[Federal Register: May 23, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 100)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 28167-28168]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23my03-26]
[[Page 28167]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. 02-069-1]
Interstate Movement of Swine Within a Production System;
Inspection of Swine
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations pertaining to the
interstate movement of swine by limiting the requirement for mandatory
veterinary inspections, at intervals of 30 days or less, to swine that
are or will be in the process of moving interstate within a swine
production system and to the premises on which such swine are housed.
With this proposed change, swine that have arrived at a finishing house
or other final destination within a single swine production system
would no longer be required to undergo veterinary inspections at
intervals of 30 days or less. In order to ensure that finishing house
animals would still undergo regular health monitoring, swine that have
completed their interstate movement within the swine production system,
as well as the premises on which they are housed, would have to be
inspected in accordance with State regulations. This proposed rule
would reduce the frequency of veterinary inspections for swine that
have completed their interstate movement within a single swine
production system without diminishing the effectiveness of our swine-
disease monitoring and surveillance activities.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July
22, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by postal mail/commercial delivery
or by e-mail. If you use postal mail/commercial delivery, please send
four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to: Docket
No. 02-069-1, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3C71, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state
that your comment refers to Docket No. 02-069-1. If you use e-mail,
address your comment to regulations@aphis.usda.gov. Your comment must
be contained in the body of your message; do not send attached files.
Please include your name and address in your message and ``Docket No.
02-069-1'' on the subject line.
You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our
reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA
South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington,
DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
APHIS documents published in the Federal Register, and related
information, including the names of organizations and individuals who
have commented on APHIS dockets, are available on the Internet at
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Adam Grow, Senior Staff
Veterinarian, National Center for Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS,
4700 River Road Unit 43, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-7708.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in subchapter C of chapter I, title 9, Code of
Federal Regulations, govern the interstate movement of animals and
animal products to prevent the dissemination of livestock and poultry
diseases in the United States. Part 71 of subchapter C includes, among
other things, requirements for the identification and inspection of
swine being moved interstate.
On December 20, 2001, we published in the Federal Register (66 FR
65598-65604, Docket No. 98-023-2) a final rule that established an
alternative to the requirements for moving swine interstate. Among
other things, the rule allowed persons to move swine interstate without
meeting individual swine identification requirements if the swine were
being moved within a single swine production system, and provided that
the swine production system agreed to monitor the health of animals
moving within the system and to facilitate tracebacks. The rule was
designed to further facilitate the interstate movement of swine while
continuing to provide protection against the interstate spread of swine
diseases.
Among other things, the final rule amended Sec. 71.1 by adding a
definition of swine production health plan. This definition featured a
provision requiring that such plans ``must identify all premises that
are part of the swine production system and that receive or send swine
in interstate commerce and must provide for regular inspections of all
identified premises and swine on the premises, at intervals no greater
than 30 days, by the swine production system accredited
veterinarians(s).'' By providing for regular inspections of ``all
identified premises and swine on the premises,'' this provision has the
effect of requiring such inspections even after the swine have
completed their interstate movement within the swine production system
and have arrived at a finishing house or other final receiving premises
within the swine production system.
Some commenters on the proposal that preceded the final rule
suggested that while veterinary inspections at intervals of 30 days or
less are appropriate and necessary for swine that are still to be moved
interstate, such regular inspections are not necessary once the animals
have completed their interstate movement within the swine production
system. Furthermore, it was suggested that retaining the 30-day
veterinary inspection requirement for animals that had reached their
final destination in the system could unintentionally increase the risk
of swine disease transmission by requiring veterinarians who may have
first inspected sick animals to inspect healthy ones as well, even in
the absence of a compelling medical need to do so.
When we promulgated the final rule, we decided to retain the 30-day
inspection provision. We were concerned that reducing the frequency
could put accredited veterinarians in violation of our accreditation
standards in 9 CFR 161.3(a). Under these standards, accredited
veterinarians must complete certificates of inspection based on
veterinary inspection. An accredited veterinarian may not issue any
certificate or other document ``which reflects the results of any
inspection, test, [etc.]'' unless he or she has personally inspected
the animal not more than 10 days prior to issuing the certificate or
other document. However, following the initial and subsequent
inspections of a herd or flock that is in a regular health maintenance
program, an accredited veterinarian may issue any certificate or other
document if not more than 30 days have passed since he or she
personally inspected the animal.
We have since concluded, however, that having a more flexible
inspection requirement for swine that have reached their final
destination in the swine production system would not conflict with our
accreditation standards. A certification of inspection is necessary for
the interstate movement of swine within a swine production system.
[[Page 28168]]
Swine that have reached a finishing house or other final destination in
the system will be destined for the slaughterhouse. Nothing in the
current proposal would preclude any inspection needed to issue a
certification for the interstate movement of swine to slaughter. The
proposal would merely eliminate routine 30-day inspections for animals
that have arrived at a finishing house or other final destination and
that may well spend months at that one location. It does not relieve
accredited veterinarians of the responsibility of complying with the
accreditation standards or other applicable requirements.
Therefore, we are proposing to amend our definition of swine
production health plan in Sec. 71.1 to allow for greater flexibility
in health inspections of swine that have completed their movement
within a swine production system. Under our proposed definition, the
swine production health plan would have to provide for health
monitoring, including inspection by the swine production system
accredited veterinarian(s), of all swine within the system. The
required frequency of inspections would vary according to the nature of
the premises and the swine that populate them. Inspections of premises
that contain swine that are or will be in the process of moving
interstate within the swine production system and of all swine on those
premises would still have to be conducted by the accredited
veterinarian(s) at intervals of no greater than 30 days. Inspections of
premises containing only swine that have completed their interstate
movement within a single swine production system and of all swine on
those premises would have to be conducted in accordance with State
regulations.
This action would reduce the frequency of veterinary inspections
for swine that have completed their interstate movement within a single
swine production system without diminishing the effectiveness of our
swine-disease monitoring and surveillance activities.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866.
The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
This proposed rule would remove a requirement in Sec. 71.1 for
veterinary inspections, at intervals no greater than 30 days, of swine
that have already completed their interstate movement within a swine
production system.
The entities affected by this proposed action would be swine owners
and swine finishing houses or other final receiving destinations in
swine production systems. Data from the 1997 Census of Agriculture
suggest that approximately 109,754 swine farms could be affected, and
that 98 percent of these swine farms could be classified as small
entities under the Small Business Administration criterion of $750,000
or less in revenue per year.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 1997 Census of Agriculture, Hogs and Pigs Inventory (http://www.nass.usda.gov
).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The overall economic impact of this proposed rule should be
positive but small. Swine operations would be able to forgo certain
costs of inspections at the finishing houses or other final receiving
premises in the swine production system. The annual savings that would
be realized by each swine operation are difficult to estimate because
many of the veterinarians who perform the inspections are held under a
retainer and perform other services for the swine operation. However,
the time and resources of the veterinarian could be redirected to other
issues at the finishing houses or other receiving premises, like caring
for sick animals, thereby benefitting swine owners.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action would
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 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is adopted: (1) All State
and local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this rule will
be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this rule; and
(3) administrative proceedings will not be required before parties may
file suit in court challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains no new information collection or
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 9 CFR 71
Animal diseases, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products,
Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71--GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 71 would continue to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
2. In Sec. 71.1, in the definition of swine production health
plan, the second sentence would be removed and four new sentences would
be added in its place to read as follows:
Sec. 71.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Swine production health plan. * * * The plan must identify all
premises that are part of the swine production system and that receive
or send swine in interstate commerce and must provide for health
monitoring of all swine within the system. Such health monitoring must
include inspections by the swine production system accredited
veterinarian(s). Inspections of all identified premises that contain
swine that are or will be in the process of moving interstate within
the swine production system and of all swine on those premises must be
conducted by the accredited veterinarian(s) at intervals of no greater
than 30 days. Inspections of all identified receiving premises that
contain only swine that have completed their interstate movement within
a single swine production system and of all swine on those premises
must be conducted in accordance with State regulations. * * *
* * * * *
Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of May 2003.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 03-12994 Filed 5-22-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P