[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14617-14619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6762]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 14617]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 75
[Docket No. 94-061-2]
Equine Infectious Anemia
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations concerning the interstate
movement of horses that test positive for equine infectious anemia to
allow the horses to be moved interstate directly to slaughter under a
permit and in a sealed conveyance, as an alternative to the horses
being officially identified prior to the interstate movement with a hot
iron or chemical brand, freezemarking, or a lip tattoo. This change in
the regulations will provide owners of equine infectious anemia
reactors with an alternative means of handling their animals while
preventing the spread of this communicable disease.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 19, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Tim Cordes, Senior Staff
Veterinarian, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary
Services, Sheep, Goat, Equine and Poultry Staff, 4700 River Road Unit
43, Riverdale, MD 20737-1228, (301) 734-3279.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 9 CFR part 75 (referred to below as the
regulations) contain provisions for the interstate movement of horses,
asses, ponies, mules, and zebras that test positive for communicable
diseases, including equine infectious anemia (EIA). The purpose of
those provisions is to prevent the spread of communicable diseases,
including EIA. EIA, also known as swamp fever, is a viral disease of
equines that may be characterized by sudden fever, swelling of the legs
and lower parts of the body, severe weight loss, and anemia.
Section 75.4(a) of the regulations defines an EIA reactor as any
horse, ass, mule, pony, or zebra that is subjected to an official test
and found positive. Under Sec. 75.4(b) of the regulations, no EIA
reactor may be moved interstate unless the reactor is officially
identified and meets certain other requirements. Section 75.4(a) of the
regulations defines ``officially identified'' as the permanent
identification of a reactor with markings permanently applied by an
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) representative, a
State representative, or an accredited veterinarian using a hot iron or
chemical brand, freezemarking, or a lip tattoo.
On October 6, 1994, we published in the Federal Register (59 FR
50860-50861, Docket No. 94-061-1) a proposal to amend the requirements
for interstate movement in Sec. 75.4(b) by adding a provision stating
that ``Official identification is not necessary if the animal is moved
directly to slaughter, traveling under a permit and in a sealed
conveyance.'' We also proposed to add definitions of ``official seal''
and ``permit'' to Sec. 75.4(a).
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
December 5, 1994. We received six comments by that date. They were from
State agriculture agencies, animal rights organizations, and a horse
industry association. Three of the commenters supported the proposed
rule, although two of those commenters suggested additional provisions
be included in the regulations. The remaining three commenters opposed
the proposed rule. We carefully considered all of the comments we
received. They are discussed below.
Comment: Horse owners may be unwilling to part with their animals
for sentimental or economic reasons. If EIA reactors are not
permanently identified, some horse owners may attempt to substitute a
different horse for an EIA reactor prior to the reactor's movement to
slaughter in a sealed conveyance.
Response: We do not believe that the substitution scenario
envisioned by the commenter will present a problem. First, we believe
that it is unlikely that a horse owner would attempt to substitute a
healthy horse for a horse infected with a debilitating disease such as
EIA. Second, when a horse is identified as an EIA reactor, that horse
is tested for EIA at least two more times, once by State animal health
authorities and once by APHIS. The APHIS and State representatives who
deal with the retests will likely be the same APHIS and State
representatives who are present at the time the reactor is sealed
aboard the conveyance on which it will be transported to slaughter, and
they would be able to recognize a horse that they had recently handled.
Additionally, the horse would be identified, in writing, for the
purposes of the tests and again when the required forms for its
interstate movement were completed. Given those factors, it is unlikely
that a horse owner could effect a substitution even if he or she
desired to do so. Finally, a reactor does not necessarily have to be
moved interstate to slaughter; a horse owner would have other options.
The regulations in Sec. 75.4(b) allow, under certain conditions, a
reactor to be moved interstate to its farm of origin or to a diagnostic
or research facility, where the reactor would remain quarantined under
State authority until natural death, slaughter, or until disposed of by
euthanasia.
Comment: APHIS should consider regulations to prohibit needlessly
cruel identification procedures such as hot-iron and chemical branding
for those EIA reactors that are not moved directly to slaughter in a
sealed conveyance. In that vein, APHIS should research and encourage
the use of microchip technology and its global standardization.
Response: Under the current regulations, the owner of a reactor is
not required to use either of the identification methods that the
commenter views as being needlessly cruel. Freezemarking and lip
tattoos are approved for use in addition to hot-iron and chemical
branding, and this final rule makes available a method by which the
owner of a reactor could move the animal interstate without permanently
identifying the animal.
With regard to microchips, we acknowledge that useful information
can be readily stored on and retrieved from microchips but, as alluded
to by [[Page 14618]] the commenter, there is no universal chip reader
that can access the information stored on chips produced by different
manufacturers. That lack of standardization currently prevents our use
of microchips in nationwide disease control programs. APHIS will,
however, continue to research the potential uses of microchips in its
disease control programs.
Comment: The proposed rule does not specify who is authorized to
open a sealed conveyance. Because there are only nine equine processing
plants in the United States, EIA reactors may have to travel several
hundred miles to slaughter. How will the feeding, watering, and resting
of EIA reactors being transported to slaughter over long distances be
accomplished if the operator of the conveyance is not authorized to
break the seal? Will an authorized person be available to open and
reseal the conveyance and ensure that all EIA reactors are returned to
the conveyance after a stop?
Response: As we stated in the proposed rule, moving EIA reactors
interstate to slaughter under a permit and in a sealed conveyance would
ensure that the animals are not diverted for other uses. Because the
seal is intended to provide evidence that the reactors have not been
removed from the conveyance during the course of the interstate
movement to the destination slaughtering establishment, it is necessary
that the seal remain unbroken until the conveyance arrives at the
destination slaughtering establishment, where an APHIS or State
representative would remove the seal. The provisions of this final rule
are presented as an alternative to officially identifying reactors
prior to an interstate movement; we understand that this alternative
may not be viable in all situations. If the interstate movement to the
destination slaughtering establishment cannot be completed without a
stop for resting, feeding, and watering a reactor, the owner of the
reactor would still be able to move the reactor interstate to
slaughter. Specifically, the owner of the reactor could choose to have
the animal officially identified and, under the regulations in
Sec. 75.4(b)(4), would be able to move the reactor interstate through
no more than one approved stockyard for sale for immediate slaughter if
the reactor is accompanied by a certificate during the interstate
movement and is moved within 5 days of its arrival at the approved
stockyard directly to slaughter.
Comment: Without permanent identification, how will the identity of
EIA reactors be maintained in the event that the conveyance in which
they are being moved has a mechanical breakdown or is involved in an
accident?
Response: The operator of the conveyance in which the reactors are
being transported will have been furnished with the telephone numbers
of APHIS representatives in the States of origin and destination prior
to his or her departure from the State of origin. If, for any reason,
the operator is unable to reach the slaughtering establishment in the
State of destination as planned, the operator will be able to contact
an APHIS representative, who will make the necessary arrangements for
APHIS or State personnel to travel to the location of the conveyance
and take whatever actions may be necessary to ensure that the reactors
are maintained in isolation sufficient to prevent the transmission of
EIA to other animals until such time as the movement to the
slaughtering establishment can be completed.
Comment: When the nearest equine processing plant is several
hundred miles away, it is not cost effective to transport a single EIA
reactor to slaughter and it may take several weeks to gather enough
animals to make the journey economically practical. If an EIA reactor
is not officially identified as such, there is an increased chance that
the animal could be diverted while waiting to be transported to
slaughter.
Response: At the time an animal is confirmed as an EIA reactor, the
APHIS representative handling the case will make arrangements for the
animal to be officially identified or moved directly to slaughter under
permit in a sealed conveyance, depending on the owner's preference. As
envisioned by the commenter, the owner of a reactor may believe that it
is not in his or her best economic interests to move the reactor
interstate directly to slaughter under a permit and in a sealed
conveyance. In such a case, the owner of the reactor would choose to
have the animal officially identified and, under the regulations in
Sec. 75.4(b)(4), could then move the reactor interstate through no more
than one approved stockyard for sale for immediate slaughter if the
reactor is accompanied by a certificate during the interstate movement
and is moved within 5 days of its arrival at the approved stockyard
directly to slaughter.
Comment: Without official identification, some reactors may be
diverted from slaughter. If APHIS' proposal to allow EIA reactors to be
moved interstate to slaughter in a sealed conveyance without official
identification is motivated by its concern that branding causes undue
distress to horses, then freezemarking, which does not cause evident
distress in horses, should be required for reactors being moved
interstate to slaughter in a sealed conveyance. Although a freeze brand
would not be immediately visible, the mark would become visible within
2 to 3 weeks, thus allowing for the identification of any EIA reactors
that may have been diverted from slaughter while being moved in a
sealed conveyance.
Response: The provisions of this final rule are intended as an
alternative to official identification. In practical terms, if we were
to require freezemarking in addition to the permit and seal
requirements, there would be no real alternative at all. Indeed, the
seal requirement would become an additional condition not found in the
other provisions of Sec. 75.4(b) regarding interstate movement to
slaughter. As stated above and in the proposed rule, we believe that
moving EIA reactors interstate to slaughter under a permit and in a
sealed conveyance will ensure that the animals are not diverted for
other uses.
Comment: Because of the incidence and nature of EIA, it is better
to expend the time and expense involved in permanently identifying an
EIA reactor than to risk its being diverted during movement and
exposing other horses to the disease.
Response: We took into account factors such as the incidence and
nature of EIA, as well as other considerations, during the development
of the proposed rule. After considering those issues, we concluded that
EIA reactors could be moved interstate to slaughter without official
identification if they were moved under a permit and in a sealed
conveyance. We believed, and continue to believe, that the permit and
seal requirements will ensure that the animals will not be diverted for
other uses or pose a greater risk of spreading EIA than reactors moved
under the other interstate movement provisions of Sec. 75.4(b).
Therefore, based on the rationale set forth in the proposed rule
and in this document, we are adopting the provisions of the proposal as
a final rule.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule
has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Because this rule provides an alternative, the economic impact to
[[Page 14619]] horse owners will be minimal. The horse owners that will
be affected by this rule change are those that have horses that test
positive for EIA and voluntarily choose to transport their horses
interstate to slaughter under an official seal. APHIS estimates that,
annually, between 500 and 1,000 horse operations have horses that
become infected with EIA. Although it is not known how many of these
operations are ``small'' entities (less than $0.5 million in annual
sales, according to Small Business Administration size criteria), it is
likely that most are in that category.
Current estimates put the number of horses in the United States
between 6 and 10 million. In 1993, about 1 million horses were tested
for EIA. Of these, 1,859 (about 0.18 percent) tested positive for EIA.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Executive Order 12372
This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.)
Executive Order 12778
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws and
regulations that are in conflict with this rule; (2) has no retroactive
effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements
included in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under OMB control number 0579-0051.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 75
Animal diseases, Horses, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
Accordingly, 9 CFR part 75 is amended as follows:
PART 75--COMMUNICABLE DISEASES IN HORSES, ASSES, PONIES, MULES, AND
ZEBRAS
1. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 115, 117, 120, 121, 123-126, and
134-134h; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(d).
2. In Sec. 75.4, paragraph (a) is amended by adding two new
definitions, in alphabetical order, and in paragraph (b), the
introductory text is amended by adding a statement immediately
following the colon, to read as follows:
Sec. 75.4 Interstate movement of equine infectious anemia reactors and
approval of laboratories, diagnostic facilities, research facilities,
and stockyards.
(a) * * *
Official seal. A serially numbered metal or plastic strip, or a
serially numbered button, consisting of a self-locking device on one
end and a slot on the other end, which forms a loop when the ends are
engaged and which cannot be reused if opened. It is applied by an APHIS
representative or State representative.
* * * * *
Permit. An official document (VS Form 1-27 or a State form which
contains the same information, but not a ``permit for entry'') issued
by an APHIS representative, State representative, or accredited
veterinarian which lists the owner's name and address, points of origin
and destination, number of animals covered, purpose of the movement,
and one of the following: The individual animal registered breed
association registration tattoo, individual animal registered breed
association registration number, or similar individual identification,
including name, age, sex, breed, color, and markings.
* * * * *
(b) * * * Provided that official identification is not necessary if
the reactor is moved directly to slaughter under a permit and in a
conveyance sealed with an official seal:
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC, this 14th day of March 1995.
Terry L. Medley,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 95-6762 Filed 3-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P