Federal Register, Volume 84 Issue 56 (Friday, March 22, 2019)
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 56 (Friday, March 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10721-10735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05422]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 56 / Friday, March 22, 2019 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 10721]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Parts 1, 2, and 3
[Docket No. APHIS-2017-0062]
RIN 0579-AE35
Animal Welfare; Amendments to Licensing Provisions and to
Requirements for Dogs
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the licensing requirements under the
Animal Welfare Act regulations to promote compliance, reduce licensing
fees, and strengthen existing safeguards that prevent individuals and
businesses who have a history of noncompliance from obtaining a license
or working with regulated animals. This action will reduce regulatory
burden with respect to licensing and will more efficiently ensure
licensees' sustained compliance with the Act. We are further proposing
to strengthen the veterinary care and watering standards for regulated
dogs to better align the regulations with the humane care and treatment
standards set by the Animal Welfare Act. Additionally, we are proposing
to make several miscellaneous changes for clarity and to correct
typographical errors.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May
21, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0062.
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to
Docket No. APHIS-2017-0062, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD,
APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1238.
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may
be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-
0062 or in our reading Room, which 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) 799-7039 before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine Jones, Chief of Staff,
Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301)
851-3730.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA or the Act, 7 U.S.C. 2131 et
seq.), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to promulgate
standards and other requirements governing the humane handling, care,
treatment, and transportation of certain animals by dealers,
exhibitors, operators of auction sales, research facilities, and
carriers and intermediate handlers. The Secretary has delegated
responsibility for administering the AWA to the Administrator of the
U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS). Within APHIS, the responsibility for
administering the AWA has been delegated to the Deputy Administrator
for Animal Care. Definitions, regulations, and standards established
under the AWA are contained in 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and 3 (referred to
below as the regulations). Part 1 contains definitions for terms used
in parts 2 and 3. Part 2 provides administrative requirements and sets
forth institutional responsibilities for regulated parties, including
licensing requirements for dealers, exhibitors, and operators of
auction sales. Dealers, exhibitors, and operators of auction sales are
required to comply in all respects with the regulations and standards
(9 CFR 2.100(a)) and to allow APHIS officials access to their place of
business, facilities, animals, and records to inspect for compliance (9
CFR 2.126). Part 3 provides standards for the humane handling, care,
treatment, and transportation of covered animals. Part 3 consists of
subparts A through E, which contain specific standards for dogs and
cats, guinea pigs and hamsters, rabbits, nonhuman primates, and marine
mammals, respectively, and subpart F, which sets forth general
standards for warmblooded animals not otherwise specified in that part.
Under the current regulations, an applicant for an initial license
is required to submit an application form, an application fee, and an
annual license fee to Animal Care (9 CFR 2.1(c)), acknowledge receipt
of a copy of the regulations and agree to comply with them by signing
the application form (9 CFR 2.2(a)), and demonstrate compliance with
the AWA regulations and standards, before APHIS can issue a license (9
CFR 2.3(a)). Once a person receives a license, the licensee may renew
his or her license annually by submitting an annual renewal form and
license fee (9 CFR 2.1(d)(1)).
Although an applicant for a license renewal must also certify, to
the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that he or she is in
compliance with all regulations and standards (9 CFR 2.2(b)), the
current regulations do not require the applicant to demonstrate
compliance before APHIS renews his or her license. The current
regulations also do not require a licensee to demonstrate compliance
when the licensee makes any subsequent changes to his or her animals or
facilities, including noteworthy changes in the number or type of
animals used in regulated activity. For example, a licensee who
obtained a license after demonstrating compliance with the standards
for his or her rabbit breeding facility (subpart C of part 3), may
subsequently acquire and deal or exhibit any number of dangerous
animals (such as tigers, bears, and elephants), without first
demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards for those
animals (subpart F of part 3). Based on our knowledge and experience
with administering and enforcing the AWA and regulations, we are
concerned that licensees may struggle to achieve and maintain
compliance after making such noteworthy changes to their animals used
in regulated activity. In addition, we have observed licensees who have
been licensed for many years struggle with compliance because they did
not have adequate programs for maintaining compliance at aging
facilities. Therefore, we believe that revisions to the
[[Page 10722]]
regulations are necessary to ensure that dealers, exhibitors, and
operators of auction sales demonstrate compliance with the applicable
standards in part 3, providing for the humane handling, care,
treatment, and transportation of animals under the AWA, as described
below.
In this proposed rule, we are proposing revisions to the licensing
requirements to promote compliance, reduce licensing fees and burdens,
and strengthen existing safeguards that prevent individuals and
businesses who are unfit to hold a license (such as any individual
whose license has been suspended or revoked or who has a history of
noncompliance) from obtaining a license or working with regulated
animals. We are also proposing revisions to the animal health and
husbandry standards of part 3, subpart A, to increase safeguards for
the adequate care and treatment of regulated dogs. The regulatory
changes we are proposing include:
Issuing fixed-term (non-renewable) licenses for dealers
and exhibitors that expire after 3 years, at which time they would be
required to demonstrate compliance before obtaining another fixed-term
license;
Specifying procedures for the issuance of temporary
licenses to licensees with histories of compliance should they be in
jeopardy of an inadvertent lapse in licensure during the license
application process;
Requiring licensees to affirmatively demonstrate
compliance and obtain a new license when making noteworthy changes
subsequent to the issuance of a license; noteworthy changes are those
with regard to the number, type, or location of animals used in
regulated activities;
Adjusting license fees consistent with other proposed
changes;
Requiring license applicants to disclose any pleas of nolo
contendere (no contest) or any other findings of violation of Federal,
State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to animal cruelty or the
transportation, ownership, neglect, or welfare of animals, to assess
their fitness for licensure (9 CFR 2.11);
Preventing individuals and businesses not operating as
bona fide exhibitors from becoming licensed in order to circumvent
State laws restricting ownership of exotic and wild animals to AWA-
licensed exhibitors;
Strengthening existing prohibitions to expressly restrict
individuals and businesses whose licenses have been suspended or
revoked from working for regulated entities, and prevent individuals
and businesses with histories of noncompliance from applying for new
licenses through different individuals or business names; and
Specifying provisions to ensure adequate access to water
and veterinary care for dogs.
Additionally, we are proposing several miscellaneous changes to the
AWA regulations, including updating the titles of APHIS officials
referenced in the regulations to reflect the current organizational
structure (such as replacing the references to the ``Regional
Director'' with the ``Deputy Administrator''), clarifying the
definition of ``business hours,'' and correcting typographical errors.
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On August 24, 2017, we published in the Federal Register (82 FR
40077-40078, Docket No. APHIS-2017-0062) an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPR) in which we solicited comments from the public
regarding potential revisions to the regulations. We solicited comments
for 60 days ending October 23, 2017, and extended the comment period
for an additional 10 days ending November 2, 2017. We received more
than 47,000 comments by that date, of which approximately 8,500 were
unique (not duplicate or form letter) comments. They were from private
citizens, breeders, exhibitors, animal welfare activists, and
professional organizations. We have reviewed and considered all of the
comments and any information submitted with the comments. The issues
raised by commenters are discussed below by topic.
License Renewal
Among other things, the ANPR requested comments on issuing fixed-
term (non-renewable) licenses that expire after 3-5 years. A large
number of commenters agreed with the example given in the ANPR to have
licenses expire with the expectation that the issuance of a new license
would be contingent upon affirmative demonstrations of compliance with
AWA regulations. Many commenters indicated a specific number of years
for license expiration within a 1-5 year range. Numerous commenters
were also critical of the current renewal process wherein licensees
self-certify AWA compliance; these commenters asked that USDA stop
``rubber-stamping'' license renewals and generally supported the
proposal for licensees to affirmatively demonstrate compliance prior to
any period of licensure.
Some commenters expressed concerns regarding the impact of rule
changes on licensees who are compliant under current standards, and
questioned the degree of flexibility that would be afforded to
compliant licensees under revised rules. In response to this concern,
we note that we have included flexibilities in this proposed rule for
the issuance of temporary licenses to licensees with histories of
compliance should they be in jeopardy of an inadvertent lapse in
licensure during the license application process.
Other commenters expressed concerns as to the impact rule changes
would have on continued compliance, indicating that a longer period of
time between license renewals could result in complacency among
licensees with respect to animal welfare. In addition, many commenters
indicated that inspections should continue along with annual license
renewals. In response to these comments, we note that no demonstration
of compliance is currently required at the time of renewal. In
addition, we will continue to conduct animal welfare compliance
inspections through the period of licensure in accordance with our
risk-based inspection system.
Several commenters requested a clarification of the term
``affirmative demonstration of compliance,'' with some requesting that
such clarification include a set of objective standards. A number of
commenters requested that license renewals only be issued for licensees
with no non-compliances for a lengthy period (up to 5 years). One
commenter suggested a change to inspection procedures in which a first
inspection would take place soon after a license is issued, e.g., 6
months. Another commenter suggested that renewals should include
inspection and/or certification by a veterinarian that animals are in
good health and receive regular care. The same commenter also suggested
that a process be instituted to allow for complaints from the public
against licensees suspected of noncompliance.
We appreciate these comments and wish to clarify that, by an
``affirmative demonstration of compliance,'' we meant that the
applicant must demonstrate that his or her premises and animals,
facilities, vehicles, equipment, and premises used or intended for use
in the business comply with the requirements set forth in parts 2 and 3
of the regulations, as is currently required in Sec. 2.3 of the
regulations. In addition to the inspections conducted by Animal Care
prior to the issuance of a license, we also have the authority to
conduct inspections throughout the period of licensure. With regard to
veterinarian
[[Page 10723]]
inspections, we note that Sec. 2.40 of the regulations already
requires dealers and exhibitors to employ an attending veterinarian
under formal arrangements and to have programs of adequate veterinary
care. Finally, Animal Care has a process for members of the public to
report concerns about AWA-covered animals. For more information or to
file such a complaint, please visit our website at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/complaint-form. (Scroll
to the bottom of the web page to access the form.)
Among the commenters who opposed the issuance of fixed-term
licenses, many viewed such a proposal as placing undue burden on
licensees who would have to reapply every few years, instead of
annually renew. One commenter expressed concern that such a revision
would increase the potential for biased inspectors to take advantage of
licensees. Another commenter recommended against the issuance of fixed-
term licenses unless license numbers could be preserved, and stated
that a uniform expiration of licenses at the same time of year could
create a backlog for inspections and result in lapsed licenses for
compliant breeders. A few commenters indicated that APHIS does not have
authority under the AWA to set expiration dates on licenses.
As discussed in the economic analyses supporting this rulemaking,
this proposed rule would reduce licensing fees and paperwork burdens on
individuals and businesses seeking an AWA license. While the current
regulations require an annual license application and fees ranging from
$40 to $760 annually, this proposed rule would only require an
application and a flat $120 fee every 3 years, which would be
equivalent to the current lowest fee of $40 (if prorated annually over
3 years). Accordingly, we do not believe that the licensing component
of this proposal places additional or undue burdens on license holders
or applicants and will in fact reduce paperwork burdens on them, as
well as reduce licensing fees for many of them.
This proposal also retains, with modifications discussed below, the
current process for demonstrating compliance prior to the issuance of a
license, which allows an applicant three opportunities (inspections) to
make such a demonstration (9 CFR 2.3(b)). We also note that Animal Care
has a process in place to appeal disputed inspection findings.\1\ This
proposed rule establishes a process for license applicants to appeal
inspection findings from the third pre-license inspection, and codifies
the existing opportunity for licensees and registrants to appeal all
other compliance inspection findings during the period of licensure.
With regard to the timing of license expirations, we do not intend to
set a uniform expiration date for all licensees but would rather
continue our current practice of accepting applications and issuing
licenses on a rolling basis throughout the year. Finally, we wish to
clarify that all licenses currently have expiration dates--they expire
1 year after issuance, and may be renewed annually. This proposed rule
would extend this period of licensure to 3 years, but require an
application for license and demonstration of compliance prior to the
issuance of a new license. This proposal is consistent with section
2133 of the Act, which prohibits the issuance of a license until the
dealer or exhibitor has demonstrated that his facilities comply with
the standards promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to section 2143.
Furthermore, section 2133 of the Act gives the Secretary the authority
to issue licenses to dealers and exhibitors upon application therefor
in such form and manner as he may prescribe, which includes the
authority to set expiration dates for those licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/sa_publications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Licensing Fees
In response to the ANPR's request for comments on licensing fees,
many commenters opposed the overall elimination of application and
license renewal fees, and called for an increase in fees to more
accurately reflect the cost of administering the regulations and
reducing the burden on taxpayers. Many commenters also suggested that
fees should be implemented in accordance with a sliding scale based on
income, or based on the number of animals being bred and sold. Some
commenters indicated that increasing licensing fees would positively
impact animal welfare by weeding out unscrupulous breeders who may not
wish to pay the fee amounts. One commenter stated that it makes sense
to charge license fees only when issuing a license, but that the
application fee should not be eliminated in order to pay for the
processing of an application and the performance of the inspection.
Another commenter suggested that fees be discounted based on the number
of species for which an applicant is licensed.
Some commenters supported the implementation of reasonable fees
that would be assessed with the issuance of a license. One such
commenter stated that the structure of fees that would be assessed
every 3 to 5 years should be based on a formal economic analysis and be
broadly comparable to the existing annual fees. Adjustments to reduce
burdens on small or non-profit entities also should be considered. A
few commenters indicated that license fees should be eliminated so as
to loosen requirements for small volume breeders.
Section 2153 of the AWA authorizes USDA to collect reasonable fees
for licenses issued and to adjust fees on an equitable basis, taking
into consideration the type and nature of the operations to be
licensed. These fees are deposited into the Treasury as miscellaneous
receipts, and are not a user fee to cover the cost of administering the
regulations. In developing this fee, we took into account the type and
nature of operations to be licensed and conducted a formal economic
analysis. One alternative to a flat fee that we considered was to
establish scaled fees, similar to those in the current regulations.
However, we found it difficult to do so in an equitable way. For
example, some dealers and exhibitors with small numbers of animals may
derive significant income from their regulated activities, while other
dealers and exhibitors with large numbers of animals may derive more
modest incomes from their activities, based on the types of animals,
location of their business, business model, and a variety of other
factors. As discussed, we are proposing a flat fee of $120 for
licensure, which represents a fee that is comparable to, or in many
cases reduced from, existing fees for licensure. In addition to being
an equitable fee for licenses, the proposed fee structure would allow
for more efficient and streamlined business processes for Animal Care,
and would simplify the calculation of licensing fees for applicants.
License Compliance; Temporary Licenses
Compliance with the regulations was a subject of concern for many
commenters. A large number of commenters expressed support for the
proposed provision to require licensees to demonstrate compliance with
the AWA and regulations when making noteworthy changes to the number,
type, or location of animals used in regulated activities. Some
commenters requested additional clarification on the meaning of the
terms ``noteworthy changes'' and ``affirmatively demonstrate
compliance.'' A few commenters did not agree with this proposed change,
noting that
[[Page 10724]]
inspections are sufficient to determine noteworthy changes and that
additional reporting would be unnecessary. As discussed below, this
proposal sets forth specifics on what changes would trigger the need
for a new license.
Pre-licensing inspections was one topic discussed in the ANPR, with
a proposed provision to reduce, from three to two, the number of
opportunities an applicant has to correct deficiencies and take
corrective measures before forfeiting his or her license application
and fee. Although many commenters supported this provision, others
raised concerns regarding the input of potentially ``bad'' inspectors,
the imposition of financial burden upon licensees in the event of
repeated findings of deficiency, and the appearance of pre-license
inspections becoming too much of a problem-finding mission as opposed
to an opportunity to educate and foster a learning process for license
applicants. A few commenters suggested that such a reduction in the
number of opportunities for applicants to correct deficiencies should
be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the type of
deficiency identified.
In this proposed rule, we have elected not to propose any changes
to the number of opportunities an applicant has to correct deficiencies
and take corrective measures before forfeiting his or her license
application and fee.
In the ANPR, another potential regulatory change under
consideration was for APHIS to specify procedures to ensure licensees
have ample time to apply for licenses and demonstrate compliance prior
to the expiration of an existing license. Issuance of conditional or
temporary licenses to those who submitted an application before the
expiration of his or her current license and have a history of
compliance, but nevertheless experience an inadvertent lapse in
licensure, would be one way to ensure continuity of licensure under any
new requirements.
Some commenters questioned the issuance of a temporary license and
how such an issuance would work. One such commenter stated that the
timelines outlined in the ANPR did not provide a comprehensive view of
the process for licensing that would prevent inadvertent lapses in
licensure. The same commenter also noted that requiring compliant
businesses to have additional inspections would obligate businesses to
make a substantial investment to ensure their site is in full
compliance at the moment of inspection, leading to potential breaks in
business continuity. Another commenter asked what would qualify as
``ample time'' to demonstrate compliance prior to the expiration of an
existing license. Another commenter stated that the term
``conditional'' carries a negative connotation and suggested the term
``provisional'' license instead.
This proposed rule refers to conditional licenses as temporary
licenses in response to these comments and sets forth specific
information on the proposed temporary licensure process. With regard to
the commenter's concern that businesses would have to invest resources
to be in full compliance, we wish to make clear that licensees are
required to be in full compliance at all times under the Act and
regulations.
Disclosure of Violations and Convictions Involving Animal Laws;
Strengthening Prohibitions
A large number of commenters expressed strong support for the
suggested regulatory provision for license applicants to disclose
incidences of violations and convictions involving animal-related laws.
Suggestions from commenters related to this provision included: Denying
licenses to individuals with a history of noncompliance, open
investigations, or interference with APHIS officials; detailing
timeframes, scope, and costs for any such regulations; suspending
licenses for noncompliant breeders with repeat violations in a 5-year
time period; offering case-by-case considerations for applicants who
disclose convictions involving animal-related laws; and requesting that
APHIS issue fines for initial disclosures of animal abuse, with
prohibition of a license occurring upon a second AWA violation.
Some commenters stated that there is no positive value to a
provision requiring applicants to disclose animal cruelty convictions
or other violations of Federal, State, or local laws pertaining to
animals. One commenter stated that such a disclosure for a single
violation could cause unjust harm to an applicant's reputation, and
suggested that only multiple violations should be disclosed.
The current regulations already set forth provisions for the denial
of a license for persons with animal cruelty convictions and certain
other violations of Federal, State, or local laws pertaining to animals
(9 CFR 2.11). This proposed rule would support Animal Care's
administration of this existing licensing restriction by requiring
affirmative disclosure of such violations at the time of application.
On the proposed topic of strengthening existing prohibitions for
persons with suspended or revoked licenses, including restricting
individuals whose licenses have been suspended or revoked from working
for other regulated entities, the majority of commenters expressed
broad support for this proposal. Specific comments related to this
topic included requiring business owners to provide proof of identity
and employee lists to APHIS on an annual basis, creating a grading
system for violations and their consequences, and increasing publicly
available data related to those with violations related to animal
mistreatment or neglect. We appreciate these comments and have set
forth specific provisions for public comment in this proposed rule.
Other Concerns
Many commenters expressed a general criticism of current USDA
enforcement of the AWA and regulations. Such criticism often also
extended to the lack of transparency of documentation that is available
to the public regarding alleged AWA violators. Other concerns mentioned
by commenters--some of which fell outside the scope of the ANPR--
included the use of unannounced inspections for licensees (which some
commenters cited as overly burdensome and time-constraining); support
for streamlining procedures for denying, terminating, and summarily
suspending a license; support for preventing individuals with a history
of noncompliance from using alternate names to apply for new licenses
or otherwise circumventing ownership laws; specific concerns related to
the care of an elephant named ``Nosey''; and requests for animal
shelters and rescues to be subject to the same regulations as USDA-
licensed breeders.
Based on our review of the ANPR comments, information submitted by
stakeholders, and our own experience with administering AWA
regulations, we are now proposing to amend the regulations concerning
licensing. Each of the proposed changes is discussed in detail below.
Definitions
We propose to amend Sec. 1.1 of the regulations, ``Definitions,''
by removing the term and definition for AC Regional Director, because
Animal Care is no longer divided up into regions and this title and
position have changed. References to the AC Regional Director, or to a
regional office, would be replaced with references to the Animal Care
Deputy Administrator or the appropriate Animal Care office,
respectively.
[[Page 10725]]
We further propose to amend the definition for business hours,
which are the hours during which licensees must allow APHIS officials
access to their places of business and their facilities, animals, and
records to inspect for compliance with the AWA and regulations.
Currently, the regulations define business hours to mean a reasonable
number of hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except for legal Federal holidays, each week of the year, during which
such inspections may be made. However, we have observed a number of
licensees who are not available a reasonable number of hours during
these times because they have full-time employment elsewhere during the
weekdays or because they operate at reduced hours on weekdays to allow
customers to visit their place of business on the weekends. To reflect
these business practices, and to ensure that such licensees are able to
make their place of business and facilities, animals, and records
available for inspection at all reasonable times, as required by the
Act, we are proposing to remove the words ``Monday through Friday,
except for legal Federal holidays'' from the definition of business
hours. APHIS will continue to coordinate with licensees and registrants
who do not maintain regular public business hours to establish optimal
times for inspection, as necessary.
Licensing Requirements
We propose to amend Sec. 2.1 of the regulations, ``Requirements
and application.'' We would revise some of the phrasing in paragraph
(a)(1) for clarity and would remove the phrases ``intending to'' or
``intends to'' operate where they appear in this paragraph. These
revisions would aim to prevent the issuance of licenses to those who do
not operate as bona fide exhibitors (i.e., they never exhibit their
animals to the public for compensation), but become licensed to
circumvent State laws restricting animal ownership.
We also would update the information required for license
applications, which would include:
The name of the person applying for the license;
A valid mailing address for the applicant;
A valid address for all premises, facilities, or locations
where animals, facilities, equipment, and records are held, kept or
maintained;
The anticipated maximum number of animals on hand at any
one single point in time during that period of licensure;
The anticipated type of animals to be owned, held,
maintained, sold, or exhibited, including those animals leased, during
the 3-year period of licensure; and, if the anticipated type of animals
includes exotic or wild animals, information and records demonstrating
that the applicant has adequate knowledge of and experience with of
those animals (such as experience carefully handling the animals in a
manner that does not cause behavior stress, physical harm or
unnecessary discomfort, using methods to train, work, and handle the
animals that do not involve physical abuse, providing humane husbandry,
care, and housing for the animals, and, if used for public exhibition,
experience handling the animal so there is minimal risk of harm to the
animal and the public, and consideration of the needs for performing
animals, young or immature animals, and animals that are fed by the
public);
If the person is seeking a license as an exhibitor,
whether the person intends to exhibit any animal at any location other
than the person's approved site(s); and
The disclosure of any plea of nolo contendere (no contest)
or finding of violation of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations
pertaining to animal cruelty or the transportation, ownership, neglect,
or welfare of animals.
We would amend paragraph (a)(2) to remove outdated language
pertaining to applicants who operate businesses in more than one State.
We also would revise language regarding license fees to remove
references to fee tables; instead, completed applications would include
a flat $120 license fee to be submitted to the appropriate Animal Care
office.
Paragraph (b) currently states the requirement that no person shall
have more than one license. We would expand this paragraph to combine
it with existing restrictions on the issuance of licenses from existing
Sec. 2.5(d), which provide that licenses are issued to specific
persons for specific premises and do not transfer upon change of
ownership, nor are they valid at a different location. We would expand
these restrictions to make clear that licenses are issued to specific
persons, and for specific activities, animals, and approved sites, and
that licenses are not valid upon changes of ownership, locations,
activities, or animals. New licenses would have to be obtained in the
event of such changes. Any changes to a licensee's name, address,
management, substantial control or ownership of his/her business or
operation, locations, activities, and number or type of animals
described in proposed paragraph (b)(2) would have to be reported to
APHIS Animal Care no fewer than 90 days before such changes take
effect. Any person who is subject to the regulations and who intends to
exhibit any animal at any location other than the person's approved
site (such as circuses and traveling educational exhibits or animal
acts) would have to provide that information on his/her application
form in accordance with paragraph (a) of Sec. 2.1 (as discussed above)
and submit written itineraries in accordance with Sec. 2.126. If the
application did not provide such information, then a new application
would have to be submitted and a new license obtained before exhibiting
at locations other than the person's approved site.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2) would state that licenses authorize
increments of 50 animals on hand at any single point in time during the
period of licensure, and that licensees must obtain a new license
before any change resulting in more than the authorized number of
animals on hand at any single point in time. For example, a dog breeder
with 30-40 breeding female dogs should apply for a license to hold 100
dogs and demonstrate compliance to house 100 dogs (adults and puppies)
to accommodate anticipated births from the dogs. Since the breeder
business model is predicated on selling puppies at or shortly after 8-
weeks of age, the applicant would have to demonstrate the ability to
safely handle, house, and care for up to 100 dogs (adult and puppies)
at the time of pre-license inspection. The pre-license demonstration of
compliance would take into account the species of dog, the number of
breeding female dogs, the projected litter size, and the facility's
business model for selling and placing puppies and adult dogs who are
no longer used for breeding purposes. Paragraph (b)(2) would also state
that licenses authorize the use of animals by subpart A through F in
part 3, except that, for subparts D and F, licenses separately
authorize the use of each of the following groups of animals: (1) Group
5 and 6 nonhuman primates, (2) big cats or large felids (lions, tigers,
leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, cougars, and any hybrid cross thereof),
(3) wolves, (4) bears, and (5) mega-herbivores (elephants,
rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, and giraffes). These groups of animals
would have to be separately authorized because these animals are
dangerous and have unique regulatory and care needs. Licensees would
also be required to obtain a new license before using any animals
beyond
[[Page 10726]]
those animals authorized for use under the existing license for
activities for which a license is required. For example, if an
applicant obtained a 3-year license after demonstrating compliance with
the regulations in part 2 and the standards pertaining to dogs and cats
(subpart A of part 3), but later decides that he or she wishes to also
acquire and use rabbits for activities that require a license, that
person would need to apply for a new license and demonstrate compliance
with all applicable regulations and standards, including the standards
pertaining to dogs, cats, and rabbits (subparts A and C of part 3), and
obtain a new license, before using the rabbits for such activities.
Paragraph (c)(2) would be amended, with existing language related
to application, initial, and renewal license fees removed and replaced
with the proposed flat license fee of $120 and corresponding payment
information. Similarly, in paragraph (d) we propose to remove language
regarding license renewals and fees, since these would no longer be in
effect under this proposal. Finally, we propose to redesignate
paragraph (e) as paragraph (d).
We propose to amend Sec. 2.2 of the regulations, ``Acknowledgement
of regulations and standards,'' by removing language related to initial
and renewal license applications, since these would no longer be in
effect under the current proposal. We also would clarify that, upon
request, a license applicant would receive a copy of the Act and the
regulations and standards from Animal Care, which are also available
for public review on the internet.\2\ We are proposing to make this
change because we have found that the vast majority of applicants and
licensees have access to the internet, and it is costly to the Agency
to send paper copies of the regulations and standards to them by postal
mail. If an applicant or licensee would like to receive a paper copy,
however, we stand ready to send one to them upon request. All license
applicants would continue to be required to review the regulations and
standards and agree to comply with them by signing the application form
before a license would be issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/AC_BlueBook_AWA_FINAL_2017_508comp.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We propose to amend Sec. 2.3 of the regulations, ``Demonstration
of compliance with standards and regulations,'' by adding that the
applicant must agree to comply with the Act and the regulations and
standards before APHIS will issue a license. In addition, we propose to
refine some of the existing language in this section. In paragraph (b),
we would clarify that no license will be issued until the license
applicant demonstrates that he or she is in full compliance with the
Act and the regulations and standards upon inspection. We also would
add provisions to explain that all applicants would be granted up to
three inspections within a 60-day period to demonstrate compliance with
the Act and regulations, and, should applicants fail to demonstrate
compliance during the third pre-license inspection, providing
applicants with the opportunity to appeal the findings of such
inspection to the Deputy Administrator within 7 days of receiving the
report. Should APHIS reject any appeal, APHIS would notify the
applicant of the Agency's denial of the license application. Within 30
days of receiving such notice, an applicant may request a hearing to
contest the Agency's denial of the license application.
Additionally, an applicant who holds a valid license at the time he
or she submitted the application that has been denied, and who
submitted a timely appeal of the inspection findings from the third
pre-license inspection, would be able to request an expedited hearing
before an administrative law judge (ALJ), and the valid license would
remain in effect until the ALJ issues his or her initial decision.
Specifics of the process for requesting a hearing would be further
described in Sec. 2.11(b). The provisions described in the new Sec.
2.11(b) are intended to afford adequate constitutionally mandated due
process protections to current license holders, while maintaining
proper regard for the policy of Congress to insure the humane care and
treatment of covered animals. We invite public comment on the proposed
licensing provisions and any suggested alternatives.
We propose to amend Sec. 2.5 of the regulations, ``Duration of
license and termination of license.'' In paragraph (a), we would state
that licenses issued under part 2 will be valid and effective for a
period of 3 years unless certain circumstances arise. Consistent with
the current regulations, a license would not be valid if it has been
revoked or suspended pursuant to section 19 of the Act or the license
is voluntarily terminated upon request of the licensee, in writing, to
the Deputy Administrator. Also in paragraph (a), we would retain the
current restriction that a license is valid unless it has expired,
while proposing to allow for the issuance of temporary licenses under
certain conditions. Specifically, the conditions for the issuance of a
temporary license under proposed paragraph (a)(3)(i) would be for
applicants who submit the appropriate application form before the
expiration date of a preceding license, and for the applicant to have
had no noncompliances with the Act or regulations documented on an
inspection report during the preceding period of licensure. To ensure
that applicants can take full advantage of the three pre-licensing
inspections provided for in Sec. 2.3(b) to demonstrate compliance with
the regulations and standards, current licensees will be encouraged to
apply 4 months prior to the expiration of their license. In proposed
paragraph (a)(3)(ii), we would provide that a license would remain
valid and in effect if an applicant meets the criteria in Sec.
2.11(b)(2), until the ALJ issues his or her initial decision involving
the denial of a license application. Finally, we would make clear in
paragraph (a)(4) that there will not be a refund of the licensing fee
if a license is denied, terminated, suspended, or revoked prior to its
expiration date.
We would remove existing paragraph (b) as it relates to license
renewals and annual fees that would no longer be in effect under the
current proposal. We would then redesignate paragraph (c) as paragraph
(b). We would remove existing paragraph (d), since its language would
be included in requirements under proposed Sec. 2.1, paragraph (b)(1).
We would then redesignate paragraph (e) as paragraph (c).
We propose to remove and reserve Sec. Sec. 2.6, 2.7, and 2.8. The
information and fee tables related to initial and annual license fees
and annual license reports contained under existing Sec. Sec. 2.6 and
2.7 would no longer be applicable under the current proposal. As noted
above, the information contained in existing Sec. 2.8 related to
notification of change of name, address, control, or ownership of
business would be included under provisions in proposed Sec. 2.1(b).
We propose to amend Sec. 2.9, ``Officers, agents, and employees of
licensees whose licenses have been suspended or revoked.'' In the
description of a person who has been or is an officer, agent, or
employee of a licensee and who was responsible for or participated in a
violation upon which an order of suspension or revocation was based, we
would replace ``a violation'' with ``activities.'' This change would
make clear that this prohibition applies to licensees whose licenses
have been suspended or revoked through consent decisions and orders
that do not include findings of violations and other similar
[[Page 10727]]
settlement agreements. We also would add that such a person would not
only be prohibited from obtaining a license as a dealer or exhibitor,
but would also be prohibited from being registered as a carrier,
intermediate handler, exhibitor, or research facility within the period
during which the order of suspension or revocation is in effect.
We propose to amend Sec. 2.10, ``Licensees whose licenses have
been suspended or revoked.'' We would add language in paragraphs (a),
(b), and (c) to require that persons with suspended or revoked licenses
shall not be registered as an exhibitor, research facility, carrier, or
intermediate handler, in addition to not being licensed, within the
period during which the order of suspension or revocation is in effect.
In paragraph (c), we would add that any person whose license has been
suspended or revoked shall not shall not buy, sell, transport, exhibit,
or deliver for transportation, any animal during the period of
suspension or revocation under any circumstances, whether on behalf of
themselves or another. In paragraph (a), we would replace ``AC Regional
Director'' with ``Deputy Administrator,'' consistent with our proposal
to update these terms.
We propose to amend Sec. 2.11, ``Denial of initial license
application.'' We would remove the word ``initial'' from the section
heading in light of the proposed application process for fixed-term
licenses. We also would adjust the section reference in paragraph
(a)(1) to reflect the change in location of fee information (from
existing Sec. 2.6 to proposed Sec. 2.1), and would add a new
paragraph (a)(4) to include the denial of a license application to any
applicant who was an officer, agent, or employee of a licensee whose
license has been suspended or revoked, as set forth in Sec. 2.9. We
would then redesignate existing paragraphs (a)(4) through (6) as (a)(5)
through (7). In proposed paragraph (a)(5), we also would conform the
length of time during which an application can be denied due to a nolo
contendere (no contest) plea or finding of a violation of any Federal,
State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to animal cruelty with
the proposed 3-year period of licensure. We would clarify in paragraph
(a)(2) that a license will not be issued to any applicant who is not in
compliance with the Act (in addition to the regulations and standards)
and in paragraph (d) that no license will be issued under circumstances
that the Administrator determines would circumvent any order,
stipulation, or settlement agreement suspending, revoking, terminating,
or denying a license or disqualifying a person from engaging in
activities under the Act.
In proposed paragraph (b), we would add provisions to outline the
process through which an applicant whose license application has been
denied may request an expedited hearing before an administrative law
judge. This process would be available to applicants who hold a valid
license at the time they submitted a new license application, submitted
the new license application no fewer than 90 days prior to the
expiration of the valid license, and who submitted a timely appeal
contesting the finding(s) from the third pre-license inspection.
Applicants meeting these criteria would receive an expedited hearing no
later than 30 days after receipt of the hearing request. Furthermore,
the ALJ must issue his or her initial decision within 30 days of the
hearing. The license the applicant held at the time he or she submitted
the new license application would remain valid and in effect until the
ALJ issued his or her initial decision. In the event the ALJ issued a
decision affirming the Agency's denial of the license application, the
license would terminate immediately and the applicant would not be
eligible for any temporary license if he or she elected to appeal the
ALJ's initial decision.
We propose to add a new Sec. 2.13, ``Appeal of Inspection
Report,'' to explain the process by which a licensee or registrant may
appeal the findings of an inspection report. To receive consideration,
the appeal must be received by the Deputy Administrator within 21 days
of the date the licensee or registration received the inspection report
and must contain a written statement contesting the inspection findings
and include any documentation or other information in support of the
appeal.
We propose to amend Sec. 2.38, ``Miscellaneous,'' by eliminating
the statement that APHIS will publish lists of research facilities in
the Federal Register. APHIS is undertaking this change to reflect both
current business practices of publishing information using public
websites for ease of access, and the Agency's practice of maintaining
and regularly updating a list of registered research facilities on the
APHIS website. Consistent with the existing provision, interested
parties may continue to request the list from the Deputy Administrator.
We propose to amend Sec. 2.127, ``Publication of names of persons
subject to the provisions of this part,'' by replacing the word
``names'' in the title with the word ``lists,'' and by removing the
statement that the list will be published in the Federal Register. As
noted above, APHIS is undertaking this change to reflect current
business practices of publishing information on its website, including
a list of persons who are licensed and registered with APHIS under the
AWA. Consistent with the existing provision, interested parties may
continue to request the list from the Deputy Administrator.
Importation of Live Dogs
We are proposing several clarifying edits to the importation of
live dog regulations for consistency and conformance with the Act. We
propose to amend Sec. 2.150, ``Import permit,'' by removing the words
``research, or veterinary treatment'' in paragraph (a) and adding the
words ``resale for'' before the words ``research purposes'' in
paragraph (c)(8). We would also clarify Sec. 2.151,
``Certifications,'' by removing the words ``research, or veterinary
treatment'' in paragraph (a), adding the words ``resale for'' before
the words ``use in research'' in the first sentence of paragraph
(b)(1), and adding the words ``and subsequent resale'' in the
discussion of veterinary treatment by a licensed veterinarian in
paragraph (b)(2). These changes would harmonize the regulations with
the Act and make clear that dogs intended for resale for research
purposes, or dogs intended for resale following veterinary treatment,
must be imported with an import permit and accompanying certifications,
except as provided in Sec. 2.151(b).
We would also amend Sec. 2.153 by adding the words ``or the Act''
immediately after the words ``this subpart.'' We are proposing this
change to make clear that the removal and seizure procedures in this
section apply to noncompliance with the Act as well as the regulations.
Finally, for consistency with the AWA and regulations, we would
remove the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' everywhere
they appear in the import of live dogs regulations and replace them
with the word ``States,'' which is defined in part 1 to mean ``a State
of the United States, the District of Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or any other territory
or possession of the United States.'' This change would make clear that
no import permit is required when transporting dogs within the United
States.
Animal Health and Husbandry Standards
In addition to the licensing revisions, we considered making
changes to requirements in the animal health and
[[Page 10728]]
husbandry standards in subpart A of part 3 that would better align the
regulations with standards of humane animal treatment established under
the AWA. One option under consideration was to revise various
provisions pertaining to the care of dogs, particularly in relation to
housing and access to water, among other things. For example, current
regulations require that dogs that do not have continual access to
water must be offered water not less than twice daily for at least 1
hour each time. Although lack of continual access to water is generally
not a risk to healthy dogs, when other stress factors are present (e.g.
ill, infirm, pregnant, or young dogs, and/or exposure to temperature
extremes), lack of access to water may escalate health consequences. We
contemplated adding a provision that would account for the unique
watering needs for certain dogs, short of requiring that the animals
have 24-hour access to clean, drinkable water to promote their health
and well-being. However, in examining the issues and accounting for the
animal health and well-being factors involved, we determined that the
most prudent approach would be to include such a provision requiring
all dogs to have 24-hour access to water. In addition, we are proposing
specific veterinary care requirements for dogs. It is our expectation
that adding this would strengthen arrangements between licensees and
registrants and their attending veterinarians and enhance preventative
and ongoing care for dogs, and, coupled with continual access to
water--by which we mean constant, uninterrupted access at all times--
would result in the greatest benefit to health and well-being of dogs.
Accordingly, we propose to revise Sec. 3.10 to add a provision that
requires dogs to have continual access to potable water, unless
restricted by the attending veterinarian.
We also propose to amend the veterinary care requirements for dogs
in a new Sec. 3.13. We would expand existing regulations in subpart D
requiring dealers and exhibitors to establish and maintain an adequate
program of veterinary care (PVC) for regulated animals. Proposed Sec.
3.13 would require that each dealer, exhibitor, and research facility
must follow an appropriate PVC for dogs that is developed, documented
in writing, and signed by an attending veterinarian, that includes
annual, hands-on veterinary exams for adult dogs by the attending
veterinarian and addresses husbandry issues for hair coat, toenails,
teeth, skin, and ears. These annual veterinary exams would be required
in addition to existing veterinary care requirements that provide for
regularly scheduled visits by the attending veterinarian to premises
where animals are kept to ensure the adequacy of animal care and use.
Dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities would be required to keep
and maintain the written program and to make it available for
inspection by APHIS. Other proposed provisions would require
vaccinations--unless contraindicated for health reasons or unless
otherwise required by a research protocol approved by the Institutional
Animal Care and Use Committee at research facilities--for contagious
and deadly diseases of dogs (including rabies, parvovirus, and
distemper), appropriate preventative care and treatment, and
recordkeeping requirements for veterinary and preventive care that the
dogs receive.
The expanded PVC would guide facilities with dogs in practicing a
minimum level of acceptable husbandry and in maintaining records of
preventative care and the treatment of ill or injured dogs. Annual
hands-on physical exams by the attending veterinarian would allow for
evaluation of factors that could affect the dogs' health, well-being,
and ability to reproduce. Health problems that are detected early could
receive timely and appropriate veterinary care. A required husbandry
program would help ensure the overall health of adult dogs and puppies,
thereby preventing avoidable disease, illness, and injury. Required
medical records would help facilities keep track of incidents,
treatments and progress of care, and would also allow facilities to
track individual health trends and the frequency of illnesses and
injuries for the kennel as a whole.
Miscellaneous
Throughout parts 1, 2, and 3, we propose to update any and all
references to ``AC Regional Director'' with ``Deputy Administrator'' to
more accurately reflect the current position title in use. Similarly,
we propose to update any and all references to ``regional offices''
with the appropriate Animal Care office. Animal Care maintains
information regarding its offices and services on the APHIS website,
and directs callers to the appropriate Animal Care office or person who
is best able to assist them. In addition, APHIS maintains a website to
assist the public with reaching the appropriate point of contact for
each program area.\3\ These interactive services will continue to
ensure individuals have information about Animal Care's offices and
services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/banner/contactus/sa_animal_welfare and https://www.usda.gov/ask-expert.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also propose to correct minor typographical errors in Sec. Sec.
2.38, 3.61, 3.78, and 3.110. We would replace an erroneous period with
a comma in Sec. 2.38(g)(1), correct the spelling of ``species'' in
Sec. 3.61(b), correct the spelling of ``words'' in Sec. 3.61(f),
replace an unintended zero with the letter ``O'' in Sec. 3.78, and
remove an inadvertently repetitive phrase in Sec. 3.110(a). Finally,
we propose to correct erroneous citations to the health certificate
requirements that appear in three places in the regulations. Instead of
listing Sec. 2.78 as the section containing the health certificate
requirements, Sec. Sec. 2.75 and 2.77 erroneously list the section as
Sec. 2.79. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
This proposed rule has been determined to be significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget. This proposed rule is expected to
be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action. Details on the estimated
costs of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic
analysis.
We have prepared an economic analysis for this rule. The economic
analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis, as required by Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, which direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety
effects, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance
of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. The economic analysis
also provides an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that examines
the potential economic effects of this rule on small entities, as
required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The economic analysis is
summarized below. Copies of the full analysis are available by
contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or
on the Regulations.gov website (see ADDRESSES above for instructions
for accessing Regulations.gov).
Based on the information we have thus far, the Agency does not
believe that adoption of this proposed rule would result in any
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities.
However, we do not currently have all of the data necessary
[[Page 10729]]
for a comprehensive analysis of the effects of this proposed rule on
small entities. Therefore, we are inviting comments on potential
effects. In particular, we are interested in determining the number and
kind of small entities that may incur benefits or costs from the
implementation of this proposed rule.
APHIS is proposing revisions to the licensing requirements to
promote compliance with the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), as well as
strengthen existing safeguards that prevent individuals and businesses
that are unfit to hold a license from obtaining a license or from
working with regulated animals. Licensees would be required to
affirmatively demonstrate compliance and pay the associated license fee
once every 3 years rather than renew their certification of regulatory
compliance every year. In addition, the fee would be changed to a flat
rate rather than a set of tiered rates. This action would promote AWA
compliance by requiring that regulated businesses affirmatively
demonstrate regulatory compliance when applying for or renewing a
license. It would reduce the license fee for most regulated entities
and would reduce the compliance paperwork burden for all licensees.
In addition, there would be cost savings in terms of the reduced
time (clerical work) needed to complete and submit initial and renewal
license applications. As shown in table 3 of the full analysis, the
combined fee and clerical work cost savings would range between about
$633,000 and $2.1 million.
APHIS considered several alternatives in developing various aspects
of the proposed rule. Regarding the types of animals that would trigger
the need for a new license, APHIS considered requiring a new license
for all exotic or wild animal changes, but rejected this alternative
because it would result in unnecessary renewals (e.g., gerbils can be
exotic/wild). Instead, APHIS proposes to require a new license for
types of animals that are dangerous and have unique regulatory and care
needs.
Regarding the number of animals that would trigger the need for a
new license, APHIS considered a range of from 20 to 100, but settled on
50 animals after reviewing animal inventory counts at regulated
facilities, considering the potential burden to licensees who add new
animals and to the agency in its administration of the licensing
program, and animal welfare benefits. If APHIS were to set the
threshold number too low, businesses would need to apply for licenses
frequently with little animal welfare benefit, and animal welfare risks
may not be acceptable if the number were too high.
For the proposed licensing fees, APHIS found continuing to use a
tiered approach for setting fees would not allow us to realize the
efficiencies to be gained through the use of a flat fee. This is
because some facilities have small numbers of animals and derive
significant income from their regulated activities, while other
facilities can have large numbers of animals and derive modest income
from their regulated activities. Also, APHIS noted the fact that the
fees are not intended to be user fees for inspections.
With respect to automatic license termination following two or more
attempted inspections during the period of licensure, APHIS considered
requiring immediate termination but decided in favor of allowing the
licensee the opportunity to first present evidence in defense. Finally,
APHIS also considered different time frames for the fixed-term license
(e.g., 4 or 5 years) and settled on 3 years based on our experience
administering the AWA.
APHIS is also proposing to amend the veterinary care requirements
for dogs that are under the care of entities covered by the AWA.
Facilities with dogs would be required to have an expanded program of
veterinary care (PVC) that includes annual, hands-on veterinary exams
for adult dogs by the attending veterinarian and addresses husbandry
issues for hair coat, toenails, teeth, skin, and ears. Facilities would
also be required to create and maintain medical records of preventative
health care measures and the treatment of ill and injured dogs.
The expanded PVC would guide the facilities in practicing a minimum
level of acceptable husbandry and in maintaining records of
preventative care and the treatment of ill or injured dogs. Annual
hands-on physical exams by the attending veterinarian would allow for
evaluation of factors that could affect the dogs' health, well-being,
and ability to reproduce. Health problems that are detected early could
receive timely and appropriate veterinary care. A required husbandry
program would help ensure the overall health of adult dogs and puppies,
thereby preventing avoidable disease, illness, and injury. Required
medical records would help facilities keep track of incidents,
treatments and progress of care. They also allow facilities to track
individual health trends and the frequency of illnesses and injuries
for the kennel as a whole.
The total industry cost of complying with this requirement is
estimated to be between $284,000 and $948,000. Additionally, expanding
a PVC form would require time for the attending veterinarian to
complete. However, the PVC only has to be written once unless changes
are made later. Most PVCs used by an attending veterinarian would be
very similar, facility-to-facility. We estimate the cost of developing
a new, fully compliant PVC would be about $150 per facility. Once a
fully compliant PVC has been developed, we estimate the cost of having
the attending veterinarian update and make adjustments to it as needed,
and of discussing any PVC changes with the licensee during the annual
premises visit would be about $50 per facility.
It would take operators time to create and maintain medical records
for any dogs that become ill or injured, and to keep preventative
health records. The incremental industry cost of keeping medical
records for ill or injured dogs would be about $112,000 per year. The
incremental industry cost of keeping preventive records would be about
$247,300.
This proposed rule would also amend the AWA standard for dogs with
respect to access to clean, drinkable water. The current regulations
state that if potable water is not continually available to a
facility's dogs, it must be offered as often as necessary to ensure the
animal's health and well-being, and not less than twice daily for at
least 1 hour each time, unless restricted by the attending
veterinarian. The proposed standard would require that facilities make
potable water continually available. We estimate that between 50 and 70
percent of regulated facilities provide 24-hour access to water. Thirty
to 50 percent of those licensees and registrants not providing 24-hour
access to water would likely bear plumbing and labor costs to ensure
such access. We estimate that the proposed water access requirements
for facilities having dogs would result in one-time costs expected to
range from $1,021,000 to $2,460,000. It is possible that some such
facilities could provide 24-hour access to clean, drinkable water using
receptacles such as pans and bowls. Some of the factors that may
influence whether water bowls are a feasible option for compliance at a
given facility may include the size of the facility, number and type of
dogs, the type, size, and configuration of water bowls used, and the
availability of staff to refill and monitor the bowls, among other
things. We welcome public comment that would enable us to better
estimate these costs.
With regard to the proposed veterinary care requirements, APHIS
considered not including the provision to require that the dogs have
24-hour
[[Page 10730]]
access to clean, drinkable water. However, the Agency determined that
this requirement is important for animal welfare and should be a part
of this proposed rule.
All businesses covered under the AWA would be affected by the
proposed licensing requirements, including animal dealers, exhibitors,
retail pet stores, brokers, and breeders. The number of these entities
varies from year to year, but has tended to be around 6,000 in recent
years. Based on reported revenue data and Small Business Administration
small-entity standards, the majority of the entities affected by this
rule can be considered small. About one-half of these businesses are
licensees and registrants with dogs, including about 2,240 dog breeder
facilities.
The proposed licensing requirements would result in annual cost
savings expected to range from about $633,000 to $2,115,000. The
proposed veterinary care requirements for facilities having dogs would
result in annual costs ranging from about $841,200 to about $1,505,200,
and the proposed water access requirement for these facilities would
result in annual costs ranging from about $1,020,800 to $2,460,000. Net
costs are therefore expected to range from annual cost savings of
$253,000 (the higher licensing cost savings estimate plus the lower
veterinary care and water access cost estimates) to annual costs of
$3,331,950 (the lower licensing cost savings estimate plus the higher
veterinary care and water access cost estimates). Based on the costs
and in accordance with guidance on complying with Executive Order
13771, the single primary estimate of the costs of this proposed rule
is $1,539,000, the mid-point estimate of net costs annualized in
perpetuity using a 7 percent discount rate. We seek comments on our
regulatory analysis, including on the assumptions underlying our
estimates. If you have an alternative estimate, please provide any
supporting documents or data.
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 2 CFR chapter IV.)
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect.
The Act provides administrative procedures which must be exhausted
prior to a judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Executive Order 13175
This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. The review reveals that this rule will not have
substantial and direct effects on Tribal Governments and will not have
significant Tribal implications.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), some of the information collection
requirements included in this proposed rule have been approved under
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number 0579-0036. The new
information collection requirements included in this proposed rule have
been submitted as a new information collection for approval to OMB.
Please send comments on the Information Collection Request (ICR) to
OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to
oira_submissions@omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS,
Washington, DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket
No. APHIS-2017-0062. Please send a copy of your comments to USDA, using
one of the methods described under ADDRESSES at the beginning of this
document.
We are proposing to amend the licensing requirements under the AWA
regulations and strengthen the veterinary care standards for regulated
dogs. The amendments include, but are not limited to, the following new
information collection requirements: Use of a new fixed-term license
application for dealers and exhibitors that expires after 3 years, at
which time they would be required to demonstrate compliance before
obtaining another fixed-term license; requiring license applicants to
disclose any animal cruelty convictions or others violations of
Federal, State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to animals, to
assess their fitness for licensure; and enhancing adequate veterinary
care for dogs, including the maintenance of medical records. The
proposed license application would replace an existing initial license
application and an annual license renewal application. We anticipate
that the proposed license application would take the same amount of
time to complete as the existing applications, but would only be
required every 3 years, instead of an annual renewal. The proposed rule
would also require licensees and registrants who hold dogs to maintain
medical records on the preventative care provided to dogs, and to track
medical conditions and treatment for ill and injured dogs. The use of
these activities will help ensure that dealers, exhibitors, and
operators of auction sales demonstrate compliance with the applicable
standards in 9 CFR part 3, providing for the humane handling, care,
treatment, and transportation of animals under the AWA.
We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection requirements.
These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 0.08 hours per response.
Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities; not-for-
profit institutions; farms; and State, local, and Tribal governments.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 5,112.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 75.
Estimated annual number of responses: 382,148.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 29,720 hours.
(Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the
product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the estimate of
burden.)
Copies of this information collection may be viewed on the
Regulations.gov website or in our reading room. (A link to
Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the
reading room are provided under the heading ADDRESSES at the beginning
of this proposed rule.) Copies can also be obtained from Ms. Kimberly
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection
[[Page 10731]]
Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483. APHIS will respond to any ICR-related
comments in the final rule. All comments will also become a matter of
public record.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the internet
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.
List of Subjects
9 CFR Parts 1 and 2
Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Research.
9 CFR Part 3
Animal welfare, Marine mammals, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Research, Transportation.
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and 3 as
follows:
PART 1--DEFINITION OF TERMS
0
1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
0
2. Section 1.1 is amended by removing the definition for AC Regional
Director and revising the definition for Business hours to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Business hours means a reasonable number of hours between 7 a.m.
and 7 p.m. each week of the year, during which inspections by APHIS may
be made.
* * * * *
PART 2--REGULATIONS
0
3. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
0
4. Section 2.1 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), (b), and (c);
0
b. By removing paragraph (d) and redesignating paragraph (e) as
paragraph (d); and
0
c. By revising newly redesignated paragraph (d).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 2.1 Requirements and application.
(a)(1) No person shall operate as a dealer, exhibitor, or operator
of an auction sale, without a valid license, except persons who are
exempt from the licensing requirements under paragraph (a)(3) of this
section. A person must be 18 years of age or older to obtain a license.
A person seeking a license shall apply on a form which will be
furnished by the Deputy Administrator. The applicant shall provide the
information requested on the application form, including, but not
limited to:
(i) The name of the person applying for the license;
(ii) A valid mailing address through which the applicant can be
reached at all times;
(iii) A valid address for all premises, facilities, or locations
where animals, animal facilities, equipment, and records are held,
kept, or maintained;
(iv) The anticipated maximum number of animals on hand at any one
time during the period of licensure;
(v) The anticipated type of animals to be owned, held, maintained,
sold, or exhibited, including those animals leased, during the period
of licensure, and if the anticipated type of animals includes exotic or
wild animals, information and records demonstrating that the applicant
has adequate knowledge of and experience with those animals;
(vi) If the person is seeking a license as an exhibitor, whether
the person intends to exhibit any animal at any location other than the
person's location(s) listed pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this
section; and
(vii) Disclosure of any plea of nolo contendere (no contest) or
finding of violation of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations
pertaining to animal cruelty or the transportation, ownership, neglect,
or welfare of animals.
(2) The completed application form, along with a $120 license fee,
shall be submitted to the appropriate Animal Care office.
* * * * *
(b)(1) No person shall have more than one license. Licenses are
issued to specific persons, and are issued for specific activities,
animals, and approved sites. Licenses are not valid upon change of
ownership, location, activities, or animals, and a new license must be
obtained. A licensee shall notify Animal Care no fewer than 90 days,
and obtain a new license, before any change in the name, address,
management, substantial control or ownership of his business or
operation, locations, activities, and number or type of animals
described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Any person who is
subject to the regulations in this subchapter and who intends to
exhibit any animal at any location other than the person's approved
site must provide that information on their application form in
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section and submit written
itineraries in accordance with Sec. 2.126.
(2) Licenses authorize a specific number and specific type(s) of
animals, as follows:
(i) Licenses authorize increments of 50 animals on hand at any
single point in time during the period of licensure. A licensee must
obtain a new license before any change resulting in more than the
authorized number of animals on hand at any single point in time during
the period of licensure.
(ii) Licenses authorize the use of animals subject to subparts A
through F in part 3 of this subchapter, except that, for animals
subject to subparts D and F, licenses must specifically authorize the
use of each of the following groups of animals: Group 5 and 6 nonhuman
primates, big cats or large felids (lions, tigers, leopards, cheetahs,
jaguars, cougars, and any hybrid cross thereof), wolves, bears, and
mega-herbivores (elephants, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, and
giraffes). A licensee must obtain a new license before using any animal
beyond those animals authorized under the existing license.
(c) A license will be issued to any applicant, except as provided
in Sec. Sec. 2.9 through 2.11, when:
(1) The applicant has met the requirements of this section and
Sec. Sec. 2.2 and 2.3; and
(2) The applicant has paid a $120 license fee to the appropriate
Animal Care office. The applicant may pay the fee by certified check,
cashier's check, personal check, money order, or credit card. An
applicant whose check is returned by a bank will be charged a fee of
$20 for each returned check. If an applicant's check is returned,
subsequent fees must be paid by certified check, cashier's check, or
money order.
(d) The failure of any person to comply with any provision of the
Act, or any of the provisions of the regulations or standards in this
subchapter, shall constitute grounds for denial of a license or for its
suspension or revocation by the Secretary, as provided in the Act.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 2.2 is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 10732]]
Sec. 2.2 Acknowledgement of regulations and standards.
Animal Care will supply a copy of the Act and the regulations and
standards to an applicant upon request. Signing the application form is
an acknowledgement that the applicant has reviewed the Act and the
regulations and standards and agrees to comply with them.
0
6. Section 2.3 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.3 Demonstration of compliance with standards and regulations.
(a) Each applicant for a license must demonstrate that his or her
location(s) and any animals, facilities, vehicles, equipment, or other
locations used or intended for use in the business comply with the Act
and the regulations and standards set forth in parts 2 and 3 of this
subchapter. Each applicant must make his or her animals, locations,
facilities, vehicles, equipment, and records available for inspection
during business hours and at other times mutually agreeable to the
applicant and APHIS, to ascertain the applicant's compliance with the
Act and the regulations and standards.
(b) Each applicant for a license must be inspected by APHIS and
demonstrate compliance with the Act and the regulations and standards,
as required in paragraph (a) of this section, before APHIS will issue a
license. If the first inspection reveals that the applicant's animals,
premises, facilities, vehicles, equipment, locations, or records do not
meet the applicable requirements of this subchapter, APHIS will advise
the applicant of existing deficiencies and the corrective measures that
must be completed to come into compliance with the regulations and
standards. An applicant who fails the first inspection may request up
to two more inspections by APHIS to demonstrate his or her compliance
with the Act and the regulations and standards. The applicant must
request the second inspection, and if applicable, the third inspection,
within 60 days following the first inspection.
(c) Any applicant who fails the third and final pre-license
inspection may appeal all or part of the inspection findings to the
Deputy Administrator. To appeal, the applicant must send a written
statement contesting the inspection finding(s) and include any
documentation or other information in support of the appeal. To receive
consideration, the appeal must be received by the Deputy Administrator
within 7 days of the date the applicant received the third pre-license
inspection report. Within 7 days of receiving a timely appeal, the
Deputy Administrator will issue a written response to notify the
applicant whether APHIS will issue a license or deny the application.
(d) If an applicant fails inspection or fails to request
reinspections within the 60-day period, or fails to submit a timely
appeal of the third pre-license inspection report as described in
paragraph (c) of this section, the applicant will forfeit the
application fee and cannot reapply for a license for a period of 6
months from the date of the failed third inspection or the expiration
of the time to request a third inspection. No license will be issued
until the applicant demonstrates upon inspection that the animals,
premises, facilities, vehicles, equipment, locations, and records are
in compliance with all applicable requirements in the Act and the
regulations and standards in this subchapter.
0
7. Section 2.5 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.5 Duration of license and termination of license.
(a) A license issued under this part shall be valid and effective
for 3 years unless:
(1) The license has been revoked or suspended pursuant to section
19 of the Act.
(2) The license is voluntarily terminated upon request of the
licensee, in writing, to the Deputy Administrator.
(3) The license has expired, except that:
(i) The Deputy Administrator may issue a temporary license that
automatically expires after 120 days to an applicant whose immediately
preceding 3-year license has expired if:
(A) The applicant submits the appropriate application form before
the expiration date of a preceding license; and
(B) The applicant had no noncompliances with the Act and the
regulations and standards in parts 2 and 3 of this subchapter
documented in an inspection report during the preceding period of
licensure.
(ii) For expedited hearings occurring under Sec. 2.11(b)(2), a
license will remain valid and effective until the administrative law
judge issues his or her initial decision. Should the administrative law
judge's initial decision affirm the denial of the license application,
the applicant's license shall terminate immediately.
(4) There will not be a refund of the license fee if a license is
denied, terminated, suspended, or revoked prior to its expiration date.
(b) Any person who seeks the reinstatement of a license that has
expired or been terminated must follow the procedure applicable to new
applicants for a license set forth in Sec. 2.1.
(c) A license which is invalid under this part shall be surrendered
to the Deputy Administrator. If the license cannot be found, the
licensee shall provide a written statement so stating to the Deputy
Administrator.
Sec. 2.6--2.8 [Removed and Reserved]
0
8. Sections 2.6--2.8 are removed and reserved.
0
9. Section 2.9 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.9 Officers, agents, and employees of licensees whose licenses
have been suspended or revoked.
Any person who has been or is an officer, agent, or employee of a
licensee whose license has been suspended or revoked and who was
responsible for or participated in the activity upon which the order of
suspension or revocation was based will not be licensed, or registered
as a carrier, intermediate handler, exhibitor, or research facility
within the period during which the order of suspension or revocation is
in effect.
0
10. Section 2.10 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.10 Licensees whose licenses have been suspended or revoked.
(a) Any person whose license has been suspended for any reason
shall not be licensed, or registered, in his or her own name or in any
other manner, within the period during which the order of suspension is
in effect. No partnership, firm, corporation, or other legal entity in
which any such person has a substantial interest, financial or
otherwise, will be licensed or registered during that period. Any
person whose license has been suspended for any reason may apply to the
Deputy Administrator, in writing, for reinstatement of his or her
license.
(b) Any person whose license has been revoked shall not be licensed
or registered, in his or her own name or in any other manner, and no
partnership, firm, corporation, or other legal entity in which any such
person has a substantial interest, financial or otherwise, will be
licensed or registered.
(c) Any person whose license has been suspended or revoked shall
not buy, sell, transport, exhibit, or deliver for transportation, any
animal during the period of suspension or revocation, under any
circumstances, whether on his or her behalf or on the behalf another
licensee or registrant.
0
11. Section 2.11 is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 10733]]
Sec. 2.11 Denial of license application.
(a) A license will not be issued to any applicant who:
(1) Has not complied with the requirements of Sec. Sec. 2.1
through 2.4 and has not paid the fees indicated in Sec. 2.1;
(2) Is not in compliance with the Act or any of the regulations or
standards in this subchapter;
(3) Has had a license revoked or whose license is suspended, as set
forth in Sec. 2.10;
(4) Was an officer, agent, or employee of a licensee whose license
has been suspended or revoked and who was responsible for or
participated in the activity upon which the order of suspension or
revocation was based, as set forth in Sec. 2.9;
(5) Has pled nolo contendere (no contest) or has been found to have
violated any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to
animal cruelty within 3 years of application, or after 3 years if the
Administrator determines that the circumstances render the applicant
unfit to be licensed;
(6) Is or would be operating in violation or circumvention of any
Federal, State, or local laws; or
(7) Has made any false or fraudulent statements or provided any
false or fraudulent records to the Department or other government
agencies, or has pled nolo contendere (no contest) or has been found to
have violated any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations
pertaining to the transportation, ownership, neglect, or welfare of
animals, or is otherwise unfit to be licensed and the Administrator
determines that the issuance of a license would be contrary to the
purposes of the Act.
(b) Applicants may request a hearing under the following
circumstances:
(1) An applicant whose initial license application has been denied
may request a hearing in accordance with the applicable rules of
practice for the purpose of showing why the application for license
should not be denied. The denial of an initial license application
shall remain in effect until the final legal decision has been
rendered. Should the license denial be upheld, the applicant may again
apply for a license 1 year from the date of the final order denying the
application, unless the order provides otherwise.
(2) An applicant who submitted a timely appeal of a third pre-
license inspection as described in Sec. 2.3(c), and whose appeal
results in the denial of the license application, may request an
expedited hearing if the applicant held a valid license when he or she
submitted the license application that has been denied and the Deputy
Administrator received such license application no fewer than 90 days
prior to the expiration of the valid license. If the applicant meets
the criteria in this paragraph, and notwithstanding the timeframes of
the proceedings set forth in the applicable rules of practice (7 CFR
1.130 through 1.151):
(i) The applicant must submit the request for an expedited hearing
within 30 days of receiving notice from the Deputy Administrator that
the license application has been denied;
(ii) The administrative law judge shall set the expedited hearing
so that it occurs within 30 days of receiving a timely request for
expedited hearing as described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section;
and
(iii) The administrative law judge must issue an initial decision
no later than 30 days after the expedited hearing.
(iv) The applicant's license will remain valid until the
administrative law judge issues his or her initial decision. Should the
administrative law judge's initial decision affirm the denial of the
license application, the applicant's license shall terminate
immediately.
(c) No partnership, firm, corporation, or other legal entity in
which a person whose license application has been denied has a
substantial interest, financial or otherwise, will be licensed within 1
year of the license denial.
(d) No license will be issued under circumstances that the
Administrator determines would circumvent any order, stipulation, or
settlement agreement suspending, revoking, terminating, or denying a
license or disqualifying a person from engaging in activities under the
Act.
0
12. Section 2.12 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.12 Termination of a license.
A license may be terminated at any time for any reason that a
license application may be denied pursuant to Sec. 2.11 after a
hearing in accordance with the applicable rules of practice.
0
13. Section 2.13 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 2.13 Appeal of inspection report.
Except as otherwise provided in Sec. 2.3(c), any licensee or
registrant may appeal all or part of the inspection findings in an
inspection report to the Deputy Administrator. To appeal, the licensee
or registrant must send a written statement contesting the inspection
finding(s) and include any documentation or other information in
support of the appeal. To receive consideration, the appeal must be
received by the Deputy Administrator within 21 days of the date the
licensee or registrant received the inspection report that is the
subject of the appeal.
Sec. 2.25 [Amended]
0
14. In Sec. 2.25, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words ``AC
Regional Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy
Administrator'' in their place.
Sec. 2.26 [Amended]
0
15. Section 2.26 is amended by removing the words ``AC Regional
Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their
place.
Sec. 2.27 [Amended]
0
16. Section 2.27 is amended by removing the words ``AC Regional
Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy
Administrator'' in their place.
Sec. 2.30 [Amended]
0
17. Section 2.30 is amended by removing the words ``AC Regional
Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy
Administrator'' in their place.
Sec. 2.36 [Amended]
0
18. In Sec. 2.36, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words ``AC
Regional Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in
their place.
0
19. Section 2.38 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (c);
0
b. In paragraph (g)(1) introductory text, by removing the period
between the words ``acquired'' and ``sold'' and adding a comma in its
place;
0
c. In paragraph (g)(7) footnote 1, by removing the words ``AC Regional
Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their
place; and
0
d. In paragraph (i) introductory text, by removing the words ``AC
Regional Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in
their place.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 2.38 Miscellaneous.
* * * * *
(c) Publication of lists of research facilities subject to the
provisions of this part. APHIS will publish on its website lists of
research facilities registered in accordance with the provisions of
this subpart. The lists may be obtained upon request from the Deputy
Administrator.
* * * * *
Sec. 2.52 [Amended]
0
20. In Sec. 2.52, footnote 4 is amended by removing the words ``AC
Regional
[[Page 10734]]
Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their
place.
Sec. 2.75 [Amended]
0
21. In Sec. 2.75, paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(2) are amended by removing
the citation ``Sec. 2.79'' and adding the citation ``Sec. 2.78'' in
its place.
Sec. 2.77 [Amended]
0
22. In Sec. 2.77, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the citation
``Sec. 2.79'' and adding the citation ``Sec. 2.78'' in its place.
Sec. 2.102 [Amended]
0
23. In Sec. 2.102, paragraphs (a) and (b) introductory text are
amended by removing the words ``AC Regional Director'' and adding the
words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their place.
Sec. 2.126 [Amended]
0
24. In Sec. 2.126, paragraph (c) is amended by removing the words ``AC
Regional Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy
Administrator'' in their place.
0
25. Section 2.127 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.127 Publication of lists of persons subject to the provisions
of this part.
APHIS will publish on its website lists of persons licensed or
registered in accordance with the provisions of this part. The lists
may also be obtained upon request from the Deputy Administrator.
Sec. 2.150 [Amended]
0
26. Section 2.150 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' each
time they appear and adding the word ``States'' in their place;
0
b. In paragraph (a), by removing the words ``, research, or veterinary
treatment''; and
0
c. In paragraph (c)(8), by adding the words ``resale for'' immediately
before the words ``research purposes''.
Sec. 2.151 [Amended]
0
27. Section 2.151 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' each
time they appear and adding the word ``States'' in their place;
0
b. In paragraph (a) introductory text, by removing the words ``,
research, or veterinary treatment'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1), by adding the words ``resale for'' immediately
before the words ``use in research, tests, or experiments at a research
facility''; and
0
d. In paragraph (b)(2) introductory text, by adding the words ``and
subsequent resale'' immediately after the words ``for veterinary
treatment by a licensed veterinarian''.
Sec. 2.152 [Amended]
0
28. Section 2.152 is amended by removing the words ``continental United
States or Hawaii'' and adding the word ``States'' in their place.
Sec. 2.153 [Amended]
0
29. Section 2.153 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' both
times they appear and adding the word ``States'' in their place; and
0
b. By adding the words ``or the Act'' immediately after the words
``this subpart''.
PART 3--STANDARDS
0
30. The authority citation for part 3 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
Sec. 3.6 [Amended]
0
31. In Sec. 3.6, paragraphs (b)(5) and (c)(3) are amended by removing
the citation ``Sec. 3.14 of this subpart'' and adding the citation
``Sec. 3.15'' in their place, and by removing the citation ``Sec.
3.14(a)(6) of this subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec.
3.15(a)(6)'' in its place.
0
32. Section 3.10 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 3.10 Watering.
(a) Potable water must be continually available to the dogs, unless
restricted by the attending veterinarian.
(b) If potable water is not continually available to the cats, it
must be offered to the cats as often as necessary to ensure their
health and well-being, but not less than twice daily for at least 1
hour each time, unless restricted by the attending veterinarian.
(c) Water receptacles must be kept clean and sanitized in
accordance with Sec. 3.11(b) and before being used to water a
different dog or cat or social grouping of dogs or cats.
Sec. Sec. 3.13 through 3.19 [Redesignated as Sec. Sec. 3.14 through
3.20]
0
33. Sections 3.13 through 3.19 are redesignated as Sec. Sec. 3.14
through 3.20, respectively.
0
34. New Sec. 3.13 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 3.13 Veterinary care for dogs.
(a) Each dealer, exhibitor, and research facility must follow an
appropriate program of veterinary care for dogs that is developed,
documented in writing, and signed by the attending veterinarian.
Dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities must keep and maintain the
written program and make it available for APHIS inspection. The written
program of veterinary care must address and meet the requirements for
attending veterinarians and adequate veterinary care for every dealer
and exhibitor in Sec. 2.40 of this subchapter and every research
facility in Sec. 2.33 of this subchapter, and must also include:
(1) Regularly scheduled visits, not less than once every 12 months,
by the attending veterinarian to all premises where animals are kept,
to assess and ensure the adequacy of veterinary care and other aspects
of animal care and use;
(2) A complete physical examination from head to tail of each dog
by the attending veterinarian not less than once every 12 months;
(3) Vaccinations for contagious and deadly diseases of dogs
(including rabies, parvovirus and distemper) and sampling and treatment
of parasites and other pests (including fleas, worms, coccidia,
giardia, and heartworm) in accordance with a schedule approved by the
attending veterinarian, unless otherwise required by a research
protocol approved by the Committee at research facilities; and
(4) Preventative care and treatment to ensure healthy and unmatted
hair coats, properly trimmed nails, and clean and healthy eyes, ears,
skin, and teeth, unless otherwise required by a research protocol
approved by the Committee at research facilities.
(b) Dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities must keep copies
of medical records for dogs and make the records available for APHIS
inspection. These records must include:
(1) The identity of the animal, including identifying marks,
tattoos, or tags on the animal and the animal's breed, sex, and age;
Provided, however, that routine husbandry, such as vaccinations,
preventive medical procedures, or treatments, performed on all animals
in a group (or herd), may be kept on a single record;
(2) If a problem is identified (such as a disease, injury, or
illness), the date and a description of the problem, examination
findings, test results, plan for treatment and care, and treatment
procedures performed, when appropriate;
(3) The names of all vaccines and treatments administered and the
dates of administration; and
(4) The dates and findings/results of all screening, routine, or
other required or recommended test or examination.
[[Page 10735]]
Sec. 3.14 [Amended]
0
35. Newly redesignated Sec. 3.14 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (c) introductory text, by removing the citation ``Sec.
3.16 of this subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec. 3.17'' in its
place;
0
b. In paragraph (d), by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.14 of this
subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec. 3.15'' in its place; and
0
c. In paragraph (e) introductory text:
0
i. In the first sentence, by removing the citation ``Sec. Sec. 3.18
and 3.19 of this subpart'' both times it appears and adding the
citation ``Sec. Sec. 3.19 and 3.20'' in its place; and
0
ii. In the second sentence, by removing the citations ``Sec. 3.18''
and ``Sec. 3.19'' and adding the citations ``Sec. 3.19''and ``Sec.
3.20'' in their place, respectively.
Sec. 3.15 [Amended]
0
36. In newly redesignated Sec. 3.15, paragraph (h) is amended by
removing the citation ``Sec. 3.13(c)'' and adding the citation ``Sec.
3.14(c)'' in its place.
Sec. 3.17 [Amended]
0
37. In newly redesignated Sec. 3.17, paragraph (a) is amended by
removing the citation ``Sec. 3.13(c) of this subpart'' both times they
appear and adding the citation ``Sec. 3.14(c)'' in its place.
Sec. 3.18 [Amended]
0
38. Newly redesignated Sec. 3.18 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a), by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.15(e)'' and
adding the citation ``Sec. 3.16(e)'' in its place;
0
b. In paragraph (b), by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.15(d)'' and
adding the citation ``Sec. 3.16(d)'' in its place; and
0
c. In paragraph (d), by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.14(b) of this
subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec. 3.15(b)'' in its place, and
by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.6 or Sec. 3.14 of this subpart''
and adding the citation ``Sec. Sec. 3.6 or 3.15'' in its place.
Sec. 3.19 [Amended]
0
39. In newly redesignated Sec. 3.19, paragraph (f) is amended by
removing the citation ``Sec. 3.13(f) of this subpart'' and adding the
citation ``Sec. 3.14(f)'' in its place.
Sec. 3.20 [Amended]
0
40. Newly redesignated Sec. 3.20 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1), by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.18(d) of
this subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec. 3.19(d)'' in its place;
and
0
b. In paragraph (a)(3), by removing the citation ``Sec. 3.13(e)'' and
adding the citation ``Sec. 3.14(e)'' in its place, and by removing the
citation ``Sec. 3.18(d) of this subpart'' and adding the citation
``Sec. 3.19(d)'' in its place.
Sec. 3.61 [Amended]
0
41. Section 3.61 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b), by removing the word ``specie'' and adding the
word ``species'' in its place; and
0
b. In paragraph (f), by removing the word ``works'' and adding the word
``words'' in its place.
0
42. Section 3.78 is amended by revising the section heading to read as
follows:
Sec. 3.78 Outdoor housing facilities.
* * * * *
Sec. 3.110 [Amended]
0
43. In Sec. 3.110, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words ``it
is determined that'' immediately after the words ``Animals without a
known medical history must be isolated until''.
Sec. 3.111 [Amended]
0
44. Section 3.111 is amended by removing the word ``regional'' in
footnote 14.
Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of March 2019.
Greg Ibach,
Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019-05422 Filed 3-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P