Exportation of Live Animals, Hatching Eggs, and Animal Germplasm From the United States, 10398-10417 [2015-04013]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 38 (Thursday, February 26, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10398-10417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04013]


========================================================================
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. 80, No. 38 / Thursday, February 26, 2015 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 10398]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. APHIS-2012-0049]
RIN 0579-AE00


Exportation of Live Animals, Hatching Eggs, and Animal Germplasm 
From the United States

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to revise the regulations pertaining to the 
exportation of livestock from the United States. Among other things, we 
propose to remove most of the requirements for export health 
certifications, tests, and treatments from the regulations, and instead 
would direct exporters to follow the requirements of the importing 
country regarding such processes and procedures. We propose to retain 
only those export health certification, testing, and treatment 
requirements that we consider necessary to have assurances regarding 
the health and welfare of livestock exported from the United States. We 
also propose to allow pre-export inspection of livestock to occur at 
facilities other than an export inspection facility associated with the 
port of embarkation, under certain circumstances, and propose to 
replace specific standards for export inspection facilities and ocean 
vessels with performance standards. These changes would provide 
exporters and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service with more 
flexibility in arranging for the export of livestock from the United 
States while continuing to ensure the health and welfare of the 
livestock. Additionally, if a country is known to require an export 
health certificate for any animal other than livestock, including pets, 
or for any hatching eggs or animal germplasm, we propose to require 
that the animal, hatching eggs, or animal germplasm have an export 
health certificate to be eligible for export from the United States. 
This change would help ensure that all animals, hatching eggs, and 
animal germplasm exported from the United States meet the health 
requirements of the countries to which they are destined. Finally, we 
are proposing editorial amendments to the regulations to make them 
easier to understand and comply with.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before April 
27, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2012-0049.
     Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to 
Docket No. APHIS-2012-0049, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, 
APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1238.
    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may 
be viewed at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2012-
0049 or in our reading room, which is located in Room 1141 of the USDA 
South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, 
DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, 
please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Jack Taniewski, Director for 
Animal Export, National Import Export Services, VS, APHIS, 4700 River 
Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-3300.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Under the Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA, 7 U.S.C. 8301 et 
seq.), the Secretary of Agriculture may prohibit or restrict the 
exportation of any animal, article, or means of conveyance if the 
Secretary determines that the prohibition or restriction is necessary 
to prevent the dissemination of any pest or disease of livestock from 
or within the United States. The AHPA also authorizes the Secretary to 
prohibit: (1) The exportation of any livestock if the Secretary 
determines that the livestock is unfit to be moved; (2) the use of any 
means of conveyance or facility in connection with the exportation of 
any animal or article if the Secretary determines that the prohibition 
or restriction is necessary to prevent the dissemination of any pest or 
disease of livestock from or within the United States; and (3) the use 
of any means of conveyance in connection with the exportation of 
livestock if the Secretary determines that the prohibition or 
restriction is necessary because the means of conveyance has not been 
maintained in a clean and sanitary condition or does not have 
accommodations for the safe and proper movement and humane treatment of 
livestock.
    The Secretary has delegated this authority to the Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA). Pursuant to this authority, APHIS has issued the 
regulations in 9 CFR part 91, ``Inspection and Handling of Livestock 
for Exportation'' (``the regulations'').
    The regulations contain requirements for the inspection and 
handling of cattle (including American bison), horses, captive cervids, 
sheep, goats, and swine (referred to below collectively as livestock) 
intended for export from the United States. Among other things:
     The livestock must be accompanied to a port of embarkation 
or land border port by an export health certificate.
     The export health certificate must contain test results 
and certifications required by the country to which the animals are 
destined, as well as certain test results and certifications required 
by APHIS, regardless of the destination country.
     If tests for brucellosis are required, the tests must be 
conducted in a cooperating State-Federal laboratory in accordance with 
the Brucellosis Uniform Methods and Rules.
     Except for livestock exported through land border ports, 
the livestock must be inspected within 24 hours of embarkation by an 
APHIS veterinarian at an export inspection facility associated with the 
port of embarkation.
     Except for livestock exported through land border ports, 
the livestock must be allowed to rest at least 5 hours at an export 
inspection facility at the port of embarkation prior to embarkation. 
The livestock must be

[[Page 10399]]

given food and water during this time unless they had food and water in 
the carrier that transported them to the export inspection facility and 
they will reach the destination country within 36 hours after they were 
last fed and watered in the United States, or, if they are under 30 
days of age, within 24 hours after they were last fed and watered in 
the United States.
     Ports of embarkation for animals to be exported by air or 
sea must meet standards set out in the regulations for construction, 
space, equipment, access, feed, and water.
     Ocean vessels used to export livestock must meet standards 
specified in the regulations for construction, ventilation, space, 
fittings, equipment, attendants, cleaning, and disinfection.
    We have not substantively amended these regulations for many years. 
Some provisions, such as those that require pre-export inspection of 
livestock at an export inspection facility associated with the port of 
embarkation and those that set forth specific construction and 
maintenance standards for export inspection facilities and ocean 
vessels, sometimes interfere with exports. Other requirements, 
particularly those that require certain tests and certifications for 
all livestock intended for export from the United States, are not 
always required by importing countries or necessary for us to have 
assurances regarding the health and welfare of the livestock at the 
time of export.
    For these reasons, we are proposing to remove requirements that we 
have determined to be unnecessary or overly prescriptive from the 
regulations in order to provide exporters and APHIS with more options 
for inspecting and handling livestock intended for export. The proposed 
changes would continue to ensure that livestock intended for export are 
humanely transported and that all livestock exported from the United 
States meet the import health requirements of the countries to which 
they are destined.
    Additionally, although our authority under the AHPA allows us to 
issue export health certificates for animals other than livestock, as 
well as for hatching eggs and germplasm, the regulations currently do 
not contain provisions for such issuance.
    However, as a signatory on the World Trade Organization's Agreement 
on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), the United 
States has agreed to respect the measures that other countries impose 
on the importation of animals other than livestock, hatching eggs, or 
animal germplasm from the United States, when these countries 
demonstrate the need to impose the measures in order to protect animal 
health. Several countries have entered into export protocols with the 
United States in which they demonstrate such a need and require export 
health certificates to be issued in order for animals other than 
livestock, hatching eggs, or animal germplasm to be exported to their 
country.
    Accordingly, we would revise part 91 so that, when an importing 
country is known to require an export health certificate for any animal 
other than livestock or for any animal semen, animal embryos, hatching 
eggs, other embryonated eggs, or gametes intended for export to that 
country, the animal or other commodity must have an export health 
certificate in order to be eligible for export from the United States.
    Finally, in order to make the regulations easier to follow, we are 
proposing to group certain provisions that are currently located in 
disparate sections of the regulations, and to make certain other 
editorial changes to make the regulations easier to read.
    We discuss our proposed revision to the regulations, by section, 
below.

Definitions (Sec.  91.1)

    The regulations in current Sec.  91.1 contain definitions of the 
following terms: Accredited veterinarian, Administrator, Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service, animals, APHIS representative, 
Department, horses, inspector, miniature swine, official brucellosis 
vaccinate, origin health certificate, premises of origin, roofing 
paper, State of origin, and Veterinary Services.
    In proposed Sec.  91.1, we would omit the definitions of 
Department, miniature swine, official brucellosis vaccinate, and 
Veterinary Services, as the terms would not be used in the revised 
regulations. We would also remove the definitions of origin health 
certificate and premises of origin and replace these terms with two 
other terms, export health certificate and premises of export, 
respectively.
    We would replace origin health certificate with export health 
certificate because the latter term is more commonly used. We would 
define the term export health certificate as ``an official document 
issued in the United States that certifies that animals or other 
commodities listed on the certificate meet the export requirements of 
this part and the importing country.'' Whereas the definition of origin 
health certificate contains provisions regarding the content and 
issuance of origin health certificates, the definition of export health 
certificate would not. This is because we have determined that these 
provisions are more accurately characterized as regulatory 
requirements, and would thus place them in proposed Sec.  91.3. That 
section would contain requirements regarding the information that must 
be contained on an export health certificate and the manner in which 
the certificate must be issued in order for us to consider it valid.
    We would replace premises of origin with premises of export for a 
different reason. The term premises of origin is often used in common 
speech to mean the premises where animals were born and/or raised. We 
mean, instead, the premises where the animals are assembled for pre-
export isolation (if such isolation is required by the importing 
country) or, if the importing country does not require pre-export 
isolation, the premises where the animals are assembled for pre-export 
inspection and/or testing, or the germplasm is collected and stored, 
before being moved to a port of embarkation or land border port. This 
could be the premises where the animals were born and/or raised, but 
could also be another location where the animals were assembled for 
isolation, testing, and/or inspection prior to movement. This nuance is 
currently reflected in the definition of premises of origin, which is 
defined in a manner that includes the premises where animals are 
assembled immediately before movement for export. However, the term 
premises of origin itself does not necessarily capture the nuance. We 
think the term premises of export better expresses our intent.
    By replacing the term premises of origin with the term premises of 
export, we would also revise the definition of State of origin, which 
currently uses the term premises of origin.
    We would also revise the definitions of Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service, animal, APHIS representative, and inspector.
    We currently define Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service as 
``The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the United States 
Department of Agriculture (APHIS or Service).'' The revised regulations 
would no longer use the term ``Service'' as a synonym for APHIS; thus, 
we would remove a reference to ``Service'' from this definition.
    As we mentioned above, the regulations currently apply only to 
horses, cattle (including American bison), captive cervids, sheep, 
swine, and goats. As a result, the definition of animal in current 
Sec.  91.1 only includes those species. However, because this proposed 
rule would contain provisions for export certification of animals other

[[Page 10400]]

than those six species, when we use the term animal in this preamble 
and proposed rule, it has the common meaning of any member of the 
animal kingdom, except a human. (This revised definition would be 
identical to the definition of animal within the AHPA itself.)
    Certain provisions of the revised regulations would only pertain to 
horses, cattle (including American bison), captive cervids, sheep, 
swine, and goats, however. To differentiate between those provisions 
that would be generally applicable to all animals, and those that would 
pertain only to those species, we would refer to horses, cattle 
(including American bison), captive cervids, sheep, swine, and goats 
collectively as livestock within the revised regulations, and would 
include such a definition of livestock within proposed Sec.  91.1.
    Currently, we define APHIS representative as ``an individual 
employed by APHIS who is authorized to perform the function involved'' 
and inspector as ``an inspector of the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service.'' However, as we have expanded our export 
certification services to animals other than livestock, we have 
occasionally authorized individuals who are not employed by APHIS to 
serve as APHIS representatives and inspectors. This usually occurs when 
we do not have the specialized expertise necessary to assess the 
disease status of a particular animal intended for export. For example, 
APHIS sometimes authorizes employees of the United States Fish and 
Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior to provide 
inspection and/or certification of certain species of aquaculture 
intended for export. To reflect these operational practices, we would 
revise the definition of APHIS representative to ``an individual who is 
authorized by APHIS to perform the function involved'' and the 
definition of inspector to ``an individual authorized by APHIS to 
inspect animals and/or animal products intended for export from the 
United States.''
    Finally, we would add definitions of the following terms to the 
regulations: Date of export, export inspection facility, export 
isolation facility, program diseases, and Program Handbook.
    We would define date of export as ``the date animals intended for 
export are loaded onto an ocean vessel or aircraft or, if moved by land 
to Canada or Mexico, the date the animals cross the border.'' We would 
include such a definition within the revised regulations because, as in 
the current regulations, we would require animals to be inspected in 
order for their export to be authorized, and this inspection would have 
to occur within a set period of time prior to the date of export.
    We would define export isolation facility as ``a facility where 
animals intended for export are isolated from other animals for a 
period of time immediately before being moved for export,'' and would 
define export inspection facility as ``a facility that is affiliated 
with a port of embarkation and that has been approved by the 
Administrator as the location where APHIS will conduct health 
inspections of livestock before they are loaded onto ocean vessels or 
aircraft for export from the United States.'' We would include a 
definition of export isolation facility because we would authorize pre-
export inspection of livestock at export isolation facilities, under 
certain conditions. We would include a definition of export inspection 
facility in order to clarify how such facilities differ from export 
isolation facilities.
    We would define program diseases to mean diseases for which there 
are cooperative State-Federal programs and domestic regulations in 
subchapter C of the APHIS' regulations in 9 CFR. As we mentioned 
earlier in this document, we are proposing to remove most testing 
requirements from the regulations, and instead would direct exporters 
to follow the testing requirements of the importing country. However, 
many countries require tests for diseases for which we have established 
domestic State-Federal quarantine programs, such as tuberculosis, 
brucellosis, and pseudorabies. Such diseases are commonly referred to 
as program diseases. We would require testing for such program diseases 
to occur according to the standards and protocols established 
domestically for these diseases.
    We would define Program Handbook to mean a document that contains 
guidance and other information related to the regulations. The 
definition would provide that the Program Handbook is available on 
APHIS' import-export Web site, and would provide the address for that 
Web site. We discuss the role that the Program Handbook would play in 
relation to the proposed regulations at greater length in the 
discussion of subsequent sections of the proposed regulations.

Applicability (Sec.  91.2)

    Current Sec.  91.2 requires livestock to be exported from the 
United States in accordance with the regulations. We would retain this 
requirement. However, since the revised regulations would also pertain 
to the export of animals other than livestock and to animal germplasm, 
proposed Sec.  91.2 would specify that such animals and animal 
germplasm must also be exported in accordance with the regulations.

General Requirements (Sec.  91.3)

    Proposed Sec.  91.3 would provide general requirements for the 
export of livestock, animals other than livestock, and animal 
germplasm.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(1) of Sec.  91.3 would provide that 
livestock must have an export health certificate in order to be 
eligible for export from the United States. We recognize that a country 
could elect to allow livestock to be imported into that country without 
an export health certificate. However, even in such instances, pursuant 
to our authority under the AHPA, we would need assurances that the 
livestock were fit to be moved for export from their premises of export 
at the time that movement occurred. The export health certificate would 
provide such assurances.
    The current regulations do not contain export health certification 
or other export-health requirements for animals other than livestock or 
for animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated 
eggs, or gametes. However, as we mentioned above, some foreign 
countries have entered into export protocols with the United States for 
species of animals other than livestock, including dogs, cats, and 
aquatic animals in which these countries require export health 
certificates to be issued in order for the animal to be exported from 
the United States to their country. Likewise, some foreign countries 
require export health certificates for animal germplasm, hatching eggs, 
other embryonated eggs, and gametes exported from the United States. 
Consistent with the SPS Agreement and our authority under the AHPA, it 
is APHIS policy to require export health certificates for the export of 
such animals and germplasm from the United States to such countries.
    Accordingly, proposed paragraph (a)(2) of Sec.  91.3 would provide 
that, if an importing country is known to require an export health 
certificate for any animal other than livestock or for any animal 
semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or 
gametes intended for export to that country, the animal or other 
commodity must have an export health certificate in order to be 
eligible for export from the United States.
    Proposed paragraph (b) of Sec.  91.3 would contain minimum 
requirements

[[Page 10401]]

regarding the information that must be contained on an export health 
certificate. Proposed paragraph (b)(1) of Sec.  91.3 would specify that 
regardless of the requirements of the importing country, an export 
health certificate for livestock must contain:
     The species of each animal.
     The breed of each animal.
     The sex of each animal.
     The age of each animal.
     The individual identification used to identify the 
animals. (Identification requirements would be contained in proposed 
Sec.  91.5.)
     The importing country.
     The consignor.
     The consignee.
     A certification that an accredited veterinarian inspected 
the livestock and found them to be fit for export.
     A signature and date by an accredited veterinarian.
     An endorsement by the APHIS veterinarian responsible for 
the State of origin.
    These information requirements, many of which are included in the 
current definition of origin health certificate, represent the minimal 
categories of information that we require in order for us to consider 
an export health certificate to have been validly issued.
    Proposed paragraph (b)(2) of Sec.  91.3 would also require export 
certificates for livestock to meet any other information or issuance 
requirements specified by the importing country. This provision would 
be substantively similar to an existing provision in current Sec.  91.3 
that requires origin health certificates for livestock to include all 
test results, certifications, or other statements required by the 
country of destination.
    Proposed paragraph (b)(3) of Sec.  91.3 would set forth 
requirements for export health certificates for animals other than 
livestock, animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other 
embryonated eggs, and gametes. For such animals and commodities, we 
propose to require that their export health certificates meet any 
information requirements specified by the importing country.
    As we mentioned above, we issue export health certificates for 
animals other than livestock and animal germplasm when such 
certificates are required by the importing country. For these reasons, 
we consider it reasonable to require that such certificates meet the 
information requirements specified by the importing country.
    Current paragraph (a) of Sec.  91.3 requires the origin health 
certificate to certify that the livestock were inspected within 30 days 
prior to the date of export, with certain exceptions. The Administrator 
may allow inspection to be done more than 30 days prior to the date of 
export if required or allowed by the importing country. Proposed 
paragraph (c) of Sec.  91.3 would require that livestock be inspected 
within the timeframe required by the importing country. If the 
importing country does not specify a timeframe, we propose to require 
that the livestock be inspected within 30 days prior to the date of 
export. These requirements would be similar to the current 
requirements, but would place a greater emphasis on meeting the 
requirements of the importing country.
    Current paragraph (c) of Sec.  91.3 sets forth general requirements 
for sampling and testing for livestock intended for export. It requires 
species-specific samples and tests, which are currently listed in Sec.  
91.5 through Sec.  91.9, to be taken by an inspector or accredited 
veterinarian in the State of origin. It further requires the samples to 
be taken and tests made within 30 days prior to the date of export, 
except when the importing country requires or allows such sampling and 
testing to be conducted more than 30 days prior to the date of export 
and the Administrator agrees to this different timeframe. It further 
allows tuberculin tests to be conducted 90 days prior to export. 
Finally, it requires tests for brucellosis to be conducted in a 
cooperative State-Federal laboratory in accordance with the Brucellosis 
Uniform Methods and Rules.
    We consider substantial revisions to these testing requirements to 
be necessary. First, although most testing is conducted by accredited 
veterinarians or APHIS inspectors, on certain occasions the samples and 
tests are administered by APHIS employees, such as animal health 
technicians, who are neither inspectors nor accredited veterinarians, 
but who have been trained by APHIS to conduct such sampling and 
testing. Such individuals function as APHIS representatives, as we are 
proposing to define that term.
    Second, while the intent of Sec. Sec.  91.3 through 91.9 is to 
require that, if an importing country requires livestock intended for 
export to be tested for a program disease, the livestock are tested for 
the disease, and are tested in the same manner and under the same 
conditions as domestic livestock are tested for that disease prior to 
interstate movement, this intent is not readily apparent. Similarly, 
current Sec.  91.3 could be construed to suggest that brucellosis is 
the only program disease for which approved laboratories exist; this is 
not the case.
    Finally, consistent with other changes that we are proposing to the 
regulations, we believe that greater emphasis must be put on meeting 
the requirements of the importing country.
    Accordingly, proposed paragraph (d) of Sec.  91.3 would set forth 
revised testing requirements for livestock intended for export. All 
samples for tests of livestock that are required by the importing 
country would have to be taken by an APHIS representative or accredited 
veterinarian. The samples would have to be taken and tests made within 
the timeframe allowed by the importing country, and, if specified, at 
the location required by the importing country. Consistent with the 
current regulations, if the importing country does not specify a 
timeframe, the samples would have to be taken and tests made within 30 
days prior to the date of export, except that tuberculin tests could be 
conducted within 90 days prior to the date of export. All tests for 
program diseases would have to be made in laboratories and using 
methods approved by the Administrator for those diseases. The Program 
Handbook would provide access to a list of approved laboratories; 
approved methods would be those specified or otherwise incorporated 
within the domestic regulations in subchapter C of 9 CFR chapter I.
    These proposed requirements, in conjunction with our proposed 
general requirement that all certification requirements of the 
importing country be met, would eliminate the need to specify species-
specific testing requirements in part 91. Thus we would not retain the 
provisions contained in current Sec. Sec.  91.5 through 91.9.
    Proposed paragraph (e) of Sec.  91.3 would set forth conditions for 
movement from the premises of export for livestock, animals other than 
livestock, and animal germplasm with an export health certificate.
    Proposed paragraph (e)(1) of Sec.  91.3 would set forth movement 
requirements for livestock moving from the premises of export under an 
export health certificate. It would require that an export health 
certificate be issued and endorsed before the livestock move from the 
premises of export. Additionally, except when the certificate has been 
issued and endorsed electronically, the original signed export health 
certificate would have to accompany the livestock for the entire 
duration of movement from the premises of export to the port of 
embarkation or land border port.
    Proposed paragraph (e)(2) of Sec.  91.3 would set forth movement 
requirements for animals other than livestock and animal germplasm 
moving from a

[[Page 10402]]

premises of export under an export health certificate. (It would 
pertain to animals other than livestock and animal germplasm only when 
export health certificates are required for such animals or 
commodities.) It would require that, when an export health certificate 
is required by the importing country for any animal other than 
livestock or for animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other 
embryonated eggs, or gametes, it must be issued and, if required by the 
importing country, endorsed by an APHIS representative prior to the 
arrival of the animal or other commodity at the port of embarkation or 
land border port.
    When presented for endorsement, the health certificate would have 
to be accompanied by reports for all laboratory tests specifically 
identified on the certificate. To preclude tampering, we would require 
either the original reports prepared by the laboratory that performed 
the tests to accompany the certificate or a copy of the reports that is 
annotated by the laboratory to indicate how the originals may be 
obtained.
    Finally, except when an export health certificate has been issued 
and endorsed electronically, the original signed export health 
certificate would have to accompany the animals or animal germplasm to 
the port of embarkation or land border port.
    Proposed paragraph (f)(1) of Sec.  91.3 would provide that, unless 
specified by the importing country, an export health certificate for 
livestock is valid for 30 days from the date of issuance, provided that 
the inspection and tests results under paragraphs (c) and (d) of Sec.  
91.3 are still valid. Similarly, proposed paragraph (f)(2) of Sec.  
91.3 would provide that, unless specified by the importing country, an 
export health certificate for animals other than livestock, animal 
semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or 
gametes is valid for 30 days from the date of issuance.

Prohibited Exports (Sec.  91.4)

    We are proposing to prohibit the export of any animal, animal 
semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or 
gametes under Federal, State, or local government quarantine or 
movement restrictions for animal health reasons unless the importing 
country issues an import permit or other written instruction allowing 
that animal or other commodity to enter its country and APHIS concurs 
with the export of the animal, animal semen, animal embryos, hatching 
eggs, other embryonated eggs, or gametes. This restriction, together 
with any export health certifications required by an importing country, 
would ensure that animals, hatching eggs, and animal germplasm exported 
from the United States meet the health requirements of importing 
countries and are free from serious diseases.

Identification of Livestock Intended for Export (Sec.  91.5)

    Proposed Sec.  91.5 would contain identification requirements for 
livestock intended for export. With one exception, we would require 
such livestock to be identified in accordance with 9 CFR part 86. That 
part contains national identification standards for livestock moving in 
interstate commerce. We consider this requirement to be necessary in 
order to align our export requirements with our domestic regulations, 
and to facilitate the interstate movement of animals intended for 
export from their premises of export to an export inspection facility, 
port of embarkation, or land border port.
    We would also require the livestock to bear any additional form of 
identification required by the importing country.
    Finally, while part 86 requires that, if a horse is identified by 
an individual animal tattoo, the horse must be accompanied by a written 
description of the horse, we would allow horses intended for export to 
be identified by individual animal tattoos alone, if allowed by the 
importing country. The United States has long-standing export protocols 
with several countries that allow horses to be identified solely by an 
animal tattoo, and we have not encountered problems with the orderly 
export of horses to those countries that would suggest the need to 
modify the protocols to specify an alternate means of identification.

Cleaning and Disinfection of Means of Conveyance, Containers, and 
Facilities Used During Movement; Approved Disinfectants (Sec.  91.6)

    Current paragraph (d) of Sec.  91.3 requires export health 
certificates to certify that the means of conveyance or container used 
to move livestock from their premises of export has been cleaned and 
disinfected since last used for animals with a disinfectant approved 
under Sec.  71.10 of 9 CFR prior to loading, or to certify that the 
carrier or container has not previously been used in transporting 
animals. Similarly, current paragraph (e) of Sec.  91.3 requires that 
facilities where animals are unloaded during movement to ports of 
embarkation or border ports be cleaned and disinfected with a 
disinfectant approved under Sec.  71.10 before the animals are unloaded 
into that facility.
    Section 71.10 lists disinfectants permitted for use on means of 
conveyance, containers, and facilities associated with the movement of 
livestock in commerce. However, the list of permitted disinfectants in 
Sec.  71.10 has not been updated in many years. Additionally, Sec.  
71.10 does not provide for a mechanism to add or remove disinfectants 
from the list, as warranted.
    Therefore, while proposed Sec.  91.6 would substantively retain the 
regulatory provisions currently located in paragraphs (d) and (e) of 
Sec.  91.3, it would no longer require use of a disinfectant listed in 
Sec.  71.10. Instead, disinfectants approved by the Administrator for 
the purposes of fulfilling these regulatory requirements would be 
listed online, at a Web address provided in the Program Handbook.
    We would also provide a mechanism for additional disinfectants to 
be added to the list of approved disinfectants. The Administrator would 
approve a disinfectant upon determining that the disinfectant is 
effective against pathogens that may be spread by the animals intended 
for export. Additionally, if the disinfectant is a chemical 
disinfectant, it would have to be registered or exempted for the 
specified use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    Under the authority of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., FIFRA), EPA requires chemical 
disinfectants used for animal pathogens to be registered with their 
Agency, unless they have granted an exemption from such registration 
for the specified use. Criteria for exemptions are specified in 
sections 18, 24, and 25 of FIFRA.
    There would also be a mechanism for removing disinfectants from the 
list of approved disinfectants. The Administrator would remove a 
disinfectant from the list if it no longer meets the conditions for 
approval specified above.

Pre-Export Inspection (Sec.  91.7)

    Currently, paragraph (a) of Sec.  91.15 requires animals offered 
for exportation to any country other than Mexico or Canada to be 
inspected by an APHIS veterinarian within 24 hours of embarkation of 
the animals at an export inspection facility associated with a port 
designated as a port of embarkation by the Administrator. Current 
paragraph (b) of Sec.  91.17 requires that owners, masters, or 
operators of ocean vessels must refuse for transportation any livestock 
that are unfit to withstand the rigors of such transportation. This 
paragraph also

[[Page 10403]]

provides that an APHIS veterinarian must make this determination.
    The paragraphs are intended to work in tandem to describe APHIS' 
usual processes regarding pre-export inspection of livestock destined 
for export aboard an ocean vessel: The animals are moved to an export 
inspection facility and an APHIS veterinarian examines the livestock to 
determine whether they are fit to travel. If any of the livestock are 
deemed unfit to travel, the veterinarian requires them to be segregated 
from the rest of the livestock intended for export, and prohibits them 
from being loaded onto the ocean vessel at the point of embarkation.
    This intent, however, is not readily apparent. Nor do the current 
regulations in part 91 specify that APHIS has in place parallel 
processes for livestock intended for export via aircraft. Finally, 
exporters have from time to time requested the criteria that lead a 
veterinarian to determine an animal is unfit for travel.
    To clarify both the nature and intent of the pre-export inspection, 
proposed paragraph (a) of Sec.  91.7 would require all livestock 
intended for export by air or sea to receive a visual health inspection 
from an APHIS veterinarian within 48 hours prior to embarkation. (We 
discuss why we are proposing to increase the allowed duration between 
this inspection and the embarkation of the animals from 24 to 48 hours 
later in this document). Paragraph (a) would also provide that the 
purpose of the inspection is to determine whether the livestock are 
sound, healthy, and fit to travel. The paragraph would further state 
that an APHIS veterinarian will reject for export any livestock that he 
or she finds to be unfit to travel.
    The paragraph would specify that it is the responsibility of the 
owner of the animals or his or her agent to make arrangements for any 
livestock found unfit to travel. The purpose of this requirement, which 
is not found in the current regulations, would be to give notice to 
owners and their agents that it is their responsibility to take 
appropriate, effective, and humane care of animals that are judged 
unfit to travel.
    Finally, proposed paragraph (a) of Sec.  91.7 would provide a list 
of conditions that make an animal unfit to travel. The list is not 
intended to be exhaustive or all-inclusive, but would cover the most 
common situations that we encounter. The list would include:
     Livestock that are sick, injured, weak, disabled, or 
fatigued.
     Livestock that are unable to stand unaided or bear weight 
on each leg.
     Livestock that are blind in both eyes.
     Livestock that cannot be moved without causing additional 
suffering.
     Newborn livestock with an unhealed navel.
     Livestock that have given birth within the previous 48 
hours and are traveling without their offspring.
     Pregnant livestock that would be in the final 10 percent 
of their gestation period at the planned time of unloading in the 
importing country.
     Livestock with unhealed wounds from recent surgical 
procedures, such as dehorning.
    As we mentioned earlier in this document, the regulations currently 
require pre-export inspection to occur at an export inspection facility 
associated with a port that has been designated as a port of 
embarkation by the Administrator.
    Currently, many countries require livestock intended for export to 
be kept isolated from other animals for a period of time immediately 
prior to movement for export. This isolation usually occurs at the 
premises of export, although, in certain instances, it occurs at 
another facility specifically designed for isolation of livestock. 
After the period of isolation ends, if the livestock will be exported 
by air or sea, they are shipped from the export isolation facility to 
an export inspection facility at a designated port of embarkation for 
pre-export inspection.
    In recent years, APHIS has received several requests from exporters 
to allow pre-export inspection of livestock at export isolation 
facilities. These requests have usually been made when the export 
isolation facility was closer to the nearest designated port of 
embarkation than it was to the export inspection facility, or when the 
exporter expressed concern that moving the livestock to the export 
inspection facility would cause undue hardship to the animals.
    Similarly, from time to time, we also have received requests from 
exporters to allow pre-export inspection of livestock at an export 
inspection facility other than the facility associated with the port of 
embarkation for the livestock. These usually have occurred when the 
export inspection facility requested by the exporter can more easily 
accommodate the lot of animals to be inspected, or has additional 
resources or personnel to conduct inspections.
    As a result, proposed paragraph (b) of Sec.  91.7 would provide 
that an APHIS veterinarian must conduct pre-export inspection at either 
an export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation, 
or, when authorized by the Administrator, at an export isolation 
facility or another export inspection facility. The conditions under 
which the Administrator would authorize inspection of the livestock at 
an export isolation facility or an export inspection facility not 
associated with the port of embarkation would be described in 
paragraphs (c) and (d) of Sec.  91.7.
    Proposed paragraph (b) of Sec.  91.7 would also provide that, 
unless APHIS has authorized otherwise, any sorting, grouping, 
identification, or other handling of the livestock by the exporter must 
be done before the inspection. It would further provide that the APHIS 
veterinarian may also conduct clinical examination of any of the 
livestock during or after this inspection if he or she deems it 
necessary in order to determine the animal's health. Any testing or 
treatment related to this clinical examination would have to be 
performed by an APHIS veterinarian or an accredited veterinarian. (In 
this context, testing refers to discretionary tests performed on 
animals exhibiting signs or symptoms of illness, not to tests required 
by APHIS or the importing country.) Finally, the paragraph would 
specify that if the facility used to conduct the inspection is a 
facility other than the export inspection facility associated with the 
port of embarkation, it must be located within 28 hours driving 
distance under normal driving conditions from the port of embarkation. 
While we have determined that there are certain instances where it 
makes sense to authorize pre-export inspection of livestock at export 
isolation facilities or export inspection facilities other than the 
export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation, 
none of these instances would suggest authorizing inspections at an 
export isolation facility or export inspection facility located more 
than 28 hours driving distance from the port of embarkation. We are 
proposing a maximum driving distance of 28 hours because, pursuant to 
the 28 hour law (49 U.S.C. 80502), the maximum time that livestock may 
be transported in interstate commerce without rest, feed, and water is 
28 hours.
    To help ensure that livestock moved from a facility located a 
significant distance from the port of embarkation are well-rested and 
fit for travel, we would require livestock to be afforded at least 48 
hours rest, with sufficient feed and water during that time period, 
prior to movement from the facility. Inspection of the livestock would 
occur during this rest period, which could also be concurrent with any 
isolation period required by the exporting country.

[[Page 10404]]

    As we mentioned above, proposed paragraph (c) of Sec.  91.7 would 
contain conditions under which the Administrator would authorize pre-
export inspection of the livestock at an export isolation facility, 
rather than the export inspection facility associated with the port of 
embarkation. Proposed paragraph (c)(1) would state that the 
Administrator may allow pre-export inspection of livestock to be 
conducted at an export isolation facility, rather than at an export 
inspection facility, when the exporter can show to the satisfaction of 
the Administrator that the livestock would suffer undue hardship if 
they had to be inspected at the export inspection facility, when the 
distance from the export isolation facility to the port of embarkation 
is significantly less than the distance from the export isolation 
facility to the export inspection facility associated with the port of 
embarkation, when inspection at the export isolation facility would be 
a more efficient use of APHIS resources, or for other reasons 
acceptable to the Administrator. In other words, generally speaking, we 
would authorize pre-export inspection of livestock at an export 
isolation facility when we determine that it would further our goal 
under the AHPA to ensure the health and humane treatment of animals 
exported from the United States, or when it would be more practical for 
the parties involved in the inspection to have it at the export 
isolation facility as long as the livestock would not suffer any undue 
hardship.
    Proposed paragraph (c)(2) of Sec.  91.7 would specify that the 
Administrator's approval of an export isolation facility as the 
location where pre-export inspection takes place is contingent upon 
APHIS having personnel available to provide services at that location. 
It would further specify that approval is also contingent upon the 
Administrator determining that the facility has space, lighting, and 
humane means of handling livestock sufficient for the APHIS personnel 
to safely conduct required inspections.
    The Program Handbook would provide guidance for isolation 
facilities regarding ways to meet these performance standards. 
Isolation facility owners or operators who follow the guidance set 
forth in the Program Handbook would be assured of APHIS approval of 
their facilities as locations for pre-export inspection. Owners and 
operators could submit alternate plans for meeting the performance 
standards to APHIS for evaluation and approval. In order for us to 
approve these alternate plans, however, they would have to be at least 
as effective in meeting the performance standards as those described in 
the Program Handbook. We would have to approve these alternate plans 
before the facility could be used for purposes of proposed Sec.  91.7.
    Proposed paragraph (d) of Sec.  91.7 would contain conditions under 
which the Administrator would authorize inspection of livestock at an 
export inspection facility other than the export inspection facility 
associated with the port of embarkation. It would state that the 
Administrator may allow pre-export inspection of livestock to be 
conducted at an export inspection facility other than the export 
inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation when the 
exporter can show to the satisfaction of the Administrator that the 
livestock would suffer undue hardship if they had to be inspected at 
the export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation, 
when inspection at this different export inspection facility would be a 
more efficient use of APHIS resources, or for other reasons acceptable 
to the Administrator.
    These conditions would be very similar to the conditions under 
which we would allow pre-export inspection at an export isolation 
facility. However, while we can foresee instances when an export 
isolation facility may be closer to the port of embarkation from which 
the livestock will be shipped than the export inspection facility 
associated with the port of embarkation, we cannot foresee instances 
when the export inspection facility associated with a different port 
would be closer to the port of embarkation than the export inspection 
facility associated with that port.
    If this rule is finalized, we anticipate approving several export 
isolation facilities and authorizing pre-export inspection of livestock 
at those facilities pursuant to paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of Sec.  
91.7. We also anticipate authorizing pre-export inspection of livestock 
at export inspection facilities other than those associated with the 
port of embarkation pursuant to paragraph (d) of Sec.  91.7 from time 
to time.
    If such authorization occurs, there could be certain instances when 
it would be difficult, if not impossible, for an animal to be inspected 
within 24 hours prior to embarkation. Even when pre-export inspection 
of livestock is conducted at an export inspection facility located at 
the port of embarkation, it can take more than 24 hours to load a large 
lot of animals safely into an ocean vessel. If pre-export inspection 
were to occur at an export isolation facility or an export inspection 
facility other than the facility associated with the port of 
embarkation, the time spent en route to the port of embarkation would 
count towards the 24 hour period. This could result in hastened loading 
of the animals and increased likelihood of their injury or distress. 
For these reasons, as we mentioned above, we are proposing to allow 
pre-export inspections to occur up to 48 hours prior to embarkation. 
Allowing the inspection to occur up to 48 hours in advance would 
provide additional time for thorough inspections and orderly loading of 
the livestock, while still keeping the final inspection close to the 
time of departure.
    That being said, we recognize that some countries have import 
requirements that specify that livestock must be inspected within a 
shorter period of time prior to export. In such instances, the 
inspection would have to take place within the timeframe specified by 
the importing country.
    Paragraph (e) of Sec.  91.7 would provide that the APHIS 
veterinarian will maintain an inspection record that includes the date 
and place of the pre-export inspection, species and number of animals 
inspected, the number of animals rejected, a description of those 
animals, and the reasons for rejection. In the event of a dispute 
regarding whether a particular animal was considered fit for travel 
during pre-export inspection, we would have recourse to these records 
to help resolve the dispute.
    For similar reasons, proposed paragraph (f) of Sec.  91.7 would 
provide that, at the request of the importing country or an exporter, 
the APHIS veterinarian who inspects the livestock will issue a 
certificate of inspection for livestock he or she finds to be sound, 
healthy, and fit for travel.

Rest, Feed, and Water Prior to Export (Sec.  91.8)

    Currently, paragraph (c) of Sec.  91.15 requires all livestock 
intended for export from the United States by sea or air to be allowed 
a period of at least 5 hours for rest at the export inspection facility 
associated with the port of embarkation, with adequate feed and water 
available, before movement to an ocean vessel or aircraft for loading 
for export. The paragraph allows this rest period to occur during pre-
export inspection, and provides that feed and water is not required if 
the animals were transported to the export inspection facility in a 
carrier in which adequate feed and water was provided and if sufficient 
evidence is presented to an APHIS veterinarian that the animals, if 
under 30 days of age, will arrive in the import country within 24 hours 
after they were last fed and watered in the United States, or in the 
case of other

[[Page 10405]]

animals, within 36 hours after they were last fed and watered in the 
United States.
    Proposed Sec.  91.8 would revise these requirements. We are 
proposing to eliminate any exemptions from the rest, feed, and water 
requirement for livestock intended for export by sea or air. We are 
proposing to do so because, once an animal leaves the territorial 
limits of the United States, it is no longer subject to our oversight, 
and because it is not uncommon for travel to a foreign region to take 
significantly longer than expected because of adverse climatic 
conditions and other reasons.
    We are, however, proposing to reduce the rest period that must be 
afforded to livestock intended for export from 5 hours to 2 hours. In 
our experience, livestock moved for export are usually not taxed by 
such movement to the extent that would warrant a 5 hour rest period.
    However, they do tend to stiffen as a result of such movement. 
Based on our experience, it takes the animals 2 hours to become limber 
once again and prepared for the rigors of sea or air travel.
    Out of recognition that there could be circumstances where 2 hours 
would be an insufficient period of time for such rest, however, we 
would allow an inspector to extend the duration of the rest period up 
to 5 hours, at his or her discretion and based on a determination that 
more rest is necessary in order to have assurances that the animals are 
fit to travel prior to loading.
    Finally, we are proposing to remove the provision from the current 
regulations allowing this rest period to be concurrent with pre-export 
inspection. Based on our experience, it is difficult for an animal to 
rest during pre-export inspection. However, if pre-export inspection 
has occurred at a facility other than the export inspection facility 
associated at the port of embarkation, we are proposing to require that 
the livestock be visually observed at the end of the rest period for 
fitness to travel.

Ports (Sec.  91.9)

    In accordance with current paragraph (a) of Sec.  91.14, all 
livestock intended for export from the United States by air or sea must 
be exported through designated ports of embarkation. As provided in 
Sec.  91.14(a) and (b), the Administrator will not designate a port of 
embarkation for livestock--even temporarily--unless the port has an 
approved export inspection facility permanently associated with it.
    We are proposing to allow the Administrator to temporarily approve 
ports without export inspection facilities under certain circumstances. 
Specifically, proposed Sec.  91.9 would provide that such ports could 
be approved on a temporary basis for a specific shipment of livestock 
when pre-export inspection of that shipment has occurred at an export 
isolation facility or an export inspection facility not associated with 
the port of embarkation, as provided in proposed Sec.  91.7. This 
change would allow temporary use of ports that do not have export 
inspection facilities permanently associated with them for specific 
shipments of livestock. Unlike ports of embarkation with export 
inspection facilities permanently associated with them, which would be 
listed in the Program Handbook, these ports would not be listed in the 
Program Handbook. Their use would be limited to the specific 
shipment(s) for which they were approved by the Administrator.

Export Inspection Facilities (Sec.  91.10)

    Currently, Sec.  91.14 sets out standards that facilities have to 
meet in order to be approved as export inspection facilities. The 
standards are often very prescriptive. For example, paragraph (c)(10), 
lighting, states that: ``The facility shall be equipped with artificial 
lighting to provide not less than 70 foot candle power in the 
inspection area and not less than 40 foot candle power in the remainder 
of the facility.''
    Proposed Sec.  91.10 would remove the prescriptive standards for 
export inspection facilities that are currently in Sec.  91.14 from the 
regulations. Instead, proposed Sec.  91.10 would require the export 
inspection facilities to be constructed, equipped, and managed in a 
manner that: (1) Prevents transmission of disease to and from livestock 
in the facilities; (2) provides for the safe and humane handling and 
restraint of livestock; and (3) provides sufficient offices, space, and 
lighting for APHIS veterinarians to safely conduct required health 
inspections of livestock and related business.
    The Program Handbook that accompanies this proposed rule provides 
guidance on ways to comply with these requirements. This guidance is 
substantively similar to the requirements currently in the regulations 
in Sec.  91.14. Owners and operators of facilities that follow the 
guidance provided in the Program Handbook are assured of meeting our 
proposed requirements.
    That said, while the Program Handbook provides one way of meeting 
the requirements in proposed Sec.  91.10, we recognize that there could 
also be other ways of meeting the requirements. To that end, owners and 
operators could submit alternative plans for meeting the requirements 
to APHIS for our evaluation and approval. Any alternatives submitted 
would have to be at least as effective in meeting the requirements as 
the methods described in the Program Handbook in order to be approved. 
APHIS approval would be required before alternatives could be used for 
the purpose described in the regulations.
    We would retain in proposed Sec.  91.10(b) the requirements 
currently in the regulations in Sec.  91.14(c)(6) and (c)(9) that 
facilities allow APHIS representatives access to all parts of the 
facility, and that applications for approval of an export inspection 
facility be accompanied by a certification that the facility meets all 
applicable environmental laws and regulations. However, we would limit 
the current scope of Sec.  91.14(c)(6) somewhat in proposed Sec.  
91.10(b)(2). While we currently require facilities to provide access to 
all parts of the facility at all times for the purpose of assessing 
compliance with the regulations, we only exercise this authority during 
the facility's business hours, that is, while the facility is in 
operation. To reflect this, we would require access to the facility 
during the facility's business hours. Additionally, while the current 
requirement does not specify why APHIS needs such broad access to the 
facility, our proposed requirement would clarify that the access is 
needed in order for us to evaluate whether the facility is in 
compliance with the requirements of the regulations for the purposes of 
approval or a subsequent audit.
    We also propose to substantively retain in proposed paragraph (c) 
of Sec.  91.10 the provisions currently in the regulations in Sec.  
91.14(d) regarding approval and denial or revocation of approval of 
export inspection facilities. We do, however, propose to add two 
conditions that would trigger the need for reapproval of an export 
inspection facility that we have previously approved: Change of 
ownership of the facility or significant damage or structural changes 
to the facility. In these instances, we would need assurances that the 
facility continues to meet the standards under which it was approved in 
light of these changes.

Export Isolation Facilities (Sec.  91.11)

    As we mentioned earlier in this document, many countries currently 
require livestock intended for export to be kept isolated from other 
animals for a period of time immediately prior to movement for export. 
Often, the

[[Page 10406]]

importing countries require this period of isolation to be ``officially 
approved'' or ``APHIS-approved.'' Proposed Sec.  91.11 would contain 
standards for APHIS approval of such facilities. In those instances, 
APHIS inspects the facility prior to any isolation in order to ensure 
that the facility has measures in place that will protect the animals 
there from exposure to diseased livestock during the isolation period.
    We are proposing to add to the regulations requirements pertaining 
to APHIS approval of export isolation facilities. Specifically, 
proposed Sec.  91.11 requires that, if an importing country requires 
livestock to undergo USDA-approved export isolation, APHIS must approve 
the export isolation facility used for the livestock prior to each 
isolation. APHIS would approve the facility only if the Administrator 
determines, upon APHIS inspection of the facility, that the facility 
meets the standards identified by the importing country. If the 
importing country does not identify specific standards, APHIS would 
approve the facility only if the Administrator determines, upon 
inspection of the facility, that the facility has adequate measures in 
place to protect the livestock in the facility from exposure to animals 
of different health status and fomites in order to prevent transmission 
of disease of livestock during the isolation period. Additionally, 
export isolation conducted at the facility would have to be supervised 
by an accredited veterinarian or, if requested by the importing 
country, by an APHIS veterinarian.
    The Program Handbook that accompanies this proposed rule provides 
guidance on measures that a facility can implement in order to comply 
with the proposed requirement that the facility have adequate measures 
in place to protect livestock at the facility from exposure to animals 
of different disease status during the isolation period. Owners and 
operators that follow the guidance provided in the Program Handbook are 
assured of meeting this proposed requirement.
    That said, while the Program Handbook provides one way of 
adequately meeting the requirement, we recognize that there could also 
be other ways of adequately meeting the requirement. To that end, 
owners and operators could submit alternate measures to APHIS for 
evaluation and approval. Alternatives would have to be at least as 
effective in meeting the requirement as those described in the Program 
Handbook in order to be approved. Alternatives would have to be 
approved by APHIS before being used for purposes of meeting the 
regulations.

Ocean Vessels (Sec.  91.12)

    Current subpart D of part 91 (Sec. Sec.  91.17-91.30) applies to 
the ocean vessels on which livestock are exported from the United 
States, and sets forth requirements that the vessels must meet with 
regard to construction, ventilation, space, fittings, equipment, and 
attendants. In a similar manner to the standards for export inspection 
facilities that are currently in the regulations, these standards are 
often very detailed and prescriptive. For example, current Sec.  91.23 
requires ramps connecting one deck of an ocean vessel to another to 
``have a clear width of 3 feet and a clear height of not less than 6 
feet 6 inches. The incline of the ramps shall not exceed 1:2 (26\1/
2\[deg]) between the ramps and the horizontal plane. The ramps shall be 
fitted with footlocks of approximately 2''X2'' lumber and spaced no 
more than one foot apart. The ramps shall have side fencing not less 
than 5 feet in height. Side doors in ship's shell plating through which 
livestock are to be loaded shall have a height of not less than 6 feet 
for cattle and 6 feet 6 inches for horses.''
    These requirements are based on performance standards that are 
sometimes articulated, but more often implied, in the current 
regulations. At the time the regulations were issued, we considered the 
requirements to be the only means of meeting those performance 
standards. However, since that time, alternate means of meeting certain 
of the standards have arisen. Accordingly, proposed Sec.  91.12 would 
require ocean vessels used to transport livestock intended for export 
to be designed, constructed, and managed to reasonably assure the 
livestock are protected from injury and remain healthy during loading 
and transport to the importing country.
    To meet this overall performance standard for ocean vessels, we 
propose the following requirements for ocean vessels:
     Pens. All pens, including gates and portable rails used to 
close access ways, would have to be designed and constructed of a 
material of sufficient strength to securely contain the livestock. They 
would have to be properly formed, closely fitted, and rigidly secured 
in place. They would also have to have smooth finished surfaces free 
from sharp protrusions, and not have worn, decayed, unsound, or 
otherwise defective parts. Flooring would have to be strong enough to 
support the livestock to be transported and provide a satisfactory non-
slip foothold. Pens on exposed upper decks would have to protect the 
livestock from the weather. Boiler rooms or similar sources of heat 
next to pens would have to be fitted to protect the livestock from 
injury due to transfer of heat. Any fittings or protrusions from the 
vessel's sides that abut pens would have to be covered in order to 
protect the livestock from injury. Finally, pens would have to be of 
appropriate size for the species, size, weight, and condition of the 
livestock being transported and take into consideration the vessel's 
route.
    We recognize that a number of these requirements are themselves 
performance-based, and potentially allow for a variety of means or 
methods in order to meet them. To that end, we provide guidance in the 
Program Handbook regarding means that may be used to meet the 
requirements. Owners and operators of ocean vessels who follow the 
guidance provided in the Program Handbook would be assured of meeting 
these and other performance-based requirements regarding ocean vessels. 
Owners and operators could submit alternate means and methods for 
meeting the requirements to APHIS for evaluation and approval. All 
alternate means and methods would have to be approved by APHIS before 
being used for purposes of complying with the regulations.
     Positioning. Livestock would have to be positioned during 
transport so that an animal handler or other responsible person can 
observe each animal regularly and clearly to ensure the livestock's 
safety and welfare.
     Resources for sick or injured animals. The vessel would 
have to have an adequate number of appropriately sized and located pens 
set aside to segregate livestock that become sick or injured from other 
animals. It would also have to have adequate veterinary medical 
supplies, including medicines, for the species, condition, and number 
of livestock transported.
     Ramps, doors, and passageways. Ramps, doors, and 
passageways used for livestock would have to be of sufficient width and 
height for their use and allow the safe passage of the species 
transported. They would have to have secure, smooth fittings free from 
sharp protrusions and non-slip flooring, and could not have worn, 
decayed, unsound, or otherwise defective parts. Ramps could not have an 
incline that is excessive for the species of livestock transported and 
would have to be fitted with foot battens to prevent slippage at 
intervals suitable for the species. The sides of ramps would have to be 
of sufficient height and strength to prevent

[[Page 10407]]

escape of the species of livestock that is transported.
     Feed and water. The feeding and watering system would have 
to be designed to permit all livestock in each pen adequate access to 
feed and water. The system would also have to be designed to minimize 
soiling of pens and to prevent animal waste from contaminating feed and 
water. Similarly, feed would have to be loaded and stored aboard the 
vessel in a manner that protects it from weather and sea water and, if 
kept under animal transport spaces, protects it from spillage from 
animal watering and feeding and from animal waste. If the normal means 
of tending, feeding, and watering of livestock on board the ocean 
vessel is wholly or partially by automatic means, the vessel would have 
to have alternate arrangements for the satisfactory tending, feeding, 
and watering of the animals in the event of a malfunction of the 
automatic means.
     Ventilation. Ventilation during loading, unloading, and 
transport must provide fresh air and remove excessive heat, humidity, 
and noxious fumes (such as ammonia and carbon dioxide). Ventilation 
would have to be adequate for variations in climate and weather and to 
meet the needs of the livestock being transported. Ventilation would 
have to be effective both when the vessel is stationary and when it is 
moving and would have to be turned on when the first animal is loaded. 
The vessel would be required to have on board a back-up ventilation 
system (including emergency power supply) in good working order or 
replacement parts and the means, including qualified personnel, to make 
the repairs or replacements.
     Waste management. The vessel would have to have a system 
or arrangements, including a backup system in working order or 
alternate arrangements, for managing waste to prevent excessive buildup 
in livestock transport spaces during the voyage.
     Lighting. The vessel would have to have adequate 
illumination to allow clear observation of livestock during loading, 
unloading, and transport.
     Bedding. Bedding would have to be loaded and stored aboard 
the vessel in a manner that protects it from weather and sea water and, 
if kept under animal transport spaces, protects it from spillage from 
animal watering and feeding and from animal waste.
     Cleaning. The vessel would have to be designed and 
constructed to allow thorough cleaning and disinfection and to prevent 
feces and urine from livestock on upper levels from soiling livestock 
or their feed or water on lower levels.
     Halters and ropes. Halters, ropes, or other equipment 
provided for the handling and tying of horses or other livestock would 
have to be satisfactory to ensure the humane treatment of the 
livestock.
     Personnel. The owner or operator of the ocean vessel would 
be required to have on board during loading, transport, and unloading 
at least 3 persons (or at least 1 person if fewer than 800 head of 
livestock will be transported) with previous experience with ocean 
vessels that have handled the kind(s) of livestock to be carried, as 
well as a sufficient number of attendants with the appropriate 
experience to be able to ensure proper care of the livestock.
     Vessel stability. The vessel would be required to have 
adequate stability, taking into consideration the weight and 
distribution of livestock and fodder, as well as effects of high winds 
and seas. If requested by APHIS, the owner or operator of the vessel 
would have to present stability calculations for the voyage that have 
been independently verified for accuracy.
     Additional conditions. The vessel would have to meet any 
other condition the Administrator determines is necessary for approval, 
as dictated by specific circumstances and communicated to the owner and 
operator of the vessel, to protect the livestock and keep them healthy 
during loading, unloading, and transport to the importing country.
    These performance standards have the same goal of ensuring the 
humane transport of livestock as stated in current Sec.  91.17 and, 
with the exception of a few proposed new standards, discussed 
immediately below, cover the same aspects of ocean vessels as addressed 
by current Sec.  91.17 and Sec. Sec.  91.20 through 91.30.
    The proposed requirement that livestock must be positioned during 
transport so that an animal handler or other responsible person can 
observe each animal regularly and clearly to ensure the livestock's 
safety and welfare is new. This is needed, since, if animals are 
positioned in a manner that consistently obscures them from view, their 
handler or responsible person may not be able to detect signs or 
symptoms of distress or illness in a timely manner. For a similar 
reason, we are requiring ocean vessels to have sufficient illumination 
to allow clear observation of the animals during loading, unloading, 
and transport.
    The proposed requirement for animal waste systems is also new. This 
is necessary, along with adequate ventilation, to ensure livestock are 
not harmed by build-up of waste in transport spaces. There is a similar 
rationale for the proposed new requirement that the vessel be designed 
and constructed to allow thorough cleaning and disinfection and to 
prevent feces and urine from livestock on upper levels from soiling 
livestock on lower levels or their feed or water, as well as for the 
requirement that water and feeding systems be designed to minimize the 
soiling of pens.
    The proposed requirements that ventilation be effective when the 
vessel is stationary as well as when it is moving, and that it be 
turned on when the first animal is loaded, are also new. As we 
mentioned earlier in this document, it can take a day or longer to load 
and unload a large shipment of livestock destined for export, and these 
requirements would ensure that the livestock have adequate fresh air 
during loading and unloading.
    Additionally, we are proposing that the vessel have adequate 
stability, taking into consideration the weight and distribution of the 
livestock and fodder, and effects of high winds and seas. One of the 
factors that APHIS needs to consider in approving a vessel for the 
transport of livestock is stability, particularly as the vessel's 
stability may be affected by the way feed and livestock will be 
arranged on the vessel. A vessel arranged to carry large animals on 
upper decks and small animals on lower decks, for instance, would be 
top heavy and more prone to capsize, resulting in likely loss of life. 
If APHIS has questions about a vessel's stability for a particular 
voyage, independently verified stability calculations would help 
resolve them, so APHIS would request such calculations as needed.
    Lastly, we are proposing that the vessel meet any other condition 
the Administrator determines is necessary for approval, as dictated by 
specific circumstances and communicated to the owner or operator of the 
vessel, to protect the livestock and keep them healthy during loading, 
unloading, and transport to the importing country. We propose to 
include this provision in the event that unforeseen circumstances make 
it necessary to require additional safeguards to protect the health of 
the livestock.
    In many instances, ocean vessels that transport livestock for 
export from the United States are constructed specifically for that 
purpose. On occasion, however, livestock are transported in shipping 
containers on ocean vessels that are not constructed specifically to 
transport livestock. In those instances, while some of the above

[[Page 10408]]

requirements would almost always be applicable--for example, we would 
still want to know whether the vessel has adequate stability to 
transport the livestock without risk of capsizing--others, such as 
those pertaining to pen size, construction, and placement on the 
vessel, as well as positioning of livestock within a pen, would almost 
always not be applicable. Additionally, other standards, such as those 
pertaining to cleaning, could be applicable in certain instances, but 
not in others, depending on the construction and location of the 
container.
    Accordingly, proposed Sec.  91.12 would provide that an inspector 
may exempt an ocean vessel that uses shipping containers to transport 
livestock to an importing country from any of the above requirements 
that he or she specifies, if the inspector determines that the 
containers themselves are designed, constructed, and managed in a 
manner to reasonably assure the livestock are protected from injury and 
remain healthy during loading, unloading, and transport to the 
importing country. The Program Handbook provides guidance regarding the 
considerations that may lead an inspector to exempt a vessel from a 
specific requirement.
    Inspection of vessels would occur in a manner very similar to the 
existing requirements. Currently, Sec.  91.19, headed ``Inspection of 
ocean vessels prior to loading,'' directs owners or masters of ocean 
vessels intended for use in exporting livestock to present the vessel 
to an inspector at a U.S. port of embarkation or, in some cases, at a 
foreign port, for an inspection to determine if the fittings aboard the 
vessel comply with the regulations. We propose to require inspection of 
an ocean vessel to determine whether it meets the above standards for 
ocean vessels only prior to initial use to transport any livestock from 
the United States. If we determine that the ocean vessel meets the 
standards, we would certify the vessel to transport livestock from the 
United States. (As an exception, if a vessel that would use shipping 
containers to transport livestock has been granted an exemption from 
certain requirements pursuant to proposed paragraph (e) of Sec.  91.12, 
we would not require the vessel to meet those particular requirements 
in order to be certified or recertified.) This initial certification 
would specify the species of livestock for which the vessel is 
approved.
    Thereafter, in most instances, the vessel would only need to be 
recertified every 3 years. The only other occasions when the vessel 
would need to be recertified would be when circumstances dictate that a 
recertification occur before the vessel is again used to transport 
livestock. These circumstances would be when significant changes are 
made to the vessel, including to livestock transport spaces or life 
support systems; when there is a failure of any major life support 
system; when species of livestock not covered by the existing 
certification are to be transported; and when the owner or operator of 
the ocean vessel changes.
    To aid us in determining whether the vessel meets the above 
standards and can be certified to transport livestock from the United 
States, we would request the following information prior to the initial 
certification inspection of the vessel (as well as prior to subsequent 
inspections for recertification, upon our request):
     General information about the vessel, including the year 
built, length and breadth, vessel name history, port of registry, call 
sign, maximum and average speed, fresh water tank capacity and fresh 
water generation rate, and feed silo capacity (if the vessel has a 
silo).
     A notarized statement from an engineer concerning the rate 
of air exchange in each compartment of the vessel.
     The species of livestock that the vessel would transport.
     Scale drawings that provide details of the design, 
materials, and methods of construction and arrangement of fittings for 
the containment and movement of livestock; provisions for the storage 
and distribution of feed and water; drainage arrangements; primary and 
secondary sources of power; and lighting.
     A photograph of the rails and gates of any pens.
     A description of the flooring surface on livestock decks.
     The following measurements: Width of the ramps; the clear 
height from the ramps to the lowest overhead structures; the incline 
between the ramps and the horizontal plane; the distance between 
footlocks on the ramps; the height of side fencing on the ramps; the 
height of the vessel's side doors through which livestock are loaded; 
the width of alleyways running fore and aft between livestock pens; and 
the distance from the floor of the livestock pens to the beams of 
lowest structures overhead.
    We recognize that, if a vessel intends to use shipping containers 
to transport livestock to an importing country, some of this 
information may not be applicable. The Program Handbook provides 
guidance for owners and operators of ocean vessels regarding how to 
indicate this non-applicability on their submission in a manner that is 
clear to APHIS, and that triggers an evaluation of the shipping 
containers themselves pursuant to proposed paragraph (e) of Sec.  
91.12.
    We propose to modify the current requirement for providing feed and 
water to livestock aboard ocean vessels. The regulations currently 
require ocean vessels to provide livestock with feed and water 
immediately after the livestock are loaded onto the vessel unless an 
APHIS representative determines that all of the livestock are 30 days 
of age or older and the vessel will arrive in the country of 
destination within 36 hours after the livestock were last fed and 
watered within the United States, or, if any of the livestock in the 
shipment are younger than 30 days, that the vessel will arrive in the 
country of destination within 24 hours after the livestock were last 
fed and watered within the United States.
    We issued these provisions on the presupposition that 36 hours is 
the maximum amount of time that livestock 30 days of age or older can 
go without feed and water before suffering duress, and 24 hours is the 
maximum amount of time that livestock younger than 30 days can go 
without feed and water before suffering duress.
    We have since determined that, in certain instances, with adequate 
food, water, and rest beforehand, livestock can go a longer period 
without food and water before suffering duress. On the other hand, we 
have also encountered several occasions since the regulations were 
issued where allowing livestock aboard an ocean vessel to go 36 hours 
without food and water adversely impacted the well-being of the 
animals. These situations usually arose when the ocean vessel carrying 
the livestock was subject to particularly adverse climatic conditions, 
such as high winds, heavy seas, or driving precipitation; the livestock 
were unaccustomed to eating and drinking while under duress; and the 
amount of feed and water aboard the vessel did not take into sufficient 
consideration the livestock's species, body weight, and eating and 
watering tendencies.
    As a result, instead of providing a maximum time period at sea that 
livestock may go without feed and water, proposed paragraph (c) of 
Sec.  91.12 would require the ocean vessel to provide sufficient feed 
and water to the livestock aboard the vessel, taking into consideration 
the livestock's species, body weight, the expected duration of the 
voyage, and the likelihood of adverse climatic conditions during

[[Page 10409]]

export. Guidance regarding this proposed requirement is found in the 
Program Handbook.
    We propose to retain the current requirements in Sec.  91.18 for 
cleaning and disinfection of ocean vessels, with some clarifications. 
Current Sec.  91.18 requires that all fittings, utensils, and 
equipment, unless new, to be used in the loading, stowing, or handling 
of animals aboard ocean vessels be cleaned and disinfected under the 
supervision of an inspector before being used for, or in conjunction 
with, the transportation of any animals from any U.S. port. In proposed 
paragraph (b) of Sec.  91.12, we propose to require cleaning and 
disinfection of any vessel intended for use in exporting livestock, and 
all fittings, utensils, containers, and equipment (unless new) used for 
loading, stowing, or other handling of livestock aboard the vessel, and 
provide guidance regarding which surfaces need to be cleaned in the 
Program Handbook. Our intent is to ensure that all surfaces where 
livestock are kept are cleaned and disinfected prior to loading, as 
well as any other surface where the crew walks in the same footwear 
that is worn in the livestock cargo areas. Likewise, all rails, gates, 
water troughs, and other equipment and utensils used for livestock 
would have to be cleaned and disinfected prior to the loading of the 
livestock.
    Additionally, we propose that this cleaning and disinfection be 
done to the satisfaction of an APHIS representative, rather than under 
the supervision of an APHIS inspector. We also propose to remove the 
list of approved disinfectants from the regulations and to instead use 
the Program Handbook to provide access to the list, which we would 
maintain online. Similar to other provisions regarding approval of 
disinfectants in this proposed rule, the Administrator would approve a 
disinfectant for use to disinfect ocean vessels upon determining that 
the disinfectant is effective against pathogens that may be spread by 
the animals and, if the disinfectant is a chemical disinfectant, that 
it is registered or exempted for the specified use by the EPA. Proposed 
paragraph (b) of Sec.  91.12 would also contain provisions for 
approving additional disinfectants, as well as withdrawing approval.
    We would also add a new requirement that all ocean vessels, upon 
docking at a U.S. port to load livestock, have disinfectant foot baths 
at entryways where persons board and exit the ship, and require such 
baths before allowing any person to disembark. Many countries have 
diseases of livestock that are not known to exist in the United States 
or that are not widely prevalent, and that can be spread by soil and 
other ground contaminants. This requirement would mitigate against the 
introduction of such diseases through such fomites.
    We would continue to inspect ocean vessels prior to each voyage to 
ensure that the vessel has been properly cleaned and disinfected. The 
inspection would also be to ensure that there is sufficient food and 
water for the voyage, and continues to meet the standards for ocean 
vessels.
    To ensure that we have sufficient notice and information to conduct 
the inspection in a timely manner, we propose to require that the owner 
or operator provide us with the following information at least 72 hours 
before the vessel will be available for inspection:
     The name of the ocean vessel.
     The port, date, and time the ocean vessel will be 
available for inspection, and the estimated time that loading will 
begin.
     A description of the livestock to be transported, 
including the type, number, and estimated average weight of the 
livestock.
     Stability data for the ship with the livestock on board.
     The port of discharge.
     The route and expected length of the voyage.
    Finally, we are proposing to require that the owner or operator of 
an ocean vessel used to export livestock from the United States, 
including vessels that use shipping containers, submit a written report 
to APHIS within 5 business days after completing the voyage. This 
report would include the name of the ocean vessel, the name and address 
of all exporters of livestock transported on the vessel, the port of 
embarkation, the dates of the voyage, the port where the livestock were 
discharged, the number of each species of livestock loaded, and the 
number of each species that died and an explanation for those 
mortalities. Additionally, the report would have to document any 
failure of any major life support system for the livestock, including, 
but not limited to, systems for providing feed and water, ventilation 
systems, and livestock waste management systems. Any such failure would 
have to be documented, regardless of the duration or whether the 
failure resulted in any harm to the livestock. Additionally, if an 
ocean vessel used to export livestock experiences such a failure of a 
major life support system for livestock during the voyage, we propose 
to require that the owner or operator of the vessel would have to 
notify APHIS immediately by telephone, facsimile, or other electronic 
means. Contact numbers and addresses would be provided in the Program 
Handbook.
    The report itself would have to include the name and contact 
information of the person who prepared the report, and would have to be 
submitted to APHIS by facsimile or email. Contact numbers and addresses 
for the report itself, as well as an optional template for the report, 
would also be provided in the Program Handbook.
    There currently are no requirements for owners or operators of 
ocean vessels to report livestock deaths or serious system failures on 
ocean vessels that could affect the health of any livestock 
transported. Having this information would allow APHIS to better 
determine whether a particular vessel meets our performance standards 
or whether any of our guidance for meeting performance standards should 
be adjusted. Requiring that APHIS be notified immediately of any major 
system failures would alert APHIS to the potential need for additional 
food or other resources for the livestock, or a potential stop at 
another port.
    APHIS would also be able to notify animal health officials in the 
importing country about any expected delays or animal health issues 
they may have to deal with as a result of system failures, including 
mortalities. In the absence of these requirements, APHIS may not learn 
of problems affecting animals during a voyage until those problems are 
reported by animal health officials in the importing country, or may 
have to scramble to make last minute arrangements in the event of a 
problem. We propose that failure to provide timely reports as required 
could result in us disapproving future livestock shipments by the owner 
or operator or revoking the vessel's certification to transport 
livestock for export.

Aircraft (Sec.  91.13)

    We are proposing to substantially retain the requirements in 
current Sec.  91.41 for cleaning and disinfection of aircraft. We are, 
however, proposing to remove specific approved disinfectants from the 
regulations, and instead, to list approved disinfectants in the Program 
Handbook. The requirements for cleaning and disinfection of aircraft 
are in paragraphs (a) through (d) of proposed Sec.  91.13.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(1) of Sec.  91.13 provides that the 
Administrator will approve a disinfectant for the purposes of that 
section upon determining that the disinfectant is effective against 
pathogens that may be spread by the animals and, if the disinfectant is 
a

[[Page 10410]]

chemical disinfectant, that it is registered or exempted for the 
specified use by the EPA. Proposed paragraph (a)(2) of Sec.  91.13 
states that the Program Handbook provides access to a list of approved 
disinfectants, and contains provisions for approving additional 
disinfectants. Proposed paragraph (a)(3) of Sec.  91.13 contains 
provisions for withdrawing approval.
    Proposed paragraphs (b) through (d) would retain, with non-
substantive editorial revisions, the other existing requirements in the 
regulations governing cleaning and disinfection of aircraft.
    Finally, we are also proposing two new requirements for livestock 
exported from the United States via aircraft, which would be contained 
in paragraph (e) of Sec.  91.13. We are proposing that any cargo 
containers used to ship the livestock would have to be designed and 
constructed of a material of sufficient strength to securely contain 
the animals, as determined by APHIS. We are doing so because, in the 
absence of such requirements, exporters have sometimes constructed 
containers out of materials, such as plywood, that are not adequate to 
prevent the livestock from escaping during transit. We are also 
proposing that the containers must provide sufficient space for the 
species being transported given the duration of the trip, as determined 
by APHIS, in order to prevent overcrowding of animals.

Other Movements and Conditions (Sec.  91.14)

    Finally, we propose to retain the provision in current Sec.  91.4 
by which the Administrator may, upon request in specific cases, permit 
the export of livestock not otherwise provided for in part 91 under 
such conditions as the Administrator may prescribe in each specific 
case to prevent the spread of livestock diseases and to ensure the 
humane treatment of the animals during transport to the importing 
country. This flexibility ensures that the Administrator can make 
appropriate exceptions in unforeseen or unusual situations.

 Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. 
The proposed 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.
    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603, we have performed an initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis, which is summarized below, regarding 
the economic effects of this proposed rule on small entities. Copies of 
the full analysis are available by contacting the person listed under 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or on the Regulations.gov Web site (see 
ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov).
    Based on the information we have, there is no reason to conclude 
that adoption of this proposed rule would result in any significant 
economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. However, we 
do not currently have all of the data necessary for a comprehensive 
analysis of the effects of this proposed rule on small entities. 
Therefore, we are inviting comments on potential effects. In 
particular, we are interested in determining the number and kind of 
small entities that may incur benefits or costs from the implementation 
of this proposed rule.
    This proposed rule would amend 9 CFR part 91, which contains 
requirements for the inspection and handling of live animals (cattle, 
horses, captive cervids, sheep, goats, and swine) to be exported from 
the United States. Among other things, the proposed rule would remove 
some prescriptive requirements applicable to livestock, either 
completely or by replacing them with performance standards, and would 
make other adjustments in inspection and handling requirements to 
assist exporters. These changes would provide APHIS and exporters more 
flexibility in arranging for the export of livestock from the United 
States while continuing to ensure the animals' health and welfare.
    The proposed rule would also add requirements for individual 
identification of livestock intended for export, use of methods and 
laboratories approved by APHIS when livestock must be tested for 
certain diseases, and obtaining export health certificates for non-
livestock animals, hatching eggs, and animal germplasm when such 
certificates are required by the importing country. These changes would 
help ensure that all live animals, hatching eggs, and animal germplasm 
exported from the United States meet the health requirements of the 
countries to which they are destined.
    Entities directly affected by this rule would include exporters of 
live animals, hatching eggs, and animal germplasm. While we do not know 
the size distribution of these exporters, we expect that the majority 
are small by Small Business Administration standards, given the 
prevalence of small entities among livestock producers. Operators of 
export inspection facilities, export isolation facilities, aircraft, 
and ocean vessels would also be directly affected. These industries are 
also largely composed of small businesses. The provisions of the 
proposed rule would facilitate the export process for affected parties.

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 inconsistent 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(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. APHIS-
2012-0049. Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) APHIS, using one 
of the methods described under ADDRESSES at the beginning of this 
document, 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.
    Revising our regulations governing the export of live animals from 
the United States will require information collection activities, 
including the issuance of export health certificates, official 
identification of exported animals, and reports filed by the owners or 
operators of ocean vessels that export livestock.
    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:

[[Page 10411]]

    (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 0.54 hours per response.
    Respondents: Veterinarians, exporters, owners, owners/operators of 
ocean vessels.
    Estimated annual number of respondents: 10,183.
    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 2.91.
    Estimated annual number of responses: 29,614.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 15,950 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 Ms. 
Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 
851-2727.

E-Government Act Compliance

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to 
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet 
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities 
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for 
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act 
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly 
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2727.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 91

    Animal diseases, Animal welfare, Exports, Livestock, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    Accordingly, we propose to revise 9 CFR part 91 to read as follows:

PART 91--EXPORTATION OF LIVE ANIMALS, HATCHING EGGS OR OTHER 
EMBRYONATED EGGS, ANIMAL SEMEN, ANIMAL EMBRYOS, AND GAMETES FROM 
THE UNITED STATES

Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec.
91.1 Definitions.
91.2 Applicability.
91.3 General requirements.
91.4 Prohibited exports.
Subpart B--Livestock
91.5 Identification of livestock intended for export.
91.6 Cleaning and disinfection of means of conveyance, containers, 
and facilities used during movement; approved disinfectants.
91.7 Pre-export inspection.
91.8 Rest, feed, and water prior to export.
91.9 Ports.
91.10 Export inspection facilities.
91.11 Export isolation facilities.
91.12 Ocean vessels.
91.13 Aircraft.
91.14 Other movements and conditions.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 19 U.S.C. 1644a(c); 21 U.S.C. 
136, 136a, and 618; 46 U.S.C. 3901 and 3902; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 
371.4.

Subpart A--General Provisions


Sec.  91.1  Definitions.

    As used in this part, the following terms will have the meanings 
set forth in this section:
    Accredited veterinarian. A veterinarian approved by the 
Administrator in accordance with part 161 of this chapter to perform 
functions specified in parts 1, 2, 3, and 11 of subchapter A, and 
subchapters B, C, and D of this chapter, and to perform functions 
required by cooperative State-Federal disease control and eradication 
programs.
    Administrator. The Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service, or any person authorized to act for the 
Administrator.
    Animal. Any member of the animal kingdom (except a human).
    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service of the United States Department of 
Agriculture.
    APHIS representative. An individual who is authorized by APHIS to 
perform the function involved.
    Date of export. The date animals intended for export are loaded 
onto an ocean vessel or aircraft or, if moved by land to Canada or 
Mexico, the date the animals cross the border.
    Export health certificate. An official document issued in the 
United States that certifies that animals or other commodities listed 
on the certificate meet the export requirements of this part and the 
importing country.
    Export inspection facility. A facility that is affiliated with a 
port of embarkation and that has been approved by the Administrator as 
the location where APHIS will conduct health inspections of livestock 
before they are loaded onto ocean vessels or aircraft for export from 
the United States.
    Export isolation facility. A facility where animals intended for 
export are isolated from other animals for a period of time immediately 
before being moved for export.
    Horses. Horses, mules, and asses.
    Inspector. An individual authorized by APHIS to inspect animals 
and/or animal products intended for export from the United States.
    Livestock. Horses, cattle (including American bison), captive 
cervids, sheep, swine, and goats, regardless of intended use.
    Premises of export. The premises where the animals intended for 
export are isolated as required by the importing country prior to 
export or, if the importing country does not require pre-export 
isolation, the farm or other premises where the animals are assembled 
for pre-export inspection and/or testing, or the germplasm is collected 
or stored, before being moved to a port of embarkation or land border 
port.
    Program diseases. Diseases for which there are cooperative State-
Federal programs and domestic regulations in subchapter C of this 
chapter.
    Program Handbook. A document that contains guidance and other 
information related to the regulations in this part. The Program 
Handbook is available on APHIS' import-export Web site (https://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/index.shtml).
    State of origin. The State in which the premises of export is 
located.


Sec.  91.2  Applicability.

    You may not export any animal or animal germplasm from the United 
States except in compliance with this part.


Sec.  91.3  General requirements.

    (a) Issuance of export health certificates. (1) Livestock must have 
an export health certificate in order to be eligible for export from 
the United States.
    (2) If an importing country is known to require an export health 
certificate for any animal other than livestock or for any animal 
semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or 
gametes intended for export to that

[[Page 10412]]

country, the animal or other commodity must have an export health 
certificate in order to be eligible for export from the United States.
    (b) Content of export health certificates. (1) Livestock; minimum 
requirements. Regardless of the requirements of the importing country, 
at a minimum, the following information must be contained on an export 
health certificate for livestock:
    (i) The species of each animal.
    (ii) The breed of each animal.
    (iii) The sex of each animal.
    (iv) The age of each animal.
    (v) The individual identification of the animals as required by 
Sec.  91.5.
    (vi) The importing country.
    (vii) The consignor.
    (viii) The consignee.
    (ix) A certification that an accredited veterinarian inspected the 
livestock and found them to be fit for export.
    (x) A signature and date by an accredited veterinarian.
    (xi) An endorsement by the APHIS veterinarian responsible for the 
State of origin.
    (2) Livestock; additional requirements. In addition to the minimum 
requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the export health 
certificate must meet any other information or issuance requirements 
specified by the importing country.
    (3) Animals other than livestock, animal semen, animal embryos, 
hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, and gametes. Export health 
certificates for animals other than livestock, animal semen, animal 
embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, and gametes must meet 
any information requirements specified by the importing country.
    (c) Inspection requirements for livestock. In order to be eligible 
for export, livestock must be inspected within the timeframe required 
by the importing country. If the importing country does not specify a 
timeframe, the livestock must be inspected within 30 days prior to the 
date of export.
    (d) Testing requirements for livestock. All samples for tests of 
livestock that are required by the importing country must be taken by 
an APHIS representative or accredited veterinarian. The samples must be 
taken and tests made within the timeframe allowed by the importing 
country and, if specified, at the location required by the importing 
country. If the importing country does not specify a timeframe, the 
samples must be taken and tests made within 30 days prior to the date 
of export, except that tuberculin tests may be conducted within 90 days 
prior to the date of export. All tests for program diseases must be 
made in laboratories and using methods approved by the Administrator 
for those diseases. The Program Handbook contains a link to an APHIS 
Web site that lists laboratories approved to conduct tests for specific 
diseases. Approved methods are those specified or otherwise 
incorporated within the domestic regulations in subchapter C of this 
chapter.
    (e) Movement of livestock, animals other than livestock, animal 
semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or 
gametes with an export health certificate. (1) Livestock. An export 
health certificate for livestock must be issued and endorsed before the 
livestock move from the premises of export. The original signed export 
health certificate must accompany the livestock for the entire duration 
of movement from the premises of export to the port of embarkation or 
land border port, except when the export health certificate has been 
issued and endorsed electronically.
    (2) Animals other than livestock, animal semen, animal embryos, 
hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, and gametes. When an export 
health certificate is required by the importing country for any animal 
other than livestock or for animal semen, animal embryos, hatching 
eggs, other embryonated eggs, or gametes, it must be issued and, if 
required by the importing country, endorsed by an APHIS representative 
prior to the arrival of the animal or other commodity at the port of 
embarkation or land border port. When presented for endorsement, the 
health certificate must be accompanied by reports for all laboratory 
tests specifically identified on the certificate. The laboratory 
reports must either be the originals prepared by the laboratory that 
performed the tests or must be annotated by the laboratory that 
performed the test to indicate how the originals may be obtained. 
Except when an export health certificate has been issued and endorsed 
electronically, the original signed export health certificate must 
accompany the animals, animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, 
other embryonated eggs, or gametes to the port of embarkation or land 
border port.
    (f) Validity of export health certificate. (1) Livestock. Unless 
specified by the importing country, the export health certificate is 
valid for 30 days from the date of issuance, provided that the 
inspection and test results under paragraphs (c) and (d) of this 
section are still valid.
    (2) Animals other than livestock, animal semen, animal embryos, 
hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, and gametes. Unless specified by 
the importing country, the export health certificate is valid for 30 
days from the date of issuance.


Sec.  91.4  Prohibited exports.

    No animal, animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other 
embryonated eggs, or gametes under Federal, State, or local government 
quarantine or movement restrictions for animal health reasons may be 
exported from the United States unless the importing country issues an 
import permit or other written instruction allowing entry of the 
animal, animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated 
eggs, or gametes, and APHIS concurs with the export of the animal, 
animal semen, animal embryos, hatching eggs, other embryonated eggs, or 
gametes.

Subpart B--Livestock


Sec.  91.5  Identification of livestock intended for export.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, livestock 
that are intended for export must be identified in accordance with part 
86 of this chapter. If the importing country requires an additional 
form of identification, the livestock must also bear that form of 
identification.
    (b) Horses may be identified by an individual animal tattoo alone, 
without an accompanying description of the horse, if allowed by the 
importing country.


Sec.  91.6  Cleaning and disinfection of means of conveyance, 
containers, and facilities used during movement; approved 
disinfectants.

    (a) All export health certificates for livestock must be 
accompanied by a statement issued by an APHIS representative and/or 
accredited veterinarian that the means of conveyance or container in 
which the livestock will be transported from the premises of export has 
been cleaned and disinfected prior to loading the livestock with a 
disinfectant approved by the Administrator for purposes of this section 
or by a statement that the means of conveyance or container was not 
previously used to transport animals.
    (b) Livestock moved for export may be unloaded only into a facility 
which has been cleaned and disinfected in the presence of an APHIS 
representative or an accredited veterinarian prior to such unloading 
with a disinfectant approved by the Administrator for purposes of this 
section. A statement certifying to such action must be attached to the 
export health certificate by the APHIS

[[Page 10413]]

representative or accredited veterinarian.
    (c) Approved disinfectants. The Administrator will approve a 
disinfectant for the purposes of this section upon determining that the 
disinfectant is effective against pathogens that may be spread by the 
animals intended for export and, if the disinfectant is a chemical 
disinfectant, that it is registered or exempted for the specified use 
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Program Handbook 
provides access to a list of disinfectants approved by the 
Administrator for use as required by this section. Other disinfectants 
may also be approved by the Administrator in accordance with this 
paragraph. The Administrator will withdraw approval of a disinfectant, 
and remove it from the list of approved disinfectants, if the 
disinfectant no longer meets the conditions for approval in this 
section.


Sec.  91.7  Pre-export inspection.

    (a) All livestock intended for export by air or sea must receive a 
visual health inspection from an APHIS veterinarian within 48 hours 
prior to embarkation, unless the importing country specifies otherwise. 
The purpose of the inspection is to determine whether the livestock are 
sound, healthy, and fit to travel. The APHIS veterinarian will reject 
for export any livestock that he or she finds unfit to travel. The 
owner of the animals or the owner's agent must make arrangements for 
any livestock found unfit to travel. Livestock that are unfit to travel 
include, but are not limited to:
    (1) Livestock that are sick, injured, weak, disabled, or fatigued;
    (2) Livestock that are unable to stand unaided or bear weight on 
each leg;
    (3) Livestock that are blind in both eyes;
    (4) Livestock that cannot be moved without causing additional 
suffering;
    (5) Newborn livestock with an unhealed navel;
    (6) Livestock that have given birth within the previous 48 hours 
and are traveling without their offspring;
    (7) Pregnant livestock that would be in the final 10 percent of 
their gestation period at the planned time of unloading in the 
importing country; and
    (8) Livestock with unhealed wounds from recent surgical procedures, 
such as dehorning.
    (b) The APHIS veterinarian must conduct the inspection at the 
export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation of 
the livestock; at an export isolation facility approved in accordance 
with Sec.  91.11, when authorized by the Administrator in accordance 
with paragraph (c) of this section; or at an export inspection facility 
other than the facility associated with the port of embarkation, when 
authorized by the Administrator in accordance with paragraph (d) of 
this section. Unless APHIS has authorized otherwise, any sorting, 
grouping, identification, or other handling of the livestock by the 
exporter must be done before this inspection. The APHIS veterinarian 
may also conduct clinical examination of any livestock during or after 
this inspection if he or she deems it necessary in order to determine 
the animal's health. Any testing or treatment related to this clinical 
examination must be performed by an APHIS veterinarian or an accredited 
veterinarian. Finally, if the facility used to conduct the inspection 
is a facility other than the export inspection facility associated with 
the port of embarkation, it must be located within 28 hours driving 
distance under normal driving conditions from the port of embarkation, 
and livestock must be afforded at least 48 hours rest, with sufficient 
feed and water during that time period, prior to movement from the 
facility.
    (c) Conditions for approval of pre-export inspection at an export 
isolation facility.
    (1) The Administrator may allow pre-export inspection of livestock 
to be conducted at an export isolation facility, rather than at an 
export inspection facility, when the exporter can show to the 
satisfaction of the Administrator that the livestock would suffer undue 
hardship if they had to be inspected at the export inspection facility, 
when the distance from the export isolation facility to the port of 
embarkation is significantly less than the distance from the export 
isolation facility to the export inspection facility associated with 
the port of embarkation, when inspection at the export isolation 
facility would be a more efficient use of APHIS resources, or for other 
reasons acceptable to the Administrator.
    (2) The Administrator's approval is contingent upon APHIS having 
personnel available to provide services at that location. Approval is 
also contingent upon the Administrator determining that the facility 
has space, lighting, and humane means of handling livestock sufficient 
for the APHIS personnel to safely conduct required inspections. The 
Program Handbook contains guidance on ways to meet these requirements. 
Owners and operators may submit alternative plans for meeting the 
requirements to APHIS for evaluation and approval. Alternatives must be 
at least as effective in meeting the requirements as those described in 
the Program Handbook in order to be approved. Alternate plans must be 
approved by APHIS before the facility may be used for purposes of this 
section.
    (d) The Administrator may allow pre-export inspection of livestock 
to be conducted at an export inspection facility other than the export 
inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation when the 
exporter can show to the satisfaction of the Administrator that the 
livestock would suffer undue hardship if they had to be inspected at 
the export inspection facility associated with the port of embarkation, 
when inspection at this different export inspection facility would be a 
more efficient use of APHIS resources, or for other reasons acceptable 
to the Administrator.
    (e) The APHIS veterinarian will maintain an inspection record that 
includes the date and place of the pre-export inspection, species and 
number of animals inspected, the number of animals rejected, a 
description of those animals, and the reasons for rejection.
    (f) If requested by the importing country or an exporter, the APHIS 
veterinarian who inspects the livestock will issue a certificate of 
inspection for livestock he or she finds to be sound, healthy, and fit 
to travel.


Sec.  91.8  Rest, feed, and water prior to export.

    All livestock intended for export by air or sea must be allowed a 
period of at least 2 hours rest prior to being loaded onto an ocean 
vessel or aircraft for export. Adequate food and water must be 
available to the livestock during the rest period. An inspector may 
extend the required rest period up to 5 hours, at his or her discretion 
and based on a determination that more rest is needed in order for the 
inspector to have assurances that the animals are fit to travel prior 
to loading. Finally, if livestock have been inspected for export at a 
facility other than the export inspection facility associated with the 
port of embarkation, they must be visually observed at the end of this 
rest period for fitness to travel.


Sec.  91.9  Ports.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, livestock 
exported by air or sea may be exported only through ports designated as 
ports of embarkation by the Administrator. Any port that has an export 
inspection facility that meets the requirements of Sec.  91.10 
permanently associated with it is designated as a port of embarkation. 
The Program Handbook contains a list of designated ports of 
embarkation. A list may also be

[[Page 10414]]

obtained from a Veterinary Services area office. Information on area 
offices is available on APHIS' import-export Web site (https://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/index.shtml).
    (b) The Administrator may approve other ports for the exportation 
of livestock on a temporary basis with the concurrence of the port 
director. The Administrator will grant such temporary approvals only 
for a specific shipment of livestock, and only if pre-export inspection 
of that shipment has occurred at an export isolation facility or an 
export inspection facility not associated with the port of embarkation, 
as provided in Sec.  91.7.
    (c) Temporarily approved ports of embarkation will not be added to 
the list of designated ports of embarkation and are only approved for 
the time period and shipment conditions specified by APHIS at the time 
of approval.


Sec.  91.10  Export inspection facilities.

    (a) Export inspection facilities must be approved by the 
Administrator before they may be used for any livestock intended for 
export. The Administrator will approve an export inspection facility 
upon determining that it meets the requirements in paragraph (b) of 
this section. This approval remains in effect unless it is revoked in 
accordance with paragraph (c) of this section, or unless any of the 
following occur, in which case reapproval must be sought:
    (1) The owner of the facility changes.
    (2) Significant damage to the facility occurs or significant 
structural changes are made to the facility.
    (b)(1) Export inspection facilities must be constructed, equipped, 
and managed in a manner that prevents transmission of disease to and 
from livestock in the facilities, provides for the safe and humane 
handling and restraint of livestock, and provides sufficient offices, 
space, and lighting for APHIS veterinarians to safely conduct required 
health inspections of livestock and related business. The Program 
Handbook contains guidance on ways to meet these requirements. Owners 
and operators may submit alternative plans for meeting the requirements 
to APHIS for evaluation and approval; the address to which to submit 
such alternatives is contained in the Program Handbook. Alternatives 
must be at least as effective in meeting the requirements as the 
methods described in the Program Handbook in order to be approved. 
Alternatives must be approved by APHIS before being used for purposes 
of this section.
    (2) For the purposes of approval or a subsequent audit, APHIS 
representatives must have access to all areas of the facility during 
the facility's business hours to evaluate compliance with the 
requirements of this section.
    (3) The application for approval of an export inspection facility 
must be accompanied by a certification from the authorities having 
jurisdiction over environmental affairs in the locality of the 
facility. The certification must state that the facility complies with 
any applicable requirements of the State and local governments, and the 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regarding disposal of animal 
wastes.
    (c) The Administrator will deny or revoke approval of an export 
inspection facility for failure to meet the requirements in paragraph 
(b) of this section.
    (1) APHIS will conduct site inspections of approved export 
inspection facilities at least once a year for continued compliance 
with the standards. If a facility fails to pass the inspection, the 
Administrator may revoke its approval. If the Administrator revokes 
approval for a facility that serves a designated port of embarkation, 
the Administrator may also remove that port from the list of designated 
ports of embarkation.
    (2) APHIS will provide written notice of any proposed denial or 
revocation to the operator of the facility, who will be given an 
opportunity to present his or her views on the issues before a final 
decision is made. The notice will list any deficiencies in detail. 
APHIS will provide notice of pending revocations at least 60 days 
before the revocation is scheduled to take effect, but may suspend 
facility operations before that date and before any consideration of 
objections by the facility operator if the Administrator determines the 
suspension is necessary to protect animal health or public health, 
interest, or safety. The operator of any facility whose approval is 
denied or revoked may request another inspection after remedying the 
deficiencies.


Sec.  91.11  Export isolation facilities.

    (a) If an importing country requires livestock to undergo pre-
export isolation approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, APHIS 
must approve the export isolation facility to be used for the livestock 
prior to each isolation. APHIS will approve a facility only if the 
Administrator determines, upon APHIS inspection of the facility, that 
the facility meets standards identified by the importing country. If 
the importing country does not identify specific standards, APHIS will 
approve the export isolation facility only if the Administrator 
determines, upon APHIS inspection of the facility, that the facility 
has adequate measures in place to protect the livestock at the facility 
from exposure to animals of different health status and fomites in 
order to prevent transmission of diseases of livestock during the 
isolation period. The Program Handbook contains guidance on measures 
acceptable to APHIS. Owners and operators may submit alternative 
measures to APHIS for evaluation and approval; the address to which to 
submit such an alternative is contained in the Program Handbook. 
Alternatives must be at least as effective in meeting the requirement 
as those described in the Program Handbook in order to be approved. 
Alternatives must be approved by APHIS before being used for purposes 
of this section.
    (b) Isolation must be under the supervision of an accredited 
veterinarian or, if requested by the importing country, by an APHIS 
veterinarian.


Sec.  91.12  Ocean vessels.

    (a) Inspection of the ocean vessel. (1) Certification to carry 
livestock. Ocean vessels must be certified by APHIS prior to initial 
use to transport any livestock from the United States. The owner or the 
operator of the ocean vessel must make arrangements prior to the 
vessel's arrival at a designated port of embarkation in the United 
States for an APHIS representative to inspect the vessel while it is at 
that port of embarkation. Alternatively, at the discretion of the 
Administrator and upon request of the exporter, transporting company, 
or their agent, the inspection may be done at a foreign port. If APHIS 
determines that the ocean vessel meets the requirements of paragraph 
(d) of this section, APHIS will certify the vessel to transport 
livestock from the United States. APHIS may certify a vessel that does 
not meet all of the requirements in paragraph (d), provided that an 
exemption from the requirements the vessel does not meet has been 
granted to the vessel pursuant to paragraph (e) of this section. The 
certification will specify the species of livestock for which the 
vessel is approved. The certification will be valid for up to 3 years; 
however, the ocean vessel must be recertified prior to transporting 
livestock any time significant changes are made to the vessel, 
including to livestock transport spaces or life support systems; any 
time a major life support system fails; any time species of livestock 
not covered by the existing certification are to be transported; and 
any time the owner or operator of the ocean vessel changes. The owner 
or operator of the vessel must present the following

[[Page 10415]]

documentation to APHIS prior to its initial inspection for 
certification and when requested by APHIS prior to subsequent 
inspections for recertification:
    (i) General information about the vessel, including year built, 
length and breadth, vessel name history, port of registry, call sign, 
maximum and average speed, fresh water tank capacity and fresh water 
generation rate, and feed silo capacity (if the vessel has a silo);
    (ii) A notarized statement from an engineer concerning the rate of 
air exchange in each compartment of the vessel;
    (iii) The species of livestock that the vessel would transport;
    (iv) Scale drawings that provide details of the design, materials, 
and methods of construction and arrangement of fittings for the 
containment and movement of livestock; provisions for the storage and 
distribution of feed and water; drainage arrangements; primary and 
secondary sources of power; and lighting;
    (v) A photograph of the rails and gates of any pens;
    (vi) A description of the flooring surface on the livestock decks; 
and
    (vii) The following measurements: Width of the ramps; the clear 
height from the ramps to the lowest overhead structures; the incline 
between the ramps and the horizontal plane; the distance between 
footlocks on the ramps; the height of side fencing on the ramps; the 
height of the vessel's side doors through which livestock are loaded; 
the width of alleyways running fore and aft between livestock pens; and 
the distance from the floor of the livestock pens to the beams or 
lowest structures overhead.
    (2) Prior to each voyage. Prior to loading any livestock intended 
for export from the United States, an APHIS representative must inspect 
the vessel to confirm that the ocean vessel has been adequately cleaned 
and disinfected as required by paragraph (b) of this section, has 
sufficient food and water for the voyage as required by paragraph (c) 
of this section, and continues to meet the requirements of paragraph 
(d) of this section. APHIS will schedule the inspection after the owner 
or operator of the ocean vessel provides the following information:
    (i) The name of the ocean vessel;
    (ii) The port, date, and time the ocean vessel will be available 
for inspection, and estimated time that loading will begin;
    (iii) A description of the livestock to be transported, including 
the type, number, and estimated average weight of the livestock;
    (iv) Stability data for the ocean vessel with livestock on board;
    (v) The port of discharge; and
    (vi) The route and expected length of the voyage.
    (3) The information in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(vi) must 
be provided at least 72 hours before the vessel will be available for 
inspection.
    (b) Cleaning and disinfection. (1) Any ocean vessel intended for 
use in exporting livestock, and all fittings, utensils, containers, and 
equipment (unless new) used for loading, stowing, or other handling of 
livestock aboard the vessel must be thoroughly cleaned and disinfected 
to the satisfaction of an APHIS representative prior to any livestock 
being loaded. The disinfectant must be approved by the Administrator. 
Guidance on cleaning and disinfecting ocean vessels may be found in the 
Program Handbook.
    (2) The Administrator will approve a disinfectant for the purposes 
of this paragraph upon determining that the disinfectant is effective 
against pathogens that may be spread by the animals and, if the 
disinfectant is a chemical disinfectant, that it is registered or 
exempted for the specified use by the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency. The Program Handbook provides access to a list of disinfectants 
approved by the Administrator. Other disinfectants may also be approved 
by the Administrator in accordance with this paragraph. The 
Administrator will withdraw approval of a disinfectant, and remove it 
from the list of approved disinfectants in the Program Handbook, if the 
disinfectant no longer meets the conditions for approval in this 
section.
    (3) All ocean vessels, upon docking at a U.S. port to load 
livestock, must have disinfectant foot baths at entryways where persons 
board and exit the ocean vessel, and require such baths before allowing 
any person to disembark.
    (c) Feed and water. Sufficient feed and water must be provided to 
livestock aboard the ocean vessel, taking into consideration the 
livestock's species, body weight, the expected duration of the voyage, 
and the likelihood of adverse climatic conditions during transport. 
Guidance on this requirement may be found in the Program Handbook.
    (d) Accommodations for the humane transport of livestock; general 
requirements. Ocean vessels used to transport livestock intended for 
export must be designed, constructed, and managed to reasonably assure 
the livestock are protected from injury and remain healthy during 
loading and transport to the importing country. Except as provided 
below in paragraph (e) of this section, no livestock may be loaded onto 
an ocean vessel unless, in the opinion of an APHIS representative, the 
ocean vessel meets the requirements of this section. The Program 
Handbook contains guidance on ways to meet the requirements. Owners and 
operators may submit alternative means and methods for meeting the 
requirements to APHIS for evaluation and approval. Alternatives must be 
at least as effective in meeting the requirements as those described in 
the Program Handbook in order to be approved. Alternatives must be 
approved by APHIS before being used for purposes of this section.
    (1) Pens. All pens, including gates and portable rails used to 
close access ways, must be designed and constructed of material of 
sufficient strength to securely contain the livestock. They must be 
properly formed, closely fitted, and rigidly secured in place. They 
must have smooth finished surfaces free from sharp protrusions. They 
must not have worn, decayed, unsound, or otherwise defective parts. 
Flooring must be strong enough to support the livestock to be 
transported and provide a satisfactory non-slip foothold. Pens on 
exposed upper decks must protect the livestock from the weather. Pens 
next to engine or boiler rooms or similar sources of heat must be 
fitted to protect the livestock from injury due to transfer of heat to 
the livestock or livestock transport spaces. Any fittings or 
protrusions from the vessel's sides that abut pens must be covered to 
protect the livestock from injury. Pens must be of appropriate size for 
the species, size, weight, and condition of the livestock being 
transported and take into consideration the vessel's route.
    (2) Positioning. Livestock must be positioned during transport so 
that an animal handler or other responsible person can observe each 
animal regularly and clearly to ensure the livestock's safety and 
welfare.
    (3) Resources for sick or injured animals. The vessel must have an 
adequate number of appropriately sized and located pens set aside to 
segregate livestock that become sick or injured from other animals. It 
must also have adequate veterinary medical supplies, including 
medicines, for the species, condition, and number of livestock 
transported.
    (4) Ramps, doors, and passageways. Ramps, doors, and passageways 
used for livestock must be of sufficient width and height for their use 
and allow the safe passage of the species transported. They must have 
secure, smooth fittings free from sharp protrusions and non-slip

[[Page 10416]]

flooring, and must not have worn, decayed, unsound, or otherwise 
defective parts. Ramps must not have an incline that is excessive for 
the species of livestock transported and must be fitted with foot 
battens to prevent slippage at intervals suitable for the species. The 
sides of ramps must be of sufficient height and strength to prevent 
escape of the species of livestock transported.
    (5) Feed and water. The feeding and watering system must be 
designed to permit all livestock in each pen adequate access to feed 
and water. The system must also be designed to minimize soiling of pens 
and to prevent animal waste from contaminating feed and water. 
Similarly, feed must be loaded and stored aboard the vessel in a manner 
that protects it from weather and sea water and, if kept under animal 
transport spaces, protects it from spillage from animal watering and 
feeding and from animal waste. If the normal means of tending, feeding, 
and watering of livestock on board the ocean vessel is wholly or 
partially by automatic means, the vessel must have alternative 
arrangements for the satisfactory tending, feeding, and watering of the 
animals in the event of a malfunction of the automatic means.
    (6) Ventilation. Ventilation during loading, unloading, and 
transport must provide fresh air and remove excessive heat, humidity, 
and noxious fumes (such as ammonia and carbon dioxide). Ventilation 
must be adequate for variations in climate and weather and to meet the 
needs of the livestock being transported. Ventilation must be effective 
both when the vessel is stationary and when it is moving and must be 
turned on when the first animal is loaded. The vessel must have on 
board a back-up ventilation system (including emergency power supply) 
in good working order or replacement parts and the means, including 
qualified personnel, to make the repairs or replacements.
    (7) Waste management. The vessel must have a system or 
arrangements, including a backup system in working order or alternate 
arrangements, for managing waste to prevent excessive buildup in 
livestock transport spaces during the voyage.
    (8) Lighting. The vessel must have adequate illumination to allow 
clear observation of livestock during loading, unloading, and 
transport.
    (9) Bedding. Bedding must be loaded and stored aboard the vessel in 
a manner that protects it from weather and sea water and, if kept under 
animal transport spaces, protects it from spillage from animal watering 
and feeding and from animal waste.
    (10) Cleaning. The vessel must be designed and constructed to allow 
thorough cleaning and disinfection and to prevent feces and urine from 
livestock on upper levels from soiling livestock or their feed or water 
on lower levels.
    (11) Halters and ropes. Halters, ropes, or other equipment provided 
for the handling and tying of horses or other livestock must be 
satisfactory to ensure the humane treatment of the livestock.
    (12) Personnel. The owner or operator of the ocean vessel must have 
on board during loading, transport, and unloading at least 3 persons 
(or at least 1 person if fewer than 800 head of livestock will be 
transported) with previous experience with ocean vessels that have 
handled the kind(s) of livestock to be carried, as well as a sufficient 
number of attendants with the appropriate experience to be able to 
ensure proper care of the livestock.
    (13) Vessel stability. The vessel must have adequate stability, 
taking into consideration the weight and distribution of livestock and 
fodder, as well as effects of high winds and seas. If requested by 
APHIS, the owner or operator of the vessel must present stability 
calculations for the voyage that have been independently verified for 
accuracy.
    (14) Additional conditions. The vessel must meet any other 
condition the Administrator determines is necessary for approval, as 
dictated by specific circumstances and communicated to the owner and 
operator of the vessel, to protect the livestock and keep them healthy 
during loading, unloading, and transport to the importing country.
    (e) Accommodations for the humane transport of livestock; vessels 
using shipping containers. An inspector may exempt an ocean vessel that 
uses shipping containers to transport livestock to an importing country 
from requirements in paragraph (d) of this section that he or she 
specifies, if the inspector determines that the containers themselves 
are designed, constructed, and managed in a manner to reasonably assure 
the livestock are protected from injury and remain healthy during 
loading, unloading, and transport to the importing country. The Program 
Handbook contains exemption guidance.
    (f) Operator's report. (1) The owner or operator of any ocean 
vessel used to export livestock (including vessels that use shipping 
containers) from the United States must submit a written report to 
APHIS within 5 business days after completing a voyage. The report must 
include the name of the ocean vessel; the name and address of all 
exporters of livestock transported on the vessel; the port of 
embarkation; dates of the voyage; the port where the livestock were 
discharged; the number of each species of livestock loaded; and the 
number of each species that died and an explanation for those 
mortalities. The report must also document any failure of any major 
life support system for the livestock, including, but not limited to, 
systems for providing feed and water, ventilation systems, and 
livestock waste management systems. Any such failure must be 
documented, regardless of the duration or whether the failure resulted 
in any harm to the livestock. The report must include the name, 
telephone number, and email address of the person who prepared the 
report and the date of the report. The report must be submitted to 
APHIS by facsimile or email. Contact numbers and addresses, as well as 
an optional template for the report, are provided in the Program 
Handbook.
    (2) If an ocean vessel used to export livestock experiences any 
failure of a major life support system for livestock during the voyage, 
the owner or operator of the ocean vessel must notify APHIS immediately 
by telephone, facsimile, or other electronic means. Contact numbers and 
addresses are provided in the Program Handbook.
    (3) Failure to provide timely reports as required by this section 
may result in APHIS disapproving future livestock shipments by the 
responsible owner or operator or revoking the vessel's certification 
under paragraph (a) of this section to carry livestock.


Sec.  91.13  Aircraft.

    (a) Prior to loading livestock aboard aircraft, the stowage area of 
the aircraft and any loading ramps, fittings, and equipment to be used 
in loading the animals must be cleaned and then disinfected with a 
disinfectant approved by the Administrator, to the satisfaction of an 
APHIS representative, unless the representative determines that the 
aircraft has already been cleaned and disinfected to his or her 
satisfaction.
    (1) The Administrator will approve a disinfectant for the purposes 
of this section upon determining that the disinfectant is effective 
against pathogens that may be spread by the animals and, if the 
disinfectant is a chemical disinfectant, that it is registered or 
exempted for the specified use by the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency.
    (2) The Program Handbook provides access to a list of disinfectants 
approved by the Administrator for use as required

[[Page 10417]]

by this section. Other disinfectants may also be approved by the 
Administrator in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (3) The Administrator will withdraw approval of a disinfectant, and 
remove it from the list of approved disinfectants in the Program 
Handbook, if the disinfectant no longer meets the conditions for 
approval in this section.
    (b) The time at which the cleaning and disinfection are to be 
performed must be approved by the APHIS representative, who will give 
approval only if he or she determines that the cleaning and 
disinfection will be effective up to the projected time the livestock 
will be loaded. If the livestock are not loaded by the projected time, 
the APHIS representative will determine whether further cleaning and 
disinfection are necessary.
    (c) The cleaning must remove all garbage, soil, manure, plant 
materials, insects, paper, and other debris from the stowage area. The 
disinfectant solution must be applied with a device that creates an 
aerosol or mist that covers 100 percent of the surfaces in the stowage 
area, except for any loaded cargo and deck surface under it that, in 
the opinion of the APHIS representative, do not contain material, such 
as garbage, soil, manure, plant materials, insects, waste paper, or 
debris, that may harbor animal disease pathogens.
    (d) After cleaning and disinfection is performed, the APHIS 
representative will sign and deliver to the captain of the aircraft or 
other responsible official of the airline involved a document stating 
that the aircraft has been properly cleaned and disinfected, and 
stating further the date, the carrier, the flight number, and the name 
of the airport and the city and state in which it is located. If an 
aircraft is cleaned and disinfected at one airport, then flies to a 
subsequent airport, with or without stops en route, to load animals for 
export, an APHIS representative at the subsequent airport will 
determine, based on examination of the cleaning and disinfection 
documents, whether the previous cleaning and disinfection is adequate 
or whether to order a new cleaning and disinfection. If the aircraft 
has loaded any cargo in addition to animals, the APHIS representative 
at the subsequent airport will determine whether to order a new 
cleaning and disinfection, based on both examination of the cleaning 
and disinfection documents and on the inspection of the stowage area 
for materials, such as garbage, soil, manure, plant materials, insects, 
waste paper, or debris, that may harbor animal disease pathogens.
    (e) Cargo containers used to ship livestock must be designed and 
constructed of a material of sufficient strength to securely contain 
the animals and must provide sufficient space for the species being 
transported given the duration of the trip, as determined by APHIS.


Sec.  91.14  Other movements and conditions.

    The Administrator may, upon request in specific cases, permit the 
exportation of livestock not otherwise provided for in this part under 
such conditions as he or she may prescribe in each specific case to 
prevent the spread of livestock diseases and to ensure the humane 
treatment of the animals during transport to the importing country.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of February 2015.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-04013 Filed 2-25-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P