This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

43269

Vol. 62, No. 156

Wednesday, August 13, 1997

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

5 CFR Chapter LIV

40 CFR Part 3

[FRL–5870–7]

Revocation of Obsolete Employee

Responsibilities and Conduct Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency is revoking the remaining

provisions of its residual Employee

Responsibilities and Conduct

regulation. These provisions, which are

no longer needed, merely crossreference the Government-wide and

EPA Standards of Ethical Conduct at 5

CFR parts 2634, 2635, and 6401 and set

forth EPA’s old regulatory conflict of

interest waivers which have now been

superseded by Office of Government

Ethics Government-wide regulatory

waivers.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 13, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donnell L. Nantkes, Office of General

Counsel (2311), Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260–4556.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Most of the former provisions of 40

CFR part 3 were removed when the

Environmental Protection Agency, with

the concurrence of the Office of

Government Ethics, published its

Supplemental Standards of Ethical

Conduct for Employees of the

Environmental Protection Agency on

August 2, 1996 at 61 FR 40500. (Most

of these provisions had previously been

superseded when the Office of

Government Ethics’ ‘‘Standards of

Ethical Conduct for Employees of the

Executive Branch,’’ as now codified at 5

CFR part 2635, became generally

effective on February 3, 1993.) The only

provisions of 40 CFR part 3, as revised

in the EPA rulemaking last August,

which remained in effect were new 40

CFR 3.100 and new redesignated 40 CFR

3.101. These provisions cross-referenced

the Government-wide and EPA

Standards of Ethical Conduct at 5 CFR

parts 2634, 2635, and 6401 and retained

EPA’s regulatory waivers of previously

designated 40 CFR 3.301(b) pending

publication of Government-wide

regulatory waivers by the Office of

Government Ethics. These Governmentwide waivers, which OGE published on

December 18, 1996 at 61 FR 66830, as

corrected at 62 FR 1361 and 23127,

revised 5 CFR part 2640 to establish

Government-wide regulatory waivers of

the conflict of interest provisions of 18

U.S.C. 208(a) as authorized by 18 U.S.C.

208(b)(2) and provided that, as of

January 17, 1997, regulatory waivers

issued by individual agencies would no

longer be effective.

The regulatory waivers at 40 CFR.

3.101 have been superseded by the

Government-wide regulatory waivers,

and the cross-referencing provision of

40 CFR 3.100 is not sufficiently

important to justify its retention.

Therefore, EPA is removing 40 CFR part

3.

III. Matters of Regulatory Procedure

Executive Order 12866

In issuing this rule, EPA has adhered

to the regulatory philosophy and the

applicable principles of regulation set

forth in section 1 of Executive Order

12866, Regulatory Planning and Review.

This regulation has not been reviewed

by the Office of Management and

Budget under that Executive order, as it

deals with agency organization,

management, and personnel matters and

is not, in any event, deemed

‘‘significant’’ thereunder.

Paperwork Reduction Act

EPA has determined that the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

chapter 35) does not apply because the

proposed regulation does not contain

any information collection requirements

that require the approval of the Office of

Management and Budget.

Administrative Procedure Act

EPA has found that good cause exists

under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3) (A), (B) and

(d)(3) for waiving, as unnecessary and

contrary to the public interest, the

general notice of proposed rulemaking

and the 30-day delay in effectiveness as

to these rules and revocations. This

rulemaking is related solely to EPA’s

organization, procedure, and practice.

Further, this regulation merely

eliminates provisions which have been

superseded in any event and should

therefore become effective immediately.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 3

Environmental protection, Conflict of

interests, Government employees.

Dated: July 30, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator, Environmental Protection

Agency.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Environmental Protection

Agency is removing part 3 of title 40 of

the Code of Federal Regulations in

accordance with its authority at 5 U.S.C.

7301.

[FR Doc. 97–21379 Filed 8–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

7 CFR Part 301

[Docket No. 97–056–4]

Mediterranean Fruit Fly; Additions to

the Quarantined Areas

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Interim rule and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

Mediterranean fruit fly regulations by

adding an area in Hillsborough County,

FL, and adding an area in Orange

County, FL, to the list of quarantined

areas. We are also revising the entry for

Manatee County, FL, to make the

boundary lines of the quarantined area

more accurate. The regulations restrict

the interstate movement of regulated

articles from the quarantined areas. This

action is necessary on an emergency

basis to prevent the spread of the
43270 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 156 / Wednesday, August 13, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Mediterranean fruit fly into noninfested

areas of the continental United States.

DATES: Interim rule effective August 7,

1997. Consideration will be given only

to comments received on or before

October 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

Docket No. 97–056–4, 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. 97–056–4. 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: Mr.

Michael B. Stefan, Operations Officer,

Domestic and Emergency Programs,

PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134,

Riverdale, MD 20737–1236, (301) 734–

8247; or e-mail:

mstefan@aphis.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis

capitata (Wiedemann), is one of the

world’s most destructive pests of

numerous fruits and vegetables. The

Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly) can

cause serious economic losses. Heavy

infestations can cause complete loss of

crops, and losses of 25 to 50 percent are

not uncommon. The short life cycle of

this pest permits the rapid development

of serious outbreaks.

The Mediterranean fruit fly

regulations (7 CFR 301.78 through

301.78–10; referred to below as the

regulations) restrict the interstate

movement of regulated articles from

quarantined areas to prevent the spread

of Medfly to noninfested areas of the

United States.

An interim rule effective on June 16,

1997, and published in the Federal

Register on June 20, 1997 (62 FR 33537–

33539, Docket No. 97–056–2), added a

portion of Hillsborough County, FL, to

the list of quarantined areas and

restricted the interstate movement of

regulated articles from the quarantined

area. We also published another interim

rule effective on July 3, 1997, and

published in the Federal Register on

July 10, 1997 (62 FR 36976–36978,

Docket No. 97–056–3), that expanded

the quarantined area in Hillsborough

County, FL, and added areas in Manatee

and Polk Counties, FL, to the list of

quarantined areas.

Recent trapping surveys by inspectors

of Florida State and county agencies and

by inspectors of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) have

revealed that an infestation of Medfly

has occurred in an additional area in

Hillsborough County and in a portion of

Orange County, FL.

The regulations in § 301.78–3 provide

that the Administrator of APHIS will list

as a quarantined area each State, or each

portion of a State, in which the Medfly

has been found by an inspector, in

which the Administrator has reason to

believe that the Medfly is present, or

that the Administrator considers

necessary to regulate because of its

inseparability for quarantine

enforcement purposes from localities in

which the Medfly has been found.

Less than an entire State will be

designated as a quarantined area only if

the Administrator determines that the

State has adopted and is enforcing

restrictions on the intrastate movement

of the regulated articles that are

equivalent to those imposed on the

interstate movement of regulated

articles, and the designation of less than

the entire State as a quarantined area

will prevent the interstate spread of the

Medfly. The boundary lines for a

portion of a State being designated as

quarantined are set up approximately

four-and-one-half-miles from the

detection sights. The boundary lines

may vary due to factors such as the

location of hosts, the location of

transportation centers, such as bus

stations and airports, the pattern of

persons moving in that State, the

number and patterns of distribution of

the Medfly, and the use of clearly

identifiable lines for the boundaries.

In accordance with these criteria and

the recent Medfly findings described

above, we are amending § 301.78–3 by

adding an area in Hillsborough County,

FL, and adding an area in Orange

County, FL, to the list of quarantined

areas. In addition, we are revising the

entry for Manatee County, FL, to make

the boundary lines more accurately

reflect the criteria described above. The

resulting quarantined areas are

described in the rule portion of this

document.

Emergency Action

The Administrator of the Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service has

determined that an emergency exists

that warrants publication of this interim

rule without prior opportunity for

public comment. Immediate action is

necessary to prevent the Medfly from

spreading to noninfested areas of the

United States.

Because prior notice and other public

procedures with respect to this action

are impracticable and contrary to the

public interest under these conditions,

we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553

to make it effective upon signature. We

will consider comments that are

received within 60 days of publication

of this rule in the Federal Register.

After the comment period closes, we

will publish another document in the

Federal Register. It will include a

discussion of any comments we receive

and any amendments we are making to

the rule as a result of the comments.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. For this action,

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process required

by Executive Order 12866.

This action amends the Medfly

regulations by adding an area in

Hillsborough County, revising the entry

for Manatee County, and adding an area

in Orange County, FL, to the list of

quarantined areas. The regulations

restrict the interstate movement of

regulated articles from the quarantined

areas.

This emergency situation makes

compliance with section 603 and timely

compliance with section 604 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.) impracticable. If we determine

that this rule would have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities, then we will

discuss the issues raised by section 604

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act in our

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

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 rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State

and local laws and regulations that are

inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not

require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court

challenging this rule.

National Environmental Policy Act

An environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact have
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 156 / Wednesday, August 13, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 43271

been prepared for this rule. The site

specific environmental assessment and

programmatic Medfly environmental

impact statement provide a basis for our

conclusion that implementation of

integrated pest management to achieve

eradication of the Medfly would not

have a significant impact on human

health and the natural environment.

Based on the finding of no significant

impact, the Administrator of the Animal

and Plant Health Inspection Service has

determined that an environmental

impact statement need not be prepared.

The environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact were

prepared in accordance with: (1) The

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2)

Regulations of the Council on

Environmental Quality for

implementing the procedural provisions

of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3)

USDA regulations implementing NEPA

(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA

Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part

372).

Copies of the environmental

assessment and finding of no significant

impact are available for public

inspection 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 copies are requested

to call ahead on (202) 690–2817 to

facilitate entry into the reading room. In

addition, copies may be obtained by

writing to the individual listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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 7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities,

Incorporation by reference, Plant

diseases and pests, Quarantining,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Transportation.

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 301 is

amended as follows:

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE

NOTICES

1. The authority citation for part 301

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 147a, 150bb, 150dd,

150ee, 150ff, 161, 162, and 164-167; 7 CFR

2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(c).

2. In § 301.78–3, paragraph (c), the

entry for Florida is amended by adding

entries for Hillsborough and Orange

Counties and revising the entry for

Manatee County to read as follows:

§ 301.78–3 Quarantined areas.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

FLORIDA

Hillsborough County. That portion of

Hillsborough County beginning at the

mouth of the Cockroach Creek in the

Cockroach Bay; then south along the

shoreline of the Cockroach Creek to

Valroy Road; then east along Valroy

Road to I–75; then north along I–75 to

the Little Manatee River; then east along

the shoreline of the Little Manatee River

to the section line dividing sections 26

and 27, T. 32 S., R. 19 E.; then north

along the section line dividing sections

26 and 27, T. 32 S., R. 19 E., to the

section line dividing sections 22 and 23,

T. 32 S., R. 19 E. (also known as S.E.

36th Street); then north along the

section line dividing sections 22 and 23,

T. 32 S., R. 19 E., (also known as S.E.

36th Street) to the section line dividing

sections 14 and 15, T. 32 S., R. 19 E.;

then north along the section line

dividing sections 14 and 15, T. 32 S., R.

19 E. to I–75; then north along I–75 to

N.E. 19th Avenue; then west along N.E.

19th Avenue to the section line dividing

sections 34 and 35, T. 31 S., R. 19 E.;

then north along the section line

dividing sections 34 and 35, T. 31 S., R.

19 E., through sections 26 and 27,

sections 22 and 23, and sections 14 and

15, T. 31 S., R. 19 E., to U.S. Highway

41; then north along U.S. Highway 41 to

Big Bend Road (State Road 672); then

west along Big Bend Road (State Road

672) to its end; then west along an

imaginary line to the shoreline of the

Tampa Bay; then south and west along

the shoreline of the Tampa Bay

(including all land masses to the east of

the Tampa Bay) to the shoreline of the

Cockroach Bay; then south and east

along the shoreline of the Cockroach

Bay to the point of beginning.

* * * * *

Manatee County. That portion of

Manatee County beginning at the

intersection of U.S. Highway 41 and

U.S. Highway 301; then south along

U.S. Highway 301 to West 49th Street;

then west along West 49th Street to 5th

Avenue West; then south along 5th

Avenue West to 33rd Street West; then

west along 33rd Street West to West 8th

Avenue; then south along West 8th

Avenue to Business U.S. Highway 41

(also known as West 8th Avenue); then

south along Business U.S. Highway 41

(also known as West 8th Avenue),

crossing the Green Bridge across the

Manatee River until Business U.S.

Highway 41 (also known as West 8th

Avenue) becomes West 9th Street; then

south along West 9th Street to 17th

Avenue West; then west along 17th

Avenue West to 26th Street West; then

west along 26th Street West along an

imaginary line to the shoreline of Palma

Sola Bay; then northwest along an

imaginary line through Palma Sola Bay

to the southern shoreline of Perico

Bayou, which separates Perico Island

from the mainland; then along the

eastern shoreline of Perico Bayou, to

Tampa Bay; then east along the northern

shoreline of the mainland to a point due

south of the westernmost end of Snead

Island; then north from this point along

an imaginary line to Snead Island; then

northeast along an imaginary line to the

western most land mass on the southern

end of Sunshine Skyway (U.S. Highway

19); then east and south along Sunshine

Skyway (U.S. Highway 19) until it

merges with U.S. Highway 41; then

south along U.S. Highway 41 to the

point of beginning.

Orange County. That portion of

Orange County beginning at the

intersection of the Lake/Orange County

line and Jones Avenue; then east along

Jones Avenue to Sand Farm Road; then

north along Sand Farm Road to Sadler

Avenue (State Road 448); then east

along Sadler Avenue (State Road 448) to

U.S. Highway 441; then north along U.S.

Highway 441 to Wadsworth Road; then

east along Wadsworth Road to its end;

then east along the section line dividing

sections 4 and 9 and sections 3 and 10,

T. 20 S., R. 27 E., to Roundlake Road;

then south along Roundlake Road to

Ondich Road; then east along Ondich

Road to Plymouth-Sorrento Road; then

east across Plymouth-Sorrento Road to

Haas Road; then east along Haas Road

to Foliage Way; then south along Foliage

Way to Kelly Park Road; then east along

Kelly Park Road to Rock Springs Road

(State Road 435); then south along Rock

Springs Road (State Road 435) to Myrtle

Street; then west along Myrtle Street to

Hawthorn Avenue; then south along

Hawthorn Avenue to 4th Street; then

west along 4th Street to Bradshaw Road;

then south along Bradshaw Road to

Ocoee-Apopka Road; then south along

Ocoee-Apopka Road to Harmon Road;

then west along Harmon Road to Binion

Road; then south along Binion Road to

the section line dividing sections 19 and

30, T. 21 S., R. 28 E.; then west along

the section line dividing sections 19 and

30, T. 21 S., R. 28 E., to the section line

dividing sections 24 and 25, T. 21 S., R.

27 E.; then west along the section line

dividing sections 24 and 25, T. 21 S., R.

27 E., to the shoreline of Lake Apopka;

then north and west along the shoreline

of Lake Apopka to the Orange/Lake
43272 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 156 / Wednesday, August 13, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

County line; then north along the

Orange/Lake County line to the point of

beginning.

Done in Washington, DC, this 7th day of

August 1997.

Terry L. Medley,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–21369 Filed 8–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Parts 1 and 3

[Docket No. 95–078–2]

RIN 0579–AA74

Humane Treatment of Dogs; Tethering

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

regulations for the humane treatment of

dogs under the Animal Welfare Act by

removing the provisions for tethering

dogs as a means of primary enclosure.

Our experience in enforcing the Animal

Welfare Act has led us to conclude that

permanently tethering a dog as a means

of primary enclosure is not a humane

practice that is in the animal’s best

interests. Temporarily tethering a dog

due to health or other reasons would be

permitted if the licensee obtains the

approval of the Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service. This action will help

ensure that dogs in facilities regulated

under the Animal Welfare Act will be

treated in a manner that is consistent

with the animals’ best interests.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 12, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Stephen Smith, Staff Animal Health

Technician, Animal Care, APHIS, suite

6D02, 4700 River Road Unit 84,

Riverdale, MD 20737–1234, (301) 734–

4972, or e-mail:

snsmith@aphis.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA)

(7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) the Secretary of

Agriculture is authorized to promulgate

standards and other requirements

governing the humane handling,

housing, care, treatment, and

transportation of certain animals by

dealers, research facilities, exhibitors,

and carriers and intermediate handlers.

Regulations established under the Act

are contained in 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and

3. Subpart A of 9 CFR part 3 (referred

to below as the regulations) contains

requirements concerning dogs and cats.

On July 2, 1996, we published in the

Federal Register (61 FR 34386–34389,

Docket No. 95–078–1) a proposal to

amend the regulations by removing the

option for facilities to use tethering as

a means of primary enclosure. In the

same document, we proposed to amend

the regulations by revising the

temperature requirements for indoor,

sheltered, and mobile and traveling

housing facilities, and for primary

conveyances used in transportation, to

require that the ambient temperature

must never exceed 90 °F (32.2 °C) when

dogs or cats are present.

We solicited comments concerning

our proposal for 60 days ending

September 3, 1996. We received 54

comments by that date. Many of the

comments we received on the proposed

rule expressed concerns with the

proposal to revise the temperature

requirements. This final rule concerns

only the part of the proposal to remove

tethering as a means of primary

enclosure. We are still reviewing the

issues concerning the effects of

temperature on dogs and cats. If we take

any further action regarding

temperature, we will publish the

appropriate document in the Federal

Register.

Thirty-three of the comments received

on the proposed rule addressed the part

of the proposal to remove tethering as a

means of primary enclosure. These

comments were from dog breeders,

humane organizations, a veterinarian,

pet industry associations, an animal

feed industry association,

pharmaceutical companies, a medical

research association, a Federal

government agency, and other interested

individuals. Nine of the comments

supported the proposal; 14 comments

opposed the proposal; 1 comment did

not oppose the proposal, but had

recommendations concerning the

proposal’s Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis; and 9 comments expressed

neither support nor opposition, but

stated that the provisions of the

proposal should be extended to apply to

anyone who owns dogs, instead of only

to licensed breeders and dealers. The

comments are discussed below by topic.

Currently, the regulations provide that

dogs in outside housing facilities

regulated under the AWA may be kept

on tethers as a means of primary

enclosure. We proposed to remove this

provision. Several commenters who

supported the proposed rule stated that,

while they believe tethering should not

be used as a primary enclosure, there

are situations when tethering is useful

for short intervals. For example, the

commenter said an owner may put a dog

on a tether while cleaning its pen, to

isolate the dog for health reasons, or to

restrain an aggressive dog. The

commenters recommended that we state

explicitly in the regulations that

tethering is prohibited as a means of

primary enclosure, and clarify in the

regulations when tethering would be

permissible.

We agree that it would be more clear

to specifically state in the regulations

that permanent tethering is prohibited

as a means of primary enclosure.

Therefore, we are adding a new

paragraph (c)(4) to § 3.6 of the

regulations to state that tethers are

prohibited for use as primary

enclosures. However, we realize that

there may be times when it would be

appropriate, and in the dog’s best

interests, to put a dog on a tether

temporarily, ranging from a few minutes

while the dog’s pen is cleaned to several

days to isolate an animal for health

reasons. If we stated in the regulations

when tethering would be permitted, we

would invariably fail to include some

circumstance. Further, while tethering

may be appropriate for one dog under a

specific circumstance, it may not be

appropriate for another dog under the

same circumstance. Therefore, we are

also adding a provision in new

paragraph (c)(4) to state that a licensee

must obtain the approval of the Animal

and Plant Health Inspection Service

(APHIS) to temporarily tether a dog at

the licensee’s facility. This safeguard

will give APHIS the opportunity to

evaluate on a case-by-case basis the

appropriateness of temporarily tethering

a dog in order to ensure that any

temporary tethering of a dog is in the

animal’s best interests.

A licensee may obtain verbal approval

from an APHIS inspector to temporarily

tether a dog for a period of 3 days or

less. If a licensee intends to regularly

tether a dog for periods of less than 3

days in order to conduct a regular

activity (for example, a licensee intends

to tether a dog every day for 20 minutes

while the dog’s primary enclosure is

being cleaned), the licensee will only

have to obtain verbal approval for such

tethering one time. If a licensee intends

to temporarily tether a dog for a period

to exceed 3 days, the licensee must

obtain written approval from the APHIS

Animal Care Regional Office for the

region in which the licensee operates.

One commenter asked us to specify

that, if an inspector finds a dog to be

temporarily tethered, the inspector

should ask the licensee to show him or

her the dog’s primary enclosure. The