ss

SUPPORTING STATEMENT - OMB NO. 0579-0148

JOHNE’S DISEASE IN DOMESTIC ANIMALS; INTERSTATE MOVEMENT

January 22, 2009

A. Justification

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.

The Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA) of 2002 is the primary Federal law governing the protection of animal health. The law gives the Secretary of Agriculture broad authority to detect, control, or eradicate pests or diseases of livestock or poultry. The Secretary may also prohibit or restrict import or export of any animal or related material if necessary to prevent the spread of any livestock or poultry pest or disease.

The AHPA is contained in Title X, Subtitle E, Sections 10401-18 of P.L. 107-171, May 13, 2002, the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.

Disease prevention is the most effective method for maintaining a healthy animal population and for enhancing our ability to compete in the world market of animal and animal product trade.

Johne’s disease affects cattle, sheep, goats, and other ruminants. It is an incurable and contagious disease that results in progressive wasting and eventual death. The disease is nearly always introduced into a healthy herd by an infected animal that is not showing symptoms of the disease.

Currently, APHIS regulations provide that cattle and other domestic animals suspected of having Johne’s disease can be moved interstate for purposes other than slaughter, provided certain procedures are strictly followed. For example, sexually intact animals that are positive to the official Johne’s disease test may be moved interstate for the collection of germplasm.

Moving Johne’s, positive livestock interstate for slaughter or for other purposes, and doing so without increasing the risk of disease spread-requires the use of an owner-shipper statement and official eartags in this program.

APHIS is asking OMB to approve, for an additional 3 years, for its use of these information collection activities in connection with APHIS’ efforts to ensure that animals affected with Johne’s disease are transported across State lines with minimal risk of spreading the disease to healthy animals.

2. Indicate how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection.

Owner-Shipper Statement

The owner-shipper statement can be completed by the owner or shipper of the animals. This enables these individuals to ship animals sooner than they could if they had to wait for government personnel to issue a certificate. (This, in turn, hastens the removal of sick animals from the farm, thereby reducing the opportunity for disease to spread to healthy animals).

The owner-shipper statement contains information similar to that contained in a certificate, including: (1) the number of animals to be moved, (2) the species of the animals, (3) the points of origin and destination, and (4) the consignor and consignee. The owner-shipper statement, like the certificate, provides written documentation alerting APHIS that the interstate movement of affected animals is occurring. This, in turn, enables APHIS to track the movement of these animals to ensure they have reached their appropriate destination.

Official Eartags

APHIS’ current regulations require that cattle positive to an official Johne’s disease test that are being moved interstate may be identified with an official eartag that need not bear the inscription “U.S. Reactor.” APHIS believes that such eartags are more than sufficient to properly identify these cattle. Accredited veterinarians typically apply the official eartag, which is used to trace these animals to their herd of origin even if they become separated from their accompanying documentation.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.

The owner-shipper statement is the primary document used in connection with this program, and continues to be used in its hard copy format. Original signatures are necessary on the owner-shipper statement and therefore, an electronic copy is not a suitable format for this document until digital signature technology is available.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purpose described in item 2 above.

The information APHIS collects in connection with this program is not available from any other source. APHIS is the only Agency responsible for preventing the spread of contagious animal diseases within the United States.

5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe any methods used to minimize burden.

The information APHIS is collecting in connection with this program is the minimum needed to assess the disease status of animals and premises, and to assist and track disease control efforts at the State and premises level. The burden is minimized by the fact that the form is completed with the minimum information required. Small beef operators may qualify as small businesses; however, the beef industry is much less affected by this burden and the impact is expected to be small.

6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

If the information was collected less frequently or not collected at all, it would significantly cripple APHIS’ ability to ensure that Johne’s disease is not spread to healthy animal populations throughout the United States. This disease is contagious and fatal, and affects many different kinds of ruminants. Its spread within the United States could therefore have serious consequences for the U.S. livestock industry.

7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with the general information collection guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.

This information collection is conducted in a manner consistent with the guidelines established in 5 CFR 1320.5.

8. Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting form, and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency's notice, soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB.

In 2008, APHIS engaged in productive consultations with the following individuals in connection with the information collection requirements associated with this program:

Elizabeth Patton

WI Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Division of Animal Health

2811 Agriculture Drive, PO Box 8911

Madison, WI 53708-8911

(608) 224-4891

Ernest Hovingh

Pennsylvania State University

115 Henning building

University Park, PA 16802

(814) 863-8526

Mel Pence

University of GA, College of Vet. Med., Vet. Diag. and Investigational Laboratory

43 Brighton Road

Tifton, GA 31793-1389

(229) 386-3340

On Monday, September 29, 2008, pages 56542-56543, APHIS published in the Federal Register, a 60 day notice seeking public comments on its plans to request a 3-year renewal of this collection of information. No comments from the public were received.

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than reenumeration of contractors or grantees.

This information collection activity involves no payments or gifts to respondents.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

No additional assurance of confidentiality is provided with this information collection. However, the confidentiality of information is protected under 5 U.S.C. 552a.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

This information collection activity will ask no questions of a personal or sensitive nature.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated.

•Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.

See APHIS Form 71. Burden estimates were developed from discussions with herd owners, shippers, and accredited veterinarians who complete the documentation necessary to move affected animals interstate.

•Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories.

APHIS estimates the total annualized cost to these respondents to be $3,273.18. APHIS arrived at this figure by multiplying the hours of estimated response time (102 hours) by the estimated average hourly wage of the above respondents ($32.09). APHIS determined the estimated hourly wage from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Report - National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, July 2006. See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291131.htm

13. Provide estimates of the total annual cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information (do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in items 12 and 14). The cost estimates should be split into two components: (a) a total capital and start-up cost component annualized over its expected useful life; and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component.

There is zero annual cost burden associated with capital and start-up costs, operation and maintenance expenditures, and purchase of services.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Provide a description of the method used to estimate cost and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information.

The annualized cost to the Federal government is estimated at $2,303.46. (See APHIS Form 79.)

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-1.

The burden hours have decreased by 10 hours since the last renewal due to the removal of the services of the State Representative who assigned the premises identification number. Current regulations and program standards do not require the use of this form of burden. Also, the number of respondents previously reported as 250 should have been 275. That number is being reflected in this renewal.

16. For collections of information whose results are planned to be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication.

APHIS has no plans to publish information it collects in connection with this program.

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

VS Form 1-27 is used in 8 collections; therefore, it is not practical to include an OMB expiration date because of the various expiration dates for each collection. APHIS is seeking approval to not display the OMB expiration date on this form.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in the "Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act."

APHIS can certify compliance with all provisions under the Act.

B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

Statistical methods are not employed in this information collection activity.