter of cotton T-shirts and the second largest exporter of cotton pullovers and denim trousers to the European Union.
Bangladeshi suppliers participating in the private trade show ranged from vertically integrated spinning mills to key customers of US cotton rich yarns and fabrics. All companies are COTTON USA Mark licensees and either spin US-grown cotton or use yarns or fabrics supplied from COTTON USA licensed mills. The participating retailers had a combined buying volume of more than a billion dollars. Initial buyers’ feedback indicates a greater willingness to source from Bangladesh -- with many anticipating doing business in the next 12 months with companies they met on the tour.
Sales, Shipments Steady
Net export sales for the week ending April 29 were 174,300 bales (480-lb). This brings total ’09-10 sales to approximately 11.5 million bales. Total sales at the same point in the ’08-09 marketing year were approximately 13.0 million bales. Total new crop (’10-11) sales are 868,600 bales.
Shipments for the week were 233,000 bales, bringing total exports to date to 8.2 million bales compared with the 9.1 million bales at the comparable point in the ’08-09 marketing year.
Effective May 7-13, ’10
Adjusted World Price, SLM 11/16
72.29 cents
*
Fine Count Adjustment ('09 Crop)
0.25 cents
Fine Count Adjustment ('10 Crop)
0.35 cents
Coarse Count Adjustment
0.00 cents
Marketing Loan Gain Value
0.00 cents
Import Quotas Open
13
Special Import Quota (480-lb bales)
894,258
ELS Payment Rate
0.00 cents
*No Adjustment Made Under Step I
Five-Day Average
Current 5 Lowest 3135 CFR Far East
89.33 cents
Forward 5 Lowest 3135 CFR Far East
83.08 cents
Coarse Count CFR Far East
NA
Current US CFR Far East
89.69 cents
Forward US CFR Far East
85.63 cents
'09-10 Weighted Marketing-Year Average Farm Price
Year-to-Date (August-March)
61.49 cents
**
**August-July average price used in determination of counter-cyclical payment
