7 C.F.R. § 760.7

Conditions required for milk or cow indemnity

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An indemnity payment for milk or cows (dairy cows including, but not limited to, bred and open heifers) may be made under this subpart to an affected farmer under the conditions in this section.

(b) If the pesticide, chemical, or toxic substance, in the contaminated milk was used by the affected farmer, the affected farmer must establish that each of the conditions in this section are met:

(1) That the pesticide, chemical, or toxic substance, when used, was registered (if applicable) and approved for use as provided in § 760.2(f);

(2) That the contaminated milk was not the result of the affected farmer's failure to use the pesticide, chemical, or toxic substance, according to the directions and limitations stated on the label; and

(3) That the contaminated milk was not otherwise the affected farmer's fault.

(c) If the violating substance in the contaminated milk was not used by the affected farmer, the affected farmer must establish that each of the conditions in this section are met:

(1) The affected farmer did not know or have reason to believe that any purchased feed contained a violating substance;

(2) None of the milk was produced by dairy cattle that the affected farmer knew, or had reason to know at the time they were acquired, had elevated levels of a violating substance; and

(3) The contaminated milk was not otherwise the affected farmer's fault.

(d) The affected farmer has adopted recommended practices and taken action to eliminate or reduce chemical residues of violating substances from the milk as soon as practicable following the initial discovery of the contaminated milk.

[86 FR 70703, Dec. 13, 2021]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1997–1999 · leading case: Boers v. United States, 44 Fed. Cl. 725 (Fed. Cl. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Boers v. United States, 44 Fed. Cl. 725 (Fed. Cl. 1999). “We held that the agency erred in treating the question of knowledge of contamination as relevant to the issue of entitlement: Absent some showing of fault, as specified, in 7 C.F.R. § 760.7 , a farmer’s knowledge that his milk is contaminated is legally irrelevant to his…”

Boers v. United States, 39 Fed. Cl. 25 (Fed. Cl. 1997). · cites it 4× “7 C.F.R. § 760.7 (b)(emphasis supplied). Finally, the “affected farmer” had to adopt recommended practices for eliminating residues of pesticides from his milk as soon as practicable following the discovery of the initial contamination.”

— 7 C.F.R. § 760.7(b)(1) — 1 case

Boers v. United States, 39 Fed. Cl. 25 (Fed. Cl. 1997). “7 C.F.R. § 760.7 (b)(emphasis supplied). Finally, the “affected farmer” had to adopt recommended practices for eliminating residues of pesticides from his milk as soon as practicable following the discovery of the initial contamination.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.