Animal Welfare; Importation of Live Dogs, 48653-48660 [2014-19515]
Download as PDF
48653
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 79, No. 159
Monday, August 18, 2014
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
9 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. APHIS–2009–0053]
RIN 0579–AD23
Animal Welfare; Importation of Live
Dogs
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are amending the
regulations to implement an amendment
to the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 added a new section to the AWA
to restrict the importation of certain live
dogs. Consistent with this amendment,
this rule prohibits the importation of
dogs, with limited exceptions, from any
part of the world into the continental
United States or Hawaii for purposes of
resale, research, or veterinary treatment,
unless the dogs are in good health, have
received all necessary vaccinations, and
are at least 6 months of age. This action
is necessary to implement the
amendment to the AWA and will help
to ensure the welfare of imported dogs.
DATES: Effective date: November 17,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Gerald Rushin, Veterinary Medical
Officer, Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River
Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737–
1236; (301) 851–3740.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
Background
Under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA
or the Act, 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.), the
Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to
promulgate standards and other
requirements governing the humane
handling, care, treatment, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
transportation of certain animals by
dealers, research facilities, exhibitors,
operators of auction sales, and carriers
and intermediate handlers. The
Secretary has delegated responsibility
for administering the AWA to the
Administrator of U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS).
Within APHIS, the responsibility for
administering the AWA has been
delegated to the Deputy Administrator
for Animal Care (AC). Regulations and
standards are established under the
AWA and are contained in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) in 9 CFR
parts 1, 2, and 3 (referred to below as
the regulations). Part 2 provides
administrative requirements and sets
forth institutional responsibilities for
regulated parties.
The Food, Conservation, and Energy
Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–246, signed
into law on June 18, 2008) added a new
section 18 to the Animal Welfare Act (7
U.S.C. 2148) to restrict the importation
of certain live dogs. As amended, the
AWA now prohibits the importation of
dogs into the United States for resale
purposes, unless the Secretary
determines that the dogs are in good
health, have received all necessary
vaccinations, and are at least 6 months
of age. Section 18 of the AWA includes
a scoping definition for the term
‘‘resale.’’ When read in context of the
requirements of that section, the term
‘‘resale’’ includes, but is not limited to,
any transfer of ownership or control of
imported dogs to another person, for
more than de minimis consideration.
The AWA further provides that the
Secretary, by regulation, must provide
an exception to these requirements in
any case in which a dog is imported for
research purposes or veterinary
treatment. The AWA also provides an
exception to the at least 6-month age
requirement for dogs that are lawfully
imported into Hawaii from the British
Isles, Australia, Guam, or New Zealand
in compliance with the applicable
regulations of Hawaii, provided the dogs
are not transported out of Hawaii for
purposes of resale at less than 6 months
of age.
The AWA provides that any importer
who fails to comply with these
provisions is subject to penalties under
7 U.S.C. 2149 and must provide for the
care (including appropriate veterinary
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
care), forfeiture, and adoption of each
applicable dog, at his or her expense.
On September 1, 2011, we published
in the Federal Register (76 FR 54392–
54397, Docket No. APHIS–2009–0053) a
proposed rule 1 to add requirements
concerning the importation of certain
live dogs as required by the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.
We proposed, with limited
exceptions, to prohibit the importation
of any dog for resale, veterinary
treatment, or research 2 unless the dog is
in good health; has received
vaccinations for rabies and distemper,
hepatitis, leptospirosis, parvovirus, and
parainfluenza virus (DHLPP); and is at
least 6 months of age. We proposed to
require that the dog be accompanied by
an import permit issued by APHIS and
a health certificate and rabies
vaccination certificate issued by a
veterinarian with a valid license to
practice veterinary medicine in the
country of export. We proposed to allow
exceptions to health, vaccination, and
age requirements for dogs imported for
veterinary treatment that cannot be
obtained in the exporting country and
for dogs imported for use in research,
tests, or experiments if the requirement
would interfere with a research protocol
approved by the research facility’s
Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee (IACUC). Additionally, we
proposed that dogs less than 6 months
old could be lawfully imported into
Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia,
Guam, or New Zealand as long as the
dog was not transported from Hawaii for
resale purposes at less than 6 months of
age.
We solicited comments for 60 days
ending October 31, 2011. We received a
total of 74,218 comments. These
included 382 unique comments from
animal welfare associations, private
breeders, veterinarians, foreign
exporters, domestic importers, and other
individuals. Two animal welfare
associations mailed an additional
73,836 comments that had been
1 To view the proposed rule and the comments
we received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2009-0053.
2 Under the AWA, as amended, dogs imported for
resale include dogs imported for the purpose of
transferring ownership or control to a research
facility or to a veterinarian for veterinary treatment.
However, because research and veterinary treatment
are not commonly considered resale purposes, we
separately identify each of these activities as
context requires.
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
48654
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
submitted directly to them. Issues raised
by the commenters are discussed by
topic below.
Applicability of the Rule
Several commenters asked that we
define the term ‘‘resale’’ in the
regulations to clarify which imports are
subject to the new restrictions regarding
dogs imported for resale.
As used in section 18 of the AWA, the
term ‘‘dogs imported for resale’’
includes dogs imported for sale in
wholesale channels, at retail, and for
adoption after arrival in the United
States, as well as dogs imported for
other purposes involving transfer of
ownership or control of the dog to
another person for more than de
minimis consideration after the dog’s
arrival in the United States. With
limited exceptions for dogs lawfully
imported into Hawaii, and for dogs
imported for veterinary treatment or
research, the restrictions regarding
health, vaccinations, and age apply to
all such imported dogs.
Many of the comments submitted
through an animal welfare association
and some others supported the
proposed rule with an exception for
imports for rescue purposes. They said
the rule should not prevent puppies
rescued from disasters, neglect, or
foreign puppy mills in foreign countries
from being imported into the United
States for adoption. Some said that the
adoption fee charged by many nonprofit
rescue groups should be viewed as de
minimis consideration under the rule. A
number of other commenters stated that
the rule should apply to dogs imported
as ‘‘rescues’’ as these dogs are often in
poor health and present a risk of
transmitting diseases to dogs in the
United States.
The AWA does not provide for
exceptions to age, vaccination, or health
requirements for dogs rescued in foreign
countries and brought into the United
States for subsequent placement. We
consider de minimis to have the
standard dictionary meaning, which,
according to Merriam-Webster, is
‘‘lacking significance or importance; so
minor as to merit disregard.’’ Similarly,
we consider ‘‘consideration’’ to have the
standard dictionary meaning, which is
defined by Merriam-Webster as ‘‘the
inducement to a contract or other legal
transaction; specifically: An act or
forbearance or the promise thereof done
or given by one party in return for the
act or promise of another.’’ While we
recognize that adoption fees charged by
some nonprofits may not recover all of
the costs incurred by the organization to
rescue and care for the dog prior to
adoption, we do not consider the fee to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
be de minimis consideration. The rule
does not, therefore, provide a specific
exception for rescue dogs.
Many commenters were concerned
that this rule would prohibit the
importation of dogs less than 6 months
of age for personal use, including as
pets, for sport, for shows or
competitions, or for breeding. One
commenter said the proposal did not
take into account dogs imported for
semen collection. A number of other
commenters expressed concern that the
rule would prohibit them from
importing puppies into training
programs for working dogs, including
dogs to be used as service dogs, for
search and rescue, or for police work.
This rule does not apply when there
is no transfer of ownership or control of
a dog to another person for more than
de minimis consideration after the dog’s
importation into the United States.
Therefore, dogs imported by a person
who will use the dog as a personal pet,
for sport, for shows or competitions, or
for breeding or semen collection are not
subject to the 6-month age restriction or
any other requirements of this rule.
Additionally, we do not consider dogs
imported for training as working dogs to
be imported for purposes of resale.
Thus, the rule will not apply to puppies
imported by legitimate training
organizations for the purpose of training
the dog to be a working dog.
All dogs imported into the United
States may, however, be subject to other
laws and regulations. For example, dogs
imported from regions of the world
where screwworm is considered to exist
must meet requirements in 9 CFR part
93, § 93.600, to ensure their freedom
from screwworm, and dogs imported
from any part of the world except
Canada, Mexico, and regions of Central
America and the West Indies that are to
be used in the handling of livestock
must meet requirements in § 93.600 to
mitigate the risk of tapeworm. In
addition, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) have
requirements for importing dogs that
must be met for a dog to be cleared for
entry into the United States. These
requirements may include a rabies
vaccination certificate or a confinement
agreement if a dog is too young to
receive the rabies vaccine.
A few commenters expressed concern
about whether a dog imported for
personal use or into a working dog
training program and did not work out
in the home or program could be placed
elsewhere without violating the
regulations. Some asked whether a dog
had to be kept for any specific length of
time before it could be rehomed.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This rule does not require that such
dogs be kept for any specific length of
time before ownership or control may be
transferred, including through sale.
APHIS understands that dogs imported
in good faith for personal use or special
training programs sometimes do not
meet the needs for which they were
imported and have to be placed
elsewhere. We will still consider the
dogs to have been imported for personal
use or training. However, we expect
such transfers of ownership or control,
particularly relatively close to the time
of importation, will be infrequent. If we
have reason to believe that dogs were
imported into the continental United
States or Hawaii for resale without
import permits or without meeting other
requirements of the regulations, we may
initiate an investigation to ascertain the
purpose of the importation and whether
there may have been a violation of the
regulations.
A few commenters asked if this rule
applies to U.S. territories. They
expressed concern that an importer
could bring dogs into a U.S. territory for
subsequent resale elsewhere in the
United States. One commenter asked
whether the rule will affect persons in
Puerto Rico who sell puppies to the U.S.
mainland.
This rule applies to dogs imported
into the continental United States and
Hawaii from any other location,
including Puerto Rico and any of the
other U.S. territories (American Samoa,
the Federated States of Micronesia,
Guam, the Midway Islands, the
Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic
of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands).
Thus, while an importer may bring a
dog into a U.S. territory for resale,
research, or veterinary treatment
without the dog meeting the
requirements of this rule, dogs
originating in a foreign country or any
U.S. territory may not be shipped from
a U.S. territory into the continental
United States or Hawaii for any of those
purposes except as provided in this
rule. Any person intending to import
such a dog into the continental United
States or Hawaii, or his or her agent,
must present the required import permit
and any applicable certifications and
veterinary treatment agreement required
by this rule to the collector of customs
at the port of first arrival.
One commenter asked whether the
regulations apply to dogs labeled ‘‘wild
animal.’’
The AWA regulations in 9 CFR part
1 define ‘‘dog’’ to mean any dog of the
species Canis familiaris (C. familiaris)
or any dog-hybrid cross. Therefore, this
rule applies to any dog of the species C.
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
familiaris or any dog-hybrid cross. Any
such dog that is imported for purposes
of resale, research, or veterinary
treatment, even if labeled ‘‘wild
animal,’’ will be subject to the
regulations.
Some commenters stated that there
should be no exceptions to the 6-month
age requirement and that it should be
applicable to all imported dogs.
Section 18 of the AWA applies only
to live dogs imported for resale,
veterinary treatment, or research. It
specifically provides an exception to the
age requirement for certain dogs legally
imported into Hawaii, provided the
dogs are not transported from Hawaii for
resale purposes at less than 6 months of
age. It also requires us to provide
exceptions to health, vaccination, and
age requirements for dogs imported for
research purposes or veterinary
treatment.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Identification of Dogs
A few commenters suggested that we
require microchips or tattoos to ensure
that dogs imported under permit are the
same ones listed on the import permit.
We proposed to require that dogs
imported for resale, veterinary
treatment, or research be identified on
permit applications, health certificates,
and rabies vaccination certificates by
breed, sex, age, color, markings, and
other identifying information. Other
identifying information would include
microchip numbers or tattoos if a dog
has them, but the rule does not require
them. We believe this information is
sufficient to verify the identity of dogs
presented for importation. This is the
same information that CDC requires on
rabies vaccination certificates for
imported dogs.
One commenter recommended that
we require all imported dogs to be
microchipped so that we would be able
to track the dogs and see where they end
up.
APHIS believes that such a
requirement is beyond the intent of the
AWA, as amended.
Intended Use of Imported Dogs
Some commenters questioned how
officials at a port of entry would
determine whether imported dogs were
intended for resale or personal use. A
few expressed concern that dogs
imported for personal use, and thus
arriving without a permit, might be
seized at the port of entry.
Dogs imported for personal use,
without transfer of ownership or control
after arrival in the United States, are not
subject to this rule and will not be
refused entry or seized because they
arrive without a permit. If APHIS has
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
reason to believe that a person is
importing dogs for resale, research, or
veterinary treatment without meeting
the requirements of this rule, we may
initiate an investigation and take
appropriate action based on the results
of that investigation.
Several commenters expressed
concern that entities importing dogs less
than 6 months of age for resale could
circumvent the new requirements by not
providing an import permit and
claiming the dogs are for personal use.
Commenters suggested a variety of
actions to prevent such occurrences,
including requiring that dogs be issued
identification numbers, which would
have to be shown on import permits;
requiring the use of transit permits for
all imported dogs that would include a
statement of purpose of the import;
requiring importers to provide a sworn
statement that dogs imported without a
permit are not for resale; limiting the
number of imported dogs of less than 6
months of age that a person may import
a year for personal use; and establishing
an import notification system that
would allow APHIS to notify authorities
at the ports of entry that a dog import
is expected and having the import
documents sent to APHIS upon arrival
for verification.
APHIS appreciates the suggestions
from commenters on ways to help
prevent fraud, and we have considered
them all. Requiring dogs imported for
resale to have numerical identification
and to include the numbers on the
permit would not prevent an importer
from fraudulently claiming a dog is
imported for his or her personal use.
Importers wishing to circumvent this
rule could also falsify statements of
purpose. Similarly, if we limited the
number of dogs that could be imported
for personal use, either per shipment or
per year, importers wishing to
circumvent this rule could get around
these restrictions, too, by breaking up
shipments or importing under different
names. Regarding port of entry
notifications and APHIS verification of
import documents, the rule already
requires importers or their agents to
present the import permit and other
required documents for dogs covered by
this rule to the collector of customs at
the port of first arrival in the continental
United States or Hawaii. Inspectors with
U.S. Customs and Border Protection will
review the paperwork to ensure the
shipment is in compliance with the
regulations; there would be no added
benefit in sending the paperwork to
APHIS for verification. Advance
notifications would only provide earlier
notice of shipments of dogs already
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48655
identified as being imported for resale,
research, or veterinary treatment.
We are developing guidance for port
inspectors to use to identify potentially
fraudulent imports and report them to
APHIS. If it appears that a person is
importing dogs for resale, research, or
veterinary treatment without meeting
the requirements of this rule, we may
initiate an investigation and take
appropriate action based on the results
of that investigation.
Import Permits
Some commenters suggested that the
requirement for an import permit would
increase the cost of importation for the
importer and exporter as a result of the
additional time needed to receive an
import permit. The commenters also
said that obtaining an import permit
could delay a sick dog from receiving
medical attention.
We expect that any time-related costs
associated with obtaining an import
permit will be minimal. There is no
charge for the permit itself.
Permit applications must include
basic information that should be readily
available to the importer: The name and
address of the person intending to
export the dog; the name and address of
the importer; the number of dogs to be
imported and their breed, sex, age,
color, markings, and other identifying
information; the purpose of the
importation; the port of embarkation
and mode of transportation; the port of
entry in the United States; the proposed
date of arrival in the continental United
States or Hawaii; the name and address
of the person who will take delivery of
the dogs; and, if the dogs will be used
for research, the USDA registration
number of the research facility. APHIS
anticipates that it will need 7 to 10 days
to process a permit application once it
is received. Thus, in most cases, dogs
can be shipped within 2 weeks of the
importer submitting an application for
permit. Upon request, APHIS will
attempt to expedite permit processing
for dogs requiring urgent veterinary
medical attention in the United States.
One commenter objected to the
proposed requirement that dogs be
accompanied by an original import
permit. The commenter stated that few
original documents are required at ports
of entry as systems move to electronic
documentation and that requiring a hard
copy of the import permit is
unnecessary and will only increase the
likelihood that imported dogs will be
forfeited or returned to their country of
export due to missing or erroneous
originals. Another commenter stated
that we should not require originals of
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
48656
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
any document to be presented at the
port of arrival.
Our rule requires an original health
certificate. This requirement will
prevent copies of a health certificate
from being used for multiple shipments
and thus reduce fraud. Our rule does
not require an original import permit,
and, as explained in the preamble to the
proposed rule, we will accept a copy of
the rabies vaccination certificate
required by the Public Health Service
regulations in 42 CFR 71.51.
Vaccinations
A few commenters asked that we
clarify the requirement in proposed
§ 2.151(a)(1)(iv) that dogs be vaccinated
in accordance with currently accepted
practices as cited in veterinary medicine
reference guides. They expressed
concern that there may be conflicting
consensus on vaccination requirements
and practices. One commenter provided
a list of reference guides and
encouraged us to include them in the
regulations.
We acknowledge that there are
various accepted vaccination practices
cited in veterinary medicine reference
guides used in the United States and
foreign countries. It is not our intention
to specify one or another, which is why
we worded the requirement in this way.
Rather, we will rely on the veterinarians
who are signing the health certificates to
make good decisions on behalf of the
dog’s welfare.
Several commenters stated that our
list of required vaccinations is
inconsistent with the list provided by
American Veterinary Medical
Association. They were specifically
concerned about our proposed
requirements for leptospirosis and
parainfluenza vaccination, stating that
they are unnecessary and may be
harmful. One commenter said that
leptospirosis vaccines may cause life
threatening reactions in some small
breeds of dogs.
Leptospirosis is a bacterium that can
cause liver disease, kidney failure, and
even death. While leptospirosis is less
likely to occur in urban areas of the
country, it is still a disease of concern
in many areas of the United States.
Parainfluenza, also a disease of concern
in the United States, is a highly
contagious respiratory infection that can
lead to pneumonia and even death.
Veterinarians routinely administer these
vaccinations to dogs to prevent infection
and spread of those diseases. Small
breed dogs, as well as other breeds, can
receive the leptospirosis vaccination,
which may need to be administered
under the direction and/or supervision
of a veterinarian.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
Several commenters objected to our
proposed requirement for rabies
vaccination. One commenter suggested
that additional studies be performed to
evaluate the source of rabies outbreaks
in the United States to analyze the
necessity for rabies vaccines prior to
importation. Another commenter asked
that dogs imported from rabies-free
countries be exempt from the rabies
certification requirement to decrease the
time and cost of importation for those
dogs. The commenter also expressed
concern that some States may not
recognize rabies vaccinations given in
other countries.
We consider rabies vaccination
necessary not only to ensure that
imported dogs do not have rabies, but
also to ensure that they are protected
from rabies after they arrive in the
United States. Rabies exists in the
United States, primarily in wildlife such
as raccoons, skunks, foxes, and coyotes.
It is transmissible, usually through the
bite of an infected animal, to other
mammals, including humans and
unvaccinated dogs. The rabies virus
infects the central nervous system,
ultimately causing disease in the brain
and death. For this reason, the rabies
vaccine is one of the core vaccinations
given to dogs in the United States as
part of a national rabies prevention and
control program. It should be noted that
the CDC also requires most dogs,
regardless of age or purpose of
importation, to be accompanied by
proof of rabies vaccination or a
confinement agreement if a dog is too
young to have received a rabies vaccine
prior to entry into the United States. If
a State does not accept rabies
vaccination given in a foreign country,
the importer may have several options,
including petitioning the State to accept
serologic testing of the vaccinated dog
as proof of immunological protection or
having the dog revaccinated after
consultation with his or her
veterinarian.
One commenter suggested that we
add Bordetella bronchiseptica to the list
of required vaccinations.
APHIS believes that the current
vaccination protocol provides adequate
immunity protection for the health and
well-being of dogs imported into the
United States for resale. In addition,
importers in consultation with their
veterinarians can elect to include
Bordetella or other vaccines in their
dog’s vaccination regimen before or after
import.
One commenter stated that we
overestimated the cost of vaccinations
in our economic analysis. The
commenter suggested that most
commercial breeders purchase vaccines
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
from suppliers and administer the
vaccines themselves at a cost of less
than $5 per injection.
We acknowledge that this may be the
case. Our estimates of the vaccination
costs were based on costs of
vaccinations performed at veterinary
clinics. The economic analysis did state
that breeders in the United States
typically administer the vaccinations
themselves. If the vaccination costs are
lower, the overall costs associated with
this rule will be lower.
Veterinary Inspection
Several commenters asked if dogs
imported for resale, research, or
veterinary treatment will be inspected
by a veterinarian at the port of entry to
verify the age and condition of the
animals listed on the health certificate.
Several commenters recommended
veterinary inspection upon arrival and
further recommended that importation
of the dogs be limited to certain ports of
entry where veterinary inspectors are
available and where dogs can receive
veterinary care if they arrive in poor
health.
Under this rule, dogs imported for
resale, veterinary treatment, or research
must be examined by a veterinarian
licensed in the country of export prior
to shipment to the United States.
Inspectors with U.S. Customs and
Border Protection will check shipments,
including health and vaccination
certifications for the dogs, upon their
arrival in the United States for
compliance with this rule. Our rule does
not require additional veterinary
inspection upon arrival. If officials at
the port of entry observe sick or injured
dogs in a shipment, they will notify
Animal Care, which can arrange for
appropriate veterinary care if needed.
Parasites
One commenter stated that our rule
should require proof of flea, tick, and
parasite treatment prior to importation.
In addition, the commenter
recommended that dogs found to be
infected or sick at the port of entry
should be placed in a quarantine facility
before returning to the country of origin.
While this rule does not require dogs
to be treated for parasites prior to
importation, it does require that a
veterinarian in the country of export
attest on the health certificate that the
dog is in good health, which includes
freedom from parasitic infections. Dogs
that are imported for resale purposes
and found to be infested with parasites
or to be ill upon arrival are subject to
the provisions in § 2.153 of this rule,
which include being seized and placed
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
for veterinary care at the importer’s
expense.
Exceptions for Veterinary Treatment
One commenter stated that our rule
should contain requirements for the
transportation and housing of dogs
imported for veterinary treatment,
including a determination that it would
not be harmful for a dog to travel.
Under this rule, dogs may be
imported for veterinary treatment
without meeting all of the age, health,
and vaccination requirements only if a
licensed veterinarian in the country of
export certifies that the dog is in need
of veterinary treatment that cannot be
obtained in the country of export.
Additionally, the importer must have
completed a veterinary treatment
agreement with Animal Care and
confine the dog until the conditions
specified in the agreement have been
met. Confinement entails maintaining
the dog in isolation from other animals
and from people other than those
necessary to provide for its care. If taken
from the building or other enclosure
where it is housed, the dog should be
leashed. Confinement must continue
until all terms of the veterinary
treatment agreement are met. These may
include determinations by the licensed
veterinarian in the United States that
the dog is in good health, has been
adequately vaccinated against DHLPP
and rabies, and is at least 6 months of
age.
Regarding the suggestion that we
require certification that it would not be
harmful for a dog to travel, we believe
it would be very difficult for a
veterinarian to make such a statement,
particularly for a dog in need of
veterinary treatment. Rather, we expect
that veterinarians who refer a dog to a
U.S. veterinarian for treatment will use
their professional judgment to weigh the
benefits of treatment for the dog in the
United States with the risks associated
with the dog traveling to the United
States before issuing a health certificate
for the dog.
One commenter stated that the
regulations should prohibit dogs
imported for veterinary treatment from
being sold after treatment.
As explained above, the regulations
provide exceptions to age, health, and
vaccination requirements for dogs
imported for veterinary treatment only
when veterinary treatment for that dog
cannot be obtained in the country of
export. We anticipate that relatively few
dogs will be imported into the United
States under these circumstances, as
veterinary care for most conditions
affecting dogs will be available in the
country of export and the costs for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
importing a dog into the United States
for specialized treatment are likely to be
quite high. If a dog is imported into the
United States under this rule for
veterinary care and is maintained in
confinement until all conditions of the
veterinary treatment agreement are met,
the dog may be transferred to another
person in the United States through a
sale or otherwise.
One commenter said that, as a
veterinarian working in foreign
countries, he had often referred dogs to
U.S. veterinarians for treatment. He
expressed concern that this rule could
prevent such referrals from being a
treatment option.
This rule allows exceptions to be
made to age, vaccination, and health
requirements for dogs to be imported for
veterinary treatment that is not available
to the dogs in the foreign country.
One commenter said that the
proposed rule did not take into account
dogs imported ‘‘for dentals, orthopedics,
or other procedures.’’
We consider these procedures to be
veterinary treatment.
Penalties
One commenter suggested that the
rule include notice that violators of the
rule are subject to penalties under
section 19 of the AWA (7 U.S.C. 2149).
The AWA, as amended, provides that
any importer that fails to comply with
the requirements regarding the
importation of live dogs shall be subject
to penalties under section 19 and shall
be responsible for the care (including
appropriate veterinary care), forfeiture,
and adoption of each applicable dog, at
the expense of the importer. Section
2149 provides for criminal and civil
penalties for violations of the AWA,
including civil penalties of up to
$10,000 for each violation. Any person
who violates our regulations will be
subject to these penalties. The
regulations include a citation to the
AWA in the authority citation at the
beginning of part 2. We do not believe
it is necessary to include the language
of the statute in the regulations.
Miscellaneous
One commenter suggested that the
estimate of 17,000 dogs imported
annually seems low.
This estimate of 17,000 imported dogs
is an annual average for 2005 through
2010 from the foreign trade statistics
compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau.
Since the publication of the proposed
rule, the U.S. Census Bureau has
released updated foreign trade statistics
that state that 8,634 dogs were imported
each year between 2009 and 2013. We
have revised the regulatory impact
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48657
analysis to include these updated
numbers. This data source contains all
shipments brought into the United
States with a fair market value of at least
$2,000. The CDC estimated that about
287,000 dogs were brought into the
United States in 2006. However, this
total covers all types of dogs, including
companion animals that are not
intended for resale. Because this rule
primarily covers dogs imported for
resale, we focused our cost estimates on
the import number reported by the U.S.
Census Bureau.
One commenter suggested that these
regulations would make the practice of
brokerage illegal and put people out of
business.
Brokers who import dogs will still be
allowed to do so, but they must abide
by these regulations to ensure the dogs
they are importing for resale are in good
health and meet vaccination and age
requirements. Brokers who have been
dealing exclusively or in large part in
puppies under the age of 6 months will
be affected by the rule and may have to
change their business model.
Several commenters stated that
requiring puppies to be at least 6
months of age before they can be
imported into the United States will
eliminate free commerce, eliminate jobs
in the United States, and cause an
increase in the cost of puppies for the
ultimate buyer.
Those businesses that have been
dependent on income related to
imported puppies less than 6 months of
age for resale will have to change or may
go out of business. The rule should have
very little effect on competition in the
market for dogs, however. While the
cost of imported puppies may increase
because of the minimum age
requirement, the overall effect on
competition in the United States should
be very small. Imported dogs comprise
a very small fraction of the U.S. dog
population. The upper-end estimate of
287,000 dogs entering the United States
annually (including companion animals
in addition to those intended for resale)
represents less than four-tenths of one
percent of the U.S. dog population.
Buyers who want to purchase a dog
under 6 months of age will still be able
to do so from domestic sources.
Domestic breeders and wholesalers are
likely to see increased volumes of
business, serving customers who
currently rely on foreign suppliers.
Some current importers are also
domestic breeders and will likely shift
from sales of imported puppies to sales
of puppies bred at their own domestic
facilities.
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
48658
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Nonsubstantive Change
We are making a minor editorial
change to the language in proposed
§ 2.153 to make it consistent with the
language in the AWA. Specifically, we
are removing the words ‘‘the cost of’’ in
the phrase ‘‘. . . any person intending
to import the dog shall provide for the
cost of the care . . . at his or her
expense.’’
Therefore, for the reasons given in the
proposed rule and in this document, we
are adopting the proposed rule as a final
rule, with the change discussed in this
document.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule has been determined to
be significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore,
has been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
We have prepared an economic
analysis for this rule. The economic
analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis,
as required by Executive Orders 12866
and 13563, which direct agencies to
assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation
is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, and equity). Executive Order
13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility. The
economic analysis also examines the
potential economic effects of this rule
on small entities, as required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The
economic analysis is summarized
below. Copies of the full analysis are
available on the Regulations.gov Web
site (see footnote 1 in this document for
a link to Regulations.gov) or by
contacting the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
The analysis examines impacts of a
rule that amends the Animal Welfare
regulations to prohibit, with certain
exceptions, the importation of dogs for
purposes of resale, research, or
veterinary treatment, unless they are in
good health, have all necessary
vaccinations, and are 6 months of age or
older. The vaccinations are rabies
vaccination (which is already required
by the CDC for imported dogs in most
instances) and DHLPP vaccination. The
rule includes limited exceptions for (1)
dogs imported for certain research
studies or veterinary treatment, and (2)
dogs lawfully imported into the State of
Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia,
Guam, or New Zealand in compliance
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
with applicable regulations of the State
of Hawaii, provided the dogs are not
transported out of the State of Hawaii
for resale at less than 6 months of age.
The rule promotes the humane
treatment of certain imported dogs and
benefits most U.S. dog importers and
dealers by ensuring that these dogs are
in good health, vaccinated, and not too
young. The benefits of these changes
include an unquantifiable enhancement
of animal welfare. The benefits also
include the avoided costs of a potential
disease outbreak. In addition, there
could be a positive economic impact for
U.S. commercial dog breeding facilities,
given that puppies currently imported at
less than 6 months of age compete for
the same market, but at lower prices.
The only entities that may be adversely
affected are those that currently import
dogs, or purchase imported dogs, that
do not meet the new requirements.
There may be a reduction in importers’
volume of business, to the extent to
which the importation of dogs that are
6 months of age or older does not
replace the importation of younger dogs.
APHIS does not have information about
the demand for imported dogs that are
younger than 6 months compared to the
demand for older imported dogs. Buyers
who want to purchase a dog under 6
months will still be able to do so from
domestic sources. Domestic breeders
and wholesalers are likely to see
increased volumes of business, serving
customers who currently rely on foreign
suppliers. Some current importers are
also domestic breeders and will likely
shift from sales of imported puppies to
sales of puppies bred at their own
domestic facilities.
The requirements of this rule may
mean additional costs related to
vaccines, veterinary care, and
paperwork for some entities. The cost of
a complete series of rabies and DHLPP
vaccinations can range between $60 and
$124 per dog. Veterinary care and
vaccinations are regular responsibilities
of owning a companion animal in the
United States and these requirements of
the rule are therefore normal for the care
of a dog.
Importers will face increased
vaccination and care costs abroad,
unless they already vaccinate or they
qualify for the narrow exceptions for
dogs imported for certain research
studies or veterinary treatment. We note
that while this rule specifies that dogs
imported for resale must be vaccinated
against rabies prior to entry into the
United States, rabies vaccinations are
already required by CDC for dogs
imported into the United States but may
occur either before or after arrival under
those rules. Therefore, most of the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
additional vaccination costs associated
with this rule are likely to fall on those
importers that do not already provide
DHLPP vaccinations prior to entry.
Assuming that all imported dogs need
both rabies and DHLPP vaccinations,
and all are at least 6 months of age, the
total cost of providing the DHLPP
vaccinations for imported dogs could
range from $518,000 to $1.07 million
annually, based on the average number
of dogs imported from 2009 through
2013, as recorded in the U.S. Census
Bureau’s foreign trade statistics.
Although DHLPP vaccination is
expected to represent the single largest
cost of the rule (there may be costs to
obtaining a health certificate as well),
APHIS believes that many imported
dogs already receive this vaccination
prior to entry. Dogs imported for resale
are covered in U.S. Census Bureau
statistics. However, these statistics may
understate the total number of dogs
affected by the rule, particularly since
they do not include shipments with a
fair market value of less than $2,000.
Any increase in costs for importers
may be wholly or partially passed on to
entities buying the imported dogs. On
the other hand, such entities may be
positively affected due to the greater
assurance that an imported dog is in
good health and of legal minimum age.
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) has established guidelines for
determining firms considered to be
small under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. Importers of live dogs for resale,
research, and veterinary treatment will
be directly affected by this rule. While
the exact number and size of affected
entities is not known, in 2007 there
were about 12,600 establishments in the
generalized category of ‘‘other
miscellaneous nondurable goods
merchant wholesalers’’ (NAICS 424990),
which includes importers of dogs, and
about 99 percent of those establishments
were considered small in 2007.3
Theoretically, any change in the
number of imported dogs into the
United States could affect the demand
for foreign veterinary services and
domestic veterinary services, dog
products and dog food. However, we
expect that any impact of the rule on
these industries will be negligible.
Imported dogs comprise a very small
fraction of the U.S. dog population, well
under 1 percent. It is therefore highly
unlikely that any change because of this
rule in the number of imported dogs
will significantly affect those domestic
markets.
3 U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau,
2007 Economic Census.
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
We believe that the benefits of this
rule, including the unquantifiable
enhancement of animal welfare, justify
the costs. Benefits of the rule include
promoting the humane treatment of
covered imported dogs in keeping with
the requirements of the Animal Welfare
Act and with standard health practices
for dogs in the United States. The rule
could also yield benefits in preventing
the spread of communicable diseases by
unvaccinated, imported dogs to other
dogs or humans in the United States.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. It is not intended to
have retroactive effect. The Act does not
provide administrative procedures
which must be exhausted prior to a
judicial challenge to the provisions of
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 final rule,
which were filed under 0579–0379,
have been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). When OMB notifies us of its
decision, if approval is denied, we will
publish a document in the Federal
Register providing notice of what action
we plan to take.
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 rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste
Sickles, APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 851–2908.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 2
Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Research.
Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR
part 2 as follows:
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
PART 2—REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 2
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131–2159; 7 CFR
2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
2. Subpart J, consisting of §§ 2.150
through 2.153, is added to read as
follows:
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:38 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
Subpart J—Importation of Live Dogs
Sec.
2.150 Import permit.
2.151 Certifications.
2.152 Notification of arrival.
2.153 Dogs refused entry.
Subpart J—Importation of Live Dogs
§ 2.150
Import permit.
(a) No person shall import a live dog
from any part of the world into the
continental United States or Hawaii for
purposes of resale, research, or
veterinary treatment unless the dog is
accompanied by an import permit
issued by APHIS and is imported into
the continental United States or Hawaii
within 30 days after the proposed date
of arrival stated in the import permit.
(b) An application for an import
permit must be submitted to the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service,
Animal Care, 4700 River Road Unit 84,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1234 or though
Animal Care’s Web site (https://
www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/).
Application forms for import permits
may be obtained from Animal Care at
the address listed above.
(c) The completed application must
include the following information:
(1) The name and address of the
person intending to export the dog(s) to
the continental United States or Hawaii;
(2) The name and address of the
person intending to import the dog(s)
into the continental United States or
Hawaii;
(3) The number of dogs to be imported
and the breed, sex, age, color, markings,
and other identifying information of
each dog;
(4) The purpose of the importation;
(5) The port of embarkation and the
mode of transportation;
(6) The port of entry in the United
States;
(7) The proposed date of arrival in the
continental United States or Hawaii;
and
(8) The name and address of the
person to whom the dog(s) will be
delivered in the continental United
States or Hawaii and, if the dog(s) is or
are imported for research purposes, the
USDA registration number of the
research facility where the dog will be
used for research, tests, or experiments.
(d) After receipt and review of the
application by APHIS, an import permit
indicating the applicable conditions for
importation under this subpart may be
issued for the importation of the dog(s)
described in the application if such
dog(s) appears to be eligible to be
imported. Even though an import permit
has been issued for the importation of
a dog, the dog may only be imported if
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48659
all applicable requirements of this
subpart and any other applicable
regulations of this subchapter and any
other statute or regulation of any State
or of the United States are met.
(Approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under control
number 0579–0379)
§ 2.151
Certifications.
(a) Required certificates. Except as
provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, no person shall import a live
dog from any part of the world into the
continental United States or Hawaii for
purposes of resale, research, or
veterinary treatment unless the
following conditions are met:
(1) Health certificate. Each dog is
accompanied by an original health
certificate issued in English by a
licensed veterinarian with a valid
license to practice veterinary medicine
in the country of export that:
(i) Specifies the name and address of
the person intending to import the dog
into the continental United States or
Hawaii;
(ii) Identifies the dog on the basis of
breed, sex, age, color, markings, and
other identifying information;
(iii) States that the dog is at least 6
months of age;
(iv) States that the dog was
vaccinated, not more than 12 months
before the date of arrival at the U.S.
port, for distemper, hepatitis,
leptospirosis, parvovirus, and
parainfluenza virus (DHLPP) at a
frequency that provides continuous
protection of the dog from those
diseases and is in accordance with
currently accepted practices as cited in
veterinary medicine reference guides;
(v) States that the dog is in good
health (i.e., free of any infectious
disease or physical abnormality which
would endanger the dog or other
animals or endanger public health,
including, but not limited to, parasitic
infection, emaciation, lesions of the
skin, nervous system disturbances,
jaundice, or diarrhea); and
(vi) Bears the signature and the
license number of the veterinarian
issuing the certificate.
(2) Rabies vaccination certificate.
Each dog is accompanied by a valid
rabies vaccination certificate 6 that was
issued in English by a licensed
veterinarian with a valid license to
practice veterinary medicine in the
country of export for the dog not less
6 Alternatively, this requirement can be met by
providing an exact copy of the rabies vaccination
certificate if so required under the Public Health
Service regulations in 42 CFR 71.51.
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
48660
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
than 3 months of age at the time of
vaccination that:
(i) Specifies the name and address of
the person intending to import the dog
into the continental United States or
Hawaii;
(ii) Identifies the dog on the basis of
breed, sex, age, color, markings, and
other identifying information;
(iii) Specifies a date of rabies
vaccination at least 30 days before the
date of arrival of the dog at a U.S. port;
(iv) Specifies a date of expiration of
the vaccination which is after the date
of arrival of the dog at a U.S. port. If no
date of expiration is specified, then the
date of vaccination shall be no more
than 12 months before the date of arrival
at a U.S. port; and
(v) Bears the signature and the license
number of the veterinarian issuing the
certificate.
(b) Exceptions. (1) Research. The
provisions of paragraphs (a)(1)(iii),
(a)(1)(iv), (a)(1)(v), and/or (a)(2) of this
section do not apply to any person who
imports a live dog from any part of the
world into the continental United States
or Hawaii for use in research, tests, or
experiments at a research facility,
provided that: Such person submits
satisfactory evidence to Animal Care at
the time of his or her application for an
import permit that the specific
provision(s) would interfere with the
dog’s use in such research, tests, or
experiments in accordance with a
research proposal and the proposal has
been approved by the research facility
IACUC.
(2) Veterinary care. The provisions of
paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) through (a)(1)(v)
and (a)(2) of this section do not apply
to any person who imports a live dog
from any part of the world into the
continental United States or Hawaii for
veterinary treatment by a licensed
veterinarian, provided that:
(i) The original health certificate
required in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section states that the dog is in need of
veterinary treatment that cannot be
obtained in the country of export and
states the name and address of the
licensed veterinarian in the United
States who intends to provide the dog
such veterinary treatment; and
(ii) The person who imports the dog
completes a veterinary treatment
agreement with Animal Care at the time
of application for an import permit and
confines the animal until the conditions
specified in the agreement are met. Such
conditions may include determinations
by the licensed veterinarian in the
United States that the dog is in good
health, has been adequately vaccinated
against DHLPP and rabies, and is at least
6 months of age. The person importing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 Aug 15, 2014
Jkt 232001
the dog shall bear the expense of
veterinary treatment and confinement.
(3) Dogs imported into Hawaii from
the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or
New Zealand. The provisions of
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section do
not apply to any person who lawfully
imports a live dog into the State of
Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia,
Guam, or New Zealand in compliance
with the applicable regulations of the
State of Hawaii, provided that the dog
is not transported out of the State of
Hawaii for purposes of resale at less
than 6 months of age.
(Approved by the Office of Management
and Budget under control number 0579–
0379)
§ 2.152
Notification of arrival.
Upon the arrival of a dog at the port
of first arrival in the continental United
States or Hawaii, the person intending
to import the dog, or his or her agent,
must present the import permit and any
applicable certifications and veterinary
treatment agreement required by this
subpart to the collector of customs for
use at that port.
§ 2.153
Dogs refused entry.
Any dog refused entry into the
continental United States or Hawaii for
noncompliance with the requirements
of this subpart may be removed from the
continental United States or Hawaii or
may be seized and the person intending
to import the dog shall provide for the
care (including appropriate veterinary
care), forfeiture, and adoption of the
dog, at his or her expense.
Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of
August 2014.
Gary Woodward,
Deputy Under Secretary for Marketing and
Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014–19515 Filed 8–15–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
provisions of the Export Administration
Regulations that were amended by two
final rules appearing in the Federal
Register on June 5, 2014 and on May 13,
2014. Both rules amended a number of
the same provisions of the Export
Administration Regulations, and certain
language was either removed or changed
inadvertently. This final rule corrects
those provisions to accurately reflect the
revisions made by both rules.
DATES: This rule is effective August 18,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Timothy Mooney, Regulatory Policy
Division, Bureau of Industry and
Security, Department of Commerce,
Phone: (202) 482–2440, Fax: (202) 482–
3355, Email: rpd2@bis.doc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Bureau of Industry and Security
(BIS) publishes this final rule to make
corrections to certain provisions of the
Export Administration Regulations that
were amended by two final rules
appearing in the Federal Register on
June 5, 2014 (79 FR 32612) and on May
13, 2014 (79 FR 27417). These two rules
were drafted and finalized
simultaneously, however they
separately revised some of the same
provisions of the Export Administration
Regulations and certain language was
either removed or changed
inadvertently. This final rule corrects
those provisions to accurately reflect the
revisions made by both rules. These
corrections include reinserting two
sentences inadvertently removed
because of an incorrect instruction in
the June 5 rule, and reinserting a phrase
inadvertently removed by the May 13
rule, which did not reflect a correction
made in a final rule published on
October 3, 2013 (78 FR 61745).
Rulemaking Requirements
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Parts 740, 742, and 758
[Docket No. 140221165–4621–02]
RIN 0694–AG11
Corrections and Clarifications to the
Export Administration Regulations;
Correction
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; correcting
amendments.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS) is correcting certain
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distribute impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This final rule, which is a
consolidation of corrections and
clarifications of final rules published in
2013 and 2014, has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
E:\FR\FM\18AUR1.SGM
18AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48653-48660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19515]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 2014 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 48653]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. APHIS-2009-0053]
RIN 0579-AD23
Animal Welfare; Importation of Live Dogs
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations to implement an amendment to
the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 added a new section to the AWA to restrict the importation of
certain live dogs. Consistent with this amendment, this rule prohibits
the importation of dogs, with limited exceptions, from any part of the
world into the continental United States or Hawaii for purposes of
resale, research, or veterinary treatment, unless the dogs are in good
health, have received all necessary vaccinations, and are at least 6
months of age. This action is necessary to implement the amendment to
the AWA and will help to ensure the welfare of imported dogs.
DATES: Effective date: November 17, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Gerald Rushin, Veterinary Medical
Officer, Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD
20737-1236; (301) 851-3740.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA or the Act, 7 U.S.C. 2131 et
seq.), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to promulgate
standards and other requirements governing the humane handling, care,
treatment, and transportation of certain animals by dealers, research
facilities, exhibitors, operators of auction sales, and carriers and
intermediate handlers. The Secretary has delegated responsibility for
administering the AWA to the Administrator of U.S. Department of
Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS). Within APHIS, the responsibility for administering the AWA has
been delegated to the Deputy Administrator for Animal Care (AC).
Regulations and standards are established under the AWA and are
contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 9 CFR parts 1, 2,
and 3 (referred to below as the regulations). Part 2 provides
administrative requirements and sets forth institutional
responsibilities for regulated parties.
The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-246,
signed into law on June 18, 2008) added a new section 18 to the Animal
Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2148) to restrict the importation of certain live
dogs. As amended, the AWA now prohibits the importation of dogs into
the United States for resale purposes, unless the Secretary determines
that the dogs are in good health, have received all necessary
vaccinations, and are at least 6 months of age. Section 18 of the AWA
includes a scoping definition for the term ``resale.'' When read in
context of the requirements of that section, the term ``resale''
includes, but is not limited to, any transfer of ownership or control
of imported dogs to another person, for more than de minimis
consideration. The AWA further provides that the Secretary, by
regulation, must provide an exception to these requirements in any case
in which a dog is imported for research purposes or veterinary
treatment. The AWA also provides an exception to the at least 6-month
age requirement for dogs that are lawfully imported into Hawaii from
the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or New Zealand in compliance with
the applicable regulations of Hawaii, provided the dogs are not
transported out of Hawaii for purposes of resale at less than 6 months
of age.
The AWA provides that any importer who fails to comply with these
provisions is subject to penalties under 7 U.S.C. 2149 and must provide
for the care (including appropriate veterinary care), forfeiture, and
adoption of each applicable dog, at his or her expense.
On September 1, 2011, we published in the Federal Register (76 FR
54392-54397, Docket No. APHIS-2009-0053) a proposed rule \1\ to add
requirements concerning the importation of certain live dogs as
required by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the proposed rule and the comments we received, go
to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2009-0053.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We proposed, with limited exceptions, to prohibit the importation
of any dog for resale, veterinary treatment, or research \2\ unless the
dog is in good health; has received vaccinations for rabies and
distemper, hepatitis, leptospirosis, parvovirus, and parainfluenza
virus (DHLPP); and is at least 6 months of age. We proposed to require
that the dog be accompanied by an import permit issued by APHIS and a
health certificate and rabies vaccination certificate issued by a
veterinarian with a valid license to practice veterinary medicine in
the country of export. We proposed to allow exceptions to health,
vaccination, and age requirements for dogs imported for veterinary
treatment that cannot be obtained in the exporting country and for dogs
imported for use in research, tests, or experiments if the requirement
would interfere with a research protocol approved by the research
facility's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).
Additionally, we proposed that dogs less than 6 months old could be
lawfully imported into Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia, Guam,
or New Zealand as long as the dog was not transported from Hawaii for
resale purposes at less than 6 months of age.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Under the AWA, as amended, dogs imported for resale include
dogs imported for the purpose of transferring ownership or control
to a research facility or to a veterinarian for veterinary
treatment. However, because research and veterinary treatment are
not commonly considered resale purposes, we separately identify each
of these activities as context requires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We solicited comments for 60 days ending October 31, 2011. We
received a total of 74,218 comments. These included 382 unique comments
from animal welfare associations, private breeders, veterinarians,
foreign exporters, domestic importers, and other individuals. Two
animal welfare associations mailed an additional 73,836 comments that
had been
[[Page 48654]]
submitted directly to them. Issues raised by the commenters are
discussed by topic below.
Applicability of the Rule
Several commenters asked that we define the term ``resale'' in the
regulations to clarify which imports are subject to the new
restrictions regarding dogs imported for resale.
As used in section 18 of the AWA, the term ``dogs imported for
resale'' includes dogs imported for sale in wholesale channels, at
retail, and for adoption after arrival in the United States, as well as
dogs imported for other purposes involving transfer of ownership or
control of the dog to another person for more than de minimis
consideration after the dog's arrival in the United States. With
limited exceptions for dogs lawfully imported into Hawaii, and for dogs
imported for veterinary treatment or research, the restrictions
regarding health, vaccinations, and age apply to all such imported
dogs.
Many of the comments submitted through an animal welfare
association and some others supported the proposed rule with an
exception for imports for rescue purposes. They said the rule should
not prevent puppies rescued from disasters, neglect, or foreign puppy
mills in foreign countries from being imported into the United States
for adoption. Some said that the adoption fee charged by many nonprofit
rescue groups should be viewed as de minimis consideration under the
rule. A number of other commenters stated that the rule should apply to
dogs imported as ``rescues'' as these dogs are often in poor health and
present a risk of transmitting diseases to dogs in the United States.
The AWA does not provide for exceptions to age, vaccination, or
health requirements for dogs rescued in foreign countries and brought
into the United States for subsequent placement. We consider de minimis
to have the standard dictionary meaning, which, according to Merriam-
Webster, is ``lacking significance or importance; so minor as to merit
disregard.'' Similarly, we consider ``consideration'' to have the
standard dictionary meaning, which is defined by Merriam-Webster as
``the inducement to a contract or other legal transaction;
specifically: An act or forbearance or the promise thereof done or
given by one party in return for the act or promise of another.'' While
we recognize that adoption fees charged by some nonprofits may not
recover all of the costs incurred by the organization to rescue and
care for the dog prior to adoption, we do not consider the fee to be de
minimis consideration. The rule does not, therefore, provide a specific
exception for rescue dogs.
Many commenters were concerned that this rule would prohibit the
importation of dogs less than 6 months of age for personal use,
including as pets, for sport, for shows or competitions, or for
breeding. One commenter said the proposal did not take into account
dogs imported for semen collection. A number of other commenters
expressed concern that the rule would prohibit them from importing
puppies into training programs for working dogs, including dogs to be
used as service dogs, for search and rescue, or for police work.
This rule does not apply when there is no transfer of ownership or
control of a dog to another person for more than de minimis
consideration after the dog's importation into the United States.
Therefore, dogs imported by a person who will use the dog as a personal
pet, for sport, for shows or competitions, or for breeding or semen
collection are not subject to the 6-month age restriction or any other
requirements of this rule. Additionally, we do not consider dogs
imported for training as working dogs to be imported for purposes of
resale. Thus, the rule will not apply to puppies imported by legitimate
training organizations for the purpose of training the dog to be a
working dog.
All dogs imported into the United States may, however, be subject
to other laws and regulations. For example, dogs imported from regions
of the world where screwworm is considered to exist must meet
requirements in 9 CFR part 93, Sec. 93.600, to ensure their freedom
from screwworm, and dogs imported from any part of the world except
Canada, Mexico, and regions of Central America and the West Indies that
are to be used in the handling of livestock must meet requirements in
Sec. 93.600 to mitigate the risk of tapeworm. In addition, the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have requirements for
importing dogs that must be met for a dog to be cleared for entry into
the United States. These requirements may include a rabies vaccination
certificate or a confinement agreement if a dog is too young to receive
the rabies vaccine.
A few commenters expressed concern about whether a dog imported for
personal use or into a working dog training program and did not work
out in the home or program could be placed elsewhere without violating
the regulations. Some asked whether a dog had to be kept for any
specific length of time before it could be rehomed.
This rule does not require that such dogs be kept for any specific
length of time before ownership or control may be transferred,
including through sale. APHIS understands that dogs imported in good
faith for personal use or special training programs sometimes do not
meet the needs for which they were imported and have to be placed
elsewhere. We will still consider the dogs to have been imported for
personal use or training. However, we expect such transfers of
ownership or control, particularly relatively close to the time of
importation, will be infrequent. If we have reason to believe that dogs
were imported into the continental United States or Hawaii for resale
without import permits or without meeting other requirements of the
regulations, we may initiate an investigation to ascertain the purpose
of the importation and whether there may have been a violation of the
regulations.
A few commenters asked if this rule applies to U.S. territories.
They expressed concern that an importer could bring dogs into a U.S.
territory for subsequent resale elsewhere in the United States. One
commenter asked whether the rule will affect persons in Puerto Rico who
sell puppies to the U.S. mainland.
This rule applies to dogs imported into the continental United
States and Hawaii from any other location, including Puerto Rico and
any of the other U.S. territories (American Samoa, the Federated States
of Micronesia, Guam, the Midway Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands,
the Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the
U.S. Virgin Islands). Thus, while an importer may bring a dog into a
U.S. territory for resale, research, or veterinary treatment without
the dog meeting the requirements of this rule, dogs originating in a
foreign country or any U.S. territory may not be shipped from a U.S.
territory into the continental United States or Hawaii for any of those
purposes except as provided in this rule. Any person intending to
import such a dog into the continental United States or Hawaii, or his
or her agent, must present the required import permit and any
applicable certifications and veterinary treatment agreement required
by this rule to the collector of customs at the port of first arrival.
One commenter asked whether the regulations apply to dogs labeled
``wild animal.''
The AWA regulations in 9 CFR part 1 define ``dog'' to mean any dog
of the species Canis familiaris (C. familiaris) or any dog-hybrid
cross. Therefore, this rule applies to any dog of the species C.
[[Page 48655]]
familiaris or any dog-hybrid cross. Any such dog that is imported for
purposes of resale, research, or veterinary treatment, even if labeled
``wild animal,'' will be subject to the regulations.
Some commenters stated that there should be no exceptions to the 6-
month age requirement and that it should be applicable to all imported
dogs.
Section 18 of the AWA applies only to live dogs imported for
resale, veterinary treatment, or research. It specifically provides an
exception to the age requirement for certain dogs legally imported into
Hawaii, provided the dogs are not transported from Hawaii for resale
purposes at less than 6 months of age. It also requires us to provide
exceptions to health, vaccination, and age requirements for dogs
imported for research purposes or veterinary treatment.
Identification of Dogs
A few commenters suggested that we require microchips or tattoos to
ensure that dogs imported under permit are the same ones listed on the
import permit.
We proposed to require that dogs imported for resale, veterinary
treatment, or research be identified on permit applications, health
certificates, and rabies vaccination certificates by breed, sex, age,
color, markings, and other identifying information. Other identifying
information would include microchip numbers or tattoos if a dog has
them, but the rule does not require them. We believe this information
is sufficient to verify the identity of dogs presented for importation.
This is the same information that CDC requires on rabies vaccination
certificates for imported dogs.
One commenter recommended that we require all imported dogs to be
microchipped so that we would be able to track the dogs and see where
they end up.
APHIS believes that such a requirement is beyond the intent of the
AWA, as amended.
Intended Use of Imported Dogs
Some commenters questioned how officials at a port of entry would
determine whether imported dogs were intended for resale or personal
use. A few expressed concern that dogs imported for personal use, and
thus arriving without a permit, might be seized at the port of entry.
Dogs imported for personal use, without transfer of ownership or
control after arrival in the United States, are not subject to this
rule and will not be refused entry or seized because they arrive
without a permit. If APHIS has reason to believe that a person is
importing dogs for resale, research, or veterinary treatment without
meeting the requirements of this rule, we may initiate an investigation
and take appropriate action based on the results of that investigation.
Several commenters expressed concern that entities importing dogs
less than 6 months of age for resale could circumvent the new
requirements by not providing an import permit and claiming the dogs
are for personal use. Commenters suggested a variety of actions to
prevent such occurrences, including requiring that dogs be issued
identification numbers, which would have to be shown on import permits;
requiring the use of transit permits for all imported dogs that would
include a statement of purpose of the import; requiring importers to
provide a sworn statement that dogs imported without a permit are not
for resale; limiting the number of imported dogs of less than 6 months
of age that a person may import a year for personal use; and
establishing an import notification system that would allow APHIS to
notify authorities at the ports of entry that a dog import is expected
and having the import documents sent to APHIS upon arrival for
verification.
APHIS appreciates the suggestions from commenters on ways to help
prevent fraud, and we have considered them all. Requiring dogs imported
for resale to have numerical identification and to include the numbers
on the permit would not prevent an importer from fraudulently claiming
a dog is imported for his or her personal use. Importers wishing to
circumvent this rule could also falsify statements of purpose.
Similarly, if we limited the number of dogs that could be imported for
personal use, either per shipment or per year, importers wishing to
circumvent this rule could get around these restrictions, too, by
breaking up shipments or importing under different names. Regarding
port of entry notifications and APHIS verification of import documents,
the rule already requires importers or their agents to present the
import permit and other required documents for dogs covered by this
rule to the collector of customs at the port of first arrival in the
continental United States or Hawaii. Inspectors with U.S. Customs and
Border Protection will review the paperwork to ensure the shipment is
in compliance with the regulations; there would be no added benefit in
sending the paperwork to APHIS for verification. Advance notifications
would only provide earlier notice of shipments of dogs already
identified as being imported for resale, research, or veterinary
treatment.
We are developing guidance for port inspectors to use to identify
potentially fraudulent imports and report them to APHIS. If it appears
that a person is importing dogs for resale, research, or veterinary
treatment without meeting the requirements of this rule, we may
initiate an investigation and take appropriate action based on the
results of that investigation.
Import Permits
Some commenters suggested that the requirement for an import permit
would increase the cost of importation for the importer and exporter as
a result of the additional time needed to receive an import permit. The
commenters also said that obtaining an import permit could delay a sick
dog from receiving medical attention.
We expect that any time-related costs associated with obtaining an
import permit will be minimal. There is no charge for the permit
itself.
Permit applications must include basic information that should be
readily available to the importer: The name and address of the person
intending to export the dog; the name and address of the importer; the
number of dogs to be imported and their breed, sex, age, color,
markings, and other identifying information; the purpose of the
importation; the port of embarkation and mode of transportation; the
port of entry in the United States; the proposed date of arrival in the
continental United States or Hawaii; the name and address of the person
who will take delivery of the dogs; and, if the dogs will be used for
research, the USDA registration number of the research facility. APHIS
anticipates that it will need 7 to 10 days to process a permit
application once it is received. Thus, in most cases, dogs can be
shipped within 2 weeks of the importer submitting an application for
permit. Upon request, APHIS will attempt to expedite permit processing
for dogs requiring urgent veterinary medical attention in the United
States.
One commenter objected to the proposed requirement that dogs be
accompanied by an original import permit. The commenter stated that few
original documents are required at ports of entry as systems move to
electronic documentation and that requiring a hard copy of the import
permit is unnecessary and will only increase the likelihood that
imported dogs will be forfeited or returned to their country of export
due to missing or erroneous originals. Another commenter stated that we
should not require originals of
[[Page 48656]]
any document to be presented at the port of arrival.
Our rule requires an original health certificate. This requirement
will prevent copies of a health certificate from being used for
multiple shipments and thus reduce fraud. Our rule does not require an
original import permit, and, as explained in the preamble to the
proposed rule, we will accept a copy of the rabies vaccination
certificate required by the Public Health Service regulations in 42 CFR
71.51.
Vaccinations
A few commenters asked that we clarify the requirement in proposed
Sec. 2.151(a)(1)(iv) that dogs be vaccinated in accordance with
currently accepted practices as cited in veterinary medicine reference
guides. They expressed concern that there may be conflicting consensus
on vaccination requirements and practices. One commenter provided a
list of reference guides and encouraged us to include them in the
regulations.
We acknowledge that there are various accepted vaccination
practices cited in veterinary medicine reference guides used in the
United States and foreign countries. It is not our intention to specify
one or another, which is why we worded the requirement in this way.
Rather, we will rely on the veterinarians who are signing the health
certificates to make good decisions on behalf of the dog's welfare.
Several commenters stated that our list of required vaccinations is
inconsistent with the list provided by American Veterinary Medical
Association. They were specifically concerned about our proposed
requirements for leptospirosis and parainfluenza vaccination, stating
that they are unnecessary and may be harmful. One commenter said that
leptospirosis vaccines may cause life threatening reactions in some
small breeds of dogs.
Leptospirosis is a bacterium that can cause liver disease, kidney
failure, and even death. While leptospirosis is less likely to occur in
urban areas of the country, it is still a disease of concern in many
areas of the United States. Parainfluenza, also a disease of concern in
the United States, is a highly contagious respiratory infection that
can lead to pneumonia and even death. Veterinarians routinely
administer these vaccinations to dogs to prevent infection and spread
of those diseases. Small breed dogs, as well as other breeds, can
receive the leptospirosis vaccination, which may need to be
administered under the direction and/or supervision of a veterinarian.
Several commenters objected to our proposed requirement for rabies
vaccination. One commenter suggested that additional studies be
performed to evaluate the source of rabies outbreaks in the United
States to analyze the necessity for rabies vaccines prior to
importation. Another commenter asked that dogs imported from rabies-
free countries be exempt from the rabies certification requirement to
decrease the time and cost of importation for those dogs. The commenter
also expressed concern that some States may not recognize rabies
vaccinations given in other countries.
We consider rabies vaccination necessary not only to ensure that
imported dogs do not have rabies, but also to ensure that they are
protected from rabies after they arrive in the United States. Rabies
exists in the United States, primarily in wildlife such as raccoons,
skunks, foxes, and coyotes. It is transmissible, usually through the
bite of an infected animal, to other mammals, including humans and
unvaccinated dogs. The rabies virus infects the central nervous system,
ultimately causing disease in the brain and death. For this reason, the
rabies vaccine is one of the core vaccinations given to dogs in the
United States as part of a national rabies prevention and control
program. It should be noted that the CDC also requires most dogs,
regardless of age or purpose of importation, to be accompanied by proof
of rabies vaccination or a confinement agreement if a dog is too young
to have received a rabies vaccine prior to entry into the United
States. If a State does not accept rabies vaccination given in a
foreign country, the importer may have several options, including
petitioning the State to accept serologic testing of the vaccinated dog
as proof of immunological protection or having the dog revaccinated
after consultation with his or her veterinarian.
One commenter suggested that we add Bordetella bronchiseptica to
the list of required vaccinations.
APHIS believes that the current vaccination protocol provides
adequate immunity protection for the health and well-being of dogs
imported into the United States for resale. In addition, importers in
consultation with their veterinarians can elect to include Bordetella
or other vaccines in their dog's vaccination regimen before or after
import.
One commenter stated that we overestimated the cost of vaccinations
in our economic analysis. The commenter suggested that most commercial
breeders purchase vaccines from suppliers and administer the vaccines
themselves at a cost of less than $5 per injection.
We acknowledge that this may be the case. Our estimates of the
vaccination costs were based on costs of vaccinations performed at
veterinary clinics. The economic analysis did state that breeders in
the United States typically administer the vaccinations themselves. If
the vaccination costs are lower, the overall costs associated with this
rule will be lower.
Veterinary Inspection
Several commenters asked if dogs imported for resale, research, or
veterinary treatment will be inspected by a veterinarian at the port of
entry to verify the age and condition of the animals listed on the
health certificate. Several commenters recommended veterinary
inspection upon arrival and further recommended that importation of the
dogs be limited to certain ports of entry where veterinary inspectors
are available and where dogs can receive veterinary care if they arrive
in poor health.
Under this rule, dogs imported for resale, veterinary treatment, or
research must be examined by a veterinarian licensed in the country of
export prior to shipment to the United States. Inspectors with U.S.
Customs and Border Protection will check shipments, including health
and vaccination certifications for the dogs, upon their arrival in the
United States for compliance with this rule. Our rule does not require
additional veterinary inspection upon arrival. If officials at the port
of entry observe sick or injured dogs in a shipment, they will notify
Animal Care, which can arrange for appropriate veterinary care if
needed.
Parasites
One commenter stated that our rule should require proof of flea,
tick, and parasite treatment prior to importation. In addition, the
commenter recommended that dogs found to be infected or sick at the
port of entry should be placed in a quarantine facility before
returning to the country of origin.
While this rule does not require dogs to be treated for parasites
prior to importation, it does require that a veterinarian in the
country of export attest on the health certificate that the dog is in
good health, which includes freedom from parasitic infections. Dogs
that are imported for resale purposes and found to be infested with
parasites or to be ill upon arrival are subject to the provisions in
Sec. 2.153 of this rule, which include being seized and placed
[[Page 48657]]
for veterinary care at the importer's expense.
Exceptions for Veterinary Treatment
One commenter stated that our rule should contain requirements for
the transportation and housing of dogs imported for veterinary
treatment, including a determination that it would not be harmful for a
dog to travel.
Under this rule, dogs may be imported for veterinary treatment
without meeting all of the age, health, and vaccination requirements
only if a licensed veterinarian in the country of export certifies that
the dog is in need of veterinary treatment that cannot be obtained in
the country of export. Additionally, the importer must have completed a
veterinary treatment agreement with Animal Care and confine the dog
until the conditions specified in the agreement have been met.
Confinement entails maintaining the dog in isolation from other animals
and from people other than those necessary to provide for its care. If
taken from the building or other enclosure where it is housed, the dog
should be leashed. Confinement must continue until all terms of the
veterinary treatment agreement are met. These may include
determinations by the licensed veterinarian in the United States that
the dog is in good health, has been adequately vaccinated against DHLPP
and rabies, and is at least 6 months of age.
Regarding the suggestion that we require certification that it
would not be harmful for a dog to travel, we believe it would be very
difficult for a veterinarian to make such a statement, particularly for
a dog in need of veterinary treatment. Rather, we expect that
veterinarians who refer a dog to a U.S. veterinarian for treatment will
use their professional judgment to weigh the benefits of treatment for
the dog in the United States with the risks associated with the dog
traveling to the United States before issuing a health certificate for
the dog.
One commenter stated that the regulations should prohibit dogs
imported for veterinary treatment from being sold after treatment.
As explained above, the regulations provide exceptions to age,
health, and vaccination requirements for dogs imported for veterinary
treatment only when veterinary treatment for that dog cannot be
obtained in the country of export. We anticipate that relatively few
dogs will be imported into the United States under these circumstances,
as veterinary care for most conditions affecting dogs will be available
in the country of export and the costs for importing a dog into the
United States for specialized treatment are likely to be quite high. If
a dog is imported into the United States under this rule for veterinary
care and is maintained in confinement until all conditions of the
veterinary treatment agreement are met, the dog may be transferred to
another person in the United States through a sale or otherwise.
One commenter said that, as a veterinarian working in foreign
countries, he had often referred dogs to U.S. veterinarians for
treatment. He expressed concern that this rule could prevent such
referrals from being a treatment option.
This rule allows exceptions to be made to age, vaccination, and
health requirements for dogs to be imported for veterinary treatment
that is not available to the dogs in the foreign country.
One commenter said that the proposed rule did not take into account
dogs imported ``for dentals, orthopedics, or other procedures.''
We consider these procedures to be veterinary treatment.
Penalties
One commenter suggested that the rule include notice that violators
of the rule are subject to penalties under section 19 of the AWA (7
U.S.C. 2149).
The AWA, as amended, provides that any importer that fails to
comply with the requirements regarding the importation of live dogs
shall be subject to penalties under section 19 and shall be responsible
for the care (including appropriate veterinary care), forfeiture, and
adoption of each applicable dog, at the expense of the importer.
Section 2149 provides for criminal and civil penalties for violations
of the AWA, including civil penalties of up to $10,000 for each
violation. Any person who violates our regulations will be subject to
these penalties. The regulations include a citation to the AWA in the
authority citation at the beginning of part 2. We do not believe it is
necessary to include the language of the statute in the regulations.
Miscellaneous
One commenter suggested that the estimate of 17,000 dogs imported
annually seems low.
This estimate of 17,000 imported dogs is an annual average for 2005
through 2010 from the foreign trade statistics compiled by the U.S.
Census Bureau. Since the publication of the proposed rule, the U.S.
Census Bureau has released updated foreign trade statistics that state
that 8,634 dogs were imported each year between 2009 and 2013. We have
revised the regulatory impact analysis to include these updated
numbers. This data source contains all shipments brought into the
United States with a fair market value of at least $2,000. The CDC
estimated that about 287,000 dogs were brought into the United States
in 2006. However, this total covers all types of dogs, including
companion animals that are not intended for resale. Because this rule
primarily covers dogs imported for resale, we focused our cost
estimates on the import number reported by the U.S. Census Bureau.
One commenter suggested that these regulations would make the
practice of brokerage illegal and put people out of business.
Brokers who import dogs will still be allowed to do so, but they
must abide by these regulations to ensure the dogs they are importing
for resale are in good health and meet vaccination and age
requirements. Brokers who have been dealing exclusively or in large
part in puppies under the age of 6 months will be affected by the rule
and may have to change their business model.
Several commenters stated that requiring puppies to be at least 6
months of age before they can be imported into the United States will
eliminate free commerce, eliminate jobs in the United States, and cause
an increase in the cost of puppies for the ultimate buyer.
Those businesses that have been dependent on income related to
imported puppies less than 6 months of age for resale will have to
change or may go out of business. The rule should have very little
effect on competition in the market for dogs, however. While the cost
of imported puppies may increase because of the minimum age
requirement, the overall effect on competition in the United States
should be very small. Imported dogs comprise a very small fraction of
the U.S. dog population. The upper-end estimate of 287,000 dogs
entering the United States annually (including companion animals in
addition to those intended for resale) represents less than four-tenths
of one percent of the U.S. dog population. Buyers who want to purchase
a dog under 6 months of age will still be able to do so from domestic
sources. Domestic breeders and wholesalers are likely to see increased
volumes of business, serving customers who currently rely on foreign
suppliers. Some current importers are also domestic breeders and will
likely shift from sales of imported puppies to sales of puppies bred at
their own domestic facilities.
[[Page 48658]]
Nonsubstantive Change
We are making a minor editorial change to the language in proposed
Sec. 2.153 to make it consistent with the language in the AWA.
Specifically, we are removing the words ``the cost of'' in the phrase
``. . . any person intending to import the dog shall provide for the
cost of the care . . . at his or her expense.''
Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with the
change discussed in this document.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule has been determined to be significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget.
We have prepared an economic analysis for this rule. The economic
analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis, as required by Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, which direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety
effects, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance
of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. The economic analysis
also examines the potential economic effects of this rule on small
entities, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The economic
analysis is summarized below. Copies of the full analysis are available
on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1 in this document for a
link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
The analysis examines impacts of a rule that amends the Animal
Welfare regulations to prohibit, with certain exceptions, the
importation of dogs for purposes of resale, research, or veterinary
treatment, unless they are in good health, have all necessary
vaccinations, and are 6 months of age or older. The vaccinations are
rabies vaccination (which is already required by the CDC for imported
dogs in most instances) and DHLPP vaccination. The rule includes
limited exceptions for (1) dogs imported for certain research studies
or veterinary treatment, and (2) dogs lawfully imported into the State
of Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or New Zealand in
compliance with applicable regulations of the State of Hawaii, provided
the dogs are not transported out of the State of Hawaii for resale at
less than 6 months of age.
The rule promotes the humane treatment of certain imported dogs and
benefits most U.S. dog importers and dealers by ensuring that these
dogs are in good health, vaccinated, and not too young. The benefits of
these changes include an unquantifiable enhancement of animal welfare.
The benefits also include the avoided costs of a potential disease
outbreak. In addition, there could be a positive economic impact for
U.S. commercial dog breeding facilities, given that puppies currently
imported at less than 6 months of age compete for the same market, but
at lower prices. The only entities that may be adversely affected are
those that currently import dogs, or purchase imported dogs, that do
not meet the new requirements. There may be a reduction in importers'
volume of business, to the extent to which the importation of dogs that
are 6 months of age or older does not replace the importation of
younger dogs. APHIS does not have information about the demand for
imported dogs that are younger than 6 months compared to the demand for
older imported dogs. Buyers who want to purchase a dog under 6 months
will still be able to do so from domestic sources. Domestic breeders
and wholesalers are likely to see increased volumes of business,
serving customers who currently rely on foreign suppliers. Some current
importers are also domestic breeders and will likely shift from sales
of imported puppies to sales of puppies bred at their own domestic
facilities.
The requirements of this rule may mean additional costs related to
vaccines, veterinary care, and paperwork for some entities. The cost of
a complete series of rabies and DHLPP vaccinations can range between
$60 and $124 per dog. Veterinary care and vaccinations are regular
responsibilities of owning a companion animal in the United States and
these requirements of the rule are therefore normal for the care of a
dog.
Importers will face increased vaccination and care costs abroad,
unless they already vaccinate or they qualify for the narrow exceptions
for dogs imported for certain research studies or veterinary treatment.
We note that while this rule specifies that dogs imported for resale
must be vaccinated against rabies prior to entry into the United
States, rabies vaccinations are already required by CDC for dogs
imported into the United States but may occur either before or after
arrival under those rules. Therefore, most of the additional
vaccination costs associated with this rule are likely to fall on those
importers that do not already provide DHLPP vaccinations prior to
entry. Assuming that all imported dogs need both rabies and DHLPP
vaccinations, and all are at least 6 months of age, the total cost of
providing the DHLPP vaccinations for imported dogs could range from
$518,000 to $1.07 million annually, based on the average number of dogs
imported from 2009 through 2013, as recorded in the U.S. Census
Bureau's foreign trade statistics. Although DHLPP vaccination is
expected to represent the single largest cost of the rule (there may be
costs to obtaining a health certificate as well), APHIS believes that
many imported dogs already receive this vaccination prior to entry.
Dogs imported for resale are covered in U.S. Census Bureau statistics.
However, these statistics may understate the total number of dogs
affected by the rule, particularly since they do not include shipments
with a fair market value of less than $2,000.
Any increase in costs for importers may be wholly or partially
passed on to entities buying the imported dogs. On the other hand, such
entities may be positively affected due to the greater assurance that
an imported dog is in good health and of legal minimum age.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established guidelines
for determining firms considered to be small under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Importers of live dogs for resale, research, and
veterinary treatment will be directly affected by this rule. While the
exact number and size of affected entities is not known, in 2007 there
were about 12,600 establishments in the generalized category of ``other
miscellaneous nondurable goods merchant wholesalers'' (NAICS 424990),
which includes importers of dogs, and about 99 percent of those
establishments were considered small in 2007.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, 2007 Economic
Census.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theoretically, any change in the number of imported dogs into the
United States could affect the demand for foreign veterinary services
and domestic veterinary services, dog products and dog food. However,
we expect that any impact of the rule on these industries will be
negligible. Imported dogs comprise a very small fraction of the U.S.
dog population, well under 1 percent. It is therefore highly unlikely
that any change because of this rule in the number of imported dogs
will significantly affect those domestic markets.
[[Page 48659]]
We believe that the benefits of this rule, including the
unquantifiable enhancement of animal welfare, justify the costs.
Benefits of the rule include promoting the humane treatment of covered
imported dogs in keeping with the requirements of the Animal Welfare
Act and with standard health practices for dogs in the United States.
The rule could also yield benefits in preventing the spread of
communicable diseases by unvaccinated, imported dogs to other dogs or
humans in the United States.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect.
The Act does not provide administrative procedures which must be
exhausted prior to a judicial challenge to the provisions of 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 final rule, which were
filed under 0579-0379, have been submitted for approval to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). When OMB notifies us of its decision,
if approval is denied, we will publish a document in the Federal
Register providing notice of what action we plan to take.
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 rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles,
APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2908.
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 2
Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Research.
Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR part 2 as follows:
PART 2--REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
0
2. Subpart J, consisting of Sec. Sec. 2.150 through 2.153, is added to
read as follows:
Subpart J--Importation of Live Dogs
Sec.
2.150 Import permit.
2.151 Certifications.
2.152 Notification of arrival.
2.153 Dogs refused entry.
Subpart J--Importation of Live Dogs
Sec. 2.150 Import permit.
(a) No person shall import a live dog from any part of the world
into the continental United States or Hawaii for purposes of resale,
research, or veterinary treatment unless the dog is accompanied by an
import permit issued by APHIS and is imported into the continental
United States or Hawaii within 30 days after the proposed date of
arrival stated in the import permit.
(b) An application for an import permit must be submitted to the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Animal Care, 4700 River
Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737-1234 or though Animal Care's Web site
(https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/). Application forms for
import permits may be obtained from Animal Care at the address listed
above.
(c) The completed application must include the following
information:
(1) The name and address of the person intending to export the
dog(s) to the continental United States or Hawaii;
(2) The name and address of the person intending to import the
dog(s) into the continental United States or Hawaii;
(3) The number of dogs to be imported and the breed, sex, age,
color, markings, and other identifying information of each dog;
(4) The purpose of the importation;
(5) The port of embarkation and the mode of transportation;
(6) The port of entry in the United States;
(7) The proposed date of arrival in the continental United States
or Hawaii; and
(8) The name and address of the person to whom the dog(s) will be
delivered in the continental United States or Hawaii and, if the dog(s)
is or are imported for research purposes, the USDA registration number
of the research facility where the dog will be used for research,
tests, or experiments.
(d) After receipt and review of the application by APHIS, an import
permit indicating the applicable conditions for importation under this
subpart may be issued for the importation of the dog(s) described in
the application if such dog(s) appears to be eligible to be imported.
Even though an import permit has been issued for the importation of a
dog, the dog may only be imported if all applicable requirements of
this subpart and any other applicable regulations of this subchapter
and any other statute or regulation of any State or of the United
States are met.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control
number 0579-0379)
Sec. 2.151 Certifications.
(a) Required certificates. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of
this section, no person shall import a live dog from any part of the
world into the continental United States or Hawaii for purposes of
resale, research, or veterinary treatment unless the following
conditions are met:
(1) Health certificate. Each dog is accompanied by an original
health certificate issued in English by a licensed veterinarian with a
valid license to practice veterinary medicine in the country of export
that:
(i) Specifies the name and address of the person intending to
import the dog into the continental United States or Hawaii;
(ii) Identifies the dog on the basis of breed, sex, age, color,
markings, and other identifying information;
(iii) States that the dog is at least 6 months of age;
(iv) States that the dog was vaccinated, not more than 12 months
before the date of arrival at the U.S. port, for distemper, hepatitis,
leptospirosis, parvovirus, and parainfluenza virus (DHLPP) at a
frequency that provides continuous protection of the dog from those
diseases and is in accordance with currently accepted practices as
cited in veterinary medicine reference guides;
(v) States that the dog is in good health (i.e., free of any
infectious disease or physical abnormality which would endanger the dog
or other animals or endanger public health, including, but not limited
to, parasitic infection, emaciation, lesions of the skin, nervous
system disturbances, jaundice, or diarrhea); and
(vi) Bears the signature and the license number of the veterinarian
issuing the certificate.
(2) Rabies vaccination certificate. Each dog is accompanied by a
valid rabies vaccination certificate \6\ that was issued in English by
a licensed veterinarian with a valid license to practice veterinary
medicine in the country of export for the dog not less
[[Page 48660]]
than 3 months of age at the time of vaccination that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Alternatively, this requirement can be met by providing an
exact copy of the rabies vaccination certificate if so required
under the Public Health Service regulations in 42 CFR 71.51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Specifies the name and address of the person intending to
import the dog into the continental United States or Hawaii;
(ii) Identifies the dog on the basis of breed, sex, age, color,
markings, and other identifying information;
(iii) Specifies a date of rabies vaccination at least 30 days
before the date of arrival of the dog at a U.S. port;
(iv) Specifies a date of expiration of the vaccination which is
after the date of arrival of the dog at a U.S. port. If no date of
expiration is specified, then the date of vaccination shall be no more
than 12 months before the date of arrival at a U.S. port; and
(v) Bears the signature and the license number of the veterinarian
issuing the certificate.
(b) Exceptions. (1) Research. The provisions of paragraphs
(a)(1)(iii), (a)(1)(iv), (a)(1)(v), and/or (a)(2) of this section do
not apply to any person who imports a live dog from any part of the
world into the continental United States or Hawaii for use in research,
tests, or experiments at a research facility, provided that: Such
person submits satisfactory evidence to Animal Care at the time of his
or her application for an import permit that the specific provision(s)
would interfere with the dog's use in such research, tests, or
experiments in accordance with a research proposal and the proposal has
been approved by the research facility IACUC.
(2) Veterinary care. The provisions of paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)
through (a)(1)(v) and (a)(2) of this section do not apply to any person
who imports a live dog from any part of the world into the continental
United States or Hawaii for veterinary treatment by a licensed
veterinarian, provided that:
(i) The original health certificate required in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section states that the dog is in need of veterinary treatment
that cannot be obtained in the country of export and states the name
and address of the licensed veterinarian in the United States who
intends to provide the dog such veterinary treatment; and
(ii) The person who imports the dog completes a veterinary
treatment agreement with Animal Care at the time of application for an
import permit and confines the animal until the conditions specified in
the agreement are met. Such conditions may include determinations by
the licensed veterinarian in the United States that the dog is in good
health, has been adequately vaccinated against DHLPP and rabies, and is
at least 6 months of age. The person importing the dog shall bear the
expense of veterinary treatment and confinement.
(3) Dogs imported into Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia,
Guam, or New Zealand. The provisions of paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this
section do not apply to any person who lawfully imports a live dog into
the State of Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or New
Zealand in compliance with the applicable regulations of the State of
Hawaii, provided that the dog is not transported out of the State of
Hawaii for purposes of resale at less than 6 months of age.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control
number 0579-0379)
Sec. 2.152 Notification of arrival.
Upon the arrival of a dog at the port of first arrival in the
continental United States or Hawaii, the person intending to import the
dog, or his or her agent, must present the import permit and any
applicable certifications and veterinary treatment agreement required
by this subpart to the collector of customs for use at that port.
Sec. 2.153 Dogs refused entry.
Any dog refused entry into the continental United States or Hawaii
for noncompliance with the requirements of this subpart may be removed
from the continental United States or Hawaii or may be seized and the
person intending to import the dog shall provide for the care
(including appropriate veterinary care), forfeiture, and adoption of
the dog, at his or her expense.
Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of August 2014.
Gary Woodward,
Deputy Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-19515 Filed 8-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P