National Veterinary Accreditation Program, 31109-31121 [E6-8493]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31109-31121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8493]


========================================================================
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. 71, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 2006 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 31109]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 160, 161, and 162

[Docket No. APHIS-2006-0093]
RIN 0579-AC04


National Veterinary Accreditation Program

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the regulations regarding the 
National Veterinary Accreditation Program to establish two 
accreditation categories in place of the current single category, to 
add requirements for supplemental training and renewal of 
accreditation, and to offer accreditation specializations. We are 
proposing these changes in order to support the Agency's animal health 
safeguarding initiatives, to involve accredited veterinarians in 
integrated surveillance activities, and to make the provisions 
governing our National Veterinary Accreditation Program more uniform 
and consistent. These proposed changes would increase the level of 
training and skill of accredited veterinarians in the areas of disease 
prevention and preparedness for animal health emergencies in the United 
States.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July 
31, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and, in the lower ``Search Regulations and Federal 
Actions'' box, select ``Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service'' 
from the agency drop-down menu, then click on ``Submit.'' In the Docket 
ID column, select APHIS-2006-0093 to submit or view public comments and 
to view supporting and related materials available electronically. 
Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for 
accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after 
the close of the comment period, is available through the site's ``User 
Tips'' link.
     Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies 
of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-
2006-0093, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-
03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state 
that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0093.
    Reading Room: You may read any comments that we receive on this 
docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of 
the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to 
help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming.
    Other Information: Additional information about APHIS and its 
programs is available on the Internet at https://www.aphis.usda.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Lawrence Miller, Program Manager, 
National Veterinary Accreditation Program, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road 
Unit 200, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 734-6188.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The regulations in 9 CFR chapter I, subchapter J (parts 160 through 
162, referred to below as the regulations), govern the accreditation of 
veterinarians and the suspension and revocation of such accreditation. 
These regulations are the foundation for the National Veterinary 
Accreditation Program (NVAP). Accredited veterinarians are approved by 
the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 
(APHIS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), to perform 
certain regulatory tasks to control and prevent the spread of animal 
diseases throughout the United States and internationally.
    In this document, we are proposing to amend the regulations to 
accomplish the following:
     Replace the current single category of accreditation with 
two categories: Category I, which would be limited in scope to 
companion animals and related activities, and Category II, which would 
encompass all animal species and accredited activities. The addition of 
Category I would allow for the accreditation of veterinarians who can 
complete certificates for the international movement of companion 
animals, diagnose exotic animal diseases in companion animals, and 
perform veterinary tasks during animal disease emergencies.
     Provide for the renewal of accreditation every 3 years and 
require accredited veterinarians to complete supplemental training 
units (four for Category I and nine for Category II) during each 3-year 
renewal period. These changes would increase the rigor of the 
accredited veterinarian program and provide additional training and 
knowledge for accredited veterinarians.
     Provide for Category II accredited veterinarians to become 
qualified to perform certain specialized activities such as trichinae 
safe herd certification work. This change would allow specialized 
activities to be performed under the regulatory auspices of the NVAP.
    We are also proposing to make several minor changes that would 
improve the program's effectiveness. Each of these proposed changes is 
discussed in detail below. In addition, we are proposing several 
organizational changes to the regulations to improve their clarity and 
effectiveness. A derivation table that shows the organizational changes 
we are proposing is provided below. The organizational changes are 
discussed in more detail later in this proposal.

  Table 1.--Derivation Table for Proposed Changes to Parts 161 and 162
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Proposed new section or paragraph                Based on
------------------------------------------------------------------------
161.1(a)..................................  No change.
161.1(b)..................................  161.2(a).
161.1(c)..................................  161.2(a)(1) and new
                                             language.
161.1(d)..................................  161.2(d) and new language.
161.1(e)..................................  161.2(a)(2) and new
                                             language.
161.1(f)..................................  New language.
161.1(g)..................................  New language.
161.2(a)..................................  161.1(b).

[[Page 31110]]

 
161.2(b)..................................  161.1(c).
161.2(c)..................................  New language.
161.3.....................................  New language.
161.4.....................................  161.3.
161.5.....................................  New language.
161.6(a)..................................  161.4(a) and new language.
161.6(b)..................................  161.2(c).
161.6(c)..................................  161.2(b) and new language.
161.6(d)..................................  161.4(b).
161.6(e)..................................  161.4(c).
161.6(f)..................................  161.4(d).
161.6(g)..................................  161.4(a).
161.7.....................................  New language.
162.10....................................  162.10 and new language.
162.12(a).................................  No change.
162.12(b).................................  162.12(d).
162.12(c).................................  162.12(b).
162.12(d).................................  162.12(c).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Categories of Accreditation

    The current regulations in Sec.  161.2(a) and (d) set out the 
requirements for initial veterinary accreditation and the tasks that 
veterinarians must be able to perform in order to be accredited, 
respectively. We would move these provisions to Sec.  161.1, as shown 
in the derivation table above, and amend the section heading of Sec.  
161.1 to read ``Statement of purpose; requirements and application 
procedures for accreditation'' to reflect the movement of those 
provisions.
    The current regulations provide for only one type of accreditation; 
however, we would revise the current requirements for accreditation to 
provide for two accreditation categories. The new category we are 
proposing to add, Category I, would allow for the accreditation of 
veterinarians who only wish to perform accredited duties relating to 
companion animals. Under Category I, a veterinarian would be accredited 
to participate in disease surveillance and issue international health 
certificates and domestic certificates for interstate movement for 
companion animals. For this category, routine disease surveillance 
would only relate to exotic animal diseases (including surveillance for 
emerging and foreign animal diseases) that occur in companion animals, 
rather than to diseases exclusively associated with companion animals. 
Except during animal disease emergencies, Category I veterinarians 
would not be authorized to perform accredited work activities with 
horses, food or fiber animal species, or other livestock or poultry 
animals. Commensurate with the limited duties that veterinarians 
accredited under Category I would be authorized to perform, the tasks a 
veterinarian would have to be able to perform to be accredited under 
Category I would also be less comprehensive than those for proposed 
Category II and would only relate to companion animals.
    Other countries often require that companion animals moved into 
those countries be accompanied by an international health certificate 
stating that those animals are free of certain diseases. The 
regulations currently do not provide for the accreditation of 
veterinarians who are competent to perform accredited duties for 
companion animals but not for livestock or poultry. Establishing 
Category I as a new accreditation category would give veterinarians for 
companion animals the option of becoming accredited without having to 
learn and perform duties relating to livestock and poultry; since most 
veterinarians practice solely on companion animal species, adding 
Category I accreditation as an option would enable veterinarians to be 
accredited to perform duties consistent with their type of practice.
    However, Category I veterinarians would be accredited to 
participate in disease surveillance for diseases relating to livestock 
and poultry as they occur in companion animals; for example, a Category 
I veterinarian could participate in surveillance for avian diseases 
when examining pet birds. In addition, Category I veterinarians could 
be asked to participate in surveillance in livestock or poultry during 
an outbreak of a livestock or poultry disease, when finding enough 
personnel to perform adequate surveillance may become a significant 
issue; Category I veterinarians would be capable of drawing blood from 
livestock or poultry for testing, for example. Therefore, adding this 
category would also increase APHIS' disease surveillance resources for 
livestock and poultry.
    To clarify the distinction between companion animals and other 
animals, we would add a definition of companion animals to Sec.  160.1. 
This definition would read: ``Animals commonly kept as pets in family 
households in the United States. Companion animals do not include 
horses, food or fiber animal species, or other livestock or poultry 
animals.'' Typically, in veterinary medicine, a horse is considered a 
companion animal; however, the duties that accredited veterinarians 
perform under the regulations governing the interstate movement and 
exportation of horses in 9 CFR chapter I are similar to those that 
accredited veterinarians perform under the regulations governing the 
interstate movement and exportation of livestock. Accordingly, we 
believe it is appropriate to require veterinarians who perform 
accredited duties with respect to horses to be accredited under 
Category II.
    Accreditation under Category II would be similar to accreditation 
under the current regulations. Under Category II, a veterinarian would 
be accredited to issue international animal health certificates, issue 
animal health certificates for interstate movement, participate in 
disease surveillance (including surveillance for emerging and foreign 
animal diseases), perform emergency animal disease management 
functions, conduct APHIS Veterinary Services program activities, and 
perform other specialized accreditation activities such as herd health 
certification work for all animal species.
    In Sec.  161.2 of the current regulations, paragraph (d) lists 
tasks that applicants for accredited status must be able to perform. 
The tasks that a veterinarian accredited under Category II would have 
to be able to perform are similar to those currently listed in Sec.  
161.2(d). However, we are proposing to make some of the task 
descriptions more general; for example, a Category II veterinarian 
would be required to be able to perform a necropsy on all animals, not 
just on livestock as in the current regulations. We would also update 
the language used to describe some of these tasks.
    We are proposing to replace one of the tasks in the current 
regulations with a new task that Category II veterinarians would have 
to be able to perform to be accredited. We would replace ``Plan a 
disease control strategy for a livestock unit task'' with ``Develop a 
herd or flock health plan.'' ``Herd or flock health plan'' is a term 
used elsewhere in 9 CFR chapter I with regard to animal diseases for 
which we conduct control or eradication efforts, and its meaning is 
more general than ``disease control strategy.'' To clarify what this 
new task entails, we would add a definition of herd or flock health 
plan to Sec.  160.1. This definition would read: ``A written herd or 
flock health management plan, which may include an agreement signed by 
the owner of a herd or flock, the accredited veterinarian, and a State 
or APHIS representative, in which each participant agrees to undertake 
actions specified in the agreement to control a disease or diseases.''
    The tasks that accredited veterinarians are required to be able to 
perform by the current regulations and

[[Page 31111]]

the tasks that veterinarians would be required to be able to perform to 
be accredited under Category I and Category II are compared in Table 2.

   Table 2.--Comparison of Current Accredited Veterinarian Tasks With
                   Proposed Category I and Category II
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Category I in        Category II in
 Current regulations in Sec.      proposed Sec.         proposed Sec.
           161.2(d)                161.1(d)(i)          161.1(d)(ii)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perform physical              Perform physical      Perform physical
 examinations of individual    examination of        examination of
 animals, and visually         individual            individual animals
 inspect herds or flocks, to   companion animals     and visually
 determine whether the         to determine          inspect herds or
 animals are free from any     whether they are      flocks to determine
 clinical signs suggestive     free from any         whether the animals
 of communicable disease.      clinical signs        are free from any
                               suggestive of         clinical signs
                               communicable          suggestive of
                               disease.              communicable
                                                     disease.
Recognize the common breeds   Recognize the common  Recognize the common
 of livestock so as to be      breeds of companion   breeds of companion
 able to record breed          animals and           animals, the types
 information on official       accurately record     of poultry as
 documents.                    breed information     defined by the
                               on official           National Poultry
                               documents.            Improvement Plan in
                                                     9 CFR subchapter G,
                                                     and the common
                                                     breeds of
                                                     livestock, and be
                                                     able to accurately
                                                     record breed
                                                     information on
                                                     official documents.
Recognize brucellosis         ....................  Recognize all USDA
 tattoos and calfhood                                animal
 vaccination tags, and                               identification
 determine the State of                              systems.
 origin of eartags, to
 properly identify animals
 in interstate commerce.
Estimate the age of           ....................  Estimate the age of
 livestock using a dental                            livestock using a
 formula.                                            dental formula.
Apply an eartag, tattoo,      Apply common animal   Apply USDA-
 backtag, and legband.         identification for    recognized
                               companion animals.    identification
                                                     (e.g., eartag,
                                                     microchip, tattoo)
                                                     for the USDA animal
                                                     identification
                                                     system.
Certify the disease status    ....................  Certify the health
 of a poultry flock with                             status of a poultry
 regard to disease caused by                         flock regarding
 Salmonella enteritidis,                             diseases of
 chlamydiosis, and exotic                            domestic or
 Newcastle disease by                                international
 evaluating records of the                           regulatory concern,
 flock's participation in                            and evaluate
 and testing by Federal and                          records pertaining
 State poultry health                                to flock testing
 programs.                                           and participation
                                                     in Federal and
                                                     State poultry
                                                     health programs and
                                                     classifications.
Properly complete             Properly complete     Properly complete
 certificates for domestic     certificates for      certificates for
 and international movement    domestic and          domestic and
 of animals.                   international         international
                               movement of           movement of
                               companion animals.    animals.
Apply and remove official     ....................  Apply and remove
 seals.                                              official seals.
Perform a necropsy on         Perform necropsies    Perform necropsies
 livestock.                    on companion          on animals.
                               animals.
Recognize clinical signs and  Recognize and report  Recognize and report
 lesions of exotic animal      clinical signs and    clinical signs and
 diseases.                     lesions of exotic     lesions of exotic
                               animal diseases       animal diseases.
                               that occur in
                               companion animals.
Plan a disease control        ....................  Develop a herd or
 strategy for a livestock                            flock health plan.
 unit.
Vaccinate for brucellosis     Vaccinate companion   Vaccinate for USDA
 and fill out the              animals and           program diseases
 vaccination certificate.      accurately complete   and accurately
                               the vaccination       complete the
                               certificate.          vaccination
                                                     certificate.
Draw and ship blood for       Properly collect and  Properly collect and
 testing.                      ship specimen         ship sample
                               samples to            specimens to an
                               appropriate           appropriate
                               laboratory for        laboratory for
                               testing with          testing with
                               complete and          complete and
                               accurate paperwork.   accurate paperwork.
Perform a caudal fold test    ....................  Properly perform
 for tuberculosis.                                   testing for
                                                     tuberculosis (e.g.,
                                                     caudal fold test).
Develop appropriate cleaning  Develop appropriate   Develop appropriate
 and disinfection plans to     biosecurity           biosecurity
 control communicable          protocols, as well    protocols, as well
 livestock disease spread.     as cleaning and       as cleaning and
                               disinfection          disinfection
                               protocols, to         protocols, to
                               control               control
                               communicable          communicable
                               disease spread in     disease spread.
                               companion animals.
Explain basic principles for  ....................  Explain basic
 control of diseases for                             principles for
 which APHIS or APHIS-State                          control of diseases
 cooperative programs exist,                         for which APHIS or
 such as brucellosis,                                APHIS-State
 pseudorabies, and                                   cooperative
 tuberculosis.                                       programs presently
                                                     exist.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The conditions under which the Administrator could accredit a 
veterinarian, presently listed in Sec.  161.2(a)(2), would be moved to 
Sec.  161.1(e) under this proposal. We are proposing to make two 
changes to these conditions. The regulations currently require that, to 
be accredited, a veterinarian must complete an orientation program 
approved by the Veterinarian-in-Charge for the State in which the 
veterinarian wishes to practice, which includes several topics mandated 
by the regulations. To this list of topics, we are proposing to add two 
new topics: Foreign animal disease awareness and animal health 
emergency management. Adding these topics would ensure that accredited 
veterinarians are familiar with these topics, which are becoming 
increasingly important as the volume of imported animals and animal 
products increases.
    The orientation program described above is typically conducted at 
veterinary medical schools prior to graduation, meaning that most 
veterinarians fulfill the requirement as part of their general 
veterinary medical education. The orientation program

[[Page 31112]]

would be all the training that would be required for initial 
accreditation under Category I. However, proposed Sec.  161.1(e)(4) 
would require that a veterinarian complete five supplemental training 
units approved by APHIS before being accredited under Category II. The 
supplemental training units we would require would either address 
topics that are not covered in the orientation program described above 
or provide more specific detail on topics of special current relevance. 
This requirement would ensure that a veterinarian seeking initial 
accreditation under Category II is fully prepared to perform accredited 
duties. We are not proposing a similar requirement for veterinarians 
seeking accreditation under Category I because we believe the current 
orientation program is adequate to acquaint Category I veterinarians 
with their comparatively limited duties. (Supplemental training units 
would be part of another new feature we are proposing to add to the 
regulations, a process for renewal of accreditation. This part of our 
proposal is discussed in detail under the heading ``Renewal of 
Accreditation'' below. However, the proposed provision described here 
would require pre-accreditation training, rather than pre-renewal 
training.)
    Proposed Sec.  161.1(f) describes a process by which veterinarians 
accredited under Category I would be able to become accredited under 
Category II and vice versa. A veterinarian who is accredited under one 
category would be able to become accredited under the other category if 
the veterinarian reapplies for accreditation, states that he or she can 
perform all the tasks which applicants would have to be able to perform 
under the new category, and has fulfilled the training requirements 
associated with renewal of accreditation under the new category. 
Therefore, a Category II veterinarian who did not wish to take all of 
the training necessary to retain Category II accreditation could become 
a Category I veterinarian by completing only the training necessary for 
Category I and continuing to comply with the proposed requirements for 
renewal of accreditation.
    Finally, we would add in proposed Sec.  161.1(g) a new requirement 
that an accredited veterinarian may not perform accredited duties in a 
State until after receiving written authorization from APHIS. 
Similarly, if a Category I accredited veterinarian completed the 
necessary training requirements and became a Category II accredited 
veterinarian, the veterinarian would not be allowed to perform Category 
II accredited duties in a State until after receiving written 
authorization from APHIS. Currently, the regulations do not contain any 
provision for a written notification that a veterinarian has been 
granted accredited status. Adding this requirement will ensure that 
both APHIS and the accredited veterinarian have a record that 
accredited status has been granted, or, in the case of veterinarians 
newly accredited under Category II, that Category II accredited status 
has been granted.

Performing Accredited Duties in Different States

    The regulations in current Sec.  161.1(b) and (c) set out the 
requirements that must be fulfilled if an accredited veterinarian 
wishes to perform accredited duties in a State other than the State for 
which the veterinarian has completed an orientation in accordance with 
Sec.  161.2(a)(4). We would move these requirements to Sec.  161.2 and 
amend the section heading to read ``Performance of accredited duties in 
different States'' to reflect this change. Placing the requirements for 
performing accredited duties in different States after the requirements 
for initial accreditation would reflect the fact that veterinarians 
must first be accredited in one specific State before they can apply to 
perform accredited duties in other States.
    We are proposing to amend the requirements for performing duties in 
different States to include a requirement that the accredited 
veterinarian may not perform accredited duties in a State other than 
the one in which the veterinarian was initially accredited until after 
he or she received written authorization from APHIS to perform 
accredited duties in the new State. Currently, the regulations do not 
contain any provision for a written notification that a veterinarian 
has been approved to perform accredited duties in a new State. Adding 
this requirement would ensure that the authority of the veterinarian is 
properly documented and that both APHIS and the accredited veterinarian 
have a record that approval to perform accredited duties in a new State 
has been granted.
    We would also amend these requirements by referring specifically to 
Form 1-36B, ``Application for Veterinary Accreditation in Another 
State.'' This would make these regulations consistent with the other 
veterinary accreditation regulations, which refer to forms by their 
title and form number.

Renewal of Accreditation

    Section 161.3 of the regulations currently contains standards for 
the performance of accredited veterinarian duties. In this proposal, we 
would redesignate Sec.  161.3 as Sec.  161.4 and add a new Sec.  161.3 
to set out provisions under which accredited veterinarians would be 
required to renew their accreditation every 3 years. Accredited 
veterinarians would be required to complete supplemental training as a 
condition of renewal. The section heading for proposed Sec.  161.3 
would, accordingly, read ``Renewal of accreditation.''
    Under the current regulations, after an initial orientation to the 
accreditation duties, accredited veterinarians are not required to 
complete any additional education to remain accredited. However, 
several potential problems have led us to believe that a renewal system 
for veterinary accreditation is necessary.
    First, accredited veterinarians need to be aware of the most up-to-
date information regarding foreign animal diseases and the risks 
associated with them. The diversity of regions from which animals and 
animal products are exported means that the international animal 
disease profile, including emerging diseases that may be relevant to 
accredited veterinary practice within the United States, are 
continually changing. The import and export requirements that are 
placed on the trade of animals and animal products by countries also 
change frequently, and any deficiencies in knowledge of these 
requirements on the part of accredited veterinarians could pose a risk. 
Because of the potential adverse impact for U.S. entities posed by 
foreign animal diseases and emerging diseases, which includes the loss 
of significant export markets due to the presence of a foreign animal 
disease or an emerging disease in the United States, it is imperative 
that our accredited veterinarians possess the latest knowledge on 
topics relevant to foreign animal disease prevention and control.
    In addition, duties performed by accredited veterinarians in the 
United States are typically performed by government-employed 
veterinarians in other countries. Some U.S. trading partners have 
expressed concern regarding the fact that our veterinary accreditation 
program does not require supplemental training. The additional training 
associated with renewal of accreditation would, we believe, increase 
the rigor of the program and thus address this concern.
    Renewing accredited status would also formally indicate that the 
accredited veterinarian intends to remain active as an accredited 
veterinarian for an additional 3 years and ensures that the renewing

[[Page 31113]]

veterinarian will have completed the requisite training units necessary 
to maintain his or her category accreditation. By renewing, the 
veterinarian would affirm his or her continued willingness and 
availability to, if called upon, perform official accredited duties. In 
addition, periodic renewal would also provide an effective means for 
APHIS to update accredited veterinarian records, thus maximizing the 
accuracy of our database of accredited veterinarians and APHIS' ability 
to efficiently run the NVAP. This would be particularly important in 
the event of an outbreak of a fast-moving animal disease such as exotic 
Newcastle disease, for which accredited veterinarians would need to be 
contacted and mobilized as quickly as possible.
    The renewal provisions we are proposing would require the 
following:
     Accredited veterinarians who wish to continue 
participating in the NVAP would have to renew their accreditation every 
3 years by completing the Application for Renewal of Veterinary 
Accreditation form, Form 1-36C, and submitting it to APHIS. (We would 
require that renewal forms be submitted to APHIS rather than to the 
Veterinarian-in-Charge because, as described above, a veterinarian may 
be accredited in several States; requiring submission to APHIS ensures 
that accredited veterinarians will only have to submit one renewal 
form.)
     Accredited veterinarians who wish to renew their 
accreditation under Category I would have to complete four supplemental 
training units approved by APHIS by the end of their 3-year tenure as 
an accredited veterinarian. Accredited veterinarians who wish to renew 
their accreditation under Category II would have to complete nine 
supplemental training units approved by APHIS by the end of their 3-
year tenure as an accredited veterinarian. The majority of the 
supplemental training units would be delivered through the World Wide 
Web. (APHIS would also make the training available by mail for those 
who lack Internet access. We also anticipate approving some classroom 
training conducted at the State level, which could then be used to 
fulfill part of the renewal requirement.) The content of the training 
units would be regularly updated and revised to ensure that accredited 
veterinarians remain informed about current domestic and international 
animal disease problems and foreign trade requirements.
     Accredited veterinarians who do not complete the required 
training within 3 years would have their accredited status expire. 
Veterinarians whose accreditation status has expired would not be 
allowed to perform accredited duties until they receive notification of 
their reinstatement from APHIS. Veterinarians who perform duties that 
only accredited veterinarians are authorized to perform while their 
accredited status has expired would be subject to such criminal and 
civil penalties as are provided by the Animal Health Protection Act (7 
U.S.C. 8301-8317) or other applicable Federal statutes or regulations. 
To be reinstated, the veterinarian would need to complete the necessary 
supplemental training units for the appropriate category and submit the 
Application for Veterinary Accreditation Renewal form to APHIS.
     A veterinarian who allows his or her accredited status to 
expire would have to have completed the required number of supplemental 
training units within 3 years of his or her application for renewal in 
order to be approved for renewal. Supplemental training units completed 
since the veterinarian's last renewal but more than 3 years before the 
veterinarian's application for renewal would not count towards his or 
her training requirement. This requirement would ensure that a 
veterinarian whose accredited status had expired prior to his or her 
application for renewal has received current training.
    Because the required training program would be administered by 
APHIS, we would have a record of completion of training units for every 
accredited veterinarian. This record would be used to review 
applications for renewal.
    As noted earlier, the veterinary accreditation regulations 
currently do not contain renewal provisions of any kind. In proposed 
Sec.  161.3(d), we would provide that currently accredited 
veterinarians may continue to perform accredited duties between the 
effective date of the final rule following this proposal and the date 
of their first renewal. APHIS would contact currently accredited 
veterinarians, by postal mail, fax, or e-mail, to notify them that they 
must elect to participate in the NVAP as Category I or Category II 
veterinarians. Veterinarians would not be required to complete any 
additional training to continue their participation in the NVAP, but 
they would be required to notify APHIS that they elect to participate 
within 3 months of this notification; otherwise, their accreditation 
would expire. After APHIS receives notice from a currently accredited 
veterinarian that he or she elects to continue to participate in the 
program as a Category I or Category II veterinarian, APHIS would notify 
the veterinarian of his or her initial renewal date. The accredited 
veterinarian would then have to complete all the training requirements 
for renewal by the initial renewal date.
    We would contact currently accredited veterinarians over a period 
of time to determine whether they wish to continue participating in the 
NVAP. We anticipate that we would issue three batches of notifications, 
approximately one year apart, to three equal-sized groups of currently 
accredited veterinarians; the first batch of notifications would be 
issued soon after the effective date of a final rule following this 
proposal. We are requesting comments and suggestions from the public on 
approaches to dividing currently accredited veterinarians into groups 
for the initial notification and renewal process.
    We acknowledge that spreading the notifications out over a period 
of time would result in some veterinarians not having to fulfill the 
training requirements for renewal of accreditation for 5 years after 
the effective date of a final rule following this proposal. Ideally, we 
would be able to process renewals and provide training for all 
currently accredited veterinarians within 3 years of the effective date 
of such a final rule. However, there are about 66,000 veterinarians who 
are accredited under the current regulations. Setting the initial 
renewal dates for all these veterinarians at 3 years after the 
effective date of the final rule following this proposal would result 
in an unmanageable load on the information technology infrastructure 
used to provide renewal training and process the renewals. Such a 
renewal plan would also not give us time to find out how to contact 
accredited veterinarians for whom we lack current contact information 
and determine whether they wish to continue to participate in the NVAP 
as Category I or Category II veterinarians. By sending out the election 
forms and setting initial renewal dates for currently accredited 
veterinarians across a period of time, we would ensure that the renewal 
process functions as smoothly as possible for currently accredited 
veterinarians.
    After the initial renewal date, currently accredited veterinarians 
would have to renew their accreditation every 3 years, in accordance 
with the previously described provisions of this proposal.

Accreditation Specializations

    The regulations currently allow accredited veterinarians to perform 
all types of accreditation activities on all

[[Page 31114]]

species. Certain APHIS disease programs have additional training 
requirements that accredited veterinarians must fulfill in order to 
perform certain activities, because performing these activities 
requires specialized technical knowledge. These training programs are 
known as accreditation specialization programs. Currently, APHIS is 
developing accreditation specialization programs for herd certification 
in the trichinae program for swine and for testing in the tuberculosis 
program for cervidae and in the scrapie program for ovines. When such 
programs are established, the NVAP would document which accredited 
veterinarians have earned accreditation specializations and, if renewal 
requirements exist, when renewal is due. However, the NVAP regulations 
presently do not explicitly provide requirements for accreditation 
specializations.
    Therefore, we are proposing to add a new section in Sec.  161.5 
with the heading ``Accreditation specializations,'' which would provide 
general requirements for the voluntary qualification of accredited 
veterinarians in areas of special interest. Participants in these 
accreditation specialization programs would be qualified in a 
particular area or specialty. Accreditation specializations would be 
developed by APHIS as needed to help protect U.S. agriculture, decrease 
the risk of the introduction and spread of animal disease, and increase 
the health and welfare of U.S. animals and animal products. In addition 
to those mentioned above, APHIS may consider developing accreditation 
specializations for topics like aquaculture and emergency management.
    An accreditation specialization recognized by the Administrator 
would be granted to a veterinarian accredited under Category II upon 
completion of an additional orientation or training program approved by 
APHIS that focuses on the specific area of specialization for which the 
veterinarian is seeking accreditation specialization. (Veterinarians 
accredited under Category I would not be eligible to earn accreditation 
specializations.) In addition to Category II training, qualification 
for an accredited specialization would include additional specialized 
training, which may include periodic training updates. For certain 
accreditation specializations, the cost of orientation or training may 
be borne by the accredited veterinarian. An accredited veterinarian 
granted an accreditation specialization would be referred to as a 
qualified accredited veterinarian, or QAV. A QAV would be authorized to 
perform those accredited duties related to the specialization he or she 
has earned; Category II accredited veterinarians not granted accredited 
specializations would not be permitted to perform the specified 
accredited duties related to that particular specialization.
    If a veterinarian is qualified for an accreditation specialization 
but allows his or her Category II accreditation to expire, the 
veterinarian's accreditation specialization would expire as well, and 
the QAV would have to become qualified for the accreditation 
specialization again in accordance with the proposed requirements. 
However, depending on the requirements of the accreditation 
specialization, a QAV may not be required to complete any training 
other than that required to renew the Category II accreditation in 
order to maintain his or her accreditation specialization. As mentioned 
previously, APHIS would require training updates as needed in order to 
maintain the accreditation specialization, but the required training 
updates would vary depending on the needs of the disease program for 
which the accreditation specialization was required.

Suspension or Revocation of Veterinary Accreditation

    The regulations in Sec.  161.4 provide for the suspension or 
revocation of veterinary accreditation as well as civil and criminal 
penalties. We are proposing to move current Sec.  161.4 into a new 
section Sec.  161.6, as shown in the derivation table above. In 
addition, we are proposing to move paragraphs (b) and (c) of Sec.  
161.2 into proposed Sec.  161.6. Those paragraphs deal with 
reaccreditation after accreditation has been revoked and reinstatement 
of accreditation after suspension, respectively, and we believe it 
would be better to have all the information relating to these subjects 
in a separate section. To accommodate these changes, we would revise 
the current section heading of Sec.  161.4 in proposed Sec.  161.6 to 
read ``Suspension or revocation of veterinary accreditation and 
reaccreditation; criminal and civil penalties.''
    We are proposing to make some changes to the current language in 
Sec.  161.4(a) as part of moving it to Sec.  161.6(a). The regulations 
currently state that the Administrator is authorized to suspend for a 
given period of time, or to revoke, the accreditation of a veterinarian 
when he or she determines that the accredited veterinarian has not 
complied with the ``Standards for Accredited Veterinarian Duties'' as 
set forth in Sec.  161.3. We would update this citation to refer to 
Sec.  161.4, which is where we are proposing to move those standards. 
We would further add that the Administrator is authorized to suspend or 
revoke accreditation if a veterinarian does not comply with the 
regulations in 9 CFR part I, subchapter J, or is otherwise found to be 
unfit to be accredited. This change would expand the circumstances for 
which we can suspend or revoke accreditation.
    In addition, the regulations currently do not explicitly indicate 
that accredited veterinarians may not perform accredited duties while 
their accredited status has been suspended or revoked. We would add a 
sentence to the end of paragraph (a) to read as follows: 
``Veterinarians who perform duties that only accredited veterinarians 
are authorized to perform while their accredited status is suspended or 
revoked will be subject to such criminal and civil penalties as are 
provided by the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301-8317) or 
other applicable Federal statutes.'' This sentence would enhance the 
integrity and clarity of the regulations. We would further indicate 
that performing accredited duties while accreditation status is 
suspended or revoked would be considered grounds for the Administrator 
to suspend accreditation, revoke accreditation, or deny application for 
reaccreditation as circumstances warrant.
    We would also add a sentence indicating that a veterinarian whose 
accredited status has been suspended or revoked may request a hearing 
under Sec.  162.13 to challenge the Administrator's decision. Such 
veterinarians have always had the option to request a hearing under 
Sec.  162.13; we believe that explicitly indicating that the option is 
available would improve clarity of the regulations and the process 
itself.
    Finally, Sec.  161.4(a) currently indicates that the Administrator 
may issue a written notice of warning to an accredited veterinarian 
when the Administrator determines a notice of warning will be adequate 
to attain compliance with the standards for accredited veterinarians. 
As part of moving this paragraph to proposed Sec.  161.6, we would move 
this statement to a new paragraph (g) at the end of the section. 
Because the rest of proposed Sec.  161.6 only discusses suspension and 
revocation of accredited status, it could be confusing to mention 
written notices of warning in the first paragraph of the section.
    We are also proposing to change the current language in Sec.  
161.2(b) as part of

[[Page 31115]]

moving it to Sec.  161.6(c). Paragraph Sec.  161.2(b) describes the 
process by which a veterinarian whose accreditation has been revoked 
may apply for reaccreditation. The introductory text in Sec.  161.2(b) 
currently states that a veterinarian whose accreditation has been 
revoked may apply for reaccreditation when the revocation has been in 
effect for 2 years. We would add a provision stating that the 
revocation order may specify that the veterinarian whose accreditation 
has been revoked may not submit an application for reaccreditation 
until the revocation has been in effect for a specific period of time 
longer than 2 years. For some veterinarians whose accreditation is 
revoked, it may be appropriate to specify a period longer than 2 years 
until they can apply for reaccreditation, depending on the 
circumstances that led us to revoke accreditation.
    Paragraph Sec.  161.2(b)(2)(iii)(A) states that, when judging the 
professional integrity and reputation of the applicant for 
reaccreditation, the Administrator shall consider any criminal 
conviction records adversely reflecting on the honesty or integrity of 
the applicant with regard to the performance or nonperformance of 
veterinary medical duties. As part of moving this paragraph to Sec.  
161.6(c)(2)(iii)(A), we are proposing to revise the paragraph to state 
that the Administrator would consider any criminal conviction records 
indicating that the applicant may lack the honesty, integrity, and 
reliability to appropriately and effectively perform accredited duties 
and to uphold the integrity of the NVAP. We believe it is important for 
the Administrator to be able to consider any criminal records relating 
to the honesty, integrity, and reliability of a veterinarian applying 
for reaccreditation as they relate to performing accredited duties and 
upholding the integrity of the NVAP. We would also add honesty and 
reliability as criteria to be evaluated in proposed Sec.  
161.6(b)(2)(iii)(C), which discusses judicial determinations in civil 
litigation, and in proposed Sec.  161.6(b)(2)(iii)(D), which allows the 
Administrator to consider any other relevant evidence.
    Paragraph Sec.  161.2(b) does not presently explain what happens 
after the Administrator reaches a decision on whether to reaccredit a 
veterinarian whose accreditation has been revoked. In proposed Sec.  
161.6(c), we would add two new paragraphs to explicitly state the 
possible outcomes. Proposed paragraph (c)(3)(i) would state that if the 
Administrator reaccredits a veterinarian under paragraph (c)(2), the 
veterinarian may begin performing accredited duties again upon receipt 
of notification from the Administrator that he or she is eligible to do 
so. Proposed paragraph (c)(3)(ii) would state that if the Administrator 
determines that an application for reaccreditation should be denied, 
the veterinarian may apply for reaccreditation in accordance with 
proposed Sec.  161.6(c) not less than 2 years after the Administrator 
last denied an application by the veterinarian for reinstatement, 
unless the Administrator's decision specifies that the veterinarian 
whose accreditation has been revoked may not reapply for 
reaccreditation until a specific period of time longer than 2 years has 
passed. We are also proposing to amend the introductory text of 
proposed paragraph (c)(2) to indicate that the Administrator may either 
approve or deny an application for reaccreditation.

Activities Performed by Non-Accredited Veterinarians

    We are proposing to add a new section 161.7 that would describe the 
accredited duties that may be performed by veterinarians who are not 
federally accredited.
     Full-time Federal (including military) and State employed 
veterinarians would be authorized to perform Category II accredited 
duties, pursuant to delegation of authority by the Administrator or 
cooperative agreements, without specific accreditation under the 
provisions of the regulations. However, in order to perform duties for 
which an accreditation specialization is required, they would need to 
be qualified under proposed Sec.  161.5.
     Except for Full-time Federal (including military) and 
State employed veterinarians, however, veterinarians who are not 
federally accredited and who attempt to perform accredited duties would 
be subject to such criminal and civil penalties as are provided by the 
Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301-8317) or other applicable 
Federal statutes or regulations.
    Currently, Federal (including military) and State veterinarians are 
authorized to perform accredited duties pursuant to delegation of 
authority by the Administrator without specific accreditation under the 
provisions of the regulations. This authorization is contained in a 
footnote to the definition of accredited veterinarian in Sec.  160.1. 
We would remove this footnote. We believe that the placement of the 
authorization for Federal (including military) and State veterinarians 
to perform Category II accredited duties under certain conditions in 
the body of the regulations would be more appropriate.
    The current regulations do not explicitly prohibit veterinarians 
who are not accredited from performing accredited duties. Such a 
prohibition is fundamental to the integrity of the NVAP. Making such a 
prohibition explicit in the regulations is essential to ensure that 
only properly accredited veterinarians perform accredited duties and to 
make the NVAP more robust.
    We would also include a provision that performing accredited duties 
without having been accredited would be considered grounds for the 
Administrator to deny an application for accreditation. This provision 
is also fundamental to the integrity of the NVAP, and we believe the 
regulations should make explicit that such information will be taken 
into account when evaluating applications for reaccreditation.

Integrity of Accreditation Program as Reason for Summary Suspension

    The regulations in Sec.  162.10 set out, in part, the circumstances 
under which the Administrator may summarily suspend the accreditation 
of veterinarians. Currently, that section states that the Administrator 
may take such action if he or she deems it necessary in order to 
prevent the introduction into the United States or the spread from one 
State to another of a contagious, infectious, or communicable disease 
of animals or to ensure that animals intended or offered for export to 
foreign countries are free from disease. We are proposing to amend 
Sec.  162.10 to provide that the Administrator may also consider the 
integrity of the NVAP in determining whether to impose a summary 
suspension. We would include this additional consideration because any 
threat to the integrity of the NVAP would jeopardize the activities of 
the National Animal Health Program. In addition, as mentioned above, 
the credibility of the United States as an international trading 
partner depends on the integrity of our accreditation program, as the 
United States uses private veterinarians accredited by APHIS rather 
than Federal or State veterinarians to accomplish many important and 
significant tasks; any threat to the integrity of the NVAP could have 
serious consequences including, for example, the loss of foreign 
markets for animals and animal products. We would also make minor edits 
to this paragraph to indicate that the type of suspension it refers to 
is summary suspension and to update the language.
    Finally, we are proposing to amend Sec.  162.12, which addresses 
informal conferences held regarding revocation or suspension of 
accreditation, by

[[Page 31116]]

reordering paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of that section. Specifically, 
we would redesignate paragraph (b) as paragraph (c), paragraph (c) as 
paragraph (d), and paragraph (d) as paragraph (b). The text of those 
paragraphs would not change. We believe that reordering those three 
paragraphs would increase the clarity of the regulations in Sec.  
162.12 by presenting the information in a more logical order.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. 
The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of 
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the 
Office of Management and Budget.
    Authority for the Secretary of Agriculture to create a veterinary 
accreditation program is provided in the Animal Health Protection Act 
(7 U.S.C. 8309). Participation by private veterinarians in the NVAP is 
voluntary. However, accredited veterinarians participating in the NVAP 
must carry out their duties in compliance with the regulations in 9 CFR 
part 161 and in compliance with all other regulations issued under the 
Animal Health Protection Act.
    APHIS is proposing to establish two accreditation categories 
(Category I and Category II) in place of the current single category, 
to add requirements for supplemental training and renewal of 
accreditation every 3 years, and to provide for accreditation 
specializations.
    Category I accreditation would require the completion of four 
supplemental training units in order to renew accreditation and would 
allow the veterinarians who choose it to perform accredited duties only 
for companion animals (i.e., animals that are not food animals, horses, 
or livestock). Category II accreditation, however, would require the 
completion of five supplemental training units prior to accreditation 
and the completion of nine supplemental training units every 3 years in 
order to renew accreditation; veterinarians who select it would be able 
to perform the full spectrum of accredited duties that do not require 
an accreditation specialization. For both categories, the majority of 
the supplemental training would be delivered through the World Wide 
Web, with no charge to the participating veterinarians. The Internet-
based training would eliminate the need for additional costs for travel 
and accommodations for these veterinarians taking the training. We also 
anticipate approving some classroom training conducted at the State 
level, which could then be used to fulfill part of the renewal 
requirement. Thus, there would be no additional costs associated with 
the new aspects of the NVAP apart from the time spent taking the 
training.
    The accreditation specialization component that APHIS is proposing 
for the NVAP could involve some cost to the accredited veterinarians 
who choose to voluntarily participate in these specializations.
    The primary cost of changes to the program would be the new 
training requirements, and these costs would be borne primarily by 
APHIS. If an accredited veterinarian wanted to be qualified in an 
accreditation specialization, some costs may be borne by the accredited 
veterinarian.

Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies consider the 
economic effects of their rules on small entities. According to the 
Small Business Administration's (SBA's) Office of Advocacy, regulations 
create economic disparities based on size when they have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This action would change a continuing program. Entities that would 
be affected as a result of the proposed changes in the regulations 
would be the participating veterinarians who enter into the new NVAP 
program. Under the North American Industrial Classification System 
(NAICS), Veterinary Services (NAICS 541940) is included under the 
Professional, Scientific and Technical Services subsector.
    The veterinary services industry comprises establishments of 
licensed veterinary practitioners primarily engaged in the practice of 
veterinary medicine, dentistry, or surgery for animals (i.e., animal 
hospitals, veterinary clinics, and veterinarians' offices); and 
establishments primarily engaged in providing testing services for 
licensed veterinary practitioners (i.e., veterinary testing 
laboratories). Veterinary services entities that have less than $5 
million in annual revenues are considered small according to the SBA's 
standards.
    The number of U.S. veterinary establishments was reported to be 
24,510 in 2000; they employed 219,868 people with an annual payroll of 
$4.82 billion (2000 County Business Patterns, NAICS, U.S. Economic 
Census 2000).
    We do not know how many of these establishments are considered 
small entities under the SBA's standards. However, the proposed changes 
are not expected to have any significant economic effect on any of 
these 24,510 establishments whether they are small or large, since the 
vast majority of program costs will be borne by the Agency.
    Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Executive Order 12372

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

Executive Order 12988

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

Paperwork Reduction Act

    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-
2006-0093. Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) Docket No. 
APHIS-2006-0093, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, 
Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238, 
and (2) Clearance Officer, OCIO, USDA, room 404-W, 14th Street and 
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. A comment to OMB is best 
assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of 
publication of this proposed rule.
    This proposed rule would amend the regulations to establish two 
accreditation categories in place of the current single category, to 
require accredited veterinarians to complete supplemental training 
units, to require accredited veterinarians to receive written approval 
from APHIS prior to performing accredited duties in a

[[Page 31117]]

different State, and to require renewal of accreditation every 3 years. 
These proposed changes would increase the level of training and skill 
of accredited veterinarians in the areas of disease surveillance, 
disease prevention, and preparedness for animal health emergencies in 
the United States.
    Enhancing the NVAP in this way will necessitate revisions to the 
Application for Veterinary Accreditation, as well as the introduction 
of two additional forms: An Application to Perform Accredited Duties in 
Another State, and an Application for Renewal of Accreditation.
    We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected 
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and 
recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us:
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 
proposed information collection, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who 
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic 
submission of responses).
    Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of 
information is estimated to average 30 minutes per response.
    Respondents: Accredited veterinarians and veterinarians applying 
for accredited status.
    Estimated annual number of respondents: 30,000.
    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.
    Estimated annual number of responses: 30,000.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 15,000 hours. (Due to 
averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of 
the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per 
response.)
    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Mrs. 
Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 
734-7477.

Government Paperwork Elimination Act Compliance

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