[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 158 (Tuesday, August 15, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49770-49775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-20657]


 ========================================================================
 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. 65, No. 158 / Tuesday, August 15, 2000 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 49770]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 79

[Docket No. 97-093-4]
RIN 0579-AA90


Scrapie in Sheep and Goats; List of Consistent States

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to establish a list of States that conduct an 
active State scrapie program that is consistent with Federal 
requirements. This list of ``Consistent States'' will be referred to in 
addressing interstate movement restrictions for sheep and goats. We 
also propose to expand the criteria we proposed earlier for how States 
may qualify to be designated as Consistent States in order to provide 
more detailed information in this area. These changes would help 
prevent the interstate spread of scrapie, an infectious disease of 
sheep and goats.

DATES: We invite you to comment on this docket. We will consider all 
comments that we receive by September 14, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Please send your comment and three copies to: Docket No. 97-
093-4, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Suite 3C03, 
4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.
    Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. 97-093-4. You 
may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading 
room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South 
Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. 
Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, 
please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
    APHIS documents published in the Federal Register, and related 
information, including the names of organizations and individuals who 
have commented on APHIS dockets, are available on the Internet at 
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Diane Sutton, Senior Staff 
Veterinarian, National Animal Health Programs Staff, 4700 River Road 
Unit 43, Riverdale, MD 20737-1235, (301) 734-6954.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scrapie is a degenerative and eventually 
fatal disease affecting the central nervous systems of sheep and goats. 
It is a member of a class of diseases called transmissible spongiform 
encephalopathies (TSE's). Its control is complicated because the 
disease has an extremely long incubation period without clinical signs 
of disease.
    To control the spread of scrapie within the United States, the 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), U.S. Department of 
Agriculture (USDA), administers regulations at 9 CFR part 79, which 
restrict the interstate movement of certain sheep and goats. APHIS also 
has regulations at 9 CFR part 54, which describe a voluntary scrapie 
control program.
    For over 40 years, USDA has had programs to eradicate or reduce the 
incidence of scrapie in the United States. The comprehensive data on 
the incidence of scrapie has always been hard to assemble due to the 
nature of the disease and its diagnosis. These programs have not 
resulted in a major reduction in the incidence of scrapie. A major 
reason for this result is that State programs for scrapie have varied 
tremendously in their resources and effectiveness. Some States may not 
invest sufficient resources to identify infected flocks or reduce the 
incidence of scrapie within that State, and sheep with undiagnosed 
cases of scrapie could then easily move to other States, infecting new 
flocks. Therefore, we believe that to build an effective national 
scrapie program, the current regulations must be adjusted to recognize 
that sheep from States with minimal or nonexistent scrapie programs 
represent a higher risk than sheep from other States.
    On November 30, 1999, we published in the Federal Register (64 FR 
66791-66812, Docket No. 97-093-2) a proposal to amend regulations in 9 
CFR parts 54 and 79 that address the control of scrapie. That proposal, 
referred to below as the November 30 proposed rule, described two sets 
of interstate movement restrictions: One set for ``Consistent States'' 
and another set for ``Inconsistent States.'' The November 30 proposed 
rule stated that Consistent States would be States that conduct an 
active State scrapie program which effectively enforces certain 
requirements to identify scrapie in flocks and control its spread. We 
proposed on November 30, 1999, to establish a new Sec. 79.6 listing the 
requirements a State would have to meet to be a Consistent State. The 
proposed requirements included reporting and investigating any scrapie-
suspect animal, affected animal, or scrapie-positive animal; 
identifying and quarantining infected and source flocks; individually 
identifying certain exposed animals; and individually identifying and 
monitoring certain high-risk animals. The proposed individual 
identification and monitoring of high-risk animals were to apply to 
animals in all flocks, not just source or infected flocks as required 
by the current regulations.
    We solicited comments concerning the November 30 proposed rule for 
30 days ending December 30, 1999. We reopened and extended the deadline 
for comments until January 14, 2000, in a document published in the 
Federal Register on January 7, 2000 (Docket No. 97-093-3, 65 FR 1074). 
We received 171 comments by that date. They were from State agriculture 
agencies, sheep and goat industry associations, sheep and goat 
producers, livestock auction and slaughter companies, and universities 
and researchers. We will address these comments later when we take 
final action on the November 30 proposed rule. However, the November 30 
proposed rule also stated that before we finalized the proposal, we 
would develop and publish for comment a list of States that qualify as 
Consistent States.
    This proposal lists the States that qualify as Consistent States.
    The November 30 proposed rule stated that, in determining whether a 
State qualified as a Consistent State, the Administrator would evaluate 
the State statutes, regulations, and directives pertaining to animal 
health activities; reports and publications of the State

[[Page 49771]]

animal health agency; and a written statement from the State animal 
health agency describing State scrapie control activities. All 50 
States have submitted written statements indicating their willingness 
to comply with the proposed requirements and have provided copies of 
their regulatory authority to carry out these actions. The 
Administrator has evaluated all of these submissions and other 
information and reports describing scrapie quarantine and control 
activities in these States and has determined that all 50 of the States 
meet the standards for Consistent State that were set forth in the 
November 30 proposed rule. That is, the Administrator considered 
whether the State's scrapie control program:
     Requires the reporting of and investigation of any suspect 
animal, affected animal, or scrapie-positive animal; requires the 
official permanent individual identification of any live scrapie-
positive, affected, or suspect animal of any age, and of any exposed 
animal, including high-risk animals, 1 year of age or over and any 
exposed animals less than 1 year of age when a change of ownership 
occurs, except those animals under 6 months of age moving within 
slaughter channels in accordance with the regulations (whether or not 
the exposed animal resides in a source or infected flock);
     Effectively enforces quarantines of all source and 
infected flocks;
     Effectively enforces quarantines of all high-risk, 
affected, suspect, and scrapie-positive animals throughout their lives 
unless moved in accordance with the regulations;
     Requires that, if an affected, suspect or scrapie-positive 
animal dies or is destroyed, that tissues be submitted for diagnostic 
testing to a laboratory authorized by the Administrator to conduct 
scrapie tests in accordance with the regulations and requires that the 
carcass be completely destroyed; and
     Releases quarantines of these flocks only upon completion 
of a flock plan and agreement by the owner to participate in a post-
exposure monitoring and management plan as defined in part 54.
    The 50 States that the Administrator has evaluated and has 
determined to be Consistent States are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, 
Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, 
Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, 
Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New 
Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, 
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South 
Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West 
Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Although the definition of State in 
the regulations includes territories and possessions of the United 
States, due to the scant amount of interstate commerce in sheep in 
territories and possessions it is unlikely that any of them will apply 
to be Consistent States.
    We intend to take final action on this proposal to list States as 
Consistent States at the same time we take final action on the November 
30 proposed rule. Comments received on this proposed rule, as well as 
comments on the November 30 proposed rule, will all be discussed in 
that final action.
    In addition to taking comments on whether to finalize the above 
list of 50 States as Consistent States, we are also seeking comment on 
proposed changes to the standards for designating Consistent States. 
These proposed changes are based largely on comments on the November 30 
proposed rule made by sheep industry associations, flock owners, and 
States regarding the standards States should meet to be designated as 
Consistent States. Several of these comments suggested that the 
regulations should be modeled after successful aspects of other APHIS 
disease eradication programs. We are proposing changes that contain 
more details on the required elements of State programs, similar to the 
detail that exists in APHIS regulations that govern similar programs 
for cattle and swine.
    In response to the suggestions made by commenters, we are proposing 
a new version of section 79.6, Standards for State programs to qualify 
as Consistent States, in lieu of the proposed section set out in the 
November 30 proposed rule at 64 FR 66812. The new proposed section and 
a discussion of it follows.
    We propose that when the Administrator evaluates a State to 
determine whether it qualifies for Consistent State status, he would 
first evaluate the following: State statutes, regulations, and 
directives pertaining to animal health activities; reports and 
publications of the State animal health agency; and a written statement 
from the State animal health agency describing State scrapie control 
activities and certifying that these activities meet the requirements 
Sec. 79.6. The Administrator would also determine whether the State has 
the authority, based on State law or regulation, to restrict the 
movement of all scrapie-infected and source flocks and to require the 
reporting of any animal suspected of having scrapie to State or Federal 
animal health authorities.
    These proposed provisions are a restatement of the requirements in 
the November 30 proposed rule that Consistent States must have 
authority to restrict movements of animals from scrapie-infected and 
source flocks and to require the reporting of suspect animal, affected 
animal, or scrapie-positive animals.
    We also propose that the Administrator would determine whether the 
State has, in cooperation with APHIS personnel, drafted and signed a 
memorandum of understanding between APHIS and the State that delineates 
the respective roles of each in National Scrapie Program 
implementation.
    In the November 30 proposed rule we requested comments on the issue 
of whether APHIS should sign compliance agreements with States 
describing the roles of APHIS and State governments in scrapie program 
activities. Several commenters endorsed this idea. We propose the use 
of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) rather than a compliance 
agreement to record the roles of APHIS and each State in program 
activities because experience in domestic disease control programs have 
shown use of MOU's greatly enhances cooperation between APHIS and State 
personnel, an MOU will achieve the same purpose as a compliance 
agreement, and States are familiar with the use of MOU's.
    We propose that the Administrator would also evaluate whether the 
State has placed all known scrapie-infected and source flocks under 
movement restrictions, with movement of animals only to slaughter, to 
feedlots under permit, and movement restrictions that ensure later 
movement to slaughter, for destruction, or for research. Scrapie-
positive and suspect animals could be moved only for transport to an 
approved research facility or for purposes of destruction. The 
Administrator would also evaluate whether the State has effectively 
implemented policies to:
     Investigate all animals reported as scrapie suspect 
animals within 7 days of notification;
     Designate a flock's status, within 15 days of notification 
that the flock contains a scrapie-positive animal, based on an 
investigation by State or Federal animal health authorities;
     Restrict the movement, in accordance with proposed 
Sec. 79.6(a)(4), of newly designated scrapie-infected and source flocks 
within 7 days after they are designated in accordance with proposed 
Sec. 79.4;

[[Page 49772]]

     Relieve infected and source flock movement restrictions 
only after completion of a flock plan created in accordance with 
proposed Sec. 54.14 or a flock plan created in accordance with an 
approved scrapie control pilot project, or as permitted by the 
conditions of such a flock plan, and after agreement by the owner to 
comply with a 5-year postexposure monitoring and management plan;
     Conduct an epidemiologic investigation of source and 
infected flocks that includes the designation of high-risk and exposed 
animals and that identifies animals to be traced;
     Conduct tracebacks of scrapie-positive animals and 
traceouts of high-risk and exposed animals and report any out-of-State 
traces to the appropriate State within 45 days of receipt of 
notification of a scrapie-positive animal; and,
     Conduct tracebacks based on slaughter sampling within 15 
days of receipt of notification of a scrapie-positive animal at 
slaughter.
    These proposed provisions expand upon the requirements in the 
November 30 proposed rule that Consistent States must effectively 
quarantine all scrapie-infected and source flocks and all high-risk, 
affected, suspect, and scrapie-positive animals. The added details 
describe best practices for investigating and quarantining scrapie 
outbreaks that are based on APHIS procedures employed during many years 
of program experience dealing with animal disease outbreaks. The 
proposed language also adds details on steps States should take before 
releasing quarantines or modifying movement restrictions, based on 
practices APHIS has found effective in past quarantine operations.
    We also propose that the Administrator would evaluate whether the 
State effectively monitors and enforces quarantines, and effectively 
enforces State reporting laws and regulations for scrapie. These 
proposed provisions are identical to requirements proposed in the 
November 30 proposed rule.
    We also propose that the Administrator would determine whether the 
State has designated at least one APHIS or State animal health official 
to coordinate scrapie program activities in the State and to serve as 
the designated scrapie epidemiologist in the State, and whether the 
State has educated those engaged in the interstate movement of sheep 
and goats regarding the identification and recordkeeping requirements 
of the regulations.
    These proposed provisions are similar to provisions employed in 
APHIS regulations for domestic disease control programs for cattle and 
swine. APHIS finds that having a designated epidemiologist for program 
activities for each State greatly facilitates management of disease 
programs, and that education programs for persons engaged in interstate 
movement of animals greatly aids compliance and the effectiveness of 
disease control programs.
    We also propose that the Administrator would determine whether the 
State has provided APHIS with a plan and timeline for complying with 
the following additional requirements, which would have to be met 
within 2 years of designation of the State as a Consistent State.\1\ 
Under these requirements, the State would have to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This provision would apply until January 1, 2003. Any State 
designated as a Consistent State after that date would have to meet 
all requirements prior to designation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Require, based on State law or regulation, and effectively 
enforce official identification upon change of ownership of all animals 
of any age not in slaughter channels and any sheep over 18 months of 
age as evidenced by eruption of the second incisor such that the animal 
may be traced to its flock of birth. A State could exempt commercial 
goats in intrastate commerce from this identification requirement if 
the goats have not been in contact with sheep and if there has been in 
that State no case of scrapie in a commercial goat in the past 10 years 
that originated in that State and cannot be attributed to exposure to 
infected sheep and there are no exposed commercial goat herds in that 
State. A State could exempt commercial whiteface sheep under 18 months 
of age in intrastate commerce from this identification requirement if 
there has been in that State no case of scrapie in commercial whiteface 
sheep that originated from that State and there are no exposed 
commercial whiteface sheep flocks in that State that have been exposed 
by a female animal. States that exempt these types of commercial 
animals must put in place the regulations necessary to require 
identification of these animals within 90 days of these conditions no 
longer existing.
     Maintain in the National Scrapie Database administered by 
APHIS, or in a State database approved by the Administrator as 
compatible with the National Scrapie Database, the State's: (1) 
Premises information and assigned premises numbers and individual 
identification number sequences assigned for use as premises 
identification; (2) individual animal information on all scrapie-
positive, suspect, high-risk, and exposed animals in the State; (3) 
individual animal information on all out-of-State animals to be traced; 
and (4) accurate flock status data.
     Require official individual identification of any live 
scrapie-positive, suspect, or high-risk animal of any age and of any 
sexually intact exposed animal of more than 1 year of age or any 
sexually intact exposed animal of less than 1 year of age upon change 
of ownership (except for exposed animals moving in slaughter channels 
at less than 1 year of age), whether or not the animal resides in a 
source or infected flock.
     Effectively enforce movement restrictions on all scrapie-
positive, suspect, and high-risk animals throughout their lives unless 
they are moved in accordance with Sec. 79.3.
     Require that tissues from all scrapie-positive or suspect 
animals and female high-risk animals that have lambed (when they have 
died or have been destroyed) be submitted to a laboratory authorized by 
the Administrator to conduct scrapie tests and requires complete 
destruction of the carcasses of scrapie-positive and suspect animals.
     Prohibit any animal from being removed from slaughter 
channels unless it is identified to the premises of birth, is not from 
an inconsistent State, and is not scrapie-exposed or from an infected 
or source flock.
     Comply with the guidelines adopted in the Scrapie 
Eradication Uniform Methods and Rules.
    Finally, we propose that, if the Administrator determines that 
statutory changes are needed to bring a State into full compliance, the 
Administrator may grant up to a 2-year extension to allow a State to 
acquire additional authorities before removing a State's Consistent 
Status. The decision to grant an extension would be based on the 
State's ability to prevent the movement of scrapie-infected animals out 
of the State and on the progress being made in making the needed 
statutory changes.
    These proposed provisions add more detail to the requirements 
proposed in the November 30 proposed rule regarding the responsibility 
of Consistent States to conduct official animal identification 
programs, restrict the movement of certain animals, and submit for 
testing tissue samples from scrapie-positive or suspect animals and 
female high-risk animals.
    One change from the November 30 proposed rule is the proposal to 
identify any animal over 18 months of age, rather than any animal over 
6 months of age. APHIS agrees with the commenters

[[Page 49773]]

that age and sexual maturity are benchmarks that divide animals into 
different risk levels for scrapie transmission and our ability to 
diagnose the disease. After 18 months of age, a lamb will have an 
eruption of the second incisors and at this age due to sexual maturity 
the risk of transmission of scrapie increases significantly, as does 
the ability to diagnose scrapie. We propose to make this change based 
on comments indicating the 6-month standard would cause needless 
expense for persons moving lambs to slaughter, without significantly 
reducing risk.
    We also propose to exempt from this identification certain 
commercial goats and whiteface sheep if the incidence of scrapie in a 
State indicates scrapie is unlikely to exist in these populations. Only 
commercial goats that have never been in contact with sheep would be 
exempted from this identification requirement. A State could exempt 
such goats only if the only cases of scrapie ever identified among 
commercial goats in the State were in goats that either associated with 
sheep (in which case the infection was probably incidental to that 
association and not endemic to the goat population), or goats that 
originated in another State. However, a State could not exempt goats 
from identification if a goat diagnosed with scrapie has given birth in 
that State resulting in the exposure of other goat herds, even if that 
goat originated in another State, because the risks of spreading 
scrapie during birth processes are high. We also propose that a State 
may exempt commercial whiteface sheep under 18 months of age from this 
identification if there has been in that State no case of scrapie in 
commercial whiteface sheep and no commercial whiteface flocks in the 
State that have been exposed by a female animal. These proposed 
exemptions are based on information from commenters indicating that 
these situations for commercial goats and whiteface sheep present very 
low risks of spreading scrapie.
    Overall, the standards proposed above incorporate the standards in 
the November 30 proposed rule and expand them with more detail 
describing adequate State scrapie programs. A large part of the new 
material covers how States must maintain records documenting their 
quarantine and movement restriction activities, and how this 
information must be made available through the National Scrapie 
Database maintained by APHIS or through State databases. The proposed 
standards also provide more detail on the standards States must apply 
in releasing animals from quarantine, give more detail on 
identification requirements, and establish timelines for required 
actions and working relationships (e.g., the memorandum of 
understanding) between APHIS and States.
    Communication with the States that have applied for Consistent 
State status indicates that all 50 of the States we propose to 
designate Consistent, under the standards contained in the November 30 
proposed rule, would also be able to qualify as Consistent under the 
expanded standards we propose today. Some of the States are currently 
making changes to their procedures and authorities to bring their 
programs into full compliance. We expect that all these States will 
complete these activities within about 90 days after the date this 
proposal is published, and prior to the time final action is taken on 
it. One possible exception is where States must pass new laws or 
regulations to comply. For example, the State of Kentucky has authority 
to require reporting of disease only by diagnostic laboratories and 
accredited veterinarians. This authority may or may not be sufficient 
to meet the requirement in proposed Sec. 79.6(a)(2) that States 
``require the reporting of any animal suspected of having scrapie to 
State or Federal animal health authorities.''
    The efficacy of Kentucky's reporting system as well as that of the 
other States will be evaluated in an annual review by the Administrator 
to verify that Consistent States meet the requirements of the 
regulations. However, in the event that States find they need 
additional statutory authority to comply with the reporting or any 
other requirement, we wish to establish a system that allows States to 
remain Consistent States while they update their statutory authorities. 
That is the purpose of proposed Sec. 79.6(b), which states that if the 
Administrator determines that statutory changes are needed to bring a 
State into full compliance, the Administrator may grant up to a 2-year 
extension to allow a State to acquire additional authorities before 
removing a State's Consistent Status.
    As noted, we intend to take final action on these proposed 
standards for Consistent States, and on the proposed list of Consistent 
States, at the same time we take final action on the November 30 
proposed rule. At that time, all of the 50 States proposed as 
Consistent in today's proposal that meet the final standards for 
Consistent States, or that have been granted an extension by the 
Administrator under Sec. 79.6(b) to change their statutes in order to 
meet all the requirements, will be designated as Consistent States. 
After that final rule is published, States' program-consistent status 
will be reviewed at least annually. Any States not found in compliance 
after such a review will be removed from the list.

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 action would designate 50 States as Consistent States under 
the scrapie regulations, but would not have any economic effects in 
itself. The possible economic effects of Consistent State status were 
discussed in the November 30 proposed rule, and will be further 
discussed in a final regulatory flexibility analysis that will be 
prepared when final action is taken on that rule.

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 record 
keeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 79

    Animal diseases, Goats, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Scrapie, Sheep, Transportation.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we propose to amend part 
79 as set out in the proposed rule published on November 30, 1999 (64 
FR 66791), as follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 79 would be revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 115, 117, 120, 121, 123-126, 134b, 
and 134f; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.


[[Page 49774]]


    2. Section 79.6 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 79.6  Standards for State programs to qualify as Consistent 
States.

    (a) In reviewing a State for Consistent State status, the 
Administrator will evaluate the State statutes, regulations, and 
directives pertaining to animal health activities; reports and 
publications of the State animal health agency; and a written statement 
from the State animal health agency describing State scrapie control 
activities and certifying that these activities meet the requirements 
of this section. In determining whether a State is a Consistent State, 
the Administrator will determine whether the State:
    (1) Has the authority, based on State law or regulation, to 
restrict the movement of all scrapie-infected and source flocks.
    (2) Has the authority, based on State law or regulation, to require 
the reporting of any animal suspected of having scrapie to State or 
Federal animal health authorities.
    (3) Has, in cooperation with APHIS personnel, drafted and signed a 
memorandum of understanding between APHIS and the State that delineates 
the respective roles of each in National Scrapie Program 
implementation.
    (4) Has placed all known scrapie-infected and source flocks under 
movement restrictions, with movement of animals only to slaughter, to 
feedlots under permit and movement restrictions that ensure later 
movement to slaughter, for destruction, or for research. Scrapie-
positive and suspect animals may be moved only for transport to an 
approved research facility or for purposes of destruction.
    (5) Has effectively implemented policies to:
    (i) Investigate all animals reported as scrapie suspect animals 
within 7 days of notification.
    (ii) Designate a flock's status, within 15 days of notification 
that the flock contains a scrapie-positive animal, based on an 
investigation by State or Federal animal health authorities and in 
accordance with this part.
    (iii) Restrict the movement, in accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of 
this section, of newly designated scrapie-infected and source flocks 
within 7 days after they are designated in accordance with Sec. 79.4 of 
this part.
    (iv) Relieve infected and source flock movement restrictions only 
after completion of a flock plan created in accordance with Sec. 54.14 
of this chapter or a flock plan created in accordance with an approved 
scrapie control pilot project, or as permitted by the conditions of 
such a flock plan, and after agreement by the owner to comply with a 5-
year postexposure monitoring and management plan.
    (v) Conduct an epidemiologic investigation of source and infected 
flocks that includes the designation of high-risk and exposed animals 
and that identifies animals to be traced.
    (vi) Conduct tracebacks of scrapie-positive animals and traceouts 
of high-risk and exposed animals and report any out-of-State traces to 
the appropriate State within 45 days of receipt of notification of a 
scrapie-positive animal.
    (vii) Conduct tracebacks based on slaughter sampling within 15 days 
of receipt of notification of a scrapie-positive animal at slaughter.
    (6) Effectively monitors and enforces quarantines.
    (7) Effectively enforces State reporting laws and regulations for 
scrapie.
    (8) Has designated at least one APHIS or State animal health 
official to coordinate scrapie program activities in the State and to 
serve as the designated scrapie epidemiologist in the State.
    (9) Has educated those engaged in the interstate movement of sheep 
and goats regarding the identification and recordkeeping requirements 
of this part.
    (10) Has provided APHIS with a plan and timeline for complying with 
the following additional requirements, which must be met within 2 years 
of designation of the State as a Consistent State:\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This provision would apply until January 1, 2003. Any State 
designated as a Consistent State after that date would have to meet 
all requirements prior to designation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) Requires, based on State law or regulation, and effectively 
enforces official identification upon change of ownership of all 
animals of any age not in slaughter channels and any sheep over 18 
months of age as evidenced by eruption of the second incisor such that 
the animal may be traced to its flock of birth; except that:
    (A) A State may exempt commercial goats in intrastate commerce that 
have not been in contact with sheep from this identification 
requirement if there has been in that State no case of scrapie in a 
commercial goat in the past 10 years that originated in that State and 
cannot be attributed to exposure to infected sheep and there are no 
exposed commercial goat herds in that State; and
    (B) A State may exempt commercial whiteface sheep under 18 months 
of age in intrastate commerce from this identification requirement if 
there has been in that State no case of scrapie in commercial whiteface 
sheep that originated from that State and there are no exposed 
commercial whiteface sheep flocks in that State that have been exposed 
by a female animal.
    (C) States that exempt these types of commercial animals must put 
in place the regulations necessary to require identification of these 
animals within 90 days of these conditions no longer existing.
    (ii) Maintains in the National Scrapie Database administered by 
APHIS, or in a State database approved by the Administrator as 
compatible with the National Scrapie Database, the State's:
    (A) premises information and assigned premise numbers and 
individual identification number sequences assigned for use as premises 
identification;
    (B) individual animal information on all scrapie-positive, suspect, 
high-risk, and exposed animals in the State;
    (C) individual animal information on all out-of-State animals to be 
traced; and
    (D) accurate flock status data.
    (iii) Requires official individual identification of any live 
scrapie-positive, suspect, or high-risk animal of any age and of any 
sexually intact exposed animal of more than 1 year of age or any 
sexually intact exposed animal of less than 1 year of age upon change 
of ownership (except for exposed animals moving in slaughter channels 
at less than 1 year of age), whether or not the animal resides in a 
source or infected flock.
    (iv) Effectively enforces movement restrictions on all scrapie-
positive, suspect, and high-risk animals throughout their lives unless 
they are moved in accordance with Sec. 79.3.
    (v) Requires that tissues from all scrapie-positive or suspect 
animals and female high-risk animals that have lambed (when they have 
died or have been destroyed) be submitted to a laboratory authorized by 
the Administrator to conduct scrapie tests and requires complete 
destruction of the carcasses of scrapie-positive and suspect animals.
    (vi) Prohibits any animal from being removed from slaughter 
channels unless it is identified to the premises of birth, is not from 
an inconsistent State, and is not scrapie-exposed or from an infected 
or source flock.
    (vii) Complies with the guidelines adopted in the Scrapie 
Eradication Uniform Methods and Rules.
    (b) If the Administrator determines that statutory changes are 
needed to bring a State into full compliance, the Administrator may 
grant up to a 2-year extension to allow a State to acquire additional 
authorities before removing a State's Consistent Status. The decision 
to grant an extension will be based on

[[Page 49775]]

the State's ability to prevent the movement of scrapie-infected animals 
out of the State and on the progress being made in making the needed 
statutory changes.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of August 2000.
Bobby R. Acord,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 00-20657 Filed 8-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-U