12 



Mr. VOLKMER. Do any other members wish to make opening 

 statements? 



[No response.] 



Mr. VOLKMER. With that, the Chair will now recognize our first 

 witness, Mr. Clayton, Acting Administrator, Agricultural Market- 

 ing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 



Your statement will be made a part of the record. You may either 

 review the statement in full or summarize, however you so desire. 



I want to thank you for being here today to give us the Depart- 

 ment's view on the legislation. Thank you very much, Mr. Clayton. 



STATEMENT OF KENNETH C. CLAYTON, ACTING ADMINIS- 

 TRATOR, AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE, U.S. DE- 

 PARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ACCOMPANIED BY MICHAEL 

 HOLBROOK, DIRECTOR, POULTRY DIVISION 



Mr. Clayton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good afternoon to 

 you and members of the subcommittee. 



I appreciate this opportunity to appear before your subcommittee 

 to discuss H.R. 1637, the Egg Research and Consumer Information 

 Act Amendments of 1993. Accompanying me today is Michael Hol- 

 brook. Director of the Poultry Division of the Agricultural Market- 

 ing Service. 



Mr. Chairman, the Department has no objection to the enact- 

 ment of H.R. 1637 if amended as outlined in our testimony. 



H.R. 1637, if enacted, will amend the Egg Research and 

 Consumer Information Act to increase the current exemption level 

 from assessments under the act from 30,000 laying hens to 50,000 

 laying hens. This change, if effected, would result in an estimated 

 127 fewer producers being subjected to the assessment provision of 

 the act, representing approximately 2 percent of the current total 

 income, or about $150,000 annually. The bill would increase the 

 current $0.10 cap to $0.30 per case. It would also authorize the 

 American Egg Board to request a change in the assessment rate if 

 it determines, through scientific studies, marketing analyses, or 

 other competent evidence, that a change in the assessment rate is 

 necessary to achieve the policy goals of the act. Any increase in the 

 assessment, which we would anticipate would be on an incremental 

 basis, would be subject to industry approval in referendum. Ref- 

 erendum approval would require two-thirds of the producers voting 

 in a referendum, or a majority of those voting if they produced not 

 less than two-thirds of the commercial eggs produced during a rep- 

 resentative period. If the referendum addressing the proposed 

 changes were not approved, the existing program would remain in 

 effect. 



While the Department has no objection to the conduct of 

 referenda to determine industry approval of any increases in the 

 assessment rate, we would recommend that any decreases sought 

 by the industry be instituted through the informal rulemaking 

 process. We would be pleased to work with the committee to draft 

 appropriate language to accommodate such a provision. 



Further, the bill requires the Secretary to issue proposed amend- 

 ments to the Egg Research and Promotion Order not later than 30 

 days after enactment of the amended act, and a final regulation not 

 later than 90 days following enactment. The Department believes 



