[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 212 (Thursday, October 31, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56155-56165]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-27975]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 51, 56, 71, 75, 76, 78, 80, and 85

[Docket No. 96-041-1]


Interstate Movement of Livestock; Approved Livestock Facilities, 
Hog Cholera Provisions, and Livestock Identification

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations regarding the 
interstate movement of livestock by combining the provisions for the 
approval of livestock markets for cattle and bison, horses, and swine 
into a single section. These changes are the result of a comprehensive 
review of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's regulations, 
programs, and policies regarding livestock markets and stockyards. We 
are also proposing to remove the regulations that restrict the movement 
of swine and swine products from areas quarantined for hog cholera and 
that provide for the payment of compensation to the owners of swine 
destroyed because of hog cholera. We would remove the hog cholera 
regulations because the United States has been free of hog cholera 
since 1978 and import requirements have proven adequate to prevent the 
reintroduction of the disease into this country. These proposed actions 
would eliminate unnecessary or duplicative regulations and remove the 
implication that hog cholera has not yet been eradicated in the United 
States.

DATES: Consideration will be given only to comments received on or 
before December 30, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and three copies of your comments to 
Docket No. 96-041-1, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, 
Suite 3C03, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please 
state that your comments refer to Docket No. 96-041-1. Comments 
received may be inspected at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th 
Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to 
inspect comments are requested to call ahead on (202) 690-2817 to 
facilitate entry into the comment reading room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. James P. Davis, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Surveillance and Animal 
Identification Team, National Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 
River Road Unit 36, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231, (301) 734-5970; or E-
mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The regulations in subchapters B and C of chapter I, title 9, of 
the Code of Federal Regulations contain provisions designed to prevent 
the dissemination of animal diseases in the United States and 
facilitate their control and eradication. Subchapter B, ``Cooperative 
Control and Eradication of Livestock or Poultry Diseases,'' comprises 9 
CFR parts 49 through 56; subchapter C, ``Interstate Transportation of 
Animals (Including Poultry) and Animal Products,'' is made up of 9 CFR 
parts 70 through 89. In this document, we are proposing to amend or 
delete portions of those two subchapters in order to eliminate 
duplication, streamline existing provisions, and remove unnecessary 
regulations.

Approval of Livestock Facilities

    The regulations in subchapter C include provisions for the approval 
of livestock markets and stockyards where livestock are gathered for 
sale purposes. Those approvals are intended to ensure that the markets 
and stockyards are constructed and operated in a manner that will 
prevent the transmission of diseases among the livestock assembled for 
sales or auctions on the premises. Currently, the regulations in 
subchapter C contain five different approvals for livestock markets or 
stockyards: One in part 75 for horses, two in part 76 for swine, and 
two in part 78 for cattle and bison. Although each approval necessarily 
differs in certain aspects from the others due to considerations 
related to the specific diseases of concern and the types of animals 
involved, there are many elements that are common to all five 
approvals. In 1995, we undertook a comprehensive review of the Animal 
and Plant Health Inspection Service's (APHIS') regulations, programs, 
and policies regarding livestock markets and stockyards, and one 
recommendation that resulted from that review was that the five 
livestock market or stockyard agreements be consolidated into a single 
agreement. We are, therefore, proposing to remove the stockyard and 
market approval provisions from parts 75, 76, and 78 and combine them 
into a single section that would be located in part 71, ``General 
Provisions.'' We believe that having a single section dealing with the 
approval of markets and stockyards

[[Page 56156]]

would be logical, given the large number of common elements shared by 
the five existing market approvals. In addition, having a single market 
approval agreement would ease the paperwork and recordkeeping burden 
for both the operators of those markets and for the APHIS and State 
personnel tasked with supervising the markets.
    The proposed new livestock facility approval provisions would be 
located in a new section, Sec. 71.20. The new section would be divided 
into two paragraphs; paragraph (a) would set out the approved livestock 
facility agreement, and paragraph (b) would contain the provisions for 
the withdrawal or denial of approval for a livestock facility. The 
agreement itself would be divided into a section of general provisions 
followed by sections specific to cattle and bison, swine, and horses. 
When completing the agreement, the operator of the livestock facility 
would indicate which animals and classes of animals the facility would 
accept by initialing the appropriate paragraphs of the agreement. Most 
elements of the existing market approval provisions, which are found in 
Sec. 75.4(c) and (d) for horses, Sec. 76.18 for swine, and Sec. 78.44 
for cattle and bison, would be incorporated into proposed new 
Sec. 71.20. Two new elements would be added to the agreement and some 
elements of the existing provisions would be eliminated or modified. 
These proposed changes are discussed below.
    Currently, the livestock market approvals in parts 75 and 78 
require that an APHIS representative, State representative, or 
accredited veterinarian must be on the premises on sale days to perform 
any duties required by State or Federal regulations. When an APHIS or 
State representative is unavailable, the operator of the livestock 
market must hire an accredited veterinarian to perform those duties, 
which increases the operating expenses for the facility. However, many 
livestock facilities do not necessarily need an APHIS or State 
representative or accredited veterinarian on the premises every sale 
day; depending on the type of animals being sold or the geographic 
origin of the animals being sold, there may be no duties to be 
performed under the applicable State or Federal regulations. For 
example, a livestock market in a tuberculosis accredited-free State may 
be handling, on a particular sale day, only steers and spayed heifers. 
Given the State's accredited-free status, there would be no 
restrictions on the interstate movement of the animals under the 
tuberculosis regulations in 9 CFR part 77, and, because the animals are 
steers and spayed heifers, there would be no restrictions on their 
interstate movement under the brucellosis regulations in 9 CFR part 78. 
In this example, there would be no need for a State or APHIS 
representative or an accredited veterinarian to be present at the 
market to inspect or test the animals prior to their sale or release 
from the facility, but the current market approval provisions require 
that a State or APHIS representative or an accredited veterinarian be 
present nonetheless.
    The current market agreements already require that the operator of 
the facility furnish a copy of the facility's schedule of sale days to 
the area veterinarian in charge and the State animal health official; 
the proposed new agreement would retain that requirement. Under the 
proposed new agreement, the State animal health official and area 
veterinarian in charge would review that schedule, which would have to 
indicate the types of animals that will be handled at the facility on 
each sale day, to ascertain which upcoming sale days will include 
categories of livestock that are regulated under State or Federal 
regulations. The State animal health official or area veterinarian in 
charge will then inform the operator of the facility which sale days 
will require the presence of an APHIS or State representative or 
accredited veterinarian. The proposed new agreement, therefore, would 
require the presence of an APHIS or State representative or accredited 
veterinarian at the livestock facility only on those days designated by 
the State animal health official or area veterinarian in charge.
    The second element that we would add to the livestock market 
agreement is an explicit prohibition on the sale of any livestock that 
show signs of being infected with any infectious, contagious, or 
communicable disease without the authorization of an APHIS or State 
representative or accredited veterinarian. The current market approvals 
provide for the sale of reactor or exposed livestock--i.e., animals 
known to be infected with or exposed to disease--so there are 
mechanisms already in place for such animals to be sold with official 
authorization. Paragraph (f) of Sec. 71.3 requires, in part, that 
persons offering livestock for interstate movement must exercise 
reasonable diligence to ascertain whether those animals are affected 
with or have been exposed to any contagious, infectious, or 
communicable disease. This proposed addition to the livestock market 
agreement would reinforce that requirement by helping to ensure that 
livestock that appear to be affected with disease--but that have not 
been officially tested and classified as reactor, exposed, or suspect--
are not sold without the knowledge and authorization of an APHIS or 
State representative or accredited veterinarian.
    As noted above, some elements of the existing market approval 
provisions would be eliminated or modified. Those proposed changes are 
as follows:
    Section 75.4. Paragraphs (c) and (d) of Sec. 75.4 pertain not only 
to the approval of stockyards, but to the approval of laboratories and 
diagnostic or research facilities as well. Therefore, Sec. 75.4(c)(1) 
(laboratories) and Sec. 75.4(c)(2) (diagnostic or research facilities) 
would remain the same; Sec. 75.4(c)(3) (stockyards) would be removed in 
its entirety and its provisions incorporated into proposed new 
Sec. 71.20 with one modification: Paragraph (8) of the current 
agreement calls for the stockyard to retain for 1 year any documents 
relating to animals that have been in the stockyard. We would increase 
the length of the record retention period to 2 years in order to make 
it consistent with that of the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards 
Administration (GIPSA). The GIPSA regulations in 9 CFR 203.4 require, 
among other things, that stockyards maintain for 2 years any 
``accounts, records, and memoranda that contain, explain, or modify its 
business,'' and many of the documents maintained to meet APHIS' 
requirements are also maintained to meet the GIPSA requirements. 
Paragraph (d) of Sec. 75.4 addresses the denial or withdrawal of 
approval for laboratories, diagnostic or research facilities, and 
stockyards. Because proposed new Sec. 71.20 would address denial and 
withdrawal of approval for stockyards, we would simply delete all the 
references to stockyards from Sec. 75.4(d) and leave in place the 
provisions for the denial or withdrawal of approval for laboratories 
and diagnostic or research facilities.
    Section 76.18. The provisions found in Sec. 76.18, ``Approval of 
Livestock Markets,'' would be incorporated into proposed new 
Sec. 71.20, with four exceptions. First, paragraph (a) of Sec. 76.18 
states that lists of livestock markets approved for the purposes of the 
regulations in part 76 will be published in the Federal Register. As 
explained below, we are proposing in this document to remove all of 
part 76 from subchapter C, which would remove the requirement to 
publish the names of approved stockyards in the Federal Register. 
Therefore, the provisions of Sec. 76.18(a) would not be incorporated 
into proposed new Sec. 71.20. Second, paragraph 10 of the agreement in 
Sec. 76.18(b)(1) and paragraph 4 of the

[[Page 56157]]

agreement in Sec. 76.18(b)(2) prohibit the inoculation of swine at the 
livestock market with hog cholera vaccine or virulent hog cholera 
virus. Because hog cholera has been eradicated in the United States, 
such inoculations have been discontinued throughout the country and 
that prohibition is no longer necessary. Third, paragraph 11 of the 
agreement in Sec. 76.18(b)(1) and paragraph 5 of the agreement in 
Sec. 76.18(b)(2) call for records to be maintained for 1 year. We would 
increase that period to 2 years to make it consistent with GIPSA 
requirements, as discussed in the previous paragraph, and with the 
swine identification retention requirements of Sec. 71.19(d)(2). 
Finally, we would eliminate the provisions of Sec. 76.18(c), ``Approval 
of livestock markets in a quarantined area,'' because there are no 
longer any areas quarantined for hog cholera.
    Section 78.44. The provisions found in Sec. 78.44, ``Specifically 
approved stockyards,'' would be incorporated into proposed new 
Sec. 71.20, with two exceptions. First, paragraph 7 of the agreement in 
Sec. 78.44(c) and paragraph 6 of the agreement in Sec. 78.44(d)(7) 
state, in part, that brucellosis reactors must be identified with a 
``B'' brand on the left jaw. However, the regulations in part 78--
specifically, the definition of ``B'' brand in Sec. 78.1--no longer 
require that brucellosis reactors be branded on the jaw; that 
requirement was removed in a final rule published in the Federal 
Register on September 19, 1995 (60 FR 48362-48369, Docket No. 95-006-
2), but the agreements in Sec. 78.44 were not amended to reflect that 
change. To ensure that brucellosis reactor cattle and bison are 
properly identified in accordance with the applicable regulations, the 
agreement in proposed Sec. 71.20 would simply state that brucellosis 
reactors must be identified in accordance with 9 CFR part 78. Second, 
paragraph 20 of the agreement in Sec. 78.44(c) and paragraph 19 of the 
agreement in Sec. 78.44(d) call for records to be maintained for 1 
year. Again, as discussed previously, we would increase the 
recordkeeping period to 2 years to make it consistent with GIPSA 
requirements.
    Our proposed consolidation of the market approval provisions into a 
single new section would make it necessary for us to amend several 
parts in subchapters B and C to update the references those parts 
contain to market or stockyard approvals in Secs. 75.4, 76.18, or 
78.44. Such references are found in Secs. 51.1, 71.18(a)(5), 75.4(a), 
78.1, 80.1, and 85.1; in each of those sections, we would amend the 
reference to read ``Sec. 71.20.'' Similarly, because we would move all 
the stockyard provisions into part 71, we would remove the references 
to stockyards that are found in the titles of Sec. 75.4 (currently 
``Interstate movement of equine infections anemia reactors and approval 
of laboratories, diagnostic facilities, research facilities, and 
stockyards''), Sec. 75.4(c) (currently ``Approval of laboratories, 
diagnostic or research facilities, and stockyards''), and subpart E of 
part 78 (currently ``Designation of Brucellosis Areas, and Specifically 
Approved Stockyards'').

Related Changes

    The proposed consolidation of livestock market approvals in part 71 
would make it necessary for us to add several definitions to Sec. 71.1 
to describe several terms used in the proposed new livestock facility 
agreement.
    First, we would add the term approved livestock facility, which we 
would define as ``A stockyard, livestock market, buying station, 
concentration point, or any other premises under State or Federal 
veterinary supervision where livestock are assembled and that has been 
approved under Sec. 71.20.'' We would also amend the existing 
definition in Sec. 71.1 of livestock market, which is currently 
defined, in part, as a premises ``where swine are assembled'' to 
broaden its applicability to include cattle, bison, and horses by 
replacing the word ``swine'' with the word ``livestock.'' We would add 
the term livestock to the definitions in Sec. 71.1 as well, defining it 
as ``Horses, cattle, bison, and swine.'' Horses would be defined as 
``Horses, asses, mules, ponies, and zebras.'' All these terms that 
would be added are used in the proposed new consolidated livestock 
facility agreement, and their proposed definitions are all similar to 
the definitions used for the same terms elsewhere in APHIS' regulations 
in title 9.
    We are also proposing to add definitions for the terms breeder 
swine, feeder swine, and slaughter swine, which are used in the swine-
specific provisions of the agreement.
    Breeder swine would be defined as ``Sexually intact swine over 6 
months of age.'' The designation ``breeder swine'' is used in the 
proposed new livestock facility agreement to differentiate these swine, 
which in most cases would be sold to a herd owner for herd increase 
purposes, from feeder swine and slaughter swine. The interstate 
movement of swine in this category is subject to the general provisions 
of part 71, the brucellosis regulations in part 78, and the 
pseudorabies regulations in part 85. Under the proposed livestock 
facility agreement, breeder swine and feeder swine could not be 
released from the facility until they had been officially identified in 
accordance with applicable Federal or State regulations and inspected 
by an APHIS representative, State representative, or accredited 
veterinarian, and certified in accordance with applicable Federal or 
State regulations. Because breeder and feeder swine are not intended to 
be moved to slaughter upon their sale at the facility, the 
identification, inspection, and certification would serve to ensure 
that the swine are in good health and, therefore, not likely to present 
any significant risk of transmitting disease to other swine.
    Feeder swine would be defined as ``Swine under 6 months of age that 
are not slaughter swine.'' Such swine would, in most cases, be brought 
to an approved livestock facility for sale to a feedlot for additional 
feeding and then moved to slaughter. The interstate movement of swine 
in this category is subject to the general provisions of part 71 and to 
the pseudorabies regulations in part 85. The proposed agreement would 
require that feeder swine be kept separate and apart from other swine 
while in the livestock facility to prevent any transmission of disease 
between feeder swine and other swine.
    Slaughter swine would be defined as ``Swine being sold or moved for 
slaughter purposes only.'' The applicability of this term is related to 
the regulations in parts 78 and 85, which provide for the interstate 
movement of certain swine through livestock markets for sale for 
slaughter. Swine infected with or exposed to brucellosis or 
pseudorabies, certain pseudorabies vaccinates, and even swine not known 
to be infected with or exposed to disease could, therefore, be 
characterized as slaughter swine for the purposes of the proposed new 
livestock facility agreement.
    In Sec. 71.1, the terms APHIS inspector and State representative 
are among the terms defined. In several places in part 71, however, 
reference is made to activities that are the responsibility of ``a 
State inspector'' or ``an APHIS or State inspector.'' For the purposes 
of consistency within part 71 and consistency with parts 75 and 78, we 
are proposing to remove the term APHIS inspector from Sec. 71.1 and 
replace it with the term APHIS representative, which is the term used 
in parts 75 and 78. We would then amend the remainder of part 71 by 
replacing references to ``inspectors''--APHIS or State--with references 
to APHIS or State ``representatives.'' The definition we would use in 
part 71 for APHIS representative would be the same

[[Page 56158]]

definition used in parts 75 and 78, i.e., ``An individual employed by 
APHIS who is authorized to perform the function involved.''
    The introductory text preceding the definitions in Sec. 71.1 states 
``As used in this part, the following terms shall have the meanings set 
forth in this section.'' However, Sec. 71.1 includes the terms 
accredited herd, designated dipping station, recognized slaughtering 
center, and stockers and feeders, terms that are not used anywhere in 
part 71. We are, therefore, proposing to remove those terms from 
Sec. 71.1.

Removal of Hog Cholera Provisions

    The regulations in 9 CFR part 76, ``Hog Cholera and Other 
Communicable Swine Diseases,'' prohibit or restrict the interstate 
movement of swine and swine products to suppress and eradicate hog 
cholera and other contagious, infectious, and communicable diseases of 
swine. The regulations in 9 CFR part 56, ``Swine Destroyed Because of 
Hog Cholera,'' provide for the payment of compensation to the owners of 
swine destroyed due to hog cholera.
    The regulations in parts 76 and 56 were established to promote the 
eradication of hog cholera within the United States by preventing its 
spread through restrictions on the interstate movement of swine and 
swine products from quarantined areas and by providing indemnity for 
the destruction of infected swine. In that the United States has been 
free of hog cholera since 1978, the objectives of those regulations 
have been met. The quarantine requirements contained in ``Subpart E--
Swine'' of 9 CFR part 92 (Secs. 92.500 through 92.523) contain testing 
and quarantine provisions that help ensure that hog cholera and other 
contagious, infectious, and communicable diseases of swine are not 
introduced into the United States.
    We are, therefore, proposing to remove, in their entirety, the hog 
cholera regulations in 9 CFR parts 56 and 76. Further, we would remove 
hog cholera from the list in Sec. 71.3(a) of diseases considered to be 
endemic to the United States and add it to the list in Sec. 71.3(b) of 
diseases not known to exist in the United States. These proposed 
actions would remove the implication that hog cholera has not yet been 
eradicated in the United States and would eliminate unnecessary 
regulations.
    The proposed removal of part 76 would also make it necessary for us 
to amend two references found in part 85, ``Pseudorabies.'' The first 
reference, found in Sec. 85.12, directs the reader to Sec. 76.30 for 
provisions regarding the cleaning and disinfection of means of 
conveyance; the second reference, found in Sec. 85.13, directs the 
reader to Sec. 76.31 for provisions regarding the cleaning and 
disinfection of livestock markets and other facilities. In both 
instances, we would remove the existing reference and replace it with a 
reference to Sec. 71.7, ``Means of conveyance, facilities and premises; 
methods of cleaning and disinfecting,'' which, like the provisions in 
Secs. 76.30 and 76.31, contains the information needed to properly 
carry out the necessary cleaning and disinfection.
    Another change we are proposing in this document is related to the 
previous two paragraphs. Specifically, we are proposing to add 
pseudorabies to the list in Sec. 71.3(a) of diseases considered to be 
endemic to the United States (the same list from which we are proposing 
to remove hog cholera).

Livestock Identification

    We are also proposing four changes in the area of livestock 
identification. First, we are proposing to amend the definitions of 
official eartag that appear in Secs. 71.1 and 78.1. Each definition 
refers, in part, to a nine-character alphanumeric identification 
system. However, the eartags used for identifying feeder swine utilize 
an eight-character alphanumeric identification system that, like the 
nine-character system, provides individual identification for each 
animal. Other eartagging systems that are being considered or that are 
already in use have more or fewer characters. The use of any eartag 
numbering system would have to be approved by APHIS prior to its 
employment and would have to provide the level of identification for 
each eartaged animal required by the particular disease control or 
surveillance program in which it is being used. For that reason, we do 
not believe it is necessary to specify the number of characters to be 
used in an eartag numbering system. Therefore, we are proposing to 
amend the definitions of official eartag in Secs. 71.1 and 78.1 to 
remove the requirement that an official eartag must utilize a nine-
character identification system.
    Second, we are proposing to amend Sec. 71.19(b) to allow the use of 
premises identification numbers as a means of identifying swine. The 
regulations in Sec. 71.19(b) currently list official eartags, USDA 
backtags, official swine tattoos, tattoos of at least four characters 
(for certain swine moving to slaughter), ear notches, or ear tattoos as 
means of swine identification approved by the Administrator. The 
premises identification number concept has been developed to provide a 
means of reliably and accurately tracing swine moved in interstate 
commerce and to slaughter.
    Currently, the primary method of identifying swine moved to 
slaughter is with a USDA backtag; however, the retention rate for those 
backtags is low and misidentification of herds is widespread when swine 
from different herds are commingled and backtags are missing. When 
traceback and testing of swine in a herd of origin are necessary, the 
lack of premises identification often leads to tracebacks to the wrong 
herd and unnecessary testing, which increases costs for producers and 
State or Federal epidemiologists. A premises identification number, 
which would be applied to swine either on an eartag or as a tattoo, 
would greatly simplify the traceback process.
    The premises identification number would be assigned and tracked by 
the State animal health official of the State in which a producer's 
premises is located. A premises would be defined as a livestock 
production unit that is, in the judgment of the State animal health 
official or the area veterinarian in charge, epidemiologically distinct 
from other livestock production units and that could be quarantined in 
the event of a disease outbreak. The premises identification number 
would consist of the State's two-letter postal abbreviation, followed 
by a space, followed by the premises' assigned number. By way of 
example, a swine producer in Minnesota might receive the premises 
identification number ``MN 1234.'' Further, a premises identification 
number could be used in conjunction with a producer's own livestock 
production numbering system to provide a unique identification number 
for each animal if the producer wished to do so.
    Because we would not require that a premises identification number 
be combined with a producer's livestock production number to provide 
unique identification for each swine, we are proposing to amend 
Sec. 71.19(a)(1), which states, in part, that swine moved in interstate 
commerce must be individually identified. The goal of that requirement 
is for each animal to be identified using one of the approved methods 
listed in Sec. 71.19(a)(2); some of those methods provide unique 
identification for each animal and others do not. To make it clear that 
unique identification for each animal is not required, we would change 
the words ``unless they are individually identified'' to ``unless each 
swine is identified,'' which better suits the intent of that paragraph 
and removes any

[[Page 56159]]

possible confusion as to whether non-unique methods of identification 
such as ear notches or the proposed premises identification number may 
be used.
    The use of premises identification numbers would be voluntary. The 
State animal health official in a particular State may decide that 
current identification methods are sufficient and elect not to issue 
premises identification numbers. Similarly, a producer in a State that 
does issue premises identification numbers may elect not to apply for 
such a number. However, based on the response that the premises 
identification number concept has received from the swine industry, 
individual producers, State animal health officials, other Federal 
agencies, and the U.S. Animal Health Association, we believe that most 
States and swine producers would avail themselves of the opportunity to 
use this proposed new system.
    Third, we are proposing to amend Sec. 71.19(b)(6), which relates to 
one of the means of swine identification approved by the Administrator. 
Specifically, that paragraph allows ear tattoos to be used as a means 
of identifying swine for interstate movement if the tattoo has been 
recorded in the book of record of a purebred registry association. 
Owners of potbellied pigs have complained that the identification 
requirements of the regulations are not well-suited to their pigs 
because eartags are unsightly on animals that are kept as pets and, 
despite the fact that there are registry associations for potbellied 
pigs that could record tattoo numbers, the ears of potbellied pigs are 
too small to accommodate a tattoo. Therefore, at the request of 
numerous owners of potbellied pigs, we are proposing to allow 
identifying tattoos to be placed either on the ear or on the inside 
flank or thigh of swine. The requirement that the tattoo number be 
recorded by a registry association would remain, although we would no 
longer specify that it be a ``purebred registry association'' because 
potbellied pigs are not purebred animals. We believe this proposed 
change would answer the requests of certain swine owners for an 
alternative method of swine identification while providing a 
satisfactory means of identifying swine moved interstate.
    Finally, we are proposing to revise Sec. 78.33, ``Sows and boars.'' 
That section, which deals primarily with the identification of sows and 
boars moved in interstate commerce, specifies when sows and boars moved 
to slaughter must be identified and sets forth the herd of origin and 
health requirements for sows and boars moved for breeding. However, the 
methods of identifying sows and boars (e.g., eartags, backtags, 
tattoos) that are set out in Sec. 78.33(a) and (b) are not unique to 
sows and boars; rather, they are the same methods that are generally 
required for swine under Sec. 71.19. Further, there is nothing unique 
to sows and boars in the provisions of Sec. 78.33(d) and (e), which 
simply repeat the provisions of Sec. 71.19(d) and (e). Therefore, we 
are proposing to remove the references to specific identification 
methods from Sec. 78.33(a) and (b) and amend those paragraphs to simply 
state that sows and boars must be identified in accordance with 
Sec. 71.19. We would also remove Sec. 78.33(d) and (e) in their 
entirety. These proposed changes would eliminate duplication and help 
simplify the regulations.

Miscellaneous

    In addition to the proposed amendments discussed above, we would 
also make several nonsubstantive changes for the sake of clarity or 
accuracy.
    First, there is a reference in Sec. 71.3(c)(2) to provisions in 
Sec. 77.8 concerning the interstate movement of tuberculin reactors, 
but Sec. 77.8 does not exist. The interstate movement provisions 
referred to in Sec. 71.3 are actually contained in Sec. 77.5. We would 
change the reference to read Sec. 77.5.
    Second, we would rectify two incorrect paragraph references in the 
introductory text of Sec. 71.18(a). The first reference is to 
Sec. 78.9(a)(3)(iv), but there is no such paragraph in Sec. 78.9. We 
would correct the reference to read Sec. 78.9(a)(3)(ii), which is the 
proper reference. The second reference is to Sec. 78.9(d)(3)(vii), 
which was removed by a final rule published in the Federal Register on 
January 18, 1989 (54 FR 1923-1926, Docket No. 88-171). When the 
paragraph was removed in that final rule, all references to the 
paragraph should have been removed as well, but this one was not. We 
would remove the reference.
    Third, also in Sec. 71.18, we would correct the paragraph 
designations used in paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and (a)(1)(iii). 
In each of the three paragraphs, italicized lowercase letters are used 
where regular uppercase letters are needed.
    Finally, footnote 1 to Sec. 71.18(a)(1)(i) states, in part, that 
approved backtags are available from a Veterinary Services 
representative and that the term Veterinary Services representative is 
defined in Sec. 78.1. However, that definition was removed, and a 
definition of APHIS representative added in its place, by a final rule 
published in the Federal Register on October 22, 1991 (56 FR 54532-
54534, Docket No. 89-150). We would, therefore, correct the footnote to 
use the current term in both instances.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. 
The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of 
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the 
Office of Management and Budget.
    This proposed rule would amend the regulations regarding the 
interstate movement of livestock by combining the provisions for the 
approval of livestock markets for cattle and bison, horses, and swine 
into a single section and by removing the regulations that restrict the 
movement of swine and swine products from areas quarantined for hog 
cholera and that provide for the payment of compensation to the owners 
of swine destroyed because of hog cholera. The proposed changes to the 
livestock market approval provisions were recommended following a 
review of APHIS' regulations, programs, and policies regarding 
livestock markets and stockyards; the hog cholera regulations would be 
removed because the United States has been free of hog cholera since 
1978 and import requirements have proven adequate to prevent the 
reintroduction of the disease into this country. These proposed actions 
would eliminate unnecessary or duplicative regulations and remove the 
implication that hog cholera has not yet been eradicated in the United 
States.
    We estimate that combining livestock market approval provisions for 
horses, swine, cattle, and bison onto one form will reduce the number 
of approvals from 4,800 to fewer than 1,800 because each livestock 
facility and stockyard will need only one approval. Many livestock 
facilities and stockyards now have three approvals. APHIS does not 
charge a user fee for inspections or approvals, so livestock facilities 
would not experience a reduction in costs. However, this proposed rule 
change would reduce the amount of paperwork associated with livestock 
facility approvals.
    The provisions of the proposed rule that would allow States, with 
APHIS concurrence, to determine how frequently State representatives, 
APHIS representatives, or accredited veterinarians should be present at 
individual stockyards and livestock facilities could potentially reduce 
the annual operating expenses of livestock facilities by about $2.3 
million annually. Conversely, total annual income for

[[Page 56160]]

accredited veterinarians could potentially be reduced by about $2.3 
million.
    The proposed removal of the hog cholera regulations in 9 CFR parts 
56 and 76 would not have any economic impact on livestock markets or 
stockyards or any other entity. Hog cholera has been eradicated in the 
United States since 1978 and there are no enforcement measures 
currently in place.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that APHIS specifically 
consider the potential economic impacts on ``small'' domestic entities 
that could result from the implementation of the amendments proposed in 
this document. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established 
size criteria by Standard Industrial Classification that were used as a 
guide in determining which economic entities meet the definition of a 
``small'' business.
    The changes proposed in this document will likely have a relatively 
minor economic impact on the following types of small entities: (1) 
Wholesale livestock traders and (2) accredited veterinarians. The SBA's 
definition of a ``small'' entity involved in the wholesale trade of 
livestock is one that employs no more than 100 employees. Currently, 
there are 1,992 domestic entities that trade livestock wholesale. About 
1,965 of these entities are classified as ``small'' by the SBA. 
Livestock facilities and stockyards comprise about 1,768 (90 percent) 
of the ``small'' entities included in this category. We estimate that 
about 884 (50 percent) of these ``small'' entities currently hire 
accredited veterinarians. The proposed rule change could reduce annual 
operating costs for these 884 ``small'' entities by about $2.3 million 
or $2,600 per entity. This accounts for less than 1 percent of total 
annual receipts for ``small'' wholesale livestock traders according to 
SBA data.
    The SBA's definition of a ``small'' entity that provides veterinary 
services for livestock--the category into which the accredited 
veterinarians potentially affected by this proposed rule would fall--is 
one that earns less than $5 million in annual receipts. Currently, 
there are 1,111 domestic entities that provide veterinary services for 
livestock; 1,110 of these entities are classified as ``small'' by the 
SBA. The Agency estimates that this proposed rule could reduce total 
annual income for livestock veterinarians, including accredited 
veterinarians, by about $2.3 million or $2,070 per ``small'' entity. 
This accounts for less than 1 percent of total annual receipts for this 
industry, according to SBA data.
    Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Executive Order 12372

    This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, 
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local 
officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 
Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is adopted: (1) All State 
and local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this rule will 
be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this rule; and 
(3) administrative proceedings will not be required before parties may 
file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains no new information collection or 
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Regulatory Reform

    This action is part of the President's Regulatory Reform 
Initiative, which, among other things, directs agencies to remove 
obsolete and unnecessary regulations and to find less burdensome ways 
to achieve regulatory goals.

List of Subjects

9 CFR Part 51

    Animal diseases, Cattle, Hogs, Indemnity payments, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

9 CFR Part 71

    Animal diseases, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products, 
Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

9 CFR Part 75

    Animal diseases, Horses, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Transportation.

9 CFR Part 76

    Animal diseases, Hogs, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Transportation.

9 CFR Part 78

    Animal diseases, Bison, Cattle, Hogs, Quarantine, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

9 CFR Part 80

    Animal diseases, Livestock, Transportation.

9 CFR Part 85

    Animal diseases, Livestock, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Transportation.

    Accordingly, we would amend chapter I, title 9, of the Code of 
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 51--ANIMALS DESTROYED BECAUSE OF BRUCELLOSIS

    1. The authority citation for part 51 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 114, 114a, 114a-1, 120, 121, 125, 
and 134b; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).


Sec. 51.1  [Amended]

    2. In Sec. 51.1, the definition of Specifically approved stockyard 
would be amended by removing the reference ``Sec. 78.44'' and adding 
the reference ``Sec. 71.20'' in its place.

PART 56--[RESERVED]

    3. Part 56 would be removed and reserved.

PART 71--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    4. The authority citation for part 71 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 114a, 114a-1, 115-117, 120-126, 
134b, and 134f; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).


Sec. 71.1  [Amended]

    5. Section 71.1 would be amended as follows:
    a. By removing the definitions of accredited herd, APHIS inspector, 
designated dipping station, recognized slaughtering center, and 
stockers and feeders.
    b. By adding, in alphabetical order, definitions of APHIS 
representative, approved livestock facility, breeder swine, horses, 
feeder swine, livestock, premises identification number, and slaughter 
swine to read as set forth below.
    c. In the definition of livestock market, by removing the word 
``swine'' and adding the word ``livestock'' in its place.
    d. In the definition of official eartag, by removing the words 
``nine-character''.


Sec. 71.1  Definitions.

* * * * *

[[Page 56161]]

    APHIS representative. An individual employed by APHIS who is 
authorized to perform the function involved.
    Approved livestock facility. A stockyard, livestock market, buying 
station, concentration point, or any other premises under State or 
Federal veterinary supervision where livestock are assembled and that 
has been approved under Sec. 71.20.
* * * * *
    Breeder swine. Sexually intact swine over 6 months of age.
* * * * *
    Feeder swine. Swine under 6 months of age that are not slaughter 
swine.
* * * * *
    Horses. Horses, asses, mules, ponies, and zebras.
* * * * *
    Livestock. Horses, cattle, bison, and swine.
* * * * *
    Premises identification number. A unique number assigned by the 
State animal health official to a livestock production unit that is, in 
the judgment of the State animal health official or area veterinarian 
in charge, epidemiologically distinct from other livestock production 
units. A premises identification number shall consist of the State's 
two-letter postal abbreviation, followed by a space, followed by the 
premises' assigned number. A premises identification number may be used 
in conjunction with a producer's own livestock production numbering 
system to provide a unique identification number for an animal.
* * * * *
    Slaughter swine. Swine being sold or moved for slaughter purposes 
only.
* * * * *


Sec. 71.3  [Amended]

    6. Section 71.3 would be amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a), the words ``hog cholera,'' would be removed 
and the word ``pseudorabies,'' would be added in its place.
    b. In paragraph (b), the words ``hog cholera,'' would be added 
immediately after the words ``African swine fever,''.
    c. In paragraph (c)(2), the reference ``Sec. 77.8'' would be 
removed and the reference ``Sec. 77.5'' would be added in its place.
    d. In paragraph (d), introductory text, in the second proviso, the 
word ``inspector'' would be removed and the word ``representative'' 
would be added in its place.
    e. In paragraph (d)(5), first sentence, the word ``inspector'' 
would be removed and the word ``representative'' would be added in its 
place.


Sec. 71.4  [Amended]

    7. Section 71.4 would be amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a), at the end of the first sentence, the word 
``inspector'' would be removed and the word ``representative'' would be 
added in its place; at the beginning of the second sentence, the words 
``such inspector'' would be removed and the words ``an APHIS or State 
representative'' would be added in their place; and near the end of the 
second sentence, the words ``such an inspector'' would be removed and 
the words ``an APHIS or State representative'' would be added in their 
place.
    b. In paragraph (b), the word ``inspector'' would be removed and 
the word ``representative'' would be added in its place.


Sec. 71.5  [Amended]

    8. In Sec. 71.5, the undesignated regulatory text would be amended 
by removing the word ``inspector'' both times it appears and by adding 
the word ``representative'' in its place.


Sec. 71.6  [Amended]

    9. In Sec. 71.6, paragraphs (a) and (b) would be amended by 
removing the word ``inspector'' both times it appears and by adding the 
word ``representative'' in its place.


Sec. 71.13  [Amended]

    10. In Sec. 71.13, the section heading and the undesignated 
regulatory text would be amended by removing the word ``inspector'' 
each time it appears and adding the word ``representative'' in its 
place.


Sec. 71.16  [Amended]

    11. In Sec. 71.16, paragraph (a) would be amended by removing the 
word ``inspector'' both times it appears and by adding the word 
``representative'' in its place.


Sec. 71.18  [Amended]

    12. Section 71.18 would be amended as follows:
    a. In the introductory text of paragraph (a), in the first 
sentence, the words ``Secs. 78.9(a)(3)(iv), 78.9(b)(3)(iv), 
78.9(c)(3)(iv), and 78.9(d)(3)(vii)'' would be removed and the words 
``Secs. 78.9(a)(3)(ii), 78.9(b)(3)(iv), and 78.9(c)(3)(iv)'' would be 
added in their place.
    b. In paragraph (a)(1)(i), footnote 1, the words ``Veterinary 
Services'' would be removed both times they appear and the word 
``APHIS'' would be added in their place.
    c. Paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(a) through (a)(1)(i)(g) would be 
redesignated as paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A) through (a)(1)(i)(G).
    d. Paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(a) through (a)(1)(ii)(f) would be 
redesignated as paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(A) through (a)(1)(ii)(F).
    e. Paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(a) through (a)(1)(iii)(g) would be 
redesignated as paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(A) through (a)(1)(iii)(G).
    f. In paragraph (a)(2), in the second sentence, the word 
``inspector'' would be removed and the word ``representative'' would be 
added in its place.
    g. In paragraph (a)(5), the words ``Sec. 78.44 of this chapter'' 
would be removed and the reference ``Sec. 71.20'' would be added in its 
place.
    13. Section 71.19 would be amended as follows:
    a. In the introductory text of paragraph (a)(1), the words ``they 
are individually'' would be removed and the words ``each swine is'' 
would be added in their place.
    b. In paragraph (b)(5), the word ``and'' at the end of the 
paragraph would be removed.
    c. Paragraph (b)(6) would be revised and a new paragraph (b)(7) 
would be added to read as follows:


Sec. 71.19  Identification of swine in interstate commerce.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) Tattoos on the ear or inner flank of any swine, if the tattoos 
have been recorded in the book of record of a swine registry 
association; and
    (7) An eartag or tattoo bearing the premises identification number 
assigned by the State animal health official to the premises on which 
the swine originated.
* * * * *
    14. A new Sec. 71.20 would be added to read as follows:


Sec. 71.20  Approval of livestock facilities.

    (a) To qualify for approval by the Administrator as an approved 
livestock facility 6 and to retain such designation, the 
individual legally responsible for the day-to-day operations of the 
livestock facility shall execute the following agreement:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A list of approved livestock facilities may be obtained by 
writing to National Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River 
Road Unit 36, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AGREEMENT--APPROVED LIVESTOCK FACILITY FOR HANDLING LIVESTOCK PURSUANT 
TO TITLE 9 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

[Name of facility]
[Address and telephone number of facility]

[[Page 56162]]

    I, [name of the individual legally responsible for the day-to-
day operations of the livestock facility], operator of [name of 
facility], hereby agree to maintain and operate the livestock 
facility located at [address of premises] in accordance with the 
applicable provisions of this agreement and Chapter I, Title 9, of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (9 CFR).

Cooperation

    (1) The State animal health official and the area veterinarian 
in charge shall be provided with a schedule of the facility's sale 
days, which shall indicate the types of animals that will be handled 
at the facility on each sale day, and shall be apprised of any 
changes to that schedule prior to the implementation of the changes. 
The State animal health official and the area veterinarian in charge 
will review the schedule and inform the operator as to which sale 
days will require the presence of an accredited veterinarian, State 
representative, or APHIS representative.
    (2) An accredited veterinarian, State representative, or APHIS 
representative shall be on the facility premises on those sale days 
designated by the State animal health official or area veterinarian 
in charge to perform duties in accordance with State and Federal 
regulations.
    (3) State representatives and APHIS representatives shall be 
granted access to the facility during normal business hours to 
evaluate whether the facility and its operations are in compliance 
with the applicable provisions of this agreement and 9 CFR parts 71, 
75, 78, and 85.
    (4) An APHIS representative, State representative, or accredited 
veterinarian shall be immediately notified of the presence at the 
facility of any livestock that are known to be infected, exposed, or 
suspect, or that show signs of possibly being infected, with any 
infectious, contagious, or communicable disease.
    (5) Any reactor, suspect, or exposed livestock shall be held in 
quarantined pens apart from all other livestock at the facility.
    (6) No reactor, suspect, or exposed livestock, nor any livestock 
that show signs of being infected with any infectious, contagious, 
or communicable disease, may be sold at the facility, except as 
authorized by an APHIS representative, State representative, or 
accredited veterinarian.

Records

    (7) Documents such as weight tickets, sales slips, and records 
of origin, identification, and destination that relate to livestock 
that are in, or that have been in, the facility shall be maintained 
by the facility for a period of 2 years. APHIS representatives and 
State representatives shall be permitted to review and copy those 
documents during normal business hours.

Identification

    (8) All livestock must be officially identified in accordance 
with the applicable regulations in 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 78, and 85 at 
the time of, or prior to, entry into the facility.

Cleaning and Disinfection

    (9) The facility, including all yards, docks, pens, alleys, sale 
rings, chutes, scales, means of conveyance, and their associated 
equipment, shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. 
The operator of the facility shall be responsible for the cleaning 
and disinfection of the facility in accordance with 9 CFR part 71 
and for maintaining an adequate supply of disinfectant and 
serviceable equipment for cleaning and disinfection.

General Facilities and Equipment Standards

    (10) All facilities and equipment shall be maintained in a state 
of good repair. The facility shall contain well-constructed and 
well-lighted livestock handling chutes, pens, alleys, and sales 
rings for the inspection, identification, vaccination, testing, and 
branding of livestock.
    (11) Quarantined pens shall be clearly labeled with paint or 
placarded with the word ``Quarantined'' or the name of the disease 
of concern, and shall be cleaned and disinfected in accordance with 
9 CFR part 71 before being used to pen livestock that are not 
reactor, suspect, or exposed animals.
    (12) Quarantined pens shall have adequate drainage, and the 
floors and those parts of the walls of the quarantined pens with 
which reactor, or suspect, or exposed livestock, their excrement, or 
discharges may have contact shall be constructed of materials that 
are substantially impervious to moisture and able to withstand 
continued cleaning and disinfection.
    (13) Electrical outlets shall be provided at the chute area for 
branding purposes.

Standards for Handling Different Classes of Livestock 

(By his or her initials, the operator of the facility shall signify 
the class or classes of livestock that the facility will handle.)

    (14) Cattle and bison:

--This facility will handle cattle and bison: [Initials of operator, 
date]
--This facility will handle cattle and bison known to be brucellosis 
reactors, suspects, or exposed: [Initials of operator, date]
--This facility will not handle cattle and bison known to be 
brucellosis reactors, suspects, or exposed and such cattle and bison 
will not be permitted to enter the facility: [Initials of operator, 
date]

    (i) Cattle and bison shall be received, handled, and released by 
the facility only in accordance with 9 CFR parts 71 and 78.
    (ii) All brucellosis reactor, brucellosis suspect, and 
brucellosis exposed cattle or bison arriving at the facility shall 
be placed in quarantined pens and consigned from the facility only 
in accordance with 9 CFR part 78.
    (iii) Any cattle or bison classified as brucellosis reactors at 
the facility shall be identified in accordance with 9 CFR part 78, 
placed in quarantined pens, and consigned from the facility only to 
a recognized slaughtering establishment or an approved intermediate 
handling facility in accordance with 9 CFR part 78.
    (iv) Any cattle or bison classified as brucellosis exposed at 
the facility shall be identified in accordance with 9 CFR part 78, 
placed in quarantined pens, and consigned from the facility only to 
a recognized slaughtering establishment, approved intermediate 
handling facility, quarantined feedlot, or farm of origin in 
accordance with 9 CFR part 78.
    (v) The identity of cattle from Class Free States or areas and 
Class A States or areas shall be maintained.
    (vi) The identity of cattle from Class B States or areas shall 
be maintained, and test-eligible cattle from Class B States or areas 
shall not be placed in pens with cattle from any other area until 
they have fulfilled the requirements of 9 CFR part 78 for release 
from the facility.
    (vii) The identity of cattle from Class C States or areas shall 
be maintained, and test-eligible cattle from Class C States or areas 
shall not be placed in pens with cattle from any other area until 
they have fulfilled the requirements of 9 CFR part 78 for release 
from the facility.
    (viii) The identity of cattle from quarantined areas shall be 
maintained, and test-eligible cattle from quarantined areas shall 
not be placed in pens with cattle from any other area until they 
have fulfilled the requirements of 9 CFR part 78 for release from 
the facility.
    (ix) Test-eligible cattle that are penned with test-eligible 
cattle from a lower class State or area, in violation of this 
agreement, shall have the status of the State or area of lower class 
for any subsequent movement.
    (x) Laboratory space shall be furnished and maintained for 
conducting diagnostic tests. All test reagents, testing equipment, 
and documents relating to the State-Federal cooperative eradication 
programs on the facility's premises shall be secured to prevent 
misuse and theft. Adequate heat, cooling, electricity, water piped 
to a properly drained sink, and sanitation shall be provided for 
properly conducting diagnostic tests.
    (15) Swine:

--This facility will handle breeding swine: [Initials of operator, 
date]
--This facility will handle slaughter swine: [Initials of operator, 
date]
--This facility will handle feeder swine: [Initials of operator, 
date]
--This facility will handle pseudorabies reactor, suspect, or 
exposed swine: [Initials of operator, date].
--This facility will not handle swine known to be pseudorabies 
reactor, suspect, or exposed swine and such swine will not be 
permitted to enter the facility: [Initials of operator, date].

    (i) Swine shall be received, handled, and released by the 
livestock facility only in accordance with 9 CFR parts 71, 78, and 
85.
    (ii) Slaughter swine may be handled only on days when no feeder 
swine or breeder swine are present at the facility, unless the 
facility has provisions to keep slaughter swine physically separated 
from feeder swine and breeder swine or unless those areas of the 
facility used by slaughter swine have been cleaned and disinfected 
before being used by feeder swine or breeder swine.
    (iii) No feeder swine or breeder swine may remain in the 
livestock facility for more than 72 hours, and no slaughter swine 
may remain

[[Page 56163]]

in the livestock market for more than 120 hours.
    (iv) Feeder swine shall be kept separate and apart from other 
swine while in the livestock facility.
    (v) No release shall be issued for the removal of feeder swine 
or breeder swine from the livestock facility until the swine are 
officially identified in accordance with applicable Federal or State 
regulations and have been inspected by an APHIS representative, 
State representative, or accredited veterinarian, and certified in 
accordance with applicable Federal or State regulations.
    (vi) No release shall be issued for the removal of slaughter 
swine from the livestock facility unless the slaughter swine are 
officially identified in accordance with applicable Federal or State 
regulations, consigned for immediate slaughter or to another 
slaughter market, and the consignee is identified on the release 
document.
    (16) Horses:

--This facility will handle horses: [Initials of operator, date]
--This facility will handle equine infectious anemia (EIA) reactors: 
[Initials of operator, date]
--This facility will not handle horses known to be EIA reactors and 
will not permit EIA reactors to enter the facility: [Initials of 
operator, date]

    (i) Horses shall be received, handled, and released by the 
livestock facility only in accordance with 9 CFR parts 71 and 75.
    (ii) Any horses classified as EIA reactors and accepted by the 
facility for sale shall be placed in quarantined pens at least 200 
yards from all non-EIA-reactor horses or other animals, unless 
moving out of the facility within 24 hours of arrival.
    (iii) Any horses classified as EIA reactors and accepted by the 
facility for sale shall be consigned from the facility only to a 
slaughtering establishment or to the home farm of the reactor in 
accordance with 9 CFR part 75.
    (iv) Fly Control Program: The livestock facility shall have in 
effect a fly control program utilizing at least one of the 
following: Baits, fly strips, electric bug killers (``Fly Zappers,'' 
``Fly Snappers,'' or similar equipment), or the application of a 
pesticide effective against flies, applied according to the schedule 
and dosage recommended by the manufacturer for fly control.

Approvals

    (17) Request for approval:
    I hereby request approval for this facility to operate as an 
approved livestock facility for the classes of livestock indicated 
in paragraphs (14) through (16) of this agreement. I acknowledge 
that I have received a copy of 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 78 and 85, and 
acknowledge that I have been informed and understand that failure to 
abide by the provisions of this agreement and the applicable 
provisions of 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 78, and 85 constitutes a basis for 
the withdrawal of this approval. [Printed name and signature of 
operator, date of signature]
    (18) Pre-approval inspection of livestock facility conducted by 
[printed name and title of APHIS representative] on [date of 
inspection].
    (19) Recommend approval:
    [Printed name and signature of State animal health official, 
date of signature]
    [Printed name and signature of area veterinarian in charge, date 
of signature]
    (20) Approval granted:
    [Printed name and signature of the Administrator, Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service, date of signature]

    (b) Denial and withdrawal of approval. The Administrator may deny 
or withdraw the approval of a livestock facility to receive livestock 
moved interstate under this subchapter upon a determination that the 
livestock facility is not or has not been maintained and operated in 
accordance with the agreement set forth in paragraph (a) of this 
section.
    (1) In the case of a denial, the operator of the facility will be 
informed of the reasons for the denial and may appeal the decision in 
writing to the Administrator within 10 days after receiving 
notification of the denial. The appeal must include all of the facts 
and reasons upon which the person relies to show that the livestock 
facility was wrongfully denied approval to receive livestock moved 
interstate under this subchapter. The Administrator will grant or deny 
the appeal in writing as promptly as circumstances permit, stating the 
reason for his or her decision. If there is a conflict as to any 
material fact, a hearing will be held to resolve the conflict. Rules of 
practice concerning the hearing will be adopted by the Administrator.
    (2) In the case of withdrawal, before such action is taken, the 
operator of the facility will be informed of the reasons for the 
proposed withdrawal. The operator of the facility may appeal the 
proposed withdrawal in writing to the Administrator within 10 days 
after being informed of the reasons for the proposed withdrawal. The 
appeal must include all of the facts and reasons upon which the person 
relies to show that the reasons for the proposed withdrawal are 
incorrect or do not support the withdrawal of the approval of the 
livestock facility to receive livestock moved interstate under this 
subchapter. The Administrator will grant or deny the appeal in writing 
as promptly as circumstances permit, stating the reason for his or her 
decision. If there is a conflict as to any material fact, a hearing 
will be held to resolve the conflict. Rules of practice concerning the 
hearing will be adopted by the Administrator. However, withdrawal shall 
become effective pending final determination in the proceeding when the 
Administrator determines that such action is necessary to protect the 
public health, interest, or safety. Such withdrawal shall be effective 
upon oral or written notification, whichever is earlier, to the 
operator of the facility. In the event of oral notification, written 
confirmation shall be given as promptly as circumstances allow. This 
withdrawal shall continue in effect pending the completion of the 
proceeding, and any judicial review thereof, unless otherwise ordered 
by the Administrator.
    (3) Approval for a livestock facility to handle livestock under 
this subchapter will be automatically withdrawn by the Administrator 
when:
    (i) The operator of the facility notifies the Administrator, in 
writing, that the facility no longer handles livestock moved interstate 
under this subchapter; or
    (ii) The person who signed the agreement executed in accordance 
with paragraph (a) of this section is no longer responsible for the 
day-to-day operations of the facility.

PART 75--COMMUNICABLE DISEASES IN HORSES, ASSES, PONIES, MULES, AND 
ZEBRAS

    15. The authority citation for part 75 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 115, 117, 120, 121, 123-126, and 
134-134h; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

Sec. 75.4  [Amended]

    16. Section 75.4 would be amended as follows:
    a. The section heading would be revised to read as set forth below.
    b. In paragraph (a), the definition of Approved stockyard would be 
amended by removing the words ``this part'' and by adding the words 
``Sec. 71.20 of this chapter'' in their place.
    c. In paragraph (c), the paragraph heading would be amended by 
removing the words ``, Diagnostic or Research Facilities, and 
Stockyards'' and by adding the words ``and Diagnostic or Research 
Facilities'' in their place, and paragraph (c)(3) and the ``Agreement'' 
following it would be removed.
    d. In paragraph (d), the introductory text of the paragraph, 
including the paragraph heading, and paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) would 
be revised to read as set forth below, and paragraph (d)(5) would be 
removed.


Sec. 75.4  Interstate movement of equine infectious anemia reactors and 
approval of laboratories, diagnostic facilities, and research 
facilities.

* * * * *
    (d) Denial and withdrawal of approval of laboratories and 
diagnostic or research facilities. The Administrator

[[Page 56164]]

may deny or withdraw approval of any laboratory to conduct the official 
test, or of any diagnostic or research facility to receive reactors 
moved interstate, upon a determination that the laboratory or 
diagnostic or research facility does not meet the criteria for approval 
under paragraph (c) of this section.
    (1) In the case of a denial, the operator of the laboratory or 
facility will be informed of the reasons for denial and may appeal the 
decision in writing to the Administrator within 10 days after receiving 
notification of the denial. The appeal must include all of the facts 
and reasons upon which the person relies to show that the laboratory or 
facility was wrongfully denied approval to conduct the official test or 
receive reactors moved interstate. The Administrator will grant or deny 
the appeal in writing as promptly as circumstances permit, stating the 
reason for his or her decision. If there is a conflict as to any 
material fact, a hearing will be held to resolve the conflict. Rules of 
practice concerning the hearing will be adopted by the Administrator.
    (2) In the case of withdrawal, before such action is taken, the 
operator of the laboratory or facility will be informed of the reasons 
for the proposed withdrawal. The operator of the laboratory or facility 
may appeal the proposed withdrawal in writing to the Administrator 
within 10 days after being informed of the reasons for the proposed 
withdrawal. The appeal must include all of the facts and reasons upon 
which the person relies to show that the reasons for the proposed 
withdrawal are incorrect or do not support the withdrawal of the 
approval of the laboratory or facility to conduct the official test or 
receive reactors moved interstate was or would be wrongfully withdrawn. 
The Administrator will grant or deny the appeal in writing as promptly 
as circumstances permit, stating the reason for his or her decision. If 
there is a conflict as to any material fact, a hearing will be held to 
resolve the conflict. Rules of practice concerning the hearing will be 
adopted by the Administrator. However, the withdrawal shall become 
effective pending final determination in the proceeding when the 
Administrator determines that such action is necessary to protect the 
public health, interest, or safety. Such withdrawal shall be effective 
upon oral or written notification, whichever is earlier, to the 
operator of the laboratory or facility. In the event of oral 
notification, written confirmation shall be given as promptly as 
circumstances allow. The withdrawal shall continue in effect pending 
the completion of the proceeding, and any judicial review thereof, 
unless otherwise ordered by the Administrator.
* * * * *

PART 76--[REMOVED AND RESERVED]

    17. Part 76 would be removed and reserved.

PART 78--BRUCELLOSIS

    18. The authority citation for part 78 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-114a-1, 114g, 115, 117, 120, 121, 123-
126, 134b, and 134f; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).


Sec. 78.1  [Amended]

    19. Section 78.1 would be amended as follows:
    a. In the definition of Approved intermediate handling facility, 
the reference ``Sec. 78.44'' would be removed and the words 
``Sec. 71.20 of this chapter'' would be added in its place.
    b. In the definition of Official eartag, the words ``nine-
character'' would be removed.
    c. In the definition of Originate, paragraph (c), the reference 
``Sec. 78.44'' would be removed and the words ``Sec. 71.20 of this 
chapter'' would be added in its place.
    d. In definition of Specifically approved stockyard, the reference 
``Sec. 78.44'' would be removed and the words ``Sec. 71.20 of this 
chapter'' would be added in its place.
    20. Section 78.33 would be revised to read as follows:


Sec. 78.33  Sows and boars.

    (a) Sows and boars may be moved in interstate commerce for 
slaughter or for sale for slaughter if they are identified in 
accordance with Sec. 71.19 of this chapter either:
    (1) Before being moved in interstate commerce and before being 
mixed with swine from any other source; or
    (2) After being moved in interstate commerce but before being mixed 
with swine from any other source only if they have been moved directly 
from their herd of origin to:
    (i) A recognized slaughtering establishment; or
    (ii) A stockyard, market agency, or dealer operating under the 
Packers and Stockyards Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).
    (b) Sows and boars may be moved in interstate commerce for breeding 
only if they are identified in accordance with Sec. 71.19 of this 
chapter before being moved in interstate commerce and before being 
mixed with swine from any other source, and the sows and boars either:
    (1) Are from a validated brucellosis-free herd or a validated 
brucellosis-free State and are accompanied by a certificate that 
states, in addition to the items specified in Sec. 78.1, that the swine 
originated in a validated brucellosis-free herd or a validated 
brucellosis-free State; or
    (2) Have tested negative to an official test conducted within 30 
days prior to interstate movement and are accompanied by a certificate 
that states, in addition to the items specified in Sec. 78.1, the dates 
and results of the official tests.
    (c) Sows and boars may be moved in interstate commerce for purposes 
other than slaughter or breeding without restriction under this subpart 
if they are identified in accordance with Sec. 71.19 of this chapter.
    21. The title of subpart E would be amended by removing the words 
``, and Specifically Approved Stockyards''.


Sec. 78.44  [Removed]

    22. Section 78.44 would be removed.
PART 80--PARATUBERCULOSIS IN DOMESTIC ANIMALS
    23. The authority citation for part 80 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 114a-1, 115, 117, 120, 121, and 
125; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).
Sec. 80.1  [Amended]
    24. In Sec. 80.1, paragraph (j) would be amended by removing the 
reference ``Sec. 78.44'' and by adding the words ``Sec. 71.20 of this 
chapter'' in its place.
PART 85--PSEUDORABIES
    25. The authority citation for part 85 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111, 112, 113, 115, 117, 120, 121, 123-126, 
134b, and 134f; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).
Sec. 85.1  [Amended]
    26. In Sec. 85.1, in the definition of Approved livestock market, 
the words ``Sec. 76.18 (9 CFR 76.18)'' would be removed and the words 
``Sec. 71.20 of this chapter'' would be added in their place.
    27. In Sec. 85.1, in the definition of Slaughter market, the words 
``Sec. 76.18 (9 CFR 76.18)'' would be removed and the words 
``Sec. 71.20 of this chapter'' would be added in their place.
Sec. 85.12  [Amended]
    28. Section 85.12 would be amended by removing the reference 
``Sec. 76.30'' and by adding the reference ``Sec. 71.7'' in its place.


Sec. 85.13  [Amended]
    29. Section 85.13 would be amended by removing the reference 
``Sec. 76.31'' and

[[Page 56165]]

by adding the reference ``Sec. 71.7'' in its place.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of October 1996.
A. Strating,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 96-27975 Filed 10-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P