[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 7, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62798-62802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21896]


 ========================================================================
 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. 72, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 7, 2007 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 62798]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 88

[Docket No. APHIS-2006-0168]
RIN 0579-AC49


Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations regarding the 
commercial transportation of equines to slaughter to add a definition 
of equine for slaughter and make other changes that will extend the 
protections afforded by the regulations to equines bound for slaughter 
but delivered first to an assembly point, feedlot, or stockyard. This 
action would further ensure the humane treatment of such equines by 
helping to ensure that the unique and special needs of equines in 
commercial transportation to slaughter are met.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before 
January 7, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
select ``Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service'' from the agency 
drop-down menu, then click ``Submit.'' In the Docket ID column, select 
APHIS-2006-0168 to submit or view public comments and to view 
supporting and related materials available electronically. Information 
on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing 
documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close 
of the comment period, is available through the site's ``User Tips'' 
link.
    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your 
comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0168, 
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 
River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your 
comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0168.
    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: Additional information about APHIS and its 
programs is available on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Timothy Cordes, Senior Staff 
Veterinarian, Equine Programs, National Center for Animal Health 
Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; 
(301) 734-3279.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On December 7, 2001, we published in the Federal Register (66 FR 
63588-63617, Docket No. 98-074-2) a final rule that established 
regulations concerning the commercial transportation of equines for 
slaughter. That rulemaking was initiated under the provisions of the 
Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (the Act), in 
which Congress, recognizing that equines being transported to slaughter 
have unique and special needs, authorized the Secretary of Agriculture 
to issue guidelines for the regulation of the commercial transportation 
of equines for slaughter by persons regularly engaged in that activity 
in the United States (see 7 U.S.C. 1901 note).
    The regulations in 9 CFR part 88 (the regulations) contain minimum 
standards to ensure the humane movement of equines for slaughter via 
commercial transportation. The regulations cover, among other things, 
the food, water, and rest provided to such equines prior to their 
transportation to slaughter, standards for conveyances used to 
transport equines to slaughter, and certain paperwork required to 
accompany equines during such transportation. The regulations also 
require the owner/shipper of the equines to take certain actions to 
ensure the safety and humane treatment of equines during loading and 
transportation for slaughter, including seeking immediate assistance 
from an equine veterinarian for any equine in obvious physical 
distress. In addition, the regulations prohibit the commercial 
transportation to slaughtering facilities of equines considered to be 
unfit for travel, the use of electric prods on equines in commercial 
transportation to slaughter, and, after December 7, 2006, the use of 
double-deck trailers for commercial transportation of equines to 
slaughtering facilities.
    The Act defines ``equine for slaughter'' as ``any member of the 
Equidae family being transferred to a slaughter facility, including an 
assembly point, feedlot, or stockyard.'' The regulations in 9 CFR part 
88 apply to equines moved in commercial transportation to slaughtering 
establishments but not to equines bound for slaughter but moved first 
to an assembly point, feedlot or stockyard. When the regulations were 
established in 2001, we believed that equines transported to 
slaughtering establishments were at high risk of being treated 
inhumanely, and that equines transported to assembly points, feedlots, 
or stockyards were likely to be treated well, either to bring more 
money at slaughter or to be sold for other purposes. Five years later, 
it appears that equines in commercial transportation to slaughtering 
facilities, specifically, are being treated humanely, in accordance 
with the regulations.
    As the regulations are written, equines sold as slaughter horses 
may be transported first to an assembly point, for example, in a 
double-deck trailer and without any of the other protections afforded 
by the regulations, such as receiving adequate water and food prior to 
loading. We believe that equines may be delivered to these intermediate 
points en route to slaughter for the sole purpose of avoiding 
compliance with the regulations. In particular, since December 7, 2006, 
when the regulations no longer allowed double-deck trailers to 
transport equines to slaughtering facilities, truckers who wish to 
continue using double-deck trailers for slaughter

[[Page 62799]]

horses have an incentive to transport them to assembly points, 
feedlots, or stockyards, where the horses could then be reloaded onto 
straight-deck trailers for the final leg of the trip to the 
slaughtering plant. We have received numerous reports of this situation 
occurring. Given these developments, it now appears that equines that 
are bound for slaughter but are delivered first to an assembly point, 
feedlot, or stockyard are at higher risk for inhumane treatment.
    To close this loophole, we are proposing to amend the regulations 
to add a definition for the term equine for slaughter to read ``any 
member of the Equidae family being transferred to a slaughter facility, 
including an assembly point, feedlot, or stockyard.'' We also propose 
to amend Sec.  88.2(b), Sec.  88.3(a) introductory text, Sec.  88.3(b), 
Sec.  88.4(a) introductory text, and Sec.  88.4(b)(4), (c), (d), and 
(e) by replacing the words ``equines to a slaughtering facility'', 
``equines to slaughtering facilities'', ``equines in commercial 
transportation to slaughtering facilities'', ``equine to the 
slaughtering facility'', and ``equines in commercial transportation to 
a slaughtering facility'' with the term ``equines for slaughter''. 
Lastly, we are proposing to amend Sec.  88.4(b) introductory text by 
replacing the words ``transit to the slaughtering facility'' with the 
words ``commercial transportation of equines for slaughter''.
    We would consider equines delivered to an assembly point, feedlot, 
or stockyard to be equines for slaughter and subject to the regulations 
unless the owner/shipper presents an official certificate of veterinary 
inspection and the original copy of a negative equine infectious anemia 
test chart, or other documents that indicate the names and addresses of 
the consigner, consignee, owner, and examining veterinarian for any 
equine being shipped, as evidence that the equines are not equines for 
slaughter.

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.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires agencies to evaluate 
the potential effects of their rules on small entities. The analysis 
that follows represents an initial regulatory flexibility analysis in 
accordance with the requirements of the RFA. Because data on the 
commercial transport of equines to intermediate points en route to 
slaughter is sparse at best, we were not able to conduct a 
comprehensive analysis of the proposed rule's potential economic 
impact. Accordingly, we welcome public comment that would enable us to 
more fully assess the proposal's impact. We are particularly interested 
in public comment on the impact of the ban on double-deck trailers for 
use in transporting equines for slaughter.
    APHIS's regulations in 9 CFR part 88 are designed to help ensure 
the humane commercial transport of equines to slaughter. Specifically, 
the regulations require that:
     For a period of not less than 6 consecutive hours 
immediately prior to the equines being loaded on the conveyance for 
transport, each equine be provided access to food and water and the 
opportunity to rest;
     Any equine that has been on the conveyance for 28 
consecutive hours or more without food, water, and the opportunity to 
rest be offloaded and, for at least 6 consecutive hours, provided with 
food, water, and the opportunity to rest;
     Each equine be provided with enough space on the 
conveyance to ensure that no animal is crowded in a way likely to cause 
injury or discomfort;
     Stallions and other aggressive equines be segregated from 
each other and all other equines on the conveyance;
     Electric prods be used only in life-threatening 
situations; and
     An owner-shipper certificate be completed for each equine 
prior to departing for the slaughtering facility. Among other things, 
the certificate must certify the equine's fitness to travel and note 
any special care and handling needs during transit.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ An equine is considered fit to travel if it: (1) Can bear 
weight on all four limbs; (2) can walk unassisted; (3) is not blind 
in both eyes; (4) is older than 6 months of age; and (5) is not 
likely to give birth in transit. The owner or commercial shipper 
must sign the certificate, and it must accompany the equine to the 
slaughtering facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At present, the regulations apply only to equines moved directly to 
slaughtering establishments, and not to equines bound for slaughter but 
moved first to an assembly point, feedlot, or stockyard. This proposed 
rule would amend the regulations to make equines delivered to 
intermediate points en route to slaughter subject to the same 
regulations as those moved directly to slaughtering establishments. 
This proposed rule is intended to ensure the humane treatment of 
equines delivered to intermediate points en route to slaughter.
    Equines are generally slaughtered for their meat, which is sold for 
human consumption, primarily outside the United States.\2\ In 2005, the 
United States exported 39.5 million pounds of horse, ass, and mule 
meat, with a value of $61.1 million. Of the total volume exported in 
2005, 35.3 million pounds, or 89 percent, was shipped to five countries 
(Belgium, France, Mexico, Russia, and Switzerland).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Horses account for almost all equines slaughtered in the 
United States.
    \3\ Source: World Trade Atlas (U.S. Census Bureau).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From 2003 through 2005, an average of 70,094 equines were 
slaughtered annually in federally inspected U.S. slaughtering 
facilities.\4\ During that period, and at the time this analysis was 
prepared, there were three slaughtering facilities that accepted 
equines in the continental United States: Two were located in Texas and 
one in Illinois. However, following a Federal appeals court ruling, the 
two facilities in Texas are now closed. Following an unsuccessful 
challenge to a State law to stay open, the Illinois facility is also 
closed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Source: USDA (NASS), Livestock Slaughter Summary (2003, 
2004, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    APHIS estimates that there are no more than 100 entities in the 
U.S. currently involved in the commercial transportation of equines to 
slaughter. As discussed below, the transport of slaughter equines to 
intermediate points is not uncommon. Based on the average number of 
equines slaughtered in the United States each year between 2003 and 
2005 (approximately 70,000) and on the estimated number of potentially 
affected shippers (approximately 100), the average number of equines 
transported annually per shipper is 700.

Economic Effects on Owners and Commercial Shippers

    The ``path'' from source supplier (farmer, rancher, pet owner, 
etc.) to slaughtering facility can vary. However, the most common 
scenario and the one used for the purpose of this analysis is as 
follows: The source suppliers transport their equines to local auction 
markets, where the equines are sold to persons who purchase the equines 
for the specific purposes of selling them to a slaughtering facility. 
(Hereafter, for the purposes of this initial regulatory flexibility 
analysis, we will refer to persons who sell equines for slaughter as 
``owners''; however, in some cases, the owners use agents to conduct 
some aspect of the business of purchasing equines and transporting and 
selling them to slaughtering facilities. We will use the term ``owner'' 
to refer to either

[[Page 62800]]

the actual owners or their agents.) The owners consider price lists 
published by the slaughtering facilities for equines (the price varies 
in relation to the weight of the equine and the quality of the meat), 
transportation costs, and profit requirements to establish the maximum 
prices that they will pay for equines at local auctions. Because the 
owners cannot usually purchase enough slaughter-quality equines at any 
one auction to make it economically feasible to ship the animals 
directly from the auction site to the slaughtering facility, the owners 
transport the equines back to their own farms or feedlots where the 
equines are kept until such time as the owners can accumulate more 
equines from other auctions. When enough equines have been accumulated 
to comprise a shipment, the owners transport the equines to the 
slaughtering facility. In an estimated 75 percent of cases, owners hire 
commercial shippers to move the equines to the slaughtering facilities; 
in the remaining estimated 25 percent of cases, owners transport the 
equines to slaughter in their own conveyances.
    Based on the slaughter scenario described above, this proposed rule 
has the potential to economically affect owners who purchase equines at 
local auction markets and then transport the animals to their farms, 
feedlots, or other assembly points prior to shipping them on to 
slaughter. (The owners' farms and feedlots are intermediate stops en 
route to slaughter.) However, the proposed rule also has the potential 
to affect owners and commercial shippers who transport equines from the 
owners' farms or feedlots to assembly points, feedlots, and stockyards 
prior to the animals' final delivery to a slaughtering facility. We are 
aware that such transport to intermediate points between the owner's 
farms or feedlots and the slaughtering facility occurs but we do not 
know the extent of that transport. However, we have no reason to 
believe it is significant.
    The proposed rule is likely to have little or no impact on most 
owners who transport equines from local auction markets to their farms 
or feedlots. There are several reasons. First, equines sold for 
slaughter at auctions usually have access to food, water, and rest for 
at least 6 hours prior to being transported to the owners' farms and 
feedlots. Sellers at auction markets have an incentive to provide 
equines with food and water because malnourished equines have a reduced 
slaughter value. Furthermore, most slaughter equines tend to be in 
their pens at auction markets for at least 6 hours, since it usually 
takes at least that long for them to be sold. Indeed, it is not 
uncommon for slaughter horses to be sold at the end of an auction 
session, after the saddle horses are sold. The requirement that equines 
have access to food, water, and rest for at least 6 consecutive hours 
immediately prior to the animals being loaded on the conveyance should 
not be a problem for owners who transport equines from auction sites.
    Second, owners typically purchase equines at auction markets that 
are in relatively close proximity to their farms and feedlots. It is 
unlikely, therefore, that equines acquired at auctions will have to be 
offloaded for feeding, rest, etc., while en route to the owners' farms 
or feedlots, since it is unlikely that the trip will take longer than 
28 hours.
    Third, the proposed rule would require that, during transport to 
intermediate points, equines be provided with enough space to ensure 
that they are not crowded in a way that is likely to cause injury or 
discomfort. The proposed rule would specifically ban the use of double-
deck trailers for such transport, as those types of conveyances are a 
source of animal injury and discomfort. However, owners who transport 
equines from local auction markets to their farms or feedlots generally 
do not do so using double-deck trailers. The transport to owner farms 
and feedlots almost always occurs in smaller capacity conveyances, such 
as straight-deck and goose-neck trailers.\5\ That owners transport the 
animals back to their own farms or feedlots (rather than to 
slaughtering facilities directly) only because they cannot purchase 
enough slaughter-quality equines at any one auction is, in itself, an 
indication that they have no need for the higher capacity double-deck 
trailers for such transport. Although overcrowding can also occur in 
single-deck (also called straight-deck) trailers, there is no evidence 
to suggest that it is an issue for owners who pick up slaughter equines 
at auction markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Double-deck livestock trailers can carry up to about 45 
equines each; single-deck trailers can carry up to about 38 equines 
each. Prior to the ban that became effective December 8, 2006, 
double-deck trailers were most often used for transporting equines 
to slaughter facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, the restriction on the use of electric prods should not 
pose a burden because effective, low-cost substitutes are available for 
use in non-life-threatening situations. For example, fiberglass poles 
with flags attached, which cost no more than about $10 each, are 
considered to be an effective alternative to electric prods. (Any 
current use of electric prods by transporters of slaughter equines 
probably derives from the traditional use of these devices to assist in 
moving other livestock, such as cattle and swine.)
    Finally, available data suggest that the segregation of stallions 
and other aggressive equines is already a common transport practice. 
Owners have an incentive to make sure that aggressive equines are 
segregated because equines that arrive at the slaughtering facilities 
injured as the result of biting and kicking en route command lower 
market values. Furthermore, relatively few stallions are transported 
for slaughter. USDA personnel stationed at two of the slaughtering 
facilities have estimated that no more than about 5 percent of equines 
arriving for slaughter are stallions. Accordingly, the requirement that 
stallions and other aggressive equines be segregated during transport 
to slaughter is not likely to have a significant economic effect on 
owners who pick up equines at various auction markets.
    As indicated above, the proposed rule also has the potential to 
affect owners and commercial shippers who transport equines from the 
owner's farms or feedlots to assembly points, feedlots, and stockyards 
prior to the animals' final delivery to a slaughtering facility. These 
entities are more likely to be affected by the proposed rule than 
owners who transport equines from auction markets to their farms and 
feedlots only, because they are more likely to be using double-deck 
trailers. (This is because equines are typically moved from owners' 
farms and feedlots only when enough equines have been accumulated to 
comprise a full shipment, a situation which is likely to foster use of 
the higher-capacity double-deck trailers.) Nonetheless, we believe that 
owners and commercial shippers who transport equines from owners' farms 
or feedlots to intermediate points prior to the animals' final delivery 
to a slaughtering facility are likely to be in compliance with most 
parts of the proposed rule.
    Nor should the ``28-hour'' rule pose a problem for the vast 
majority of owners and commercial shippers who transport equines from 
owners' farms or feedlots to intermediate points prior to the animals' 
final shipment to a slaughtering facility. Even in a worst-case 
scenario in terms of travel distance (i.e., equines transported from 
farms or feedlots on the east or west coasts to border crossing points 
in closest proximity to the slaughtering facilities in Mexico, which 
are all located in the central part of the United States), the 
overwhelming majority of trips should take less than 28 hours. Assuming 
an average highway speed of 55 mph and

[[Page 62801]]

two different drivers, and allowing 1.5 hours for loading and 2 hours 
for refueling and meal stops, even a trip as long as 1,300 miles would 
take only about 27 hours.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ It is common transport practice to use two different drivers 
on long trips. This practice allows the equines to be transported 
virtually nonstop because one person can drive while the other 
rests, thereby avoiding federally mandated rest periods that apply 
in a single-driver situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Double-deck trailers can carry more equines than single-deck 
trailers, and owners and shippers who are using the former will be 
affected by the reduction in the number of equines that could be 
transported in a single conveyance. However, for affected owners and 
commercial shippers, the ban on double-deck trailers is likely to be 
mitigated by several factors. First, commercial shippers can use their 
double-deck trailers to transport other livestock and produce. In this 
regard, it has been estimated that double-deck trailers in general 
carry equines no more than about 10 percent of the time they are in 
use. Second, owners who cannot find another use for the double-deck 
trailers can trade them for single-deck trailers. Owners should be able 
to sell their serviceable trailers at fair market value to transporters 
of commodities other than equines.
    In conclusion, we believe that most transporters to intermediate 
points are already in compliance with most or all of the proposed 
rule's requirements. Those that are not now in compliance are likely to 
be owners and commercial shippers who transport equines from owners' 
farms or feedlots to intermediate points prior to the animals' final 
delivery to a slaughtering facility, since their load volume fosters 
the use of the higher capacity double-deck trailers. While we know that 
transport to intermediate points between the owners' farms or feedlots 
and the slaughtering facility occurs, we do not believe it is at a 
level that this proposed rule would result in any significant economic 
impacts.

Impact on Horse Slaughtering Facilities

    The proposed rule also has the potential to economically affect the 
horse slaughtering facilities, to the extent that it could negatively 
affect the supply of slaughter horses. As indicated above, there are 
currently no horse slaughtering facilities operating in the United 
States, however, the possibility exists that such facilities could open 
in the future. As a result of the ban on double-deck trailers, for 
example, fewer transporters may be willing to haul slaughter horses, 
and those that are willing will have to do it in smaller capacity 
single-deck trailers. A decline in supply has implications for the 
slaughtering facility since it may lead to an increase in the price 
they pay to acquire horses. Nevertheless, as indicated above, we 
believe that most transporters to intermediate points are already in 
compliance with most or all of the proposed rule's requirements, 
including the prohibition on double-deck trailers.

Impact on Small Entities

    As indicated above, it is estimated that no more than about 100 
entities are potentially affected by the proposed rule, most of whom 
are equine owners and commercial shippers. Although we do not have 
specific information on the annual receipts of these entities, it is 
reasonable to assume that most are small by U.S. Small Business 
Administration (SBA) standards. This assumption is based on composite 
data for providers of the same and similar services in the United 
States. In 2002, the most recent year for which data is available, 
there were 44,933 U.S. establishments in North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) categories 48422 and 48423, which 
comprise firms primarily engaged in specialized freight trucking, 
including the transportation of livestock. The per-establishment 
average gross receipts for all 44,933 establishments that year was $0.9 
million, well below the SBA's small-entity threshold of $23.5 million. 
Similarly, in 2002, there were 1,048 U.S. establishments in NAICS 
42459, a classification category that includes horse dealers. For all 
1,048 establishments, the per-establishment average number of employees 
that year was 7, well below the SBA's small-entity threshold of 100 
employees for those firms.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Source: SBA and U.S. Census Bureau (2002 Economic Census).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    APHIS has not identified any duplication, overlap, or conflict of 
this proposed rule with other Federal rules.

Alternatives

    In developing the current regulations, APHIS opted for a number of 
alternatives designed to lessen the economic effects of the regulations 
on affected small entities, including a deferral, for 5 years, of the 
effective date for the prohibition on double-deck trailers.\8\ The ban 
on double-deck trailers under the current regulations took effect 
December 8, 2006, which means that owner-shippers that currently use 
double-deck trailers to transport equines to intermediate points would 
face a ban on the use of those trailers under the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The final rule published in 2001 noted that a 5-year 
deferral allows slaughter facilities time to respond to the expected 
decline in the number of transporters willing to haul horses to 
slaughter, including time to budget and to arrange for financing of 
equipment they may need to acquire if they must haul horses on their 
own because commercial shippers and owners will not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public comment on the proposed rule's economic impact is invited, 
especially comment on any impact for small entities stemming from 
prohibition on the use of double-deck trailers to move equines to 
intermediate points, such as stockyards and feedlots, before moving 
them to a slaughter facility.

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

    In accordance with section 3507(j) of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection and 
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. APHIS-
2006-0168. Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) Docket No. 
APHIS-2006-0168, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, 
Station 3A-03.8, 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.
    This proposed rule would amend the regulations in 9 CFR part 88 to 
provide for the humane treatment of equines en route to slaughter 
facilities through intermediate points. We are soliciting

[[Page 62802]]

comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our 
information collection and recordkeeping requirements. These comments 
will help us:
    (1) Evaluate whether the 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 
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 0.834960937 hours per response.
    Respondents: Owners and shippers of slaughter horses and drivers of 
vehicles of equines for slaughter.
    Estimated annual number of respondents: 130.
    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 39.38461538.
    Estimated annual number of responses: 5,120.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 4,275 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.

E-Government Act Compliance

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to 
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet 
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities 
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for 
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act 
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste 
Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 734-7477.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 88

    Animal welfare, Horses, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Transportation.
    Accordingly, we are proposing to amend 9 CFR part 88 as follows:

PART 88--COMMERCIAL TRANSPORTATION OF EQUINES FOR SLAUGHTER

    1. The authority citation for part 88 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1901, 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, 371.4.

    2. Section 88.1 is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, a new 
definition for equine for slaughter to read as follows:


Sec.  88.1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Equine for slaughter. Any member of the Equidae family being 
transferred to a slaughter facility, including an assembly point, 
feedlot, or stockyard.
* * * * *


Sec.  88.2  [Amended]

    3. In Sec.  88.2, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the words 
``equines to a slaughtering facility'' and adding the words ``equines 
for slaughter'' in their place.


Sec.  88.3  [Amended]

    4. Section 88.3 is amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a), introductory text, by removing the words 
``equines to slaughtering facilities'' and adding the words ``equines 
for slaughter'' in their place.
    b. In paragraph (b), by removing the words ``Equines in commercial 
transportation to slaughtering facilities'' and adding the words 
``Equines for slaughter'' in their place.


Sec.  88.4  [Amended]

    5. Section 88.4 is amended as follows:
    a. In paragraph (a), introductory text, by removing the words 
``equines to a slaughtering facility'' and adding the words ``equines 
for slaughter'' in their place.
    b. In paragraph (a)(3), by removing the words ``transit to the 
slaughtering facility'' and adding the words ``throughout transit to 
slaughter'' in their place.
    c. In paragraph (b), introductory text, by removing the words 
``transit to the slaughtering facility'' and adding the words 
``commercial transportation of equines for slaughter'' in their place.
    d. In paragraph (b)(4), by removing the words ``equine to the 
slaughtering facility'' and adding the words ``equines for slaughter'' 
in their place.
    e. In paragraph (c), by removing the words ``equines in commercial 
transportation to a slaughtering facility'' both times they occur and 
adding the words ``equines for slaughter'' in their place.
    f. In paragraphs (d) and (e), by removing the words ``equines to a 
slaughtering facility'' and adding the words ``equines for slaughter'' 
in their place.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 1st day of November 2007.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-21896 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P