# Animal Welfare; Confiscation of Animals > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-13621 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Proposed Rule - **Published:** May 28, 1999 - **Citation:** 64 FR 28940 ## Text DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 9 CFR Part 2 [Docket No. 98-065-1] Animal Welfare; Confiscation of Animals AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the Animal Welfare Act regulations to allow us to place animals confiscated from situations detrimental to the animal's health and well-being with a person or facility that is not licensed by or registered with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, if the person or facility can offer a level of care equal to or exceeding that required by the regulations. The change would facilitate the relocation of confiscated animals and minimize the amount of time neglected, sick, or injured animals stay in unhealthy situations. DATES: We invite you to comment on this docket. We will consider all comments that we receive by July 27, 1999. ADDRESSES: Please send your comment and three copies to: Docket No. 98- 065-1, Regulatory Analysis and Development, Suite 3C03, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. 98-065-1. You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 690-2817 before coming. APHIS documents published in the Federal Register, and related information, including the names of organizations and individuals who have commented on APHIS rules, are available on the Internet at http:// www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Bettye K. Walters, Staff Veterinarian, Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737-1234; (301) 734-8100. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate standards and other requirements governing the humane handling, housing, care, treatment, and transportation of certain animals by dealers and other regulated businesses. The Secretary of Agriculture has delegated the responsibility for enforcing the AWA to the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Regulations established under the AWA are contained in 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and 3. Part 1 contains definitions for terms used in parts 2 and 3. Part 2 sets forth general requirements, and part 3 sets forth the standards for the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of covered animals by regulated entities. [[Page 28941]] In part 2, Sec. 2.129 provides for the confiscation and destruction of animals. Paragraph (a) of Sec. 2.129 provides that if an animal being held by a dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier is found by APHIS to be suffering as a result of the failure of the dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier to comply with the Animal Welfare regulations, APHIS will notify the dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier of the condition of the animal and request that the animal's suffering be alleviated, or that the animal be euthanized. If the dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier refuses to comply with APHIS' request, an APHIS official may confiscate the animal for care, treatment, or disposal. Paragraph (c) of Sec. 2.129 provides that APHIS may place confiscated animals with a person or facility that is licensed by or registered with APHIS and that complies with the regulations and can provide proper care. Alternatively, the confiscated animals may be euthanized by APHIS or the receiving facility. The dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier from whom the animals were confiscated is responsible for all costs associated with the placement or euthanasia of the animals. We are proposing to amend Sec. 2.129(c) to allow APHIS to place confiscated animals with a person or facility that can offer a level of care equal to or exceeding that required by the regulations, even if the person or facility is not licensed by or registered with APHIS. Such facilities may include local animal shelters. Although confiscations of animals are relatively rare (approximately two confiscations per year), we are proposing this action because we have had problems finding licensees or registrants who have room to accommodate new animals. We would expect a person or facility approved to accept confiscated animals to house, care for, and try to locate permanent homes for the confiscated animals. The person or facility would also be authorized to euthanize, if necessary, any animals that were in severe distress, mortally wounded, or could not be placed in a permanent home in a reasonable period of time. This action would increase the options for APHIS when placing confiscated animals and would, therefore, allow neglected, sick, or injured animals to be removed more quickly from situations detrimental to their health and well-being. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. We are proposing to amend the Animal Welfare Act regulations to allow APHIS to place animals confiscated from situations detrimental to the animals' health and well-being with a person or facility that is not licensed by or registered with APHIS. The change would increase the options for APHIS when placing confiscated animals and would, therefore, facilitate the relocation of confiscated animals and minimize the amount of time neglected, sick, or injured animals stay in unhealthy situations. Confiscation is a complicated and expensive procedure. Currently, the regulations require that APHIS place confiscated animals with a person or facility licensed by or registered with APHIS. Finding a licensee or registrant with the capacity and ability to house and care for the animals' well-being is one of the major challenges in the confiscation process. In some cases, local humane protection groups have been willing to assist in the placement of confiscated animals at local animal shelters but have been unable to because the shelters are not licensed by or registered with APHIS. This proposed rule would make the task of finding an adequate facility for confiscated animals faster and simpler, which would reduce APHIS' costs associated with locating a facility and the cost of the care APHIS must provide when adequate facilities cannot be located. At times, APHIS assumes the associated costs for care or euthanasia of confiscated animals when the dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier from whom the animals were confiscated is unable to pay these costs and APHIS cannot find a facility at which to place the animals. The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies consider the potential economic effects of rules on small businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions. Businesses and organizations potentially affected by this proposed rule are those that are not licensed by or registered with APHIS but that can accommodate and provide adequate care for confiscated animals. We expect that the types of facilities most likely to accept confiscated animals under this proposal are animal shelters run by humane societies. The number of humane societies that are small entities under the Small Business Administration's (SBA) standards are unknown because information as to their size in terms of gross receipts and number of employees is not available. Humane societies are not-for- profit organizations where some of the employees work on a voluntary basis, and there is not a way to determine their revenue. In addition, the costs incurred by humane societies are covered by membership donations. In the United States, there are at least 121 known humane societies in 35 States. Most of these are in California (at least 14); Texas and Illinois (at least 7 each); Florida, Georgia, and Minnesota (at least 6 each); Oregon, Virginia, Maryland, and Wisconsin (at least 5 each); and Colorado, Alabama, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania (at least 4 each). APHIS confiscates animals, on average, only about twice a year. Adoption of this proposed rule would expedite relocation of any confiscated animals. It is likely that the receiving facilities, as noted above, would be small entities. The regulations require that the dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier from whom the animals are confiscated bear all costs associated with performing the placement or euthanasia. If a facility accepts confiscated animals, that facility would be responsible for the future costs incurred for the care of those animals while at the facility. However, APHIS needs to place confiscated animals only about twice a year, and the acceptance of confiscated animals is voluntary. Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Executive Order 12372 This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.) Executive Order 12988 This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. This rule would not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. The Act does not provide administrative procedures which must [[Page 28942]] be exhausted prior to a judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule contains no information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 2 Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research. Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR part 2 as follows: PART 2--REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 2 would continue to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(g). 2. In Sec. 2.129, paragraph (c) would be revised and new paragraph (d) would be added to read as follows: Sec. 2.129 Confiscation and destruction of animals. * * * * * (c) Confiscated animals may be: (1) Placed, by sale or donation, with other licensees or registrants that comply with the standards and regulations and can provide proper care; or (2) Placed with persons or facilities that can offer a level of care equal to or exceeding the standards and regulations, as determined by APHIS, even if the persons or facilities are not licensed by or registered with APHIS; or (3) Euthanized. (d) The dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, or carrier from whom the animals were confiscated must bear all costs incurred in performing the placement or euthanasia activities authorized by this section. Done in Washington, DC, this 24th day of May 1999. Joan N. Arnoldi, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. 99-13621 Filed 5-27-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A99-13621. Public record. Not legal advice.