Field study, definition [Animal welfare, proposed rules] : 9 CFR part 1

6 Pages·1998·0.28 MB·English

by  United States. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Historic, Archive Document
<
Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

,
40844 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 147/Friday, July 31, 1998/Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE We are proposing to amend the We have always intended that field
definition offieldstudy. Currently, a studies not include any invasive
Animal and Plant Health Inspection field study, as defined in § 1.1 ofthe procedures, harm the animals under
Service regulations, is any study that is study, or materially alter the behavior of
“conducted on free-living wild animals the animals under study. However, we
9 CFR Part 1 in their natural habitat, which does not are concerned that, as currently worded,
[Docket No. 98-043-1] involve an invasive procedure, and the definition could be interpreted to
which does not harm or materially alter mean that a field study may include any
Field Study; Definition the behavior ofthe animals under one ofthese situations. By clarifying the
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health study.” definition of fieldstudy, this proposed
Inspection Service, USDA. We have always intended that field rule would help ensure that studies that
studies not include any invasive should be subject to the Animal Welfare
ACTION: Proposed rule.
procedures, harm the animals under regulations are subject to the Animal
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend study, or materially alter the behavior of Welfare regulations.
the Animal Welfare regulations by the animals under study. However, we The only entities that would be
clarifying the definition ofthe term field are concerned that, as currently worded, affected by this proposed rule would be
study. We want to clarify that a field the definition could be interpreted to entities that perform studies conducted
study cannot involve an invasive mean that a field study may include any on free-living wild animals in their
We
procedure, harm the animals under one ofthese situations. natural habitat. estimate that at least
study, or materially alter the behavior of Determining whether a study should 50 entities may be impacted by this
the animals under study. As currently be classified as a field study is essential proposed rule; however, we do not have
worded, the definition offieldstudy because a field study is not subject to an exact number. These entities may be
could be interpreted to mean that a field the regulations in § 2.31(d). In § 2.31 considered small and large entities by
study may include one ofthese paragraph (d) requires the Institutional Small Business Administration
situations. This action would help Animal Care and Use Committee standards, but this proposed rule would
ensure the proper use and care of (IACUC) for each research facility to only affect a small portion ofthe
animals used in field studies. review all studies, except field studies, entities’ activities. As we are not
DATES: Consideration will be given only to ensure that the planned care and use proposing a substantive change in the
to comments received on or before ofthe animals comply with the Act and definition, the impact on these entities
September 29, 1998. the regulations in 9 CFR parts 2 and 3. should not be significant.
addresses: Please send an original and However, ifthe definition ofa field Under these circumstances, the
three copies ofyour comments to study is not clear, a study that involves Administrator ofthe Animal and Plant
Docket No. 98-043-1, Regulatory an invasive procedure or harms or Health Inspection Service has
Analysis and Development, PPD, materially alters the behavior ofthe determined that this action would not
APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road animals under study may be have a significant economic impact on
Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. misclassified as a field study and, a substantial number ofsmall entities.
Please state that your comments refer to accordingly, would not be reviewed by Executive Order 12372
Docket No. 98-043-1. Comments the IACUC.
received may be inspected at USDA, We are, therefore, proposing to amend This program/activity is listed in the
ranodomIn1d1e41p,enSdoeuntcheBAuviledniunge,S1W4.t,h Street wthoeuldedfidneiftiinoenfoifelfdiesltdusdtyuadsyainny§s1t.u1d. yWe CuantdaelrogNoo.f F1e0d.e0r2a5laDnodmeisstsuibcjeAcstsitsotance
Executive Order 12372, which requires
Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and conducted on free-living wild animals
e4:x3c0eppt.mh.o,liMdoaynsd.aPyertshornosugwhisFhriidnagy,to ainddthtehier npartouvriasliohnabtihtaatt.thWeetewromulfdieladlso iStnatteergaonvderlnomcaelntoaffliccioanlss,ul(tsaetei7onCwFiRthpart
inspect comments are requested to call studyexcludes any study that involves 3015, subpart V.)
ahead on [phone] to facilitate an invasive procedure orhas the Executive Order 12988
entry into the comment reading room. potential to harm or materially alter the This proposed rule has been reviewed
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. behavior ofthe animals under study. under Executive Order 12988. Civil
Jerry DePoyster, Senior Veterinary
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Justice Reform. It is not intended to
Medical Officer, Animal Care, APHIS,MD Flexibility Act have retroactive effect. This rule would
4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, not preempt any State and local laws,
20737-1228, [phone]. This proposed rule has been reviewed regulations, or policies, unless they
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The under Executive Order 12866. The rule present an irreconcilable conflict with
Animal Welfare Act (the Act) (7 U.S.C. has been determined to be not this rule. The Act does not provide
2131 etseq.) authorizes the Secretary of significant for the purposes ofExecutive administrative procedures which must
Agriculture to promulgate standards and Order 12866 and, therefore, has not be exhausted prior to ajudicial
other requirements governing the been reviewed by the Office of challenge to the provisions ofthis rule.
humane handling, housing, care, Management and Budget.
treatment, and transportation ofcertain This proposed rule would clarify the Paperwork Reduction Act
animals by dealers, research facilities, definition offieldstudy. Currently, a This proposed rule contains no
exhibitors, carriers, and intermediate field study, as defined in § 1.1 ofthe information collection or recordkeeping
handlers. regulations, is any study that is requirements under the Paperwork
The regulations established under the “conducted on free-living wild animals Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Act are contained in title 9 ofthe Code in their natural habitat, which does not etseq.).
ofFederal Regulations (9 CFR). chapter involve an invasive procedure, and
I, subchapter A, parts 1, 2, and 3. Part which does not harm or materially alter List ofSubjects in 9 CFR Part 1
1 defines various terms used in parts 2 the behavior ofthe animals under Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and
and 3. study.” recordkeeping requirements. Research.

Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 147/Friday, July 31, 1998/Proposed Rules 40845
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 DATES: Comments must be received on Availability ofNPRMs
CFR part 1 as follows: or before September 4, 1998. Any person may obtain a copy ofthis
PART 1—DEFINITION OF TERMS ADDRESSES: Submit comments in NPRM by submitting a request to the
triplicate to the Federal Aviation FAA, Central Region, Office ofthe
1. The authority citation for part 1 Administration (FAA), Central Region, Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules
would continue to read as follows: Office ofthe Regional Counsel, Docket No. 98-CE-69-AD, Room 1558,
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, Attention: Rules Docket No. 98-CE-69- 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri
2.80, and 371.2(g). AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, 64106.
w*o2u.lI*dnb§e1*.r1e,vit*sheeddte*ofirneiatdioansoffolfileolwds:study bKmaeantyswaebseenCiin8tsyap,.emMc.itseadsnodautr4tihpi6.s4m1.l0,o6cM.atoCinoodnmamyents DiTschuessFieodneral Office for Civil Aviation
§1.1 Definitions. through Friday, holidays excepted. (FOCA), which is the airworthiness
authority for Switzerland, recently
Fieldstudymeans any study prSoeprovsiecdeAinDfomramyatbieonobthtaatinaepdplfireosmto the cnootnidfiiteidonthmeaFyAeAxitshtatonanMoudnsealfsePC-12
conducted on free-living wild animals Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison and PC-12/45 airplanes that are
in their natural habitat. This term Manager, CH-6371 Stans, Switzerland; equipped with the “corporate commuter
excludes any study that involves an telephone: [phone]; facsimile: cabin layout.” This layout is a Pilatus
invasive procedure or has the potential [phone]. This information also designation only and the affected
t*o ha*rm o*r mat*erial*ly alter the behavior may be examined at the Rules Docket at airplanes are not certificated for
ofan animal under study. the address above. commuter operation. The FOCA of
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Switzerland reports that the current
Done in Washington, DC, this 27th day of Roman T. Gabrys, Aerospace Engineer, executive cabin layout ofthe above-
July 1998.
Small Airplane Directorate, Airplane referenced airplanes, in particular the
Alfred S. Elder, Certification Service, FAA, 1201 passenger seat configuration, has been
ActingAdministrator, AnimalandPlant Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri found to not fully meet the head injury
HealthInspectionService.
64106; telephone: [phone]; criteria (HIC) requirements ofsection
[FR Doc. 98-20499 Filed 7-30-98; 8:45 am] facsimile: [phone]. 23.562 ofthe Federal Aviation
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P Regulations (14 CFR 23.562).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These conditions, ifnot corrected in
Comments Invited a timely manner, could result in
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION passenger injuries during an airplane
Interested persons are invited to crash because the passenger seat
Federal Aviation Administration participate in the making ofthe configuration has been found to not
14 CFR Part 39 proposed rule by submitting such fully meet current head injury criteria
written data, views, or arguments as regulations.
[Docket No. 98-CE-69-AD] they may desire. Communications
Relevant Service Information
R!N 2120-AA64 should identify the Rules Docket
number and be submitted in triplicate to Pilatus has issued Service Bulletin
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus the address specified above. All No. 25-006, dated April 7, 1998, which
Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-12 and PC-12/ communications received on or before specifies procedures for modifying the
45 Airplanes the closing date for comments, specified passenger seats and seat rail covers.
above, will be considered before taking The FOCA ofSwitzerland classified
AGENCY: Federal Aviation action on the proposed rule. The this service bulletin as mandatory and
Administration, DOT. proposals contained in this notice may issued Swiss AD HB 98-179, dated June
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking be changed in light ofthe comments 15, 1998, in order to assure the
(NPRM). continued airworthiness ofthese
received.
airplanes in Switzerland.
SUMMARY: This document proposes to Comments are specifically invited on
adopt a new airworthiness directive the overall regulatory, economic, The FAA’s Determination
(AD) that would apply to Pilatus environmental, and energy aspects of These airplane models are
Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus) Models PC-12 and the proposed rule. All comments manufactured in Switzerland and are
PC-12/45 airplanes that are equipped submitted will be available, both before type certificated for operation in the
with the “corporate commuter cabin and after the closing date for comments, United States under the provisions of
layout.” This layout is a Pilatus in the Rules Docket for examination by section 21.29 ofthe Federal Aviation
A
designation only and the affected interested persons. report that Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the
airplanes are not certificated for summarizes each FAA-public contact applicable bilateral airworthiness
commuter operation. The proposed AD concerned with the substance ofthis agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral
would require modifying the passenger proposal will be filed in the Rules airworthiness agreement, the FOCA of
seats and seat rail covers. The proposed Docket. Switzerland has kept the FAA informed
AD is the result ofmandatory Commenters wishing the FAA to ofthe situation described above.
continuing airworthiness information acknowledge receipt oftheir comments The FAA has examined the findings
(MCAI) issued by the airworthiness submitted in response to this notice ofthe FOCA ofSwitzerland; reviewed
authority for Switzerland. The actions must submit a self-addressed, stamped all available information, including the
specified by the proposed AD are postcard on which the following service information referenced above;
intended to prevent passenger injuries statement is made: “Comments to and determined that AD action is
because the passenger seat configuration Docket No. 98-CE-69-AD.” The necessary for products ofthis type
has been found to not fully meet current postcard will be date stamped and design that are certificated for operation
head injury criteria regulations. returned to the commenter. in the United States.
.
"