[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 165 (Thursday, August 26, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52451-52461]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-19516]


 ========================================================================
 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. 69, No. 165 / Thursday, August 26, 2004 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 52451]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. 00-094-1]
RIN 0579-AB84


Interstate Movement of Sheep and Goats; Approved Livestock 
Facilities, Identification and Recordkeeping Requirements

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations regarding the 
interstate movement of animals to require livestock facilities that 
handle sheep or goats in interstate commerce to be approved by us. This 
would include stockyards, livestock markets, buying stations, 
concentration points, or any other premises where sheep or goats in 
interstate commerce are assembled. Our approval would be contingent on 
the facility operator meeting certain minimum standards and other 
conditions relating to the receipt, handling, and release of sheep and 
goats at the facility, as well as complying with certain animal 
identification and recordkeeping requirements. The proposed standards 
and other conditions would be based, in part, on recently implemented 
regulations relating to the interstate movement of sheep and goats in 
order to control the spread of scrapie, a serious disease of sheep and 
goats. This proposed rule would provide for the establishment of 
standards for the approval of livestock facilities that handle sheep or 
goats in interstate commerce.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before 
October 25, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies 
of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. 00-094-1, 
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3C71, 4700 
River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your 
comment refers to Docket No. 00-094-1.
     E-mail: Address your comment to 
[email protected]. Your comment must be contained in the body 
of your message; do not send attached files. Please include your name 
and address in your message and ``Docket No. 00-094-1'' on the subject 
line.
     Agency Web Site: Go to http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/cominst.html for a form you can use to submit an e-mail comment through 
the APHIS Web site.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for locating this 
docket and submitting comments.
    Reading Room: 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.
    Other Information: You may view APHIS documents published in the 
Federal Register and related information, including the names of groups 
and individuals who have commented on APHIS dockets, on the Internet at 
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (USDA), regulates the interstate movement of 
certain animals (including poultry) and animal products to prevent the 
spread of livestock and poultry diseases within the United States. The 
regulations are contained in 9 CFR chapter I, subchapter C, parts 70 
through 89. The regulations in part 71 contain general provisions 
covering the interstate transportation of animals and animal products. 
The regulations in part 71 also provide the standards and other 
requirements that livestock facilities, including stockyards, livestock 
markets, buying stations, concentration points, or any other premises 
where livestock in interstate commerce are assembled, must follow in 
order to be approved by APHIS. The approval of facilities by APHIS is 
intended to ensure that such facilities are constructed and operated in 
a manner that will help prevent the interstate transmission of 
livestock diseases. Such facilities are subject to State or Federal 
veterinary supervision. We presently require the approval of livestock 
facilities that handle horses, cattle, bison, or swine in interstate 
commerce.
    The regulations in part 79 contain certain restrictions and other 
requirements regarding the interstate movement of sheep and goats in 
order to control the spread of scrapie within the United States. 
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. Its 
control is complicated because the disease has an extremely long 
incubation period without clinical signs of disease. APHIS also 
administers the Scrapie Flock Certification Program (SFCP), described 
at 9 CFR part 54, and produces a program standards document entitled 
``Program Standards--Voluntary Scrapie Flock Certification Program,'' 
which is available on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/scrapie/umr. A copy of the program standards also may be obtained by 
contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    On August 21, 2001, we published in the Federal Register (66 FR 
43964-44003, Docket No. 97-093-5) a final rule amending part 79 by 
providing additional restrictions for the interstate movement of sheep 
and goats. We also added new requirements with regard to the 
identification, recordkeeping, and health status of sheep and goats in 
order to provide a more effective national program for surveillance of 
scrapie and for the tracing of animals affected with scrapie. In our 
August 2001 final rule,

[[Page 52452]]

we also amended part 54 by reinstating a scrapie indemnification 
program for sheep and goats. The recent changes to parts 54 and 79 were 
designed, in part, to provide a national standard for the control and 
eradication of scrapie. These changes also reflect our commitment to 
eliminating scrapie from the United States.
    For the scrapie eradication program to be effective, it is 
imperative that the identification, recordkeeping, and other 
requirements in part 79 be carried out at livestock facilities that 
handle sheep and goats in interstate commerce. The regulations in part 
79 do contain requirements relating to identification, recordkeeping, 
and handling of sheep and goats that must be followed by approved 
livestock markets. However, at this time, the regulations in part 71 do 
not provide for the approval of facilities that handle sheep and goats 
as they do for facilities that handle cattle and bison, swine, and 
horses. Therefore, it is imperative that an approval process be added 
to our regulations to ensure that certain uniform practices relating to 
identification, recordkeeping, and handling of sheep or goats be 
followed at these facilities in order to help minimize the risk of the 
spread of scrapie.
    Therefore, we are proposing to amend the regulations in part 71 by 
requiring that livestock facilities handling sheep or goats in 
interstate commerce would have to be approved by APHIS and be subject 
to State or Federal veterinary supervision. Providing such approval 
would be contingent on the facility agreeing to comply with certain 
standards and conditions, which we would add to Sec.  71.20 of the 
regulations.

Changes to Part 71

    The regulations in Sec.  71.20(a) contain an agreement that sets 
out the requirements that livestock facilities handling certain classes 
of livestock in interstate commerce, i.e., cattle and bison, swine, and 
horses, must agree to follow in order to be designated as an approved 
livestock facility. (We note that, although sheep are included in the 
definition of livestock in Sec.  71.1, the agreement in Sec.  71.20(a) 
contains no sheep-related provisions.) In that agreement, paragraphs 
(a)(1) through (a)(13) provide certain general requirements relating to 
oversight, recordkeeping, animal identification, cleaning and 
disinfection, and facility and equipment standards. These requirements 
include:
     Providing the State animal health official and the APHIS 
area veterinarian in charge a schedule of the facility's sale days that 
indicates the types of animals that will be handled at the facility on 
each sale day;
     Ensuring that an accredited veterinarian, State 
representative, or APHIS representative is on the facility premises on 
sale days to perform duties in accordance with State and Federal 
regulations;
     Allowing State representatives and APHIS representatives 
access to the facility during normal business hours to evaluate whether 
the facility and its operations are in compliance with applicable 
regulations;
     Providing immediate notification to an APHIS 
representative, a State representative, or an accredited veterinarian 
of any livestock at the facility that are known to be infected, 
exposed, or suspect, or that show signs of possibly being infected, 
with any infectious, contagious, or communicable disease;
     Placing reactor, suspect, or exposed livestock in 
quarantined pens apart from all other livestock while such animals are 
at the facility;
     Prohibiting the sale of any reactor, suspect, or exposed 
livestock, and any livestock that show signs of being infected with any 
communicable disease, except when authorized by an APHIS 
representative, State representative, or accredited veterinarian;
     Maintaining documents such as weight tickets, sales slips, 
and records of origin, identification, and destination relating to 
livestock handled by the facility for a period of 5 years. Such 
documentation is subject to review by APHIS representatives and State 
representatives;
     Ensuring that all livestock are officially identified in 
accordance with the applicable regulations;
     Maintaining the facility, including all yards, docks, 
pens, alleys, sale rings, chutes, scales, means of conveyance, and 
other associated equipment, in a clean and sanitary condition in 
accordance with the regulations. The facility also must maintain an 
adequate supply of disinfectant and serviceable equipment for cleaning 
and disinfection;
     Maintaining the facility and equipment in good repair. The 
facility must provide well-constructed and well-lighted livestock 
handling chutes, pens, alleys, and sales rings for the inspection, 
identification, vaccination, testing, and branding of livestock. 
Electrical outlets also must be provided at the chute area for branding 
purposes; and
     Ensuring that quarantined pens are clearly marked as such 
and are cleaned and disinfected in accordance with the regulations in 
part 71 before being used to pen livestock that are not reactor, 
suspect, or exposed animals. The quarantined pens also must have 
adequate drainage, and the floors and other parts of the quarantined 
pens with which reactor, suspect, or exposed livestock, or their 
excrement or discharges, may have contact must be constructed of 
materials that are substantially impervious to moisture and able to 
withstand continuing cleaning and disinfection.
    We propose to amend the agreement in Sec.  71.20(a) so that 
livestock facilities handling sheep or goats in interstate commerce 
also would be specified as being subject to the general standards just 
discussed.
    In the agreement in Sec.  71.20, paragraphs (a)(14), (a)(15), and 
(a)(16) provide specific additional handling and identification 
standards applicable to cattle and bison, swine, and horses, 
respectively, that approved livestock facilities must comply with to 
help prevent the spread of certain animal diseases specific to those 
livestock species. We would amend the agreement in Sec.  71.20(a) to 
provide specific additional standards applicable to sheep and goats 
that livestock facilities receiving sheep or goats in interstate 
commerce would have to follow in order to minimize the risk in the 
spread of scrapie. A number of additional conditions would be based on 
requirements appearing in part 79 of the regulations.
    This proposed rule would provide for the establishment of standards 
for the approval of livestock facilities that handle sheep or goats in 
interstate commerce, and would facilitate our enforcement of existing 
animal identification and recordkeeping requirements in part 79 of the 
regulations. A more detailed discussion of the proposed changes to part 
71 of the regulations follows.

Definitions

    We are proposing to add definitions to Sec.  71.1 of the 
regulations for the terms consistent States and inconsistent States. 
Both of these terms would be used in conjunction with the approval of 
livestock facilities handling sheep or goats, as discussed below. 
Consistent States would be defined as those States listed as consistent 
States in 9 CFR 79.1 because they meet certain standards, as provided 
in part 79, for conducting an active State scrapie program that 
involves the identification of scrapie in sheep and goats for the 
purpose of controlling the spread of scrapie. Inconsistent States would 
be defined as those States not included in the list of

[[Page 52453]]

consistent States appearing in Sec.  79.1. Inconsistent States would 
generally include those States that do not consider scrapie a 
reportable disease or do not require the quarantine of infected flocks 
or source flocks, or that otherwise do not meet the requirements in 9 
CFR 79.6. Section 79.6 sets forth the standards for States to qualify 
as consistent States. We note that, under the regulations in Sec.  
79.1, all 50 States currently hold consistent State status.
    We also would amend the definition of livestock in Sec.  71.1 of 
the regulations by adding goats, cervids, and camelids to the current 
list of animals that includes horses, cattle, bison, sheep, and swine.

Interstate Movement of Diseased Animals

    Section 71.3 of the regulations covers the interstate movement of 
diseased animals and poultry. Paragraph (a) of Sec.  71.3 provides that 
animals or poultry affected with a communicable disease endemic to the 
United States cannot be moved interstate except as provided in 
paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of that same section. Scrapie is listed 
among the diseases endemic to the United States in Sec.  71.3(a). 
Paragraphs (c) and (d) of Sec.  71.3 authorize the interstate movement 
of certain classes of livestock affected with particular diseases under 
specific circumstances, while in Sec.  71.3(e), the Administrator is 
authorized to grant exceptions in specific cases involving individual 
animals being moved to a designated diagnostic or research facility.
    Section 71.3 of the regulations does not provide a specific 
exception from the general interstate movement prohibition for animals 
affected with scrapie. However, the scrapie regulations in part 79 do 
allow for the interstate movement of sheep and goats with scrapie 
status designations under certain conditions. Since part 79 does 
authorize the restricted movement of animals with scrapie status 
designations, we would amend Sec.  71.3 of the regulations and add a 
new paragraph (c)(5) that would stipulate that sheep and goats 
designated, with regard to scrapie, as exposed, high-risk, suspect, or 
scrapie-positive animals, as those terms are defined in part 79 of the 
regulations, may be moved interstate in accordance with the regulations 
in part 79.

Approval of Livestock Facilities

    The regulations in Sec.  71.20(a) provide the standards and other 
conditions that livestock facilities handling horses, cattle, bison, or 
swine in interstate commerce must follow in order to be approved by us. 
These standards and conditions are intended, in part, to ensure that 
the facilities are constructed and operated in a manner that will 
prevent the transmission of livestock diseases in interstate commerce. 
Some of the standards and conditions provided in Sec.  71.20(a) apply 
to all approved livestock facilities, while other standards and 
conditions apply only to those facilities that handle specific classes 
of livestock.
    To be designated as an approved livestock facility, the facility 
operator must execute a livestock facility agreement that indicates his 
or her intention to comply with all applicable standards and conditions 
provided in Sec.  71.20(a). The facility operator also must indicate, 
by initialing the appropriate paragraphs of the agreement, the class or 
classes of livestock that will be handled at the facility. Paragraph 
(b) of Sec.  71.20 sets forth the basis and procedures for APHIS 
withdrawing or denying approval of a livestock facility.
    We would amend Sec.  71.20(a) to require that livestock facilities 
handling sheep or goats in interstate commerce would now have to be 
approved by APHIS. APHIS approval would be contingent on the facility 
meeting certain standards and conditions, as provided in Sec.  
71.20(a), that would relate to facility construction, maintenance, and 
equipment, as well as other requirements relating to the receipt, 
handling, and release of animals. Facility operators also would be 
subject to certain identification and recordkeeping requirements 
relating to sheep and goats handled at the facility.
    In broadening the applicability of Sec.  71.20(a) to cover those 
livestock facilities that handle sheep or goats in interstate commerce, 
we would amend Sec.  71.20(a) to include those particular animal 
health-status designations covering sheep and goats affected with 
scrapie. We also would amend Sec.  71.20(a) by referencing the 
applicability of the scrapie regulations in part 79, where appropriate.
    Paragraph (a)(3) of Sec.  71.20 provides that State representatives 
and APHIS representatives must be granted access to an approved 
livestock facility during normal business hours to evaluate whether the 
facility and its operations are in compliance with the livestock 
facility agreement, as well as with other applicable provisions in 9 
CFR parts 71, 75, 78, and 85. Part 75 contains additional restrictions 
with regard to the interstate movement of horses, asses, ponies, mules, 
and zebras with communicable diseases; part 78 contains additional 
interstate movement restrictions for animals with brucellosis; and part 
85 contains additional interstate movement restrictions for animals 
with pseudorabies.
    In broadening the scope of Sec.  71.20 to include the approval of 
livestock facilities handling sheep and goats, we would amend Sec.  
71.20(a)(3) by adding a reference to the scrapie regulations in part 
79. With this change, livestock facilities approved to handle sheep or 
goats under part 71 of the regulations also would be subject to the 
requirements in part 79, which include movement restrictions, 
identification and recordkeeping requirements, and other conditions 
affecting the interstate movement of sheep and goats in order to 
control the spread of scrapie.
    Paragraph (a)(4) of Sec.  71.20 provides that an APHIS 
representative, a State representative, or an 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. We are proposing to amend Sec.  71.20(a)(4) to 
clarify the applicability of this provision to all animal health-status 
designations involving scrapie. As discussed previously, sheep and 
goats with scrapie disease classifications are classified as exposed, 
high-risk, suspect, or scrapie-positive animals in accordance with part 
79 of the regulations. The term scrapie-positive would be covered by 
the term infectious. So, to cover classifications relating to scrapie, 
we would amend Sec.  71.20(a)(4) by adding the scrapie status 
designation ``high-risk.''
    Paragraph (a)(5) of Sec.  71.20 provides that any reactor, suspect, 
or exposed livestock shall be held in quarantined pens apart from all 
other livestock at an approved livestock facility. We require the 
separation of animals affected with communicable livestock diseases as 
a further safeguard against the spread of such diseases. To emphasize 
the applicability of the quarantine requirements in Sec.  71.20(a)(5) 
to animals subject to scrapie, we would amend Sec.  71.20(a)(5) and add 
references to ``high-risk'' and ``scrapie-positive'' alongside the 
existing animal health-status designations of reactor, suspect, or 
exposed livestock. We would qualify this change, however, by noting 
that the quarantine requirements would not apply to those sheep or 
goats designated as scrapie-exposed or high risk animals that will be 
moved directly to slaughter in accordance with parts 71 and 79. We 
would provide this exception since these particular slaughter animals

[[Page 52454]]

would pose a negligible risk for the spread of scrapie.
    Paragraph (a)(6) of Sec.  71.20 provides that 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 an approved livestock facility, except as authorized by an 
APHIS representative, State representative, or an accredited 
veterinarian. We would make a number of changes to this provision. 
First, we would expand the coverage of Sec.  71.20(a)(6) to apply not 
only to the sale of livestock, but also to any other situation in which 
the animals are moved from the facility. To clarify the regulatory 
basis for allowing the sale or movement of such animals, we would 
provide that such sale or movement from the facility must be in 
accordance with 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 78, 79, or 85. Referring to those 
specific regulatory authorities would provide additional guidance as to 
when affected animals could be sold or moved from the facility. 
Finally, in order to broaden the applicability of Sec.  71.20(a)(6) to 
cover livestock facilities with sheep or goats, we would add references 
to the scrapie health-status designations ``high-risk'' and ``scrapie-
positive.'' This would mean that sheep and goats designated as suspect, 
exposed, high-risk, or scrapie-positive animals could not be sold at or 
moved from an approved livestock facility except in accordance with 9 
CFR parts 71 and 79.
    Paragraph (a)(7) of Sec.  71.20 provides that 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 must be 
permitted to review and copy those documents during normal business 
hours. We would amend Sec.  71.20(a)(7) to require that facilities must 
maintain documents relating to sheep or goats for a period of 5 years. 
These documents are used to trace a positive animal back to its flock 
of origin, so the additional 3 years are necessary because the 
incubation period for scrapie is between 2 and 5 years.
    Paragraph (a)(8) of Sec.  71.20 provides that 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 
an approved livestock facility. As noted previously, parts 75, 78, and 
85 include requirements not covered in the general provisions of part 
71 of the regulations with regard to the interstate movement of 
particular classes of livestock that are affected with certain 
communicable livestock diseases. Identification and recordkeeping 
requirements relating to the interstate movement of sheep and goats are 
provided in part 79. Therefore, to enlarge the scope of part 71 to 
cover approved livestock facilities handling sheep or goats, we would 
amend Sec.  71.20(a)(8) by adding a reference to part 79 so that 
operators of approved livestock facilities handling sheep or goats in 
interstate commerce would be subject to the identification and 
recordkeeping requirements found in part 79 of the regulations.
    Paragraph (a)(11) of Sec.  71.20 provides that quarantined pens at 
approved livestock facilities must be clearly labeled with paint or 
placarded with the word ``Quarantined'' or the name of the disease of 
concern, and must be cleaned and disinfected in accordance with the 
regulations in part 71 before the pens may be used to hold livestock 
that are not reactor, suspect, or exposed animals. In order for this 
provision to be applicable to facilities handling sheep or goats 
affected with scrapie, we would amend Sec.  71.20(a)(11) and insert 
references to the animal health-status designations ``high-risk'' and 
``scrapie-positive'' alongside the existing designations of reactor, 
suspect, and exposed. In addition, because the regulations in 9 CFR 
part 54, ``Control of Scrapie,'' contain specific cleaning and 
disinfection procedures related to scrapie, we would also amend 
paragraph (a)(11) so that it specifies that quarantined pens used to 
hold animals affected with scrapie would have to be cleaned and 
disinfected in accordance with 9 CFR 54.7(e)(2), which contains 
specific procedures on the cleaning and disinfection of non-earth 
surfaces of premises used to hold animals affected with scrapie.
    Paragraph (a)(12) of Sec.  71.20 provides that 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, or 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. 
Similar to changes proposed elsewhere in part 71 of the regulations, we 
would amend Sec.  71.20(a)(12) by adding references to the animal 
health-status designations of ``high-risk'' and ``scrapie-positive'' 
alongside the references to reactor, suspect, or exposed livestock in 
order to cover sheep and goats affected with scrapie.
    Paragraphs (a)(14) through (a)(16) of Sec.  71.20 provide 
additional standards that operators of approved livestock facilities 
must follow in order for their facility to handle particular classes of 
livestock, i.e., cattle and bison, swine, and horses. We are proposing 
to add a new paragraph (a)(17) that would list additional standards and 
conditions that operators of approved livestock facilities handling 
sheep or goats in interstate commerce would have to follow in order for 
their facility to handle sheep or goats in interstate commerce. To add 
this paragraph at Sec.  71.20(a)(17), we would redesignate existing 
paragraphs (a)(17) through (a)(20) as paragraphs (a)(18) through 
(a)(21).
    Under proposed Sec.  71.20(a)(17), the facility operator would have 
to indicate in the livestock facility agreement whether the facility 
would be handling sheep or goats; and if so, whether those animals 
would be breeding or slaughter animals. The operator also would have to 
indicate in the agreement whether the facility would be receiving sheep 
or goats classified as scrapie-positive, exposed, high-risk, or suspect 
animals; and if so, whether those particular animals are breeding 
animals or for slaughter only.
    Under proposed Sec.  71.20(a)(17) of the regulations, operators of 
livestock facilities handling sheep or goats in interstate commerce 
also would have to adhere to the following operating practices:
     The facility would have to receive, handle, and release 
sheep and goats in accordance with parts 71 and 79 of the regulations;
     The facility operator would have to officially identify 
all sheep and goats handled at the facility, including whether the 
animals are from consistent or inconsistent States, and maintain 
relevant records pertaining to those animals in accordance with part 79 
of the regulations;
     Breeding and slaughter animals would have to remain 
separated at all times while at the facility, so that no contact will 
occur;
     Any breeding sheep or goats that are designated, with 
regard to scrapie, as exposed, high-risk, suspect, or scrapie-positive 
animals, or any slaughter sheep or goats that are designated as 
scrapie-positive or suspect animals, would have to be held in 
quarantined pens while at the facility;
     Any sheep or goats that are designated as scrapie-exposed 
or high-risk animals could be consigned from the facility only in 
accordance with part 79 of the regulations; and
     Any sheep or goats that are designated as scrapie-positive 
or suspect

[[Page 52455]]

animals would have to be reported immediately by the facility operator 
to a State representative, an APHIS representative, or an accredited 
veterinarian. Such animals could be released or consigned from the 
facility only if accompanied by a permit issued by a State 
representative, an APHIS representative, or an accredited veterinarian, 
allowing movement of the animals to an approved disposal site or 
research facility in accordance with parts 71 and 79 of the 
regulations.

Miscellaneous Changes

    We would make miscellaneous nonsubstantive changes in Sec.  71.1 to 
the definitions of accredited veterinarian, area veterinarian in 
charge, interstate commerce, State, State animal health official, and 
State representative, to be consistent with how these terms appear 
elsewhere in the regulations, as well as to be consistent with the 
Government Printing Office Style Manual.
    We also would amend Sec.  71.6(a) to include a specific reference 
to goats among the listed animals subject to this provision on cleaning 
and disinfecting of conveyances used in the interstate transportation 
of affected with or infected with a livestock or poultry disease.
    The proposed addition of paragraph (a)(17) to Sec.  71.20 would 
require several nonsubstantive changes in Sec.  71.20 to include a 
reference to that paragraph or to update references to other paragraphs 
that would be redesignated as a result of the addition of paragraph 
(a)(17). We also would amend Sec.  71.20(a)(18) to refer to part 79 in 
addition to parts 71, 75, 78, and 85.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. 
The rule has been determined to be significant for the purposes of 
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by the Office 
of Management and Budget.
    We have prepared an economic analysis for this rule, which is set 
out below. The economic analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis as 
required by Executive Order 12866 and an analysis of the potential 
economic effects on small entities as required by the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.
    We do not have enough data for a comprehensive analysis of the 
economic effects of this proposed rule on small entities. Therefore, in 
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603, we have performed an initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis for this proposed rule. We are inviting comments 
about this proposed rule as it relates to small entities. In 
particular, we are interested in determining the number and kind of 
small entities who may incur benefits or costs from implementation of 
this proposed rule and the economic effect of those benefits or costs. 
Based on the information we have, there is no basis to conclude that 
this rule will result in any significant economic effect on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301-8317), USDA 
is authorized to conduct programs for the control of communicable 
animal diseases and to regulate the interstate movement of animals that 
may spread disease. The regulations are contained in 9 CFR chapter I, 
subchapter C, parts 70 through 89. The regulations in part 71 (referred 
to below as the regulations) contain general provisions covering the 
interstate transportation of animals and animal products. The 
regulations also set forth requirements that livestock facilities 
handling certain classes of livestock in interstate commerce, including 
cattle and bison, swine, and horses, must follow in order to be 
designated by us as approved livestock facilities.
    This proposed rule would establish a means for APHIS approval of 
livestock facilities that handle sheep or goats in interstate commerce. 
The conditions for approval would be based, in part, on recently 
implemented regulations relating to the interstate movement of sheep 
and goats in order to control the spread of scrapie.
    To be designated as an approved livestock facility for handling 
sheep or goats, the facility would have to enter into an agreement in 
which it agrees to follow certain identification, recordkeeping, and 
handling practices with respect to animals under its control in 
accordance with 9 CFR parts 71 and 79. Any reactor, suspect, exposed, 
scrapie high-risk, or scrapie-positive livestock would have to be held 
in quarantined pens apart from all other livestock at the facility. The 
quarantined pens holding such animals would have to be clearly marked, 
and would have to be cleaned and disinfected before being used by other 
animals not affected with disease. The quarantined pens also would have 
to have proper drainage and be constructed of materials that are 
substantially impervious to moisture and able to withstand continued 
cleaning and disinfection.
    To be approved, such facilities would have to provide access to 
accredited veterinarians, State representatives, and APHIS 
representatives, as well as comply with certain notification 
requirements with respect to livestock known to be infected, exposed, 
or suspect, or that show signs of being infected with a communicable 
disease. Such facilities also would have to keep State animal health 
officials and APHIS informed of upcoming sale days at the facility.
    This proposed rule, if implemented, would strengthen scrapie 
control programs on the national level, reduce the losses that scrapie 
causes to the sheep and goat industries, and prevent the further spread 
of scrapie. Proper handling and identification of animals that may be 
infected with scrapie is essential for an effective scrapie eradication 
program. States do not have uniform requirements for markets handling 
sheep and goats in interstate commerce. Therefore, it is imperative 
that a process for approving livestock facilities that handle sheep or 
goats in interstate commerce be established to ensure that such 
livestock facilities follow certain identification, recordkeeping, and 
handling practices and procedures designed to prevent the spread of 
scrapie and other communicable diseases.
    The primary alternative to the proposed rule would be to make no 
changes at all to the existing regulations. The regulations in part 79 
already include certain requirements to be followed by approved 
livestock markets with respect to the identification, recordkeeping, 
and handling of sheep and goats in interstate commerce. However, the 
regulations in part 71 do not specify the process by which these 
facilities are to be approved. Therefore, it is imperative that an 
approval process be added to our regulations.
    We considered how we could consolidate or simplify the compliance 
and reporting requirements contained in this proposal. We believe we 
accomplish this objective by including the approval standards for sheep 
and goat facilities in part 71 amongst the existing requirements for 
approval of livestock facilities handling other classes of livestock. 
In this way, many of the same requirements for approving sheep and goat 
facilities would parallel those requirements for approving facilities 
handling other classes of livestock.

Overview of U.S. Sheep and Goat Industry Operations, Inventory, and 
Trade

    As of January 1, 2004, there were 6.09 million sheep and lambs in 
the United States, valued at approximately $721 million. This 
represented a 3 percent decline from the level on January 1, 2003. The 
above total of 6.09 million sheep and lambs consists of 4.48 million

[[Page 52456]]

breeding sheep and lambs and 1.61 million market sheep. There were 
approximately 64,170 operations that produced sheep and lambs in 2002, 
which is 1.5 percent less than the previous year.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ USDA/NASS, Sheep and Goats, January 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sheep are produced in all parts of the United States, although 
stock levels vary from State to State. Ten States (California, 
Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and 
Wyoming) account for nearly 69 percent of the total inventory, mostly 
in the Mountain, North Central, and South Central States. The 
northeastern and southeastern States have the smallest sheep 
populations, accounting only for 5.2 percent of the total.

                          Table 1.--Sheep and Lambs: Farms and Inventory by Size, 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Percent of sheep
                                               Number of     Percent of farms   Inventory of    and lambs (based
      Number of sheep/lambs per farm          farms with     (based on total      sheep and         on total
                                              sheep/lambs    number of farms)       lambs          inventory)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 to 99...................................          58,909               91.8       1,820,910               29.9
100 to 499................................           4,299                6.7       1,449,420               23.8
500 to 4,999..............................             898                1.4       2,015,790               33.1
5,000 or more.............................              65                0.1         803,880               13.2
                                           -----------------
    Total.................................          64,170                100       6,090,000                100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: USDA/NASS, Sheep and Goats, January 2004.

    About 92 percent of the producers had fewer than 100 animals each, 
but these accounted only for about 30 percent of the total inventory of 
sheep and lambs. On the other hand, large sheep operations with 5,000 
sheep or more each represented less than 1 percent of the farms but 
accounted for about 13 percent of the total inventory. The overall 
average size of a flock was 95 animals in 2003; therefore, most sheep 
operations would be classified as small entities with annual sales of 
$750,000 or less. The average size of a flock on large operations of 
5,000 sheep or more was 12,367 animals, while that of small operations 
was 82 animals. Of the total number of operations, about 60 percent of 
producers were full owners, about 32 percent were part owners, and 8 
percent were tenants.
    A total of about 5.65 million sheep and lambs were marketed in 
2003. A little over 85 percent of these were lambs and the rest were 
mature sheep. Marketing includes animals for slaughter market, younger 
animals shipped to other States for feeding and breeding purposes, and 
some exports. Approximately 81 percent of sheep and lambs are marketed, 
involving the crossing of State lines in most cases.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ USDA/NASS, Meat Animals Production, Disposition, and Income: 
2003 Summary, April 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A total of 3.042 million sheep and lambs were slaughtered in 2003, 
of which 95.2 percent were lambs.\3\ Most of the sheep and lambs 
shipped for immediate slaughter would not be affected by this proposed 
rule since they would not be handled by a livestock market or other 
assembly point en route to the slaughter facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ USDA/NASS, Livestock Slaughter: 2003 Summary, March 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1997 (the latest year for which data are available for all 
States), there were 57,925 goat operations in the United States, which 
raised about 1.99 million goats, valued at approximately $74 million, a 
decline of about 21 percent from the 1992 level. About 40.7 percent 
were Angora goats, about 7.4 percent were milk goats, and about 52 
percent were goats other than Angora or milk goats. The number of 
Angora goats declined from about 1.8 million in 1992 to about 0.8 
million in 1997, as many mohair producers shifted from producing Angora 
goats to meat type goats because of the repeal of the Wool and Mohair 
Act in October 1993. The State of Texas accounted for about 64.3 
percent of the goat inventory. Other important goat-raising States are 
Arizona, California, Georgia, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and 
Tennessee. These States together represented another 14.2 percent of 
the U.S. goat holdings. Goat holdings vary in size and degree of 
commercialization, with many producers relying on other sources of 
income. With an average holding of about 35 goats, most, if not all, 
goat operations are relatively small, and would be classified as small 
entities with annual sales of $750,000 or less.
    There are currently about 1,300 livestock facilities that handle 
cattle and calves, swine, or sheep and goats moving in interstate 
commerce. Of this total, about 126 handle sheep or goats.
    The United States produced about 204 million pounds of lamb and 
mutton in 2003, a decline of about 8 percent from the previous year. 
Imports of lamb and mutton increased from 162.8 million pounds in 2002 
to 170.9 million pounds in 2003, an increase of about 5 percent.
    An increasing proportion of domestic demand for lamb and mutton is 
met by imports. The share of imports in domestic consumption of lamb 
and mutton increased from about 11 percent in 1991 to about 46.5 
percent in 2003. Even with such increased imports both total 
consumption as well as per capita consumption of lamb declined. Total 
consumption declined from about 396 million pounds to 367.5 million 
pounds, a decline of about 7.2 percent. Per capita consumption (based 
on carcass weight equivalent) of lamb and mutton slightly declined from 
1.6 pounds per person in 1991 to 1.1 pounds per person in 2002. This 
decline in sheep meat consumption is not unique to the United States 
but is a worldwide phenomenon.
    The United States has a limited foreign trade both in live sheep 
and goats and their products. Both the sources of imports and 
destinations of exports are concentrated in a few countries. During 
calendar year 2003, the United States exported 172,726 head of sheep 
valued at $10.273 million (see table 2). Most exports were to Mexico 
(170,595 head). Other sheep markets were Ecuador (878 head), Trinidad 
and Tobago (463 head), Dominican Republic (277 head), Canada (257 
head), Netherlands (233 head), Venezuela (15 head) and Japan (8 head). 
The United States also exported 29,579 goats valued at $1.615 million 
in 2003. The primary importers were Mexico (25,202 head), China (4,112 
head), Canada (133 head), Netherlands (81 head), and Jamaica (33 head) 
in 2003. Other destinations included Grenada (6 head), Philippines (6 
head), and Japan (6 head).

[[Page 52457]]



                              Table 2.--Sheep and Goats: Imports and Exports, 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Number of     Value of imports     Number of     Value of exports
                   Item                         imports       (in millions)        exports       (in millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheep.....................................          67,778             $7.106         172,726            $10.273
Goats.....................................           7,453              0.578          29,579              1.615
                                           -----------------
    Total.................................          75,231              7.684         202,305             11.888
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: World Trade Atlas, Global Trade Information Services, Inc., U.S. Edition, March 2004.

    In 2003, the United States imported 67,778 sheep valued at $7.106 
million. All sheep imports in 2003 were from Canada (67,766 head) and 
Australia (12 head). Additionally, the United States imported 7,453 
goats valued at $0.578 million in 2003, of which 5,967 were from Canada 
and 1,486 were from Australia. In 2003, the United States imported 
170.9 million pounds of sheep and goat meat, valued at $353 million and 
exported 7.4 million pounds of sheep and goat meat valued at $7.9 
million. Most lamb and mutton imports came from Australia and New 
Zealand.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

    This proposed rule, if implemented, could result in additional 
administrative burdens and costs for livestock facilities handling 
sheep or goats in interstate commerce in order to qualify for and 
maintain their status as approved livestock facilities.
    There are currently 126 facilities that handle sheep and goats 
moving in interstate commerce. These facilities would have to provide 
access to accredited veterinarians, State representatives, and APHIS 
representatives, as well as comply with certain notification 
requirements with respect to livestock known to be infected, exposed, 
or suspect, or that show signs of being infected with a communicable 
disease. Such facilities also would have to keep State animal health 
officials and APHIS informed of upcoming sale days at the facility. 
Some of the livestock facilities covered by this rule, if implemented, 
are already subject to these requirements as approved livestock 
facilities handling other classes of livestock.
    To be approved, such livestock facilities also would have to follow 
certain identification, recordkeeping, and handling practices with 
respect to sheep or goats under their control as provided in 9 CFR 
parts 71 and 79. Documents such as weight tickets, sales slips, and 
records of origin, identification, and destination relating to 
livestock at the facility would have to be maintained by the facility 
for a period of 5 years. Some of these requirements are already 
provided for elsewhere in the regulations, and thus would not represent 
a new burden. However, any new paperwork and administrative burdens may 
result in additional costs to facility operators who find it necessary 
to adjust their operations to meet the new requirements. We do not 
expect that this will be a significant issue for most facilities.
    The livestock facility and equipment would have to be maintained in 
a state of good repair. Chutes, pens, alleys, and sales rings would 
have to be well-constructed and well-lighted for the inspection, 
identification, vaccination, testing and branding of livestock. 
Electrical outlets would have to be provided at the chute area for 
branding purposes. The facility, including all yards, docks, pens, 
alleys, sale rings, chutes, scales, means of conveyance and their 
associated equipment would have to be maintained in a clean and 
sanitary condition. The operator of the facility would be responsible 
for maintaining an adequate supply of disinfectant and serviceable 
equipment for cleaning and disinfection. Meeting these standards could 
entail additional costs for some livestock facilities seeking to 
qualify as approved livestock facilities. However, we do not expect 
this to be a significant issue as a number of these conditions 
represent good business practices that most facilities already follow. 
In addition, some of these facilities would already be complying with 
these conditions as approved livestock facilities handling other 
classes of livestock. So the additional changes in this proposed rule 
should not have a significant effect on facilities conducting their 
businesses.
    In addition, as a condition of approval, reactor, suspect, exposed, 
scrapie high-risk, or scrapie-positive livestock would have to be held 
in quarantined pens apart from all other livestock at the facility. The 
quarantined pens in which such animals are held would have to be 
clearly marked and would have to be cleaned and disinfected before 
being used to hold other animals not affected with diseases. The 
quarantined pens also would have to have proper drainage and be 
constructed of materials that are substantially impervious to moisture 
and able to withstand continued cleaning and disinfection. The 
regulations in Sec.  71.20(a)(5) already require that approved 
livestock facilities hold any reactor, suspect, or exposed livestock in 
quarantined pens apart from all other livestock at the facility; 
facilities handling sheep or goats that do not have quarantined pens 
would likely incur a one time capital investment of about $3,000 to 
$5,000 to install such a pen. Otherwise, we expect that the number of 
reactor, suspect, exposed, scrapie high-risk, or scrapie-positive 
livestock handled by approved livestock facilities to be very small, 
and thus quarantining of such animals should not have a significant 
effect on facility operations or economic activity.
    Producers who are engaged in intrastate and interstate marketing 
also may pay higher consignment fees as approved livestock facilities 
pass their increased costs of providing services to affected producers. 
Other costs to producers of this proposed action could result for those 
animals requiring special handling at approved livestock facilities.
    This proposal, if implemented, could result in a small increase in 
the time that APHIS and State representatives would spend monitoring 
livestock facilities. In those cases where a facility is already 
operating as approved livestock facility for other classifications of 
livestock, and APHIS or State representatives (as opposed to an 
accredited veterinarian) are already on site, the addition of sheep and 
goats to the classifications of livestock covered by the agreement is 
unlikely to substantially increase the workload for those 
representatives. In those cases where a facility handling sheep and 
goats is not already an approved livestock facility, APHIS or State 
representatives are also present in order to monitor compliance with 
the identification requirements of the scrapie regulations in part 79. 
Thus, we believe that any additional monitoring responsibilities on the 
part of State or Federal representatives that may result

[[Page 52458]]

from implementation of this proposed rule could be handled by existing 
staff.
    In spite of the potential burdens to facility operators and 
producers, we believe that the long-term avoided costs of coping with 
losses associated with scrapie by the U.S. sheep and goat industry far 
exceed the potential costs of this proposed rule. This includes the 
avoidance of those veterinary and associated costs for managing 
scrapie-affected flocks. A recent agency estimate showed that scrapie 
costs the U.S. sheep industry about $24 million per year in direct 
losses. This includes an estimated $10 million in lost breeding stock 
and embryo sales, $10.5 million in disposal costs for offal, and $2.8 
million in lost meat sales and of bone meal sales from non-federally 
inspected plants.
    Accelerating the eradication of scrapie in the United States also 
could facilitate the U.S. sheep and goat industry to once again become 
competitive both in the domestic and global market, particularly in the 
export of live sheep and goats. Currently, producers in countries such 
as Australia and New Zealand have a competitive advantage over U.S. 
producers, based in part on the absence of scrapie in those countries. 
The achievement of ``scrapie-free'' status in the United States could 
neutralize the competitive advantage of such countries.
    Since both actual product quality as well as purchaser's perception 
of quality contribute to continued market acceptance, efforts to 
eradicate scrapie and secure the health of U.S. sheep and goats will 
continue to serve the economic interests of the industry and the 
Nation.
    This proposed rule should not affect the interstate flow of sheep 
and goats. The interstate movement of sheep and goats is important as 
it reduces interstate price differences faced by consumers of livestock 
products and it allows movement of sheep and goats from areas of 
surplus to areas of deficit. A majority of sheep and goats moving 
across State lines are slaughter animals. Although we do not have 
specific data, based on our observation of livestock markets and the 
sheep and goat industry, we believe that most of these slaughter 
animals move directly to the slaughterhouse and bypass the types of 
livestock facilities that are the subject of this proposed rule. In 
addition, the operators of livestock facilities that agree to handle 
animals affected by scrapie would be most impacted under this proposed 
rule. However, the number of sheep or goats affected by scrapie and 
handled by these livestock facilities is likely to be very small. So 
this proposed rule should not pose a significant burden on operators of 
livestock facilities or producers so as to reduce interstate commerce 
or retard economic activity.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    Agencies are required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) to evaluate the potential economic effects of 
proposed rules on small entities. We do not have enough information to 
fully evaluate the potential effect of this proposed rule on small 
entities. As such, we are inviting comments addressing this issue. In 
particular, we are interested in determining the number and kinds of 
small entities that may incur benefits or costs from implementation of 
this proposed rule, and if there are any special issues relating to the 
business practices of these small entities that would make them 
particularly different from larger firms in their ability to comply 
with this proposed rule. We also are interested whether any other costs 
may result from implementation of this proposed rule that are not 
discussed in this analysis. Based on what information we have, we have 
made some initial conclusions.
    The changes in this proposed rule would directly affect livestock 
facilities that handle sheep or goats in interstate commerce. This 
would include stockyards, livestock markets, buying stations, 
concentration points, or any other premises under State or Federal 
veterinary supervision where sheep or goats have been assembled. 
Producers of sheep or goats also could be affected by the proposed rule 
if livestock facilities pass their increased costs of providing 
services to affected producers.
    The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established guidelines 
for determining which types of firms are to be considered small under 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Facilities that handle livestock such 
as stockyards, livestock markets, buying stations, concentration 
points, or any other premises under State or Federal veterinary 
supervision where livestock are assembled are considered small if they 
have 100 or fewer employees. There are currently about 1,300 livestock 
facilities that handle cattle and calves, swine, or sheep and goats 
moving in interstate commerce. Of this total, about 126 handle sheep or 
goats. Of those livestock facilities that handle sheep and goats, only 
1 facility may be considered to be large and all other facilities are 
small entities of 100 employees or less.
    Livestock facilities that are considered small entities would have 
to meet the same standards as other larger firms. This would include 
following certain identification, recordkeeping, and handling practices 
with respect to sheep or goats. Some of these requirements are already 
provided in part 79 of the regulations, and thus would not represent a 
new burden. In addition, a certain number of these facilities already 
comply with many of the conditions in this proposed rule in operating 
as approved livestock facilities for other classes of livestock.
    We considered the feasibility of exempting small entities from some 
or all of the requirements in this proposed rule or establishing 
differing compliance or reporting requirements that take into account 
the resources available to small entities. However, one of the aims of 
an effective national program to control and eradicate scrapie is to 
establish uniform standards that will be followed by all livestock 
facilities handling sheep or goats in interstate commerce. Programs 
relating to disease surveillance and control do not lend themselves to 
different compliance standards based on the size of the entity subject 
to regulation. Also, the requirements in part 79 pertaining to 
identification, recordkeeping, and handling of sheep and goats make no 
distinction as to the size of producer or other livestock facility 
handling the animals.
    As discussed above, producers who are engaged in intrastate and 
interstate marketing may be indirectly affected by this proposed rule 
if they have to pay higher consignment fees as livestock facilities 
pass their increased costs of providing services. Other costs to 
producers of this proposed action could result for those animals 
requiring special handling at approved livestock facilities. An 
establishment engaged in sheep or goat production is considered small 
if it has annual sales of less than $750,000. As discussed previously, 
the vast majority of sheep and goat producers would be considered small 
entities based on such criteria. Based on our initial analysis, the 
potential costs to sheep and goat producers considered small entities 
should not be significant.
    In sum, it is reasonable to expect that both small and large 
entities would benefit from this proposed rule, which would strengthen 
scrapie control programs resulting in long-term avoided costs of coping 
with market losses associated with scrapie to the U.S. sheep and goat 
industry, currently estimated as high as $24 million per year in direct 
losses to the U.S. sheep industry alone. We expect any costs to 
operators of livestock facilities or to producers to be more than 
offset by the added benefits to the industry at large

[[Page 52459]]

in providing a more effective scrapie eradication program.
    This proposed rule would entail information collection 
requirements. These requirements are described in this document under 
the heading ``Paperwork Reduction Act.''

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.

National Environmental Policy Act

    An environmental assessment has been prepared for this proposed 
rule. The assessment provides a basis for the conclusion that Animal 
and Plant Health Inspection Service approval of livestock facilities 
that handle sheep or goats in interstate commerce under the conditions 
specified in this proposed rule would not have a significant impact on 
the quality of the human environment.
    The environmental assessment was prepared in accordance with: (1) 
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental 
Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 
parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 
1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
    Copies of the environmental assessment are available for public 
inspection in our reading room (information on the location and hours 
of the reading room is provided under the heading ADDRESSES at the 
beginning of this docket). In addition, copies may be obtained by 
writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection or 
recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been 
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 
Please send written comments to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington, 
DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket No. 00-094-1. 
Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) Docket No. 00-094-1, 
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River 
Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238, and (2) Clearance Officer, 
OCIO, USDA, room 404-W, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20250. A comment to OMB is best assured of having its 
full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication of this 
proposed rule.
    We are proposing that livestock facilities that handle sheep or 
goats in interstate commerce would have to meet certain standards and 
follow certain operating practices in order to be approved by us. 
Complying with the proposed standards and other conditions described in 
this proposed rule would necessitate the use of several information 
collection activities, including (1) executing a livestock facility 
agreement that provides the conditions under which the facility must 
operate in order to be approved by us, (2) notifying an APHIS or State 
representative or accredited veterinarian concerning the presence of 
any sick animal at the facility, (3) completing an application for 
permit in order for the facility to release certain sheep and goats 
affected with scrapie, and (4) maintaining records relating to the 
identity of sheep handled at the facility. We note that much of the 
information that would be requested under the proposed rule is already 
being recorded by livestock facility owners/operators as part of their 
routine business practices. In addition, much of the information 
requested is currently required by our regulations in 9 CFR parts 54, 
71, and 79, and is thus already being provided by many of the 
respondents who would be affected by the proposed regulations.
    We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected 
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and 
recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us:
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 
proposed information collection, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who 
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic 
submission of responses).
    Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of 
information is estimated to average 0.5068226 hours per response.
    Respondents: Owners/operators of certain livestock facilities that 
handle sheep or goats moving interstate, accredited veterinarians, and 
State animal health authorities.
    Estimated annual number of respondents: 1,026.
    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.
    Estimated annual number of responses: 1,026.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 520 hours. (Due to 
averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of 
the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per 
response.)
    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Mrs. 
Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 
734-7477.

Government Paperwork Elimination Act Compliance

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to 
compliance with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), which 
requires Government agencies in general to provide the public the 
option of submitting information or transacting business electronically 
to the maximum extent possible. For information pertinent to GPEA 
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste 
Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 734-7477.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 71

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

    Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.


[[Page 52460]]


    2. Section 71.1 would be amended by revising the definitions of 
Accredited Veterinarian, Area Veterinarian in Charge, interstate 
commerce, livestock, State, State animal health official, State 
representative and by adding, in alphabetical order, new definitions 
for consistent States and inconsistent States, to read as follows:


Sec.  71.1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Accredited veterinarian. A veterinarian who is approved by the 
Administrator, in accordance with part 161 of this chapter, to perform 
official animal health work of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service specified in subchapters A, B, C, and D of this chapter; and to 
perform work required by cooperative State-Federal disease control and 
eradication programs.
* * * * *
    Area veterinarian in charge. The veterinary official of APHIS who 
is assigned by the Administrator to supervise and perform the official 
animal health work of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in 
the State concerned.
* * * * *
    Consistent States. Those States listed as consistent States in 
Sec.  79.1 of this subchapter because they meet certain standards, as 
provided in Sec.  79.6 of this subchapter, for conducting an active 
State scrapie program involving the identification of scrapie in sheep 
and goats for the purpose of controlling the spread of scrapie.
* * * * *
    Inconsistent States. Those States not included in the list of 
consistent States appearing in Sec.  79.1 of this subchapter.
* * * * *
    Interstate commerce. Trade, traffic, transportation, or other 
commerce between a place in a State and any place outside of that 
State, or between points within a State but through any place outside 
of that State.
* * * * *
    Livestock. Horses, cattle, bison, cervids, camelids, sheep, goats, 
and swine.
* * * * *
    State. Any of the 50 States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the District of Columbia, 
and any territories and possessions of the United States.
    State animal health official. The State official responsible for 
livestock and poultry disease control and eradication programs.
    State representative. An individual employed in animal health work 
by a State or a political subdivision thereof and authorized by such 
State or political subdivision to perform the function involved.
* * * * *
    3. Section 71.3 would be amended by adding a new paragraph (c)(5) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  71.3  Interstate movement of diseased animals and poultry 
generally prohibited.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) Sheep or goats designated, with regard to scrapie, as exposed 
animals, high-risk animals, suspect animals, or scrapie-positive 
animals, as those terms are defined in part 79 of this chapter, may be 
moved interstate only in accordance with part 79 of this chapter.
* * * * *


Sec.  71.6  [Amended]

    4. In Sec.  71.6, paragraph (a), the first sentence would be 
amended by adding the word ``goats,'' immediately after the word 
``sheep,''.


Sec.  71.19  [Amended]

    5. In Sec.  71.19, paragraph (d), the introductory text would be 
amended by removing the words ``Area Veterinarian in Charge'' and 
adding the words ``area veterinarian in charge'' in their place.
    6. Section Sec.  71.20 would be amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a)(3), by adding the number ``79,'' immediately 
after the number ``78,''.
    b. In paragraph (a)(4), by adding the words ``high-risk'' 
immediately after the word ``exposed,''.
    c. By revising paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(11) to 
read as set forth below.
    d. In paragraph (a)(8), by adding the number ``79,'' immediately 
after the number ``78,''.
    e. In paragraph (a)(12), by removing the words ``or suspect, or 
exposed'' and adding in their place the words ``suspect, exposed, high-
risk, or scrapie-positive''.
    f. By redesignating paragraphs (a)(17) through (a)(20) as 
paragraphs (a)(18) through (a)(21), respectively, and adding a new 
paragraph (a)(17) before the undesignated center heading ``Approvals'' 
to read as set forth below.
    g. By revising newly redesignated paragraph (a)(18) to read as set 
forth below.


Sec.  71.20  Approval of livestock facilities.

* * * * *
    (5) Any reactor, suspect, exposed, high-risk, or scrapie-positive 
livestock shall be held in quarantined pens apart from all other 
livestock at the facility. This requirement shall not apply to sheep or 
goats designated under 9 CFR part 79 as exposed or high-risk animals 
that will be moved directly to slaughter in accordance with 9 CFR parts 
71 and 79.
    (6) No reactor, suspect, exposed, high-risk, or scrapie-positive 
livestock, nor any livestock that show signs of being infected with any 
infectious, contagious, or communicable disease, may be sold at or 
moved from the facility, except in accordance with 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 
78, 79, and 85.

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, or for a period of 5 years in the 
case of sheep or goats. APHIS representatives and State representatives 
shall be permitted to review and copy those documents during normal 
business hours.
* * * * *
    (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, as well as 9 CFR 54.7(e)(2) if the disease of concern is 
scrapie, before being used to pen livestock that are not reactor, 
suspect, exposed, high-risk, or scrapie-positive animals.
* * * * *
    (17) Sheep and goats:

--This facility will handle breeding sheep or goats: [Initials of 
operator, date]
--This facility will handle slaughter sheep or goats: [Initials of 
operator, date]
--This facility will handle scrapie-exposed or high-risk sheep or 
goats: [Initials of operator, date]
--This facility will handle scrapie-exposed or high-risk sheep or goats 
for slaughter only: [Initials of operator, date]
--This facility will not handle scrapie-exposed, high-risk, suspect, or 
scrapie-positive sheep or goats, nor permit such animals to enter the 
facility: [Initials of operator, date]

    (i) All sheep and goats must be received, handled, and released by 
the facility only in accordance with 9 CFR parts 71 and 79.
    (ii) All sheep and goats at the facility must be officially 
identified and relevant records relating to those

[[Page 52461]]

identified animals must be maintained by the facility operator, as 
required under 9 CFR part 79.
    (iii) The identity of sheep and goats from consistent States and 
inconsistent States must be maintained by the facility operator.
    (iv) Breeding and slaughter animals must be separated at all times 
so that no contact will occur.
    (v) Any breeding sheep or goats that are designated, with regard to 
scrapie, as exposed, high risk, suspect, or scrapie-positive animals, 
or any slaughter sheep or goats that are designated as scrapie-positive 
or suspect animals, must be held in quarantined pens while at the 
facility.
    (vi) Any sheep or goats that are designated as scrapie-exposed or 
high-risk animals must be consigned from the facility only in 
accordance with 9 CFR part 79.
    (vii) Any sheep or goats that are designated as scrapie-positive or 
suspect animals must be reported immediately by the facility operator 
to a State representative, an APHIS representative, or an accredited 
veterinarian. Such animals may be released or consigned from the 
facility only if accompanied by a permit issued by a State, an APHIS 
representative, or an accredited veterinarian, allowing movement of the 
animals to an approved disposal site or research facility in accordance 
with 9 CFR parts 71 and 79.

Approvals

    (18) 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 (17) of this agreement. I acknowledge that I 
have received a copy of 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 78, 79, 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, 79, and 85 constitutes a basis for the 
withdrawal of this approval. [Printed name and signature of operator, 
date of signature]
* * * * *

    Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of August, 2004.
Bill Hawks,
Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 04-19516 Filed 8-25-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P