[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 16 (Monday, January 26, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3671-3673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1810]
[[Page 3671]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Parts 54 and 79
[Docket No. 97-093-1]
RIN 0579-AA90
Interstate Movement of Sheep and Goats From States That Do Not
Quarantine Scrapie Infected and Source Flocks
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are soliciting public comment to help us develop options
for potential changes to our regulations for the interstate movement of
sheep and goats. We believe changes may be necessary to improve control
and limit the spread of scrapie, a serious disease of sheep and goats.
After evaluating public comment on the issues presented in this notice,
we will determine whether proposing changes to our regulations is
necessary.
DATES: Consideration will be given only to comments received on or
before March 27, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted as paper copies or through the
World Wide Web. If you submit paper copies, please send an original and
three copies of your comments to Docket No. 97-093-1, Regulatory
Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road Unit
118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comments refer to
Docket No. 97-093-1. We encourage the submission of copies through the
World Wide Web, since this both facilitates our analysis of the
comments and allows us to make the text of comments available to the
public via the Internet. The Web page address for comments on this
proposed rule is http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/scrapie. This Web page
also contains copies of the proposed rule in several formats and links
to related information. Please be sure to include your full name and
organization in any comments you submit via the Web. If your Web
comment is a duplicate of a paper copy you have submitted, please state
this in the first line of your Web message. Both paper and Web comments
received may be inspected at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th
Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to
inspect comments are requested to call ahead on (202) 690-2817 to
facilitate entry into the comment reading room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Joseph VanTiem, Senior Staff
Veterinarian, National Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River
Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231, (301) 734-7716.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Scrapie is a degenerative and eventually fatal disease affecting
the central nervous systems of sheep and goats. Its control is
complicated because the disease often has an extremely long incubation
period without clinical signs of disease, and because there is no
validated live-animal test for the disease.
Scrapie is the prototype of the group of diseases known as the
transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). These diseases are
caused by a transmissible agent which is yet to be fully characterized.
TSEs share the following common characteristics:
A prolonged incubation period of months or years;
A progressive debilitating neurological illness that is
always fatal;
When examined by electron microscopy, detergent treated
extracts of brain tissue from animals or humans affected by these
diseases reveal the presence of scrapie associated fibrils;
Pathological changes are confined to the central nervous
system and include vacuolation, astrocytosis, and glyosis. Amyloid
plaques may be seen, especially in mice and hamsters; and
The transmissible agent elicits no detectable specific
immune response in the host.
Several recent scientific findings are relevant to the
understanding and control of scrapie. While there is still no validated
live animal test for scrapie, a recent study conducted in The
Netherlands (Schreuder et al., 1996) indicates that immunohistochemical
analysis of tonsil samples may be useful in detecting scrapie in sheep
prior to the onset of clinical signs. The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) is currently completing a pilot study to
harvest various tissues (tonsil, head lymph nodes, and brain) from
mature sheep at slaughter and then test them using immunohistochemistry
to ascertain if the partially protease-resistant form of the prion
protein (PrPsc--the protein associated with scrapie) may be routinely
detected in the preclinical animal. If this proves to be an effective
method of surveillance, it may prove useful as a screening tool and
facilitate tracebacks to infected flocks.
In addition to the possibility that a validated live-animal test
for scrapie may be developed, genetic studies have yielded a greater
understanding of the role of specific genes in determining the
incubation period of scrapie in sheep. However, there is still much to
be determined about the role of genetics in scrapie susceptibility. A
key question is whether certain genotypes fully prevent scrapie
infection, or merely protect against clinical manifestation in an
animal while possibly allowing the animal to serve as a carrier of
scrapie.
While these advances may come to significantly affect the control
of scrapie, current control programs rely largely on postmortem
diagnosis of scrapie, traceback of animal movements, and certification
of flocks' scrapie status based on monitoring the flock for scrapie
over a period of years.
Current APHIS initiatives concerning scrapie include interstate
movement regulations in 9 CFR part 79, which restrict the interstate
movement of certain sheep and goats in order to help control the spread
of scrapie, and the Voluntary Scrapie Flock Certification Program (the
Voluntary Program), described in regulations in 9 CFR part 54 and in a
program standards document entitled ``Uniform Methods and Rules--
Voluntary Scrapie Flock Certification'' (UM&R), which is available at
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/scrapie/umr. A hard-copy of the UM&R may
be obtained by contacting the individual listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
APHIS worked with industry to develop the Voluntary Program, under
which participating flocks follow strict identification, recordkeeping
and other requirements and may eventually be certified free from
scrapie. If a flock that is participating in the Voluntary Program is
identified as an infected flock or source flock, it is removed from the
program until the flock completes a flock plan. The flock plan calls
for an epidemiologic investigation to remove high-risk animals from the
flock and includes other conditions, such as cleaning and disinfection
of flock premises, educating flock personnel in techniques to recognize
clinical signs of scrapie and control its spread, and maintaining
records of animals in the flock.
The regulations in part 79 also restrict the interstate movement of
scrapie-positive sheep and goats, and sheep and goats from scrapie
infected and source flocks. The regulations impose minimal restrictions
on the interstate movement
[[Page 3672]]
of animals \1\ under 1 year of age destined for slaughter and animals
marked on the jaw with a 1-inch letter ``S.'' Other animals from
scrapie infected and source flocks may be moved interstate under
requirements that limit the further spread of scrapie and make it
feasible to trace back the movements of animals that are later
diagnosed with scrapie. These requirements include:
\1\ Throughout this document, when the term ``animals'' is used,
it refers only to sheep and goats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The owner of the flock or his or her agent has signed
an agreement with the Administrator in which the owner of the flock
or his or her agent agrees to comply with the requirements of 9 CFR
79.2 until the time the flock is no longer an infected flock or
source flock.
The owner of the flock or his or her agent shall
immediately report to a State representative, APHIS representative,
or an accredited veterinarian any animals in the flock exhibiting
the following: weight loss despite retention of appetite; behavioral
abnormalities; pruritus (itching); wool pulling; biting at legs or
side; lip smacking; motor abnormalities such as incoordination, high
stepping gait of forelimbs, bunny hop movement of rear legs, swaying
of back end; increased sensitivity to noise and sudden movement;
tremor, ``star gazing,'' head pressing, recumbency, or other signs
of neurological disease or chronic wasting illness. Such animals
must not be removed from the flock without written permission of an
APHIS representative or State representative.
The owner of the flock or his or her agent shall
identify all animals 1 year of age or over within the flock. All
animals less than 1 year of age will be identified when a change of
ownership occurs, with the exception of those moving within
slaughter channels. The form of identification shall be an
electronic implant, flank tattoo, or ear tattoo, providing a unique
identification number that may be applied by the owner of the flock
or his or her agent in accordance with instructions by an APHIS
representative, State representative, or an accredited veterinarian.
The owner of the flock or his or her agent shall
maintain, and keep for a minimum of 5 years after an animal dies or
is otherwise removed from a flock, the following records for each
animal in the flock: The animal's individual identification number
from its electronic implant, flank tattoo, or ear tattoo, and any
secondary form of identification the owner of the flock may choose
to maintain; sex; breed; date of acquisition and source (previous
flock), if the animal was not born in the flock; and disposition,
including the date and cause of death, if known, or date of removal
from the flock.
The owner of the flock or his or her agent shall allow
breed associations and registries, livestock markets, and packers to
disclose records to APHIS representatives or State representatives,
to be used to trace source flocks and expose animals.
The owner of the flock or his or her agent shall make
animals in the flock and records required to be kept under paragraph
(a)(2)(iv) of 9 CFR 79.2 available for inspection by APHIS
representatives and State representatives, given reasonable prior
notice.
Upon request of an APHIS representative, the owner of
the flock or his or her agent will have an accredited veterinarian
collect and submit tissues from animals reported in accordance with
paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of 9 CFR 79.2 to a laboratory designated by an
APHIS representative.
However, part 79 applies only when flock owners wish to move sheep
interstate. Part 79 does not restrict the intrastate movement of
animals from infected and source flocks, and such movement may spread
scrapie to other animals in a State. If these other animals, which are
not subject to the restrictions in part 79, then move interstate,
scrapie could be spread interstate.
Therefore, there is a risk that scrapie infection that originated
in an infected or source flock could spread interstate despite part 79.
This risk is very low where State authorities have imposed quarantines
on infected and source flocks that keep animals in these flocks from
contact with other animals. The risk is higher in States that do not
quarantine scrapie infected and source flocks.
APHIS does not have statutory authority to require intrastate
movement restrictions for sheep and goats (unless the Secretary has
declared an extraordinary emergency). However, APHIS does have
statutory authority to restrict the interstate movement of animals from
a State if intrastate movement practices result in a threat of
spreading disease interstate. We are seeking public input on whether
and how APHIS should restrict the interstate movement of animals from
States that do not quarantine infected and source flocks.
We are examining current interstate movement restrictions both to
ensure effective domestic control of scrapie and to ensure that our
domestic interstate restrictions are consistent with our requirements
for importing sheep and goats. The World Trade Organization principles
of ``national treatment'' and ``transparency'' state that regulations
shall be applied without discrimination between domestic and imported
consignments, and that countries shall make available to trading
partners the rationale of their requirements. Our current regulations
for importing sheep and goats use equivalency with the Voluntary
Program to qualify certain animals for import (see 9 CFR 93.435), and
we wish to ensure consistency between our import requirements and our
interstate movement requirements.
We believe the interstate movement restrictions and the definition
of ``flock plan'' in part 79 provide a good model for how an infected
or source flock may be effectively quarantined and managed until
release from quarantine is justified. One possible approach to
controlling the intrastate contact risks described above would be to
amend part 79 to prohibit or restrict movement of animals from a State
unless the State quarantines infected and source flocks in a manner
that is equivalent to the methods employed by part 79. However,
commenters may well suggest other approaches to revising part 79 to
address the risks of intrastate movements from infected and source
flocks.
In particular, we ask commenters to address the following areas
that apply to possible State quarantine standards, the alignment of
Federal interstate movement restrictions with State standards, and
Voluntary Program standards:
Should APHIS further restrict interstate movement of
animals from States that do not consider scrapie a reportable
disease or do not quarantine infected flocks or source flocks? If
so, should restrictions focus on high-risk animals or on broader
classes of animals? (A high-risk animal is defined in 9 CFR 79.1. In
short, a high-risk animal is: (1) An animal that is the progeny of a
scrapie-positive dam; (2) an animal born in the same flock during
the same lambing season as progeny of a scrapie-positive dam, with
certain exceptions outlined in the definition; or (3) an animal born
during the same lambing season as a scrapie-positive ewe or ram in a
source flock or trace flock.)
Currently, part 79 does not restrict interstate
movement of high-risk animals from flocks that are not infected
flocks or are not source flocks. Should APHIS restrict such
movements, and if so, how?
Should APHIS define how a State must conduct a
quarantine in order to avoid further restrictions on interstate
movement of animals from that State? If so, how should APHIS
describe the necessary quarantine conditions (e.g., imposition of
the quarantine; movement of animals into and from quarantined
flocks; duration of the quarantine; identification requirements for
quarantined animals, development and use of a flock plan; procedures
for release from quarantine and follow-up monitoring)?
Should any of the definitions in the interstate
movement regulations in part 79 or the Voluntary Program in part 54
be revised to better address this problem (e.g., the definitions of
source flock, trace flock, and high-risk animal)?
Should there be additional permit or official
identification requirements for the interstate movement of any
classes of sheep and goats to allow for a more effective national
program for surveillance for scrapie and traceback of scrapie-
positive animals?
Currently APHIS makes the following information
available on its World Wide Web
[[Page 3673]]
site: The identity of scrapie infected flocks and source flocks
designated under part 79, and the identity and certification status
of flocks participating in the Voluntary Program. Should APHIS
continue to provide this information on the Web?
To assess the impacts of options regarding the
interstate movement of sheep and goats, baseline estimates of costs
and benefits are needed. What are the costs and benefits of the
current system of part 79, State quarantine standards, and the
Voluntary Program? For example, what costs are involved in complying
with State quarantine programs and how large are these costs?
Similarly, what are the costs to a flock owner who participates in
the Voluntary Program?
We invite comments on these topics. We also welcome ideas as to
different approaches we might take to improve our scrapie programs. In
responding to the questions posed in this notice, commenters are urged
to include economic reasons and data supporting their positions.
Whenever possible, please refer to specific terms, definitions, or
procedures contained in the current regulations in 9 CFR parts 54 and
79, and in the program standards UM&R (available at http://
www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/scrapie/umr). A hard-copy of the program
standards UM&R may be obtained by contacting the individual listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. These resources should provide a
common context for discussing suggested changes. You may also wish to
refer to the Scrapie Flock Status Report on the APHIS Web, which lists
the certification status of flocks in the Voluntary Program and
identifies known infected and source flocks nationwide. This report is
at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/scrapie/status.html.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111-114, 114a, 115, 117, 120, 121, 123-126,
134a-134h; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).
Done in Washington, DC, this 21st day of January 1998.
Thomas E. Walton,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 98-1810 Filed 1-21-98; 4:40 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-M
