Animal Welfare; Amendments to Licensing Provisions and to Requirements for Dogs, 10721-10735 [2019-05422]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 56 (Friday, March 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10721-10735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05422]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 56 / Friday, March 22, 2019 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 10721]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 1, 2, and 3

[Docket No. APHIS-2017-0062]
RIN 0579-AE35


Animal Welfare; Amendments to Licensing Provisions and to 
Requirements for Dogs

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the licensing requirements under the 
Animal Welfare Act regulations to promote compliance, reduce licensing 
fees, and strengthen existing safeguards that prevent individuals and 
businesses who have a history of noncompliance from obtaining a license 
or working with regulated animals. This action will reduce regulatory 
burden with respect to licensing and will more efficiently ensure 
licensees' sustained compliance with the Act. We are further proposing 
to strengthen the veterinary care and watering standards for regulated 
dogs to better align the regulations with the humane care and treatment 
standards set by the Animal Welfare Act. Additionally, we are proposing 
to make several miscellaneous changes for clarity and to correct 
typographical errors.

DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 
21, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0062.
     Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to 
Docket No. APHIS-2017-0062, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, 
APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1238.
    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may 
be viewed at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-
0062 or in our reading Room, which is located in Room 1141 of the USDA 
South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC. 
Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, 
please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine Jones, Chief of Staff, 
Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 
851-3730.

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, 
exhibitors, operators of auction sales, research facilities, and 
carriers and intermediate handlers. The Secretary has delegated 
responsibility for administering the AWA to the Administrator of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) 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. Definitions, regulations, and standards established 
under the AWA are contained in 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and 3 (referred to 
below as the regulations). Part 1 contains definitions for terms used 
in parts 2 and 3. Part 2 provides administrative requirements and sets 
forth institutional responsibilities for regulated parties, including 
licensing requirements for dealers, exhibitors, and operators of 
auction sales. Dealers, exhibitors, and operators of auction sales are 
required to comply in all respects with the regulations and standards 
(9 CFR 2.100(a)) and to allow APHIS officials access to their place of 
business, facilities, animals, and records to inspect for compliance (9 
CFR 2.126). Part 3 provides standards for the humane handling, care, 
treatment, and transportation of covered animals. Part 3 consists of 
subparts A through E, which contain specific standards for dogs and 
cats, guinea pigs and hamsters, rabbits, nonhuman primates, and marine 
mammals, respectively, and subpart F, which sets forth general 
standards for warmblooded animals not otherwise specified in that part.
    Under the current regulations, an applicant for an initial license 
is required to submit an application form, an application fee, and an 
annual license fee to Animal Care (9 CFR 2.1(c)), acknowledge receipt 
of a copy of the regulations and agree to comply with them by signing 
the application form (9 CFR 2.2(a)), and demonstrate compliance with 
the AWA regulations and standards, before APHIS can issue a license (9 
CFR 2.3(a)). Once a person receives a license, the licensee may renew 
his or her license annually by submitting an annual renewal form and 
license fee (9 CFR 2.1(d)(1)).
    Although an applicant for a license renewal must also certify, to 
the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that he or she is in 
compliance with all regulations and standards (9 CFR 2.2(b)), the 
current regulations do not require the applicant to demonstrate 
compliance before APHIS renews his or her license. The current 
regulations also do not require a licensee to demonstrate compliance 
when the licensee makes any subsequent changes to his or her animals or 
facilities, including noteworthy changes in the number or type of 
animals used in regulated activity. For example, a licensee who 
obtained a license after demonstrating compliance with the standards 
for his or her rabbit breeding facility (subpart C of part 3), may 
subsequently acquire and deal or exhibit any number of dangerous 
animals (such as tigers, bears, and elephants), without first 
demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards for those 
animals (subpart F of part 3). Based on our knowledge and experience 
with administering and enforcing the AWA and regulations, we are 
concerned that licensees may struggle to achieve and maintain 
compliance after making such noteworthy changes to their animals used 
in regulated activity. In addition, we have observed licensees who have 
been licensed for many years struggle with compliance because they did 
not have adequate programs for maintaining compliance at aging 
facilities. Therefore, we believe that revisions to the

[[Page 10722]]

regulations are necessary to ensure that dealers, exhibitors, and 
operators of auction sales demonstrate compliance with the applicable 
standards in part 3, providing for the humane handling, care, 
treatment, and transportation of animals under the AWA, as described 
below.
    In this proposed rule, we are proposing revisions to the licensing 
requirements to promote compliance, reduce licensing fees and burdens, 
and strengthen existing safeguards that prevent individuals and 
businesses who are unfit to hold a license (such as any individual 
whose license has been suspended or revoked or who has a history of 
noncompliance) from obtaining a license or working with regulated 
animals. We are also proposing revisions to the animal health and 
husbandry standards of part 3, subpart A, to increase safeguards for 
the adequate care and treatment of regulated dogs. The regulatory 
changes we are proposing include:
     Issuing fixed-term (non-renewable) licenses for dealers 
and exhibitors that expire after 3 years, at which time they would be 
required to demonstrate compliance before obtaining another fixed-term 
license;
     Specifying procedures for the issuance of temporary 
licenses to licensees with histories of compliance should they be in 
jeopardy of an inadvertent lapse in licensure during the license 
application process;
     Requiring licensees to affirmatively demonstrate 
compliance and obtain a new license when making noteworthy changes 
subsequent to the issuance of a license; noteworthy changes are those 
with regard to the number, type, or location of animals used in 
regulated activities;
     Adjusting license fees consistent with other proposed 
changes;
     Requiring license applicants to disclose any pleas of nolo 
contendere (no contest) or any other findings of violation of Federal, 
State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to animal cruelty or the 
transportation, ownership, neglect, or welfare of animals, to assess 
their fitness for licensure (9 CFR 2.11);
     Preventing individuals and businesses not operating as 
bona fide exhibitors from becoming licensed in order to circumvent 
State laws restricting ownership of exotic and wild animals to AWA-
licensed exhibitors;
     Strengthening existing prohibitions to expressly restrict 
individuals and businesses whose licenses have been suspended or 
revoked from working for regulated entities, and prevent individuals 
and businesses with histories of noncompliance from applying for new 
licenses through different individuals or business names; and
     Specifying provisions to ensure adequate access to water 
and veterinary care for dogs.
    Additionally, we are proposing several miscellaneous changes to the 
AWA regulations, including updating the titles of APHIS officials 
referenced in the regulations to reflect the current organizational 
structure (such as replacing the references to the ``Regional 
Director'' with the ``Deputy Administrator''), clarifying the 
definition of ``business hours,'' and correcting typographical errors.

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On August 24, 2017, we published in the Federal Register (82 FR 
40077-40078, Docket No. APHIS-2017-0062) an advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking (ANPR) in which we solicited comments from the public 
regarding potential revisions to the regulations. We solicited comments 
for 60 days ending October 23, 2017, and extended the comment period 
for an additional 10 days ending November 2, 2017. We received more 
than 47,000 comments by that date, of which approximately 8,500 were 
unique (not duplicate or form letter) comments. They were from private 
citizens, breeders, exhibitors, animal welfare activists, and 
professional organizations. We have reviewed and considered all of the 
comments and any information submitted with the comments. The issues 
raised by commenters are discussed below by topic.

License Renewal

    Among other things, the ANPR requested comments on issuing fixed-
term (non-renewable) licenses that expire after 3-5 years. A large 
number of commenters agreed with the example given in the ANPR to have 
licenses expire with the expectation that the issuance of a new license 
would be contingent upon affirmative demonstrations of compliance with 
AWA regulations. Many commenters indicated a specific number of years 
for license expiration within a 1-5 year range. Numerous commenters 
were also critical of the current renewal process wherein licensees 
self-certify AWA compliance; these commenters asked that USDA stop 
``rubber-stamping'' license renewals and generally supported the 
proposal for licensees to affirmatively demonstrate compliance prior to 
any period of licensure.
    Some commenters expressed concerns regarding the impact of rule 
changes on licensees who are compliant under current standards, and 
questioned the degree of flexibility that would be afforded to 
compliant licensees under revised rules. In response to this concern, 
we note that we have included flexibilities in this proposed rule for 
the issuance of temporary licenses to licensees with histories of 
compliance should they be in jeopardy of an inadvertent lapse in 
licensure during the license application process.
    Other commenters expressed concerns as to the impact rule changes 
would have on continued compliance, indicating that a longer period of 
time between license renewals could result in complacency among 
licensees with respect to animal welfare. In addition, many commenters 
indicated that inspections should continue along with annual license 
renewals. In response to these comments, we note that no demonstration 
of compliance is currently required at the time of renewal. In 
addition, we will continue to conduct animal welfare compliance 
inspections through the period of licensure in accordance with our 
risk-based inspection system.
    Several commenters requested a clarification of the term 
``affirmative demonstration of compliance,'' with some requesting that 
such clarification include a set of objective standards. A number of 
commenters requested that license renewals only be issued for licensees 
with no non-compliances for a lengthy period (up to 5 years). One 
commenter suggested a change to inspection procedures in which a first 
inspection would take place soon after a license is issued, e.g., 6 
months. Another commenter suggested that renewals should include 
inspection and/or certification by a veterinarian that animals are in 
good health and receive regular care. The same commenter also suggested 
that a process be instituted to allow for complaints from the public 
against licensees suspected of noncompliance.
    We appreciate these comments and wish to clarify that, by an 
``affirmative demonstration of compliance,'' we meant that the 
applicant must demonstrate that his or her premises and animals, 
facilities, vehicles, equipment, and premises used or intended for use 
in the business comply with the requirements set forth in parts 2 and 3 
of the regulations, as is currently required in Sec.  2.3 of the 
regulations. In addition to the inspections conducted by Animal Care 
prior to the issuance of a license, we also have the authority to 
conduct inspections throughout the period of licensure. With regard to 
veterinarian

[[Page 10723]]

inspections, we note that Sec.  2.40 of the regulations already 
requires dealers and exhibitors to employ an attending veterinarian 
under formal arrangements and to have programs of adequate veterinary 
care. Finally, Animal Care has a process for members of the public to 
report concerns about AWA-covered animals. For more information or to 
file such a complaint, please visit our website at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/complaint-form. (Scroll 
to the bottom of the web page to access the form.)
    Among the commenters who opposed the issuance of fixed-term 
licenses, many viewed such a proposal as placing undue burden on 
licensees who would have to reapply every few years, instead of 
annually renew. One commenter expressed concern that such a revision 
would increase the potential for biased inspectors to take advantage of 
licensees. Another commenter recommended against the issuance of fixed-
term licenses unless license numbers could be preserved, and stated 
that a uniform expiration of licenses at the same time of year could 
create a backlog for inspections and result in lapsed licenses for 
compliant breeders. A few commenters indicated that APHIS does not have 
authority under the AWA to set expiration dates on licenses.
    As discussed in the economic analyses supporting this rulemaking, 
this proposed rule would reduce licensing fees and paperwork burdens on 
individuals and businesses seeking an AWA license. While the current 
regulations require an annual license application and fees ranging from 
$40 to $760 annually, this proposed rule would only require an 
application and a flat $120 fee every 3 years, which would be 
equivalent to the current lowest fee of $40 (if prorated annually over 
3 years). Accordingly, we do not believe that the licensing component 
of this proposal places additional or undue burdens on license holders 
or applicants and will in fact reduce paperwork burdens on them, as 
well as reduce licensing fees for many of them.
    This proposal also retains, with modifications discussed below, the 
current process for demonstrating compliance prior to the issuance of a 
license, which allows an applicant three opportunities (inspections) to 
make such a demonstration (9 CFR 2.3(b)). We also note that Animal Care 
has a process in place to appeal disputed inspection findings.\1\ This 
proposed rule establishes a process for license applicants to appeal 
inspection findings from the third pre-license inspection, and codifies 
the existing opportunity for licensees and registrants to appeal all 
other compliance inspection findings during the period of licensure. 
With regard to the timing of license expirations, we do not intend to 
set a uniform expiration date for all licensees but would rather 
continue our current practice of accepting applications and issuing 
licenses on a rolling basis throughout the year. Finally, we wish to 
clarify that all licenses currently have expiration dates--they expire 
1 year after issuance, and may be renewed annually. This proposed rule 
would extend this period of licensure to 3 years, but require an 
application for license and demonstration of compliance prior to the 
issuance of a new license. This proposal is consistent with section 
2133 of the Act, which prohibits the issuance of a license until the 
dealer or exhibitor has demonstrated that his facilities comply with 
the standards promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to section 2143. 
Furthermore, section 2133 of the Act gives the Secretary the authority 
to issue licenses to dealers and exhibitors upon application therefor 
in such form and manner as he may prescribe, which includes the 
authority to set expiration dates for those licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/sa_publications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Licensing Fees

    In response to the ANPR's request for comments on licensing fees, 
many commenters opposed the overall elimination of application and 
license renewal fees, and called for an increase in fees to more 
accurately reflect the cost of administering the regulations and 
reducing the burden on taxpayers. Many commenters also suggested that 
fees should be implemented in accordance with a sliding scale based on 
income, or based on the number of animals being bred and sold. Some 
commenters indicated that increasing licensing fees would positively 
impact animal welfare by weeding out unscrupulous breeders who may not 
wish to pay the fee amounts. One commenter stated that it makes sense 
to charge license fees only when issuing a license, but that the 
application fee should not be eliminated in order to pay for the 
processing of an application and the performance of the inspection. 
Another commenter suggested that fees be discounted based on the number 
of species for which an applicant is licensed.
    Some commenters supported the implementation of reasonable fees 
that would be assessed with the issuance of a license. One such 
commenter stated that the structure of fees that would be assessed 
every 3 to 5 years should be based on a formal economic analysis and be 
broadly comparable to the existing annual fees. Adjustments to reduce 
burdens on small or non-profit entities also should be considered. A 
few commenters indicated that license fees should be eliminated so as 
to loosen requirements for small volume breeders.
    Section 2153 of the AWA authorizes USDA to collect reasonable fees 
for licenses issued and to adjust fees on an equitable basis, taking 
into consideration the type and nature of the operations to be 
licensed. These fees are deposited into the Treasury as miscellaneous 
receipts, and are not a user fee to cover the cost of administering the 
regulations. In developing this fee, we took into account the type and 
nature of operations to be licensed and conducted a formal economic 
analysis. One alternative to a flat fee that we considered was to 
establish scaled fees, similar to those in the current regulations. 
However, we found it difficult to do so in an equitable way. For 
example, some dealers and exhibitors with small numbers of animals may 
derive significant income from their regulated activities, while other 
dealers and exhibitors with large numbers of animals may derive more 
modest incomes from their activities, based on the types of animals, 
location of their business, business model, and a variety of other 
factors. As discussed, we are proposing a flat fee of $120 for 
licensure, which represents a fee that is comparable to, or in many 
cases reduced from, existing fees for licensure. In addition to being 
an equitable fee for licenses, the proposed fee structure would allow 
for more efficient and streamlined business processes for Animal Care, 
and would simplify the calculation of licensing fees for applicants.

License Compliance; Temporary Licenses

    Compliance with the regulations was a subject of concern for many 
commenters. A large number of commenters expressed support for the 
proposed provision to require licensees to demonstrate compliance with 
the AWA and regulations when making noteworthy changes to the number, 
type, or location of animals used in regulated activities. Some 
commenters requested additional clarification on the meaning of the 
terms ``noteworthy changes'' and ``affirmatively demonstrate 
compliance.'' A few commenters did not agree with this proposed change, 
noting that

[[Page 10724]]

inspections are sufficient to determine noteworthy changes and that 
additional reporting would be unnecessary. As discussed below, this 
proposal sets forth specifics on what changes would trigger the need 
for a new license.
    Pre-licensing inspections was one topic discussed in the ANPR, with 
a proposed provision to reduce, from three to two, the number of 
opportunities an applicant has to correct deficiencies and take 
corrective measures before forfeiting his or her license application 
and fee. Although many commenters supported this provision, others 
raised concerns regarding the input of potentially ``bad'' inspectors, 
the imposition of financial burden upon licensees in the event of 
repeated findings of deficiency, and the appearance of pre-license 
inspections becoming too much of a problem-finding mission as opposed 
to an opportunity to educate and foster a learning process for license 
applicants. A few commenters suggested that such a reduction in the 
number of opportunities for applicants to correct deficiencies should 
be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the type of 
deficiency identified.
    In this proposed rule, we have elected not to propose any changes 
to the number of opportunities an applicant has to correct deficiencies 
and take corrective measures before forfeiting his or her license 
application and fee.
    In the ANPR, another potential regulatory change under 
consideration was for APHIS to specify procedures to ensure licensees 
have ample time to apply for licenses and demonstrate compliance prior 
to the expiration of an existing license. Issuance of conditional or 
temporary licenses to those who submitted an application before the 
expiration of his or her current license and have a history of 
compliance, but nevertheless experience an inadvertent lapse in 
licensure, would be one way to ensure continuity of licensure under any 
new requirements.
    Some commenters questioned the issuance of a temporary license and 
how such an issuance would work. One such commenter stated that the 
timelines outlined in the ANPR did not provide a comprehensive view of 
the process for licensing that would prevent inadvertent lapses in 
licensure. The same commenter also noted that requiring compliant 
businesses to have additional inspections would obligate businesses to 
make a substantial investment to ensure their site is in full 
compliance at the moment of inspection, leading to potential breaks in 
business continuity. Another commenter asked what would qualify as 
``ample time'' to demonstrate compliance prior to the expiration of an 
existing license. Another commenter stated that the term 
``conditional'' carries a negative connotation and suggested the term 
``provisional'' license instead.
    This proposed rule refers to conditional licenses as temporary 
licenses in response to these comments and sets forth specific 
information on the proposed temporary licensure process. With regard to 
the commenter's concern that businesses would have to invest resources 
to be in full compliance, we wish to make clear that licensees are 
required to be in full compliance at all times under the Act and 
regulations.

Disclosure of Violations and Convictions Involving Animal Laws; 
Strengthening Prohibitions

    A large number of commenters expressed strong support for the 
suggested regulatory provision for license applicants to disclose 
incidences of violations and convictions involving animal-related laws. 
Suggestions from commenters related to this provision included: Denying 
licenses to individuals with a history of noncompliance, open 
investigations, or interference with APHIS officials; detailing 
timeframes, scope, and costs for any such regulations; suspending 
licenses for noncompliant breeders with repeat violations in a 5-year 
time period; offering case-by-case considerations for applicants who 
disclose convictions involving animal-related laws; and requesting that 
APHIS issue fines for initial disclosures of animal abuse, with 
prohibition of a license occurring upon a second AWA violation.
    Some commenters stated that there is no positive value to a 
provision requiring applicants to disclose animal cruelty convictions 
or other violations of Federal, State, or local laws pertaining to 
animals. One commenter stated that such a disclosure for a single 
violation could cause unjust harm to an applicant's reputation, and 
suggested that only multiple violations should be disclosed.
    The current regulations already set forth provisions for the denial 
of a license for persons with animal cruelty convictions and certain 
other violations of Federal, State, or local laws pertaining to animals 
(9 CFR 2.11). This proposed rule would support Animal Care's 
administration of this existing licensing restriction by requiring 
affirmative disclosure of such violations at the time of application.
    On the proposed topic of strengthening existing prohibitions for 
persons with suspended or revoked licenses, including restricting 
individuals whose licenses have been suspended or revoked from working 
for other regulated entities, the majority of commenters expressed 
broad support for this proposal. Specific comments related to this 
topic included requiring business owners to provide proof of identity 
and employee lists to APHIS on an annual basis, creating a grading 
system for violations and their consequences, and increasing publicly 
available data related to those with violations related to animal 
mistreatment or neglect. We appreciate these comments and have set 
forth specific provisions for public comment in this proposed rule.

Other Concerns

    Many commenters expressed a general criticism of current USDA 
enforcement of the AWA and regulations. Such criticism often also 
extended to the lack of transparency of documentation that is available 
to the public regarding alleged AWA violators. Other concerns mentioned 
by commenters--some of which fell outside the scope of the ANPR--
included the use of unannounced inspections for licensees (which some 
commenters cited as overly burdensome and time-constraining); support 
for streamlining procedures for denying, terminating, and summarily 
suspending a license; support for preventing individuals with a history 
of noncompliance from using alternate names to apply for new licenses 
or otherwise circumventing ownership laws; specific concerns related to 
the care of an elephant named ``Nosey''; and requests for animal 
shelters and rescues to be subject to the same regulations as USDA-
licensed breeders.
    Based on our review of the ANPR comments, information submitted by 
stakeholders, and our own experience with administering AWA 
regulations, we are now proposing to amend the regulations concerning 
licensing. Each of the proposed changes is discussed in detail below.

Definitions

    We propose to amend Sec.  1.1 of the regulations, ``Definitions,'' 
by removing the term and definition for AC Regional Director, because 
Animal Care is no longer divided up into regions and this title and 
position have changed. References to the AC Regional Director, or to a 
regional office, would be replaced with references to the Animal Care 
Deputy Administrator or the appropriate Animal Care office, 
respectively.

[[Page 10725]]

    We further propose to amend the definition for business hours, 
which are the hours during which licensees must allow APHIS officials 
access to their places of business and their facilities, animals, and 
records to inspect for compliance with the AWA and regulations. 
Currently, the regulations define business hours to mean a reasonable 
number of hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except for legal Federal holidays, each week of the year, during which 
such inspections may be made. However, we have observed a number of 
licensees who are not available a reasonable number of hours during 
these times because they have full-time employment elsewhere during the 
weekdays or because they operate at reduced hours on weekdays to allow 
customers to visit their place of business on the weekends. To reflect 
these business practices, and to ensure that such licensees are able to 
make their place of business and facilities, animals, and records 
available for inspection at all reasonable times, as required by the 
Act, we are proposing to remove the words ``Monday through Friday, 
except for legal Federal holidays'' from the definition of business 
hours. APHIS will continue to coordinate with licensees and registrants 
who do not maintain regular public business hours to establish optimal 
times for inspection, as necessary.

Licensing Requirements

    We propose to amend Sec.  2.1 of the regulations, ``Requirements 
and application.'' We would revise some of the phrasing in paragraph 
(a)(1) for clarity and would remove the phrases ``intending to'' or 
``intends to'' operate where they appear in this paragraph. These 
revisions would aim to prevent the issuance of licenses to those who do 
not operate as bona fide exhibitors (i.e., they never exhibit their 
animals to the public for compensation), but become licensed to 
circumvent State laws restricting animal ownership.
    We also would update the information required for license 
applications, which would include:
     The name of the person applying for the license;
     A valid mailing address for the applicant;
     A valid address for all premises, facilities, or locations 
where animals, facilities, equipment, and records are held, kept or 
maintained;
     The anticipated maximum number of animals on hand at any 
one single point in time during that period of licensure;
     The anticipated type of animals to be owned, held, 
maintained, sold, or exhibited, including those animals leased, during 
the 3-year period of licensure; and, if the anticipated type of animals 
includes exotic or wild animals, information and records demonstrating 
that the applicant has adequate knowledge of and experience with of 
those animals (such as experience carefully handling the animals in a 
manner that does not cause behavior stress, physical harm or 
unnecessary discomfort, using methods to train, work, and handle the 
animals that do not involve physical abuse, providing humane husbandry, 
care, and housing for the animals, and, if used for public exhibition, 
experience handling the animal so there is minimal risk of harm to the 
animal and the public, and consideration of the needs for performing 
animals, young or immature animals, and animals that are fed by the 
public);
     If the person is seeking a license as an exhibitor, 
whether the person intends to exhibit any animal at any location other 
than the person's approved site(s); and
     The disclosure of any plea of nolo contendere (no contest) 
or finding of violation of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations 
pertaining to animal cruelty or the transportation, ownership, neglect, 
or welfare of animals.
    We would amend paragraph (a)(2) to remove outdated language 
pertaining to applicants who operate businesses in more than one State. 
We also would revise language regarding license fees to remove 
references to fee tables; instead, completed applications would include 
a flat $120 license fee to be submitted to the appropriate Animal Care 
office.
    Paragraph (b) currently states the requirement that no person shall 
have more than one license. We would expand this paragraph to combine 
it with existing restrictions on the issuance of licenses from existing 
Sec.  2.5(d), which provide that licenses are issued to specific 
persons for specific premises and do not transfer upon change of 
ownership, nor are they valid at a different location. We would expand 
these restrictions to make clear that licenses are issued to specific 
persons, and for specific activities, animals, and approved sites, and 
that licenses are not valid upon changes of ownership, locations, 
activities, or animals. New licenses would have to be obtained in the 
event of such changes. Any changes to a licensee's name, address, 
management, substantial control or ownership of his/her business or 
operation, locations, activities, and number or type of animals 
described in proposed paragraph (b)(2) would have to be reported to 
APHIS Animal Care no fewer than 90 days before such changes take 
effect. Any person who is subject to the regulations and who intends to 
exhibit any animal at any location other than the person's approved 
site (such as circuses and traveling educational exhibits or animal 
acts) would have to provide that information on his/her application 
form in accordance with paragraph (a) of Sec.  2.1 (as discussed above) 
and submit written itineraries in accordance with Sec.  2.126. If the 
application did not provide such information, then a new application 
would have to be submitted and a new license obtained before exhibiting 
at locations other than the person's approved site.
    Proposed paragraph (b)(2) would state that licenses authorize 
increments of 50 animals on hand at any single point in time during the 
period of licensure, and that licensees must obtain a new license 
before any change resulting in more than the authorized number of 
animals on hand at any single point in time. For example, a dog breeder 
with 30-40 breeding female dogs should apply for a license to hold 100 
dogs and demonstrate compliance to house 100 dogs (adults and puppies) 
to accommodate anticipated births from the dogs. Since the breeder 
business model is predicated on selling puppies at or shortly after 8-
weeks of age, the applicant would have to demonstrate the ability to 
safely handle, house, and care for up to 100 dogs (adult and puppies) 
at the time of pre-license inspection. The pre-license demonstration of 
compliance would take into account the species of dog, the number of 
breeding female dogs, the projected litter size, and the facility's 
business model for selling and placing puppies and adult dogs who are 
no longer used for breeding purposes. Paragraph (b)(2) would also state 
that licenses authorize the use of animals by subpart A through F in 
part 3, except that, for subparts D and F, licenses separately 
authorize the use of each of the following groups of animals: (1) Group 
5 and 6 nonhuman primates, (2) big cats or large felids (lions, tigers, 
leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, cougars, and any hybrid cross thereof), 
(3) wolves, (4) bears, and (5) mega-herbivores (elephants, 
rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, and giraffes). These groups of animals 
would have to be separately authorized because these animals are 
dangerous and have unique regulatory and care needs. Licensees would 
also be required to obtain a new license before using any animals 
beyond

[[Page 10726]]

those animals authorized for use under the existing license for 
activities for which a license is required. For example, if an 
applicant obtained a 3-year license after demonstrating compliance with 
the regulations in part 2 and the standards pertaining to dogs and cats 
(subpart A of part 3), but later decides that he or she wishes to also 
acquire and use rabbits for activities that require a license, that 
person would need to apply for a new license and demonstrate compliance 
with all applicable regulations and standards, including the standards 
pertaining to dogs, cats, and rabbits (subparts A and C of part 3), and 
obtain a new license, before using the rabbits for such activities.
    Paragraph (c)(2) would be amended, with existing language related 
to application, initial, and renewal license fees removed and replaced 
with the proposed flat license fee of $120 and corresponding payment 
information. Similarly, in paragraph (d) we propose to remove language 
regarding license renewals and fees, since these would no longer be in 
effect under this proposal. Finally, we propose to redesignate 
paragraph (e) as paragraph (d).
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.2 of the regulations, ``Acknowledgement 
of regulations and standards,'' by removing language related to initial 
and renewal license applications, since these would no longer be in 
effect under the current proposal. We also would clarify that, upon 
request, a license applicant would receive a copy of the Act and the 
regulations and standards from Animal Care, which are also available 
for public review on the internet.\2\ We are proposing to make this 
change because we have found that the vast majority of applicants and 
licensees have access to the internet, and it is costly to the Agency 
to send paper copies of the regulations and standards to them by postal 
mail. If an applicant or licensee would like to receive a paper copy, 
however, we stand ready to send one to them upon request. All license 
applicants would continue to be required to review the regulations and 
standards and agree to comply with them by signing the application form 
before a license would be issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/AC_BlueBook_AWA_FINAL_2017_508comp.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We propose to amend Sec.  2.3 of the regulations, ``Demonstration 
of compliance with standards and regulations,'' by adding that the 
applicant must agree to comply with the Act and the regulations and 
standards before APHIS will issue a license. In addition, we propose to 
refine some of the existing language in this section. In paragraph (b), 
we would clarify that no license will be issued until the license 
applicant demonstrates that he or she is in full compliance with the 
Act and the regulations and standards upon inspection. We also would 
add provisions to explain that all applicants would be granted up to 
three inspections within a 60-day period to demonstrate compliance with 
the Act and regulations, and, should applicants fail to demonstrate 
compliance during the third pre-license inspection, providing 
applicants with the opportunity to appeal the findings of such 
inspection to the Deputy Administrator within 7 days of receiving the 
report. Should APHIS reject any appeal, APHIS would notify the 
applicant of the Agency's denial of the license application. Within 30 
days of receiving such notice, an applicant may request a hearing to 
contest the Agency's denial of the license application.
    Additionally, an applicant who holds a valid license at the time he 
or she submitted the application that has been denied, and who 
submitted a timely appeal of the inspection findings from the third 
pre-license inspection, would be able to request an expedited hearing 
before an administrative law judge (ALJ), and the valid license would 
remain in effect until the ALJ issues his or her initial decision. 
Specifics of the process for requesting a hearing would be further 
described in Sec.  2.11(b). The provisions described in the new Sec.  
2.11(b) are intended to afford adequate constitutionally mandated due 
process protections to current license holders, while maintaining 
proper regard for the policy of Congress to insure the humane care and 
treatment of covered animals. We invite public comment on the proposed 
licensing provisions and any suggested alternatives.
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.5 of the regulations, ``Duration of 
license and termination of license.'' In paragraph (a), we would state 
that licenses issued under part 2 will be valid and effective for a 
period of 3 years unless certain circumstances arise. Consistent with 
the current regulations, a license would not be valid if it has been 
revoked or suspended pursuant to section 19 of the Act or the license 
is voluntarily terminated upon request of the licensee, in writing, to 
the Deputy Administrator. Also in paragraph (a), we would retain the 
current restriction that a license is valid unless it has expired, 
while proposing to allow for the issuance of temporary licenses under 
certain conditions. Specifically, the conditions for the issuance of a 
temporary license under proposed paragraph (a)(3)(i) would be for 
applicants who submit the appropriate application form before the 
expiration date of a preceding license, and for the applicant to have 
had no noncompliances with the Act or regulations documented on an 
inspection report during the preceding period of licensure. To ensure 
that applicants can take full advantage of the three pre-licensing 
inspections provided for in Sec.  2.3(b) to demonstrate compliance with 
the regulations and standards, current licensees will be encouraged to 
apply 4 months prior to the expiration of their license. In proposed 
paragraph (a)(3)(ii), we would provide that a license would remain 
valid and in effect if an applicant meets the criteria in Sec.  
2.11(b)(2), until the ALJ issues his or her initial decision involving 
the denial of a license application. Finally, we would make clear in 
paragraph (a)(4) that there will not be a refund of the licensing fee 
if a license is denied, terminated, suspended, or revoked prior to its 
expiration date.
    We would remove existing paragraph (b) as it relates to license 
renewals and annual fees that would no longer be in effect under the 
current proposal. We would then redesignate paragraph (c) as paragraph 
(b). We would remove existing paragraph (d), since its language would 
be included in requirements under proposed Sec.  2.1, paragraph (b)(1). 
We would then redesignate paragraph (e) as paragraph (c).
    We propose to remove and reserve Sec. Sec.  2.6, 2.7, and 2.8. The 
information and fee tables related to initial and annual license fees 
and annual license reports contained under existing Sec. Sec.  2.6 and 
2.7 would no longer be applicable under the current proposal. As noted 
above, the information contained in existing Sec.  2.8 related to 
notification of change of name, address, control, or ownership of 
business would be included under provisions in proposed Sec.  2.1(b).
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.9, ``Officers, agents, and employees of 
licensees whose licenses have been suspended or revoked.'' In the 
description of a person who has been or is an officer, agent, or 
employee of a licensee and who was responsible for or participated in a 
violation upon which an order of suspension or revocation was based, we 
would replace ``a violation'' with ``activities.'' This change would 
make clear that this prohibition applies to licensees whose licenses 
have been suspended or revoked through consent decisions and orders 
that do not include findings of violations and other similar

[[Page 10727]]

settlement agreements. We also would add that such a person would not 
only be prohibited from obtaining a license as a dealer or exhibitor, 
but would also be prohibited from being registered as a carrier, 
intermediate handler, exhibitor, or research facility within the period 
during which the order of suspension or revocation is in effect.
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.10, ``Licensees whose licenses have 
been suspended or revoked.'' We would add language in paragraphs (a), 
(b), and (c) to require that persons with suspended or revoked licenses 
shall not be registered as an exhibitor, research facility, carrier, or 
intermediate handler, in addition to not being licensed, within the 
period during which the order of suspension or revocation is in effect. 
In paragraph (c), we would add that any person whose license has been 
suspended or revoked shall not shall not buy, sell, transport, exhibit, 
or deliver for transportation, any animal during the period of 
suspension or revocation under any circumstances, whether on behalf of 
themselves or another. In paragraph (a), we would replace ``AC Regional 
Director'' with ``Deputy Administrator,'' consistent with our proposal 
to update these terms.
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.11, ``Denial of initial license 
application.'' We would remove the word ``initial'' from the section 
heading in light of the proposed application process for fixed-term 
licenses. We also would adjust the section reference in paragraph 
(a)(1) to reflect the change in location of fee information (from 
existing Sec.  2.6 to proposed Sec.  2.1), and would add a new 
paragraph (a)(4) to include the denial of a license application to any 
applicant who was an officer, agent, or employee of a licensee whose 
license has been suspended or revoked, as set forth in Sec.  2.9. We 
would then redesignate existing paragraphs (a)(4) through (6) as (a)(5) 
through (7). In proposed paragraph (a)(5), we also would conform the 
length of time during which an application can be denied due to a nolo 
contendere (no contest) plea or finding of a violation of any Federal, 
State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to animal cruelty with 
the proposed 3-year period of licensure. We would clarify in paragraph 
(a)(2) that a license will not be issued to any applicant who is not in 
compliance with the Act (in addition to the regulations and standards) 
and in paragraph (d) that no license will be issued under circumstances 
that the Administrator determines would circumvent any order, 
stipulation, or settlement agreement suspending, revoking, terminating, 
or denying a license or disqualifying a person from engaging in 
activities under the Act.
    In proposed paragraph (b), we would add provisions to outline the 
process through which an applicant whose license application has been 
denied may request an expedited hearing before an administrative law 
judge. This process would be available to applicants who hold a valid 
license at the time they submitted a new license application, submitted 
the new license application no fewer than 90 days prior to the 
expiration of the valid license, and who submitted a timely appeal 
contesting the finding(s) from the third pre-license inspection. 
Applicants meeting these criteria would receive an expedited hearing no 
later than 30 days after receipt of the hearing request. Furthermore, 
the ALJ must issue his or her initial decision within 30 days of the 
hearing. The license the applicant held at the time he or she submitted 
the new license application would remain valid and in effect until the 
ALJ issued his or her initial decision. In the event the ALJ issued a 
decision affirming the Agency's denial of the license application, the 
license would terminate immediately and the applicant would not be 
eligible for any temporary license if he or she elected to appeal the 
ALJ's initial decision.
    We propose to add a new Sec.  2.13, ``Appeal of Inspection 
Report,'' to explain the process by which a licensee or registrant may 
appeal the findings of an inspection report. To receive consideration, 
the appeal must be received by the Deputy Administrator within 21 days 
of the date the licensee or registration received the inspection report 
and must contain a written statement contesting the inspection findings 
and include any documentation or other information in support of the 
appeal.
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.38, ``Miscellaneous,'' by eliminating 
the statement that APHIS will publish lists of research facilities in 
the Federal Register. APHIS is undertaking this change to reflect both 
current business practices of publishing information using public 
websites for ease of access, and the Agency's practice of maintaining 
and regularly updating a list of registered research facilities on the 
APHIS website. Consistent with the existing provision, interested 
parties may continue to request the list from the Deputy Administrator.
    We propose to amend Sec.  2.127, ``Publication of names of persons 
subject to the provisions of this part,'' by replacing the word 
``names'' in the title with the word ``lists,'' and by removing the 
statement that the list will be published in the Federal Register. As 
noted above, APHIS is undertaking this change to reflect current 
business practices of publishing information on its website, including 
a list of persons who are licensed and registered with APHIS under the 
AWA. Consistent with the existing provision, interested parties may 
continue to request the list from the Deputy Administrator.

Importation of Live Dogs

    We are proposing several clarifying edits to the importation of 
live dog regulations for consistency and conformance with the Act. We 
propose to amend Sec.  2.150, ``Import permit,'' by removing the words 
``research, or veterinary treatment'' in paragraph (a) and adding the 
words ``resale for'' before the words ``research purposes'' in 
paragraph (c)(8). We would also clarify Sec.  2.151, 
``Certifications,'' by removing the words ``research, or veterinary 
treatment'' in paragraph (a), adding the words ``resale for'' before 
the words ``use in research'' in the first sentence of paragraph 
(b)(1), and adding the words ``and subsequent resale'' in the 
discussion of veterinary treatment by a licensed veterinarian in 
paragraph (b)(2). These changes would harmonize the regulations with 
the Act and make clear that dogs intended for resale for research 
purposes, or dogs intended for resale following veterinary treatment, 
must be imported with an import permit and accompanying certifications, 
except as provided in Sec.  2.151(b).
    We would also amend Sec.  2.153 by adding the words ``or the Act'' 
immediately after the words ``this subpart.'' We are proposing this 
change to make clear that the removal and seizure procedures in this 
section apply to noncompliance with the Act as well as the regulations.
    Finally, for consistency with the AWA and regulations, we would 
remove the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' everywhere 
they appear in the import of live dogs regulations and replace them 
with the word ``States,'' which is defined in part 1 to mean ``a State 
of the United States, the District of Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto 
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or any other territory 
or possession of the United States.'' This change would make clear that 
no import permit is required when transporting dogs within the United 
States.

Animal Health and Husbandry Standards

    In addition to the licensing revisions, we considered making 
changes to requirements in the animal health and

[[Page 10728]]

husbandry standards in subpart A of part 3 that would better align the 
regulations with standards of humane animal treatment established under 
the AWA. One option under consideration was to revise various 
provisions pertaining to the care of dogs, particularly in relation to 
housing and access to water, among other things. For example, current 
regulations require that dogs that do not have continual access to 
water must be offered water not less than twice daily for at least 1 
hour each time. Although lack of continual access to water is generally 
not a risk to healthy dogs, when other stress factors are present (e.g. 
ill, infirm, pregnant, or young dogs, and/or exposure to temperature 
extremes), lack of access to water may escalate health consequences. We 
contemplated adding a provision that would account for the unique 
watering needs for certain dogs, short of requiring that the animals 
have 24-hour access to clean, drinkable water to promote their health 
and well-being. However, in examining the issues and accounting for the 
animal health and well-being factors involved, we determined that the 
most prudent approach would be to include such a provision requiring 
all dogs to have 24-hour access to water. In addition, we are proposing 
specific veterinary care requirements for dogs. It is our expectation 
that adding this would strengthen arrangements between licensees and 
registrants and their attending veterinarians and enhance preventative 
and ongoing care for dogs, and, coupled with continual access to 
water--by which we mean constant, uninterrupted access at all times--
would result in the greatest benefit to health and well-being of dogs. 
Accordingly, we propose to revise Sec.  3.10 to add a provision that 
requires dogs to have continual access to potable water, unless 
restricted by the attending veterinarian.
    We also propose to amend the veterinary care requirements for dogs 
in a new Sec.  3.13. We would expand existing regulations in subpart D 
requiring dealers and exhibitors to establish and maintain an adequate 
program of veterinary care (PVC) for regulated animals. Proposed Sec.  
3.13 would require that each dealer, exhibitor, and research facility 
must follow an appropriate PVC for dogs that is developed, documented 
in writing, and signed by an attending veterinarian, that includes 
annual, hands-on veterinary exams for adult dogs by the attending 
veterinarian and addresses husbandry issues for hair coat, toenails, 
teeth, skin, and ears. These annual veterinary exams would be required 
in addition to existing veterinary care requirements that provide for 
regularly scheduled visits by the attending veterinarian to premises 
where animals are kept to ensure the adequacy of animal care and use. 
Dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities would be required to keep 
and maintain the written program and to make it available for 
inspection by APHIS. Other proposed provisions would require 
vaccinations--unless contraindicated for health reasons or unless 
otherwise required by a research protocol approved by the Institutional 
Animal Care and Use Committee at research facilities--for contagious 
and deadly diseases of dogs (including rabies, parvovirus, and 
distemper), appropriate preventative care and treatment, and 
recordkeeping requirements for veterinary and preventive care that the 
dogs receive.
    The expanded PVC would guide facilities with dogs in practicing a 
minimum level of acceptable husbandry and in maintaining records of 
preventative care and the treatment of ill or injured dogs. Annual 
hands-on physical exams by the attending veterinarian would allow for 
evaluation of factors that could affect the dogs' health, well-being, 
and ability to reproduce. Health problems that are detected early could 
receive timely and appropriate veterinary care. A required husbandry 
program would help ensure the overall health of adult dogs and puppies, 
thereby preventing avoidable disease, illness, and injury. Required 
medical records would help facilities keep track of incidents, 
treatments and progress of care, and would also allow facilities to 
track individual health trends and the frequency of illnesses and 
injuries for the kennel as a whole.

Miscellaneous

    Throughout parts 1, 2, and 3, we propose to update any and all 
references to ``AC Regional Director'' with ``Deputy Administrator'' to 
more accurately reflect the current position title in use. Similarly, 
we propose to update any and all references to ``regional offices'' 
with the appropriate Animal Care office. Animal Care maintains 
information regarding its offices and services on the APHIS website, 
and directs callers to the appropriate Animal Care office or person who 
is best able to assist them. In addition, APHIS maintains a website to 
assist the public with reaching the appropriate point of contact for 
each program area.\3\ These interactive services will continue to 
ensure individuals have information about Animal Care's offices and 
services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/banner/contactus/sa_animal_welfare and https://www.usda.gov/ask-expert.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also propose to correct minor typographical errors in Sec. Sec.  
2.38, 3.61, 3.78, and 3.110. We would replace an erroneous period with 
a comma in Sec.  2.38(g)(1), correct the spelling of ``species'' in 
Sec.  3.61(b), correct the spelling of ``words'' in Sec.  3.61(f), 
replace an unintended zero with the letter ``O'' in Sec.  3.78, and 
remove an inadvertently repetitive phrase in Sec.  3.110(a). Finally, 
we propose to correct erroneous citations to the health certificate 
requirements that appear in three places in the regulations. Instead of 
listing Sec.  2.78 as the section containing the health certificate 
requirements, Sec. Sec.  2.75 and 2.77 erroneously list the section as 
Sec.  2.79. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.
    This proposed 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. This proposed rule is expected to 
be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action. Details on the estimated 
costs of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic 
analysis.
    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 provides an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that 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 by 
contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or 
on the Regulations.gov website (see ADDRESSES above for instructions 
for accessing Regulations.gov).
    Based on the information we have thus far, the Agency does not 
believe that adoption of this proposed rule would result in any 
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. 
However, we do not currently have all of the data necessary

[[Page 10729]]

for a comprehensive analysis of the effects of this proposed rule on 
small entities. Therefore, we are inviting comments on potential 
effects. In particular, we are interested in determining the number and 
kind of small entities that may incur benefits or costs from the 
implementation of this proposed rule.
    APHIS is proposing revisions to the licensing requirements to 
promote compliance with the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), as well as 
strengthen existing safeguards that prevent individuals and businesses 
that are unfit to hold a license from obtaining a license or from 
working with regulated animals. Licensees would be required to 
affirmatively demonstrate compliance and pay the associated license fee 
once every 3 years rather than renew their certification of regulatory 
compliance every year. In addition, the fee would be changed to a flat 
rate rather than a set of tiered rates. This action would promote AWA 
compliance by requiring that regulated businesses affirmatively 
demonstrate regulatory compliance when applying for or renewing a 
license. It would reduce the license fee for most regulated entities 
and would reduce the compliance paperwork burden for all licensees.
    In addition, there would be cost savings in terms of the reduced 
time (clerical work) needed to complete and submit initial and renewal 
license applications. As shown in table 3 of the full analysis, the 
combined fee and clerical work cost savings would range between about 
$633,000 and $2.1 million.
    APHIS considered several alternatives in developing various aspects 
of the proposed rule. Regarding the types of animals that would trigger 
the need for a new license, APHIS considered requiring a new license 
for all exotic or wild animal changes, but rejected this alternative 
because it would result in unnecessary renewals (e.g., gerbils can be 
exotic/wild). Instead, APHIS proposes to require a new license for 
types of animals that are dangerous and have unique regulatory and care 
needs.
    Regarding the number of animals that would trigger the need for a 
new license, APHIS considered a range of from 20 to 100, but settled on 
50 animals after reviewing animal inventory counts at regulated 
facilities, considering the potential burden to licensees who add new 
animals and to the agency in its administration of the licensing 
program, and animal welfare benefits. If APHIS were to set the 
threshold number too low, businesses would need to apply for licenses 
frequently with little animal welfare benefit, and animal welfare risks 
may not be acceptable if the number were too high.
    For the proposed licensing fees, APHIS found continuing to use a 
tiered approach for setting fees would not allow us to realize the 
efficiencies to be gained through the use of a flat fee. This is 
because some facilities have small numbers of animals and derive 
significant income from their regulated activities, while other 
facilities can have large numbers of animals and derive modest income 
from their regulated activities. Also, APHIS noted the fact that the 
fees are not intended to be user fees for inspections.
    With respect to automatic license termination following two or more 
attempted inspections during the period of licensure, APHIS considered 
requiring immediate termination but decided in favor of allowing the 
licensee the opportunity to first present evidence in defense. Finally, 
APHIS also considered different time frames for the fixed-term license 
(e.g., 4 or 5 years) and settled on 3 years based on our experience 
administering the AWA.
    APHIS is also proposing to amend the veterinary care requirements 
for dogs that are under the care of entities covered by the AWA. 
Facilities with dogs would be required to have an expanded program of 
veterinary care (PVC) that includes annual, hands-on veterinary exams 
for adult dogs by the attending veterinarian and addresses husbandry 
issues for hair coat, toenails, teeth, skin, and ears. Facilities would 
also be required to create and maintain medical records of preventative 
health care measures and the treatment of ill and injured dogs.
    The expanded PVC would guide the facilities in practicing a minimum 
level of acceptable husbandry and in maintaining records of 
preventative care and the treatment of ill or injured dogs. Annual 
hands-on physical exams by the attending veterinarian would allow for 
evaluation of factors that could affect the dogs' health, well-being, 
and ability to reproduce. Health problems that are detected early could 
receive timely and appropriate veterinary care. A required husbandry 
program would help ensure the overall health of adult dogs and puppies, 
thereby preventing avoidable disease, illness, and injury. Required 
medical records would help facilities keep track of incidents, 
treatments and progress of care. They also allow facilities to track 
individual health trends and the frequency of illnesses and injuries 
for the kennel as a whole.
    The total industry cost of complying with this requirement is 
estimated to be between $284,000 and $948,000. Additionally, expanding 
a PVC form would require time for the attending veterinarian to 
complete. However, the PVC only has to be written once unless changes 
are made later. Most PVCs used by an attending veterinarian would be 
very similar, facility-to-facility. We estimate the cost of developing 
a new, fully compliant PVC would be about $150 per facility. Once a 
fully compliant PVC has been developed, we estimate the cost of having 
the attending veterinarian update and make adjustments to it as needed, 
and of discussing any PVC changes with the licensee during the annual 
premises visit would be about $50 per facility.
    It would take operators time to create and maintain medical records 
for any dogs that become ill or injured, and to keep preventative 
health records. The incremental industry cost of keeping medical 
records for ill or injured dogs would be about $112,000 per year. The 
incremental industry cost of keeping preventive records would be about 
$247,300.
    This proposed rule would also amend the AWA standard for dogs with 
respect to access to clean, drinkable water. The current regulations 
state that if potable water is not continually available to a 
facility's dogs, it must be offered as often as necessary to ensure the 
animal's health and well-being, and not less than twice daily for at 
least 1 hour each time, unless restricted by the attending 
veterinarian. The proposed standard would require that facilities make 
potable water continually available. We estimate that between 50 and 70 
percent of regulated facilities provide 24-hour access to water. Thirty 
to 50 percent of those licensees and registrants not providing 24-hour 
access to water would likely bear plumbing and labor costs to ensure 
such access. We estimate that the proposed water access requirements 
for facilities having dogs would result in one-time costs expected to 
range from $1,021,000 to $2,460,000. It is possible that some such 
facilities could provide 24-hour access to clean, drinkable water using 
receptacles such as pans and bowls. Some of the factors that may 
influence whether water bowls are a feasible option for compliance at a 
given facility may include the size of the facility, number and type of 
dogs, the type, size, and configuration of water bowls used, and the 
availability of staff to refill and monitor the bowls, among other 
things. We welcome public comment that would enable us to better 
estimate these costs.
    With regard to the proposed veterinary care requirements, APHIS 
considered not including the provision to require that the dogs have 
24-hour

[[Page 10730]]

access to clean, drinkable water. However, the Agency determined that 
this requirement is important for animal welfare and should be a part 
of this proposed rule.
    All businesses covered under the AWA would be affected by the 
proposed licensing requirements, including animal dealers, exhibitors, 
retail pet stores, brokers, and breeders. The number of these entities 
varies from year to year, but has tended to be around 6,000 in recent 
years. Based on reported revenue data and Small Business Administration 
small-entity standards, the majority of the entities affected by this 
rule can be considered small. About one-half of these businesses are 
licensees and registrants with dogs, including about 2,240 dog breeder 
facilities.
    The proposed licensing requirements would result in annual cost 
savings expected to range from about $633,000 to $2,115,000. The 
proposed veterinary care requirements for facilities having dogs would 
result in annual costs ranging from about $841,200 to about $1,505,200, 
and the proposed water access requirement for these facilities would 
result in annual costs ranging from about $1,020,800 to $2,460,000. Net 
costs are therefore expected to range from annual cost savings of 
$253,000 (the higher licensing cost savings estimate plus the lower 
veterinary care and water access cost estimates) to annual costs of 
$3,331,950 (the lower licensing cost savings estimate plus the higher 
veterinary care and water access cost estimates). Based on the costs 
and in accordance with guidance on complying with Executive Order 
13771, the single primary estimate of the costs of this proposed rule 
is $1,539,000, the mid-point estimate of net costs annualized in 
perpetuity using a 7 percent discount rate. We seek comments on our 
regulatory analysis, including on the assumptions underlying our 
estimates. If you have an alternative estimate, please provide any 
supporting documents or data.

Executive Order 12372

    This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, 
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local 
officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.)

Executive Order 12988

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 
Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. 
The Act provides administrative procedures which must be exhausted 
prior to a judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.

Executive Order 13175

    This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments. The review reveals that this rule will not have 
substantial and direct effects on Tribal Governments and will not have 
significant Tribal implications.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), some of the information collection 
requirements included in this proposed rule have been approved under 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number 0579-0036. The new 
information collection requirements included in this proposed rule have 
been submitted as a new information collection for approval to OMB.
    Please send comments on the Information Collection Request (ICR) to 
OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to 
oira_submissions@omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, 
Washington, DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket 
No. APHIS-2017-0062. Please send a copy of your comments to USDA, using 
one of the methods described under ADDRESSES at the beginning of this 
document.
    We are proposing to amend the licensing requirements under the AWA 
regulations and strengthen the veterinary care standards for regulated 
dogs. The amendments include, but are not limited to, the following new 
information collection requirements: Use of a new fixed-term license 
application for dealers and exhibitors that expires after 3 years, at 
which time they would be required to demonstrate compliance before 
obtaining another fixed-term license; requiring license applicants to 
disclose any animal cruelty convictions or others violations of 
Federal, State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to animals, to 
assess their fitness for licensure; and enhancing adequate veterinary 
care for dogs, including the maintenance of medical records. The 
proposed license application would replace an existing initial license 
application and an annual license renewal application. We anticipate 
that the proposed license application would take the same amount of 
time to complete as the existing applications, but would only be 
required every 3 years, instead of an annual renewal. The proposed rule 
would also require licensees and registrants who hold dogs to maintain 
medical records on the preventative care provided to dogs, and to track 
medical conditions and treatment for ill and injured dogs. The use of 
these activities will help ensure that dealers, exhibitors, and 
operators of auction sales demonstrate compliance with the applicable 
standards in 9 CFR part 3, providing for the humane handling, care, 
treatment, and transportation of animals under the AWA.
    We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected 
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection requirements. 
These comments will help us:
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 
proposed information collection, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who 
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic 
submission of responses).
    Estimate of burden: Public burden for this collection of 
information is estimated to average 0.08 hours per response.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities; not-for-
profit institutions; farms; and State, local, and Tribal governments.
    Estimated annual number of respondents: 5,112.
    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 75.
    Estimated annual number of responses: 382,148.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 29,720 hours.
    (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the 
product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the estimate of 
burden.)
    Copies of this information collection may be viewed on the 
Regulations.gov website or in our reading room. (A link to 
Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the 
reading room are provided under the heading ADDRESSES at the beginning 
of this proposed rule.) Copies can also be obtained from Ms. Kimberly 
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection

[[Page 10731]]

Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483. APHIS will respond to any ICR-related 
comments in the final rule. All comments will also become a matter of 
public record.

E-Government Act Compliance

    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to 
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the internet 
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities 
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for 
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act 
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly 
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

List of Subjects

9 CFR Parts 1 and 2

    Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Research.

9 CFR Part 3

    Animal welfare, Marine mammals, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Research, Transportation.

    Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and 3 as 
follows:

PART 1--DEFINITION OF TERMS

0
1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
0
2. Section 1.1 is amended by removing the definition for AC Regional 
Director and revising the definition for Business hours to read as 
follows:


Sec.  1.1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Business hours means a reasonable number of hours between 7 a.m. 
and 7 p.m. each week of the year, during which inspections by APHIS may 
be made.
* * * * *

PART 2--REGULATIONS

0
3. 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
4. Section 2.1 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), (b), and (c);
0
b. By removing paragraph (d) and redesignating paragraph (e) as 
paragraph (d); and
0
c. By revising newly redesignated paragraph (d).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  2.1  Requirements and application.

    (a)(1) No person shall operate as a dealer, exhibitor, or operator 
of an auction sale, without a valid license, except persons who are 
exempt from the licensing requirements under paragraph (a)(3) of this 
section. A person must be 18 years of age or older to obtain a license. 
A person seeking a license shall apply on a form which will be 
furnished by the Deputy Administrator. The applicant shall provide the 
information requested on the application form, including, but not 
limited to:
    (i) The name of the person applying for the license;
    (ii) A valid mailing address through which the applicant can be 
reached at all times;
    (iii) A valid address for all premises, facilities, or locations 
where animals, animal facilities, equipment, and records are held, 
kept, or maintained;
    (iv) The anticipated maximum number of animals on hand at any one 
time during the period of licensure;
    (v) The anticipated type of animals to be owned, held, maintained, 
sold, or exhibited, including those animals leased, during the period 
of licensure, and if the anticipated type of animals includes exotic or 
wild animals, information and records demonstrating that the applicant 
has adequate knowledge of and experience with those animals;
    (vi) If the person is seeking a license as an exhibitor, whether 
the person intends to exhibit any animal at any location other than the 
person's location(s) listed pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this 
section; and
    (vii) Disclosure of any plea of nolo contendere (no contest) or 
finding of violation of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations 
pertaining to animal cruelty or the transportation, ownership, neglect, 
or welfare of animals.
    (2) The completed application form, along with a $120 license fee, 
shall be submitted to the appropriate Animal Care office.
* * * * *
    (b)(1) No person shall have more than one license. Licenses are 
issued to specific persons, and are issued for specific activities, 
animals, and approved sites. Licenses are not valid upon change of 
ownership, location, activities, or animals, and a new license must be 
obtained. A licensee shall notify Animal Care no fewer than 90 days, 
and obtain a new license, before any change in the name, address, 
management, substantial control or ownership of his business or 
operation, locations, activities, and number or type of animals 
described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Any person who is 
subject to the regulations in this subchapter and who intends to 
exhibit any animal at any location other than the person's approved 
site must provide that information on their application form in 
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section and submit written 
itineraries in accordance with Sec.  2.126.
    (2) Licenses authorize a specific number and specific type(s) of 
animals, as follows:
    (i) Licenses authorize increments of 50 animals on hand at any 
single point in time during the period of licensure. A licensee must 
obtain a new license before any change resulting in more than the 
authorized number of animals on hand at any single point in time during 
the period of licensure.
    (ii) Licenses authorize the use of animals subject to subparts A 
through F in part 3 of this subchapter, except that, for animals 
subject to subparts D and F, licenses must specifically authorize the 
use of each of the following groups of animals: Group 5 and 6 nonhuman 
primates, big cats or large felids (lions, tigers, leopards, cheetahs, 
jaguars, cougars, and any hybrid cross thereof), wolves, bears, and 
mega-herbivores (elephants, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, and 
giraffes). A licensee must obtain a new license before using any animal 
beyond those animals authorized under the existing license.
    (c) A license will be issued to any applicant, except as provided 
in Sec. Sec.  2.9 through 2.11, when:
    (1) The applicant has met the requirements of this section and 
Sec. Sec.  2.2 and 2.3; and
    (2) The applicant has paid a $120 license fee to the appropriate 
Animal Care office. The applicant may pay the fee by certified check, 
cashier's check, personal check, money order, or credit card. An 
applicant whose check is returned by a bank will be charged a fee of 
$20 for each returned check. If an applicant's check is returned, 
subsequent fees must be paid by certified check, cashier's check, or 
money order.
    (d) The failure of any person to comply with any provision of the 
Act, or any of the provisions of the regulations or standards in this 
subchapter, shall constitute grounds for denial of a license or for its 
suspension or revocation by the Secretary, as provided in the Act.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 2.2 is revised to read as follows:

[[Page 10732]]

Sec.  2.2  Acknowledgement of regulations and standards.

    Animal Care will supply a copy of the Act and the regulations and 
standards to an applicant upon request. Signing the application form is 
an acknowledgement that the applicant has reviewed the Act and the 
regulations and standards and agrees to comply with them.
0
6. Section 2.3 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.3  Demonstration of compliance with standards and regulations.

    (a) Each applicant for a license must demonstrate that his or her 
location(s) and any animals, facilities, vehicles, equipment, or other 
locations used or intended for use in the business comply with the Act 
and the regulations and standards set forth in parts 2 and 3 of this 
subchapter. Each applicant must make his or her animals, locations, 
facilities, vehicles, equipment, and records available for inspection 
during business hours and at other times mutually agreeable to the 
applicant and APHIS, to ascertain the applicant's compliance with the 
Act and the regulations and standards.
    (b) Each applicant for a license must be inspected by APHIS and 
demonstrate compliance with the Act and the regulations and standards, 
as required in paragraph (a) of this section, before APHIS will issue a 
license. If the first inspection reveals that the applicant's animals, 
premises, facilities, vehicles, equipment, locations, or records do not 
meet the applicable requirements of this subchapter, APHIS will advise 
the applicant of existing deficiencies and the corrective measures that 
must be completed to come into compliance with the regulations and 
standards. An applicant who fails the first inspection may request up 
to two more inspections by APHIS to demonstrate his or her compliance 
with the Act and the regulations and standards. The applicant must 
request the second inspection, and if applicable, the third inspection, 
within 60 days following the first inspection.
    (c) Any applicant who fails the third and final pre-license 
inspection may appeal all or part of the inspection findings to the 
Deputy Administrator. To appeal, the applicant must send a written 
statement contesting the inspection finding(s) and include any 
documentation or other information in support of the appeal. To receive 
consideration, the appeal must be received by the Deputy Administrator 
within 7 days of the date the applicant received the third pre-license 
inspection report. Within 7 days of receiving a timely appeal, the 
Deputy Administrator will issue a written response to notify the 
applicant whether APHIS will issue a license or deny the application.
    (d) If an applicant fails inspection or fails to request 
reinspections within the 60-day period, or fails to submit a timely 
appeal of the third pre-license inspection report as described in 
paragraph (c) of this section, the applicant will forfeit the 
application fee and cannot reapply for a license for a period of 6 
months from the date of the failed third inspection or the expiration 
of the time to request a third inspection. No license will be issued 
until the applicant demonstrates upon inspection that the animals, 
premises, facilities, vehicles, equipment, locations, and records are 
in compliance with all applicable requirements in the Act and the 
regulations and standards in this subchapter.
0
7. Section 2.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.5  Duration of license and termination of license.

    (a) A license issued under this part shall be valid and effective 
for 3 years unless:
    (1) The license has been revoked or suspended pursuant to section 
19 of the Act.
    (2) The license is voluntarily terminated upon request of the 
licensee, in writing, to the Deputy Administrator.
    (3) The license has expired, except that:
    (i) The Deputy Administrator may issue a temporary license that 
automatically expires after 120 days to an applicant whose immediately 
preceding 3-year license has expired if:
    (A) The applicant submits the appropriate application form before 
the expiration date of a preceding license; and
    (B) The applicant had no noncompliances with the Act and the 
regulations and standards in parts 2 and 3 of this subchapter 
documented in an inspection report during the preceding period of 
licensure.
    (ii) For expedited hearings occurring under Sec.  2.11(b)(2), a 
license will remain valid and effective until the administrative law 
judge issues his or her initial decision. Should the administrative law 
judge's initial decision affirm the denial of the license application, 
the applicant's license shall terminate immediately.
    (4) There will not be a refund of the license fee if a license is 
denied, terminated, suspended, or revoked prior to its expiration date.
    (b) Any person who seeks the reinstatement of a license that has 
expired or been terminated must follow the procedure applicable to new 
applicants for a license set forth in Sec.  2.1.
    (c) A license which is invalid under this part shall be surrendered 
to the Deputy Administrator. If the license cannot be found, the 
licensee shall provide a written statement so stating to the Deputy 
Administrator.


Sec.  2.6--2.8   [Removed and Reserved]

0
8. Sections 2.6--2.8 are removed and reserved.
0
9. Section 2.9 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.9  Officers, agents, and employees of licensees whose licenses 
have been suspended or revoked.

    Any person who has been or is an officer, agent, or employee of a 
licensee whose license has been suspended or revoked and who was 
responsible for or participated in the activity upon which the order of 
suspension or revocation was based will not be licensed, or registered 
as a carrier, intermediate handler, exhibitor, or research facility 
within the period during which the order of suspension or revocation is 
in effect.
0
10. Section 2.10 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.10  Licensees whose licenses have been suspended or revoked.

    (a) Any person whose license has been suspended for any reason 
shall not be licensed, or registered, in his or her own name or in any 
other manner, within the period during which the order of suspension is 
in effect. No partnership, firm, corporation, or other legal entity in 
which any such person has a substantial interest, financial or 
otherwise, will be licensed or registered during that period. Any 
person whose license has been suspended for any reason may apply to the 
Deputy Administrator, in writing, for reinstatement of his or her 
license.
    (b) Any person whose license has been revoked shall not be licensed 
or registered, in his or her own name or in any other manner, and no 
partnership, firm, corporation, or other legal entity in which any such 
person has a substantial interest, financial or otherwise, will be 
licensed or registered.
    (c) Any person whose license has been suspended or revoked shall 
not buy, sell, transport, exhibit, or deliver for transportation, any 
animal during the period of suspension or revocation, under any 
circumstances, whether on his or her behalf or on the behalf another 
licensee or registrant.
0
11. Section 2.11 is revised to read as follows:

[[Page 10733]]

Sec.  2.11  Denial of license application.

    (a) A license will not be issued to any applicant who:
    (1) Has not complied with the requirements of Sec. Sec.  2.1 
through 2.4 and has not paid the fees indicated in Sec.  2.1;
    (2) Is not in compliance with the Act or any of the regulations or 
standards in this subchapter;
    (3) Has had a license revoked or whose license is suspended, as set 
forth in Sec.  2.10;
    (4) Was an officer, agent, or employee of a licensee whose license 
has been suspended or revoked and who was responsible for or 
participated in the activity upon which the order of suspension or 
revocation was based, as set forth in Sec.  2.9;
    (5) Has pled nolo contendere (no contest) or has been found to have 
violated any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations pertaining to 
animal cruelty within 3 years of application, or after 3 years if the 
Administrator determines that the circumstances render the applicant 
unfit to be licensed;
    (6) Is or would be operating in violation or circumvention of any 
Federal, State, or local laws; or
    (7) Has made any false or fraudulent statements or provided any 
false or fraudulent records to the Department or other government 
agencies, or has pled nolo contendere (no contest) or has been found to 
have violated any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations 
pertaining to the transportation, ownership, neglect, or welfare of 
animals, or is otherwise unfit to be licensed and the Administrator 
determines that the issuance of a license would be contrary to the 
purposes of the Act.
    (b) Applicants may request a hearing under the following 
circumstances:
    (1) An applicant whose initial license application has been denied 
may request a hearing in accordance with the applicable rules of 
practice for the purpose of showing why the application for license 
should not be denied. The denial of an initial license application 
shall remain in effect until the final legal decision has been 
rendered. Should the license denial be upheld, the applicant may again 
apply for a license 1 year from the date of the final order denying the 
application, unless the order provides otherwise.
    (2) An applicant who submitted a timely appeal of a third pre-
license inspection as described in Sec.  2.3(c), and whose appeal 
results in the denial of the license application, may request an 
expedited hearing if the applicant held a valid license when he or she 
submitted the license application that has been denied and the Deputy 
Administrator received such license application no fewer than 90 days 
prior to the expiration of the valid license. If the applicant meets 
the criteria in this paragraph, and notwithstanding the timeframes of 
the proceedings set forth in the applicable rules of practice (7 CFR 
1.130 through 1.151):
    (i) The applicant must submit the request for an expedited hearing 
within 30 days of receiving notice from the Deputy Administrator that 
the license application has been denied;
    (ii) The administrative law judge shall set the expedited hearing 
so that it occurs within 30 days of receiving a timely request for 
expedited hearing as described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section; 
and
    (iii) The administrative law judge must issue an initial decision 
no later than 30 days after the expedited hearing.
    (iv) The applicant's license will remain valid until the 
administrative law judge issues his or her initial decision. Should the 
administrative law judge's initial decision affirm the denial of the 
license application, the applicant's license shall terminate 
immediately.
    (c) No partnership, firm, corporation, or other legal entity in 
which a person whose license application has been denied has a 
substantial interest, financial or otherwise, will be licensed within 1 
year of the license denial.
    (d) No license will be issued under circumstances that the 
Administrator determines would circumvent any order, stipulation, or 
settlement agreement suspending, revoking, terminating, or denying a 
license or disqualifying a person from engaging in activities under the 
Act.
0
12. Section 2.12 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.12  Termination of a license.

    A license may be terminated at any time for any reason that a 
license application may be denied pursuant to Sec.  2.11 after a 
hearing in accordance with the applicable rules of practice.
0
13. Section 2.13 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  2.13  Appeal of inspection report.

    Except as otherwise provided in Sec.  2.3(c), any licensee or 
registrant may appeal all or part of the inspection findings in an 
inspection report to the Deputy Administrator. To appeal, the licensee 
or registrant must send a written statement contesting the inspection 
finding(s) and include any documentation or other information in 
support of the appeal. To receive consideration, the appeal must be 
received by the Deputy Administrator within 21 days of the date the 
licensee or registrant received the inspection report that is the 
subject of the appeal.


Sec.  2.25   [Amended]

0
14. In Sec.  2.25, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words ``AC 
Regional Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy 
Administrator'' in their place.


Sec.  2.26   [Amended]

0
15. Section 2.26 is amended by removing the words ``AC Regional 
Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their 
place.


Sec.  2.27  [Amended]

0
16. Section 2.27 is amended by removing the words ``AC Regional 
Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy 
Administrator'' in their place.


Sec.  2.30   [Amended]

0
17. Section 2.30 is amended by removing the words ``AC Regional 
Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy 
Administrator'' in their place.


Sec.  2.36   [Amended]

0
18. In Sec.  2.36, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words ``AC 
Regional Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in 
their place.
0
19. Section 2.38 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (c);
0
b. In paragraph (g)(1) introductory text, by removing the period 
between the words ``acquired'' and ``sold'' and adding a comma in its 
place;
0
c. In paragraph (g)(7) footnote 1, by removing the words ``AC Regional 
Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their 
place; and
0
d. In paragraph (i) introductory text, by removing the words ``AC 
Regional Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in 
their place.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  2.38  Miscellaneous.

* * * * *
    (c) Publication of lists of research facilities subject to the 
provisions of this part. APHIS will publish on its website lists of 
research facilities registered in accordance with the provisions of 
this subpart. The lists may be obtained upon request from the Deputy 
Administrator.
* * * * *


Sec.  2.52   [Amended]

0
20. In Sec.  2.52, footnote 4 is amended by removing the words ``AC 
Regional

[[Page 10734]]

Director'' and adding the words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their 
place.


Sec.  2.75   [Amended]

0
21. In Sec.  2.75, paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(2) are amended by removing 
the citation ``Sec.  2.79'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  2.78'' in 
its place.


Sec.  2.77   [Amended]

0
22. In Sec.  2.77, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the citation 
``Sec.  2.79'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  2.78'' in its place.


Sec.  2.102   [Amended]

0
23. In Sec.  2.102, paragraphs (a) and (b) introductory text are 
amended by removing the words ``AC Regional Director'' and adding the 
words ``Deputy Administrator'' in their place.


Sec.  2.126   [Amended]

0
24. In Sec.  2.126, paragraph (c) is amended by removing the words ``AC 
Regional Director'' each time they appear and adding the words ``Deputy 
Administrator'' in their place.
0
25. Section 2.127 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.127  Publication of lists of persons subject to the provisions 
of this part.

    APHIS will publish on its website lists of persons licensed or 
registered in accordance with the provisions of this part. The lists 
may also be obtained upon request from the Deputy Administrator.


Sec.  2.150   [Amended]

0
26. Section 2.150 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' each 
time they appear and adding the word ``States'' in their place;
0
b. In paragraph (a), by removing the words ``, research, or veterinary 
treatment''; and
0
c. In paragraph (c)(8), by adding the words ``resale for'' immediately 
before the words ``research purposes''.


Sec.  2.151   [Amended]

0
27. Section 2.151 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' each 
time they appear and adding the word ``States'' in their place;
0
b. In paragraph (a) introductory text, by removing the words ``, 
research, or veterinary treatment'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1), by adding the words ``resale for'' immediately 
before the words ``use in research, tests, or experiments at a research 
facility''; and
0
d. In paragraph (b)(2) introductory text, by adding the words ``and 
subsequent resale'' immediately after the words ``for veterinary 
treatment by a licensed veterinarian''.


Sec.  2.152   [Amended]

0
28. Section 2.152 is amended by removing the words ``continental United 
States or Hawaii'' and adding the word ``States'' in their place.


Sec.  2.153   [Amended]

0
29. Section 2.153 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the words ``continental United States or Hawaii'' both 
times they appear and adding the word ``States'' in their place; and
0
b. By adding the words ``or the Act'' immediately after the words 
``this subpart''.

PART 3--STANDARDS

0
30. The authority citation for part 3 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.


Sec.  3.6   [Amended]

0
31. In Sec.  3.6, paragraphs (b)(5) and (c)(3) are amended by removing 
the citation ``Sec.  3.14 of this subpart'' and adding the citation 
``Sec.  3.15'' in their place, and by removing the citation ``Sec.  
3.14(a)(6) of this subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  
3.15(a)(6)'' in its place.
0
32. Section 3.10 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  3.10  Watering.

    (a) Potable water must be continually available to the dogs, unless 
restricted by the attending veterinarian.
    (b) If potable water is not continually available to the cats, it 
must be offered to the cats as often as necessary to ensure their 
health and well-being, but not less than twice daily for at least 1 
hour each time, unless restricted by the attending veterinarian.
    (c) Water receptacles must be kept clean and sanitized in 
accordance with Sec.  3.11(b) and before being used to water a 
different dog or cat or social grouping of dogs or cats.


Sec. Sec.  3.13 through 3.19   [Redesignated as Sec. Sec.  3.14 through 
3.20]

0
33. Sections 3.13 through 3.19 are redesignated as Sec. Sec.  3.14 
through 3.20, respectively.
0
34. New Sec.  3.13 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  3.13  Veterinary care for dogs.

    (a) Each dealer, exhibitor, and research facility must follow an 
appropriate program of veterinary care for dogs that is developed, 
documented in writing, and signed by the attending veterinarian. 
Dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities must keep and maintain the 
written program and make it available for APHIS inspection. The written 
program of veterinary care must address and meet the requirements for 
attending veterinarians and adequate veterinary care for every dealer 
and exhibitor in Sec.  2.40 of this subchapter and every research 
facility in Sec.  2.33 of this subchapter, and must also include:
    (1) Regularly scheduled visits, not less than once every 12 months, 
by the attending veterinarian to all premises where animals are kept, 
to assess and ensure the adequacy of veterinary care and other aspects 
of animal care and use;
    (2) A complete physical examination from head to tail of each dog 
by the attending veterinarian not less than once every 12 months;
    (3) Vaccinations for contagious and deadly diseases of dogs 
(including rabies, parvovirus and distemper) and sampling and treatment 
of parasites and other pests (including fleas, worms, coccidia, 
giardia, and heartworm) in accordance with a schedule approved by the 
attending veterinarian, unless otherwise required by a research 
protocol approved by the Committee at research facilities; and
    (4) Preventative care and treatment to ensure healthy and unmatted 
hair coats, properly trimmed nails, and clean and healthy eyes, ears, 
skin, and teeth, unless otherwise required by a research protocol 
approved by the Committee at research facilities.
    (b) Dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities must keep copies 
of medical records for dogs and make the records available for APHIS 
inspection. These records must include:
    (1) The identity of the animal, including identifying marks, 
tattoos, or tags on the animal and the animal's breed, sex, and age; 
Provided, however, that routine husbandry, such as vaccinations, 
preventive medical procedures, or treatments, performed on all animals 
in a group (or herd), may be kept on a single record;
    (2) If a problem is identified (such as a disease, injury, or 
illness), the date and a description of the problem, examination 
findings, test results, plan for treatment and care, and treatment 
procedures performed, when appropriate;
    (3) The names of all vaccines and treatments administered and the 
dates of administration; and
    (4) The dates and findings/results of all screening, routine, or 
other required or recommended test or examination.

[[Page 10735]]

Sec.  3.14   [Amended]

0
35. Newly redesignated Sec.  3.14 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (c) introductory text, by removing the citation ``Sec.  
3.16 of this subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  3.17'' in its 
place;
0
b. In paragraph (d), by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.14 of this 
subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  3.15'' in its place; and
0
c. In paragraph (e) introductory text:
0
i. In the first sentence, by removing the citation ``Sec. Sec.  3.18 
and 3.19 of this subpart'' both times it appears and adding the 
citation ``Sec. Sec.  3.19 and 3.20'' in its place; and
0
ii. In the second sentence, by removing the citations ``Sec.  3.18'' 
and ``Sec.  3.19'' and adding the citations ``Sec.  3.19''and ``Sec.  
3.20'' in their place, respectively.


Sec.  3.15   [Amended]

0
36. In newly redesignated Sec.  3.15, paragraph (h) is amended by 
removing the citation ``Sec.  3.13(c)'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  
3.14(c)'' in its place.


Sec.  3.17   [Amended]

0
37. In newly redesignated Sec.  3.17, paragraph (a) is amended by 
removing the citation ``Sec.  3.13(c) of this subpart'' both times they 
appear and adding the citation ``Sec.  3.14(c)'' in its place.


Sec.  3.18   [Amended]

0
38. Newly redesignated Sec.  3.18 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a), by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.15(e)'' and 
adding the citation ``Sec.  3.16(e)'' in its place;
0
b. In paragraph (b), by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.15(d)'' and 
adding the citation ``Sec.  3.16(d)'' in its place; and
0
c. In paragraph (d), by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.14(b) of this 
subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  3.15(b)'' in its place, and 
by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.6 or Sec.  3.14 of this subpart'' 
and adding the citation ``Sec. Sec.  3.6 or 3.15'' in its place.


Sec.  3.19   [Amended]

0
39. In newly redesignated Sec.  3.19, paragraph (f) is amended by 
removing the citation ``Sec.  3.13(f) of this subpart'' and adding the 
citation ``Sec.  3.14(f)'' in its place.


Sec.  3.20   [Amended]

0
40. Newly redesignated Sec.  3.20 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1), by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.18(d) of 
this subpart'' and adding the citation ``Sec.  3.19(d)'' in its place; 
and
0
b. In paragraph (a)(3), by removing the citation ``Sec.  3.13(e)'' and 
adding the citation ``Sec.  3.14(e)'' in its place, and by removing the 
citation ``Sec.  3.18(d) of this subpart'' and adding the citation 
``Sec.  3.19(d)'' in its place.


Sec.  3.61   [Amended]

0
41. Section 3.61 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b), by removing the word ``specie'' and adding the 
word ``species'' in its place; and
0
b. In paragraph (f), by removing the word ``works'' and adding the word 
``words'' in its place.
0
42. Section 3.78 is amended by revising the section heading to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3.78  Outdoor housing facilities.

* * * * *


Sec.  3.110   [Amended]

0
43. In Sec.  3.110, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words ``it 
is determined that'' immediately after the words ``Animals without a 
known medical history must be isolated until''.


Sec.  3.111   [Amended]

0
44. Section 3.111 is amended by removing the word ``regional'' in 
footnote 14.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of March 2019.
Greg Ibach,
Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019-05422 Filed 3-21-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3410-34-P