inspection date as an optional attribute for the animal

[nephiharvey]

Based on our meeting today in Denver, I propose that the actual inspection date (if known) of the animal also be included as an optional animal attribute. Thx. Nephi

[scottrydberg]

I would agree with this as it is a field on current CVIs and on our eCVI.
Thx Kurt

[mmcgrath]

There was consensus on this point but it can be interpreted two ways:

• Option 1 - move the InspectionDate attribute from the Accession to the Animal and keep it mandatory. In the spirit of comments by @MitzyTorres on issue #14 this keeps the coding logic simple.
• Option 2 - add an optional InspectionDate attribute to the Animal and keep the Accession level InspectionDate attribute - if the animal-level attribute isn't provided, the Accession-level attribute should be the default instead.

I'm in favor of option 1 for the reasons @MitzyTorres outlined in #14. Let me know your thoughts.

[mkm1879]

I agree. In most cases it makes more "work" for the sending system, but it is simple, deterministic processing. And it simplifies the receiving system logic which is where having too many options makes things more complicated.

[Note later discussion. I was seduced by the database logic here and missed the more fundamental CVI logic. Inspection date is not the same issue as animal species.]

[ssantamaria]

I agree that inspection date should be mandatory and should be moved from the Accession to the Animal (option 1 above).

[mmcgrath]

Will close at end of October unless anyone objects

[StaceySchwabenlander]

I agree with the group that the 'inspection date' should be required. The inspection date determines the number of days until the CVI must be issued and also the time an issued CVI is valid for.

CFR 9, 161.4(a) and (c) in case anyone is curious as to the specific wording of the regulation.

[scottrydberg]

I agree with Stacey, It makes good sense to have a "inspection date" for the entire eCVI.

[mkm1879]

I'm debating myself here:

I have heard the case made that for some large shipments inspection takes place over a period of time. So not all animals would have the same inspection date. I don't know whether this ever becomes an issue in practice.

As I posted earlier, for the sending end putting the same inspection date on every animal is no big deal. But for the receiving end, if the receiving system has inspection date at the level of the CVI and they receive different dates which one do they populate at the CVI level? The first? The last?

I ran this by my boss. (Random sample of national assembly n=1) He says if there is a need for different inspection dates then it should go on different CVIs, one for each date. But if it took three days to inspect the whole herd, he would be comfortable getting the last day the vet was there as the inspection date for the whole herd.

So, I guess my final opinion is that there should be a single inspection date for the whole CVI. If we really need individual animal inspection dates those would be optional additional data.

[StaceySchwabenlander]

Good point @mkm1879 I hadn't originally thought of loads all represented by one CVI with inspection dates over more than one day. I see how these loads could all be separated out to have each set of animals inspected on a specific day to be on 1 CVI as suggested above.

Alternatively, if all animals were maintained on 1 CVI, the CVI could still be legally issued if the 1st inspection date was used provided all animals were inspected within 10 days and then the CVI was issued within 10 days of the first inspection date. However, if the last inspection date were used, it would be possible that animals that were first inspected (perhaps 14 days prior) would no longer be eligible to be on the CVI (as the CVI must be issued within 10 days of inspection).

Herds with 'regular health maintenance programs' as defined by USDA are regularly inspected on different dates, but these would not present a problem as the veterinarians in these herds can issue a CVI for any animals on the premises they regularly inspected within 30 days of that inspection (using the date of the most recent visit as the inspection date).

If I am getting too far into the weeds, I apologize, I am new to the group!

[mmcgrath]

This is an agenda item for discussion on today's call -- the decision we need to get to is if we need to re-instate the "CVI level" Inspection date......

[mmcgrath]

11/14 refer to main cttee

[mmcgrath]

This has been stagnant for a number of years and will be closed on 2 Sept unless objections are raised.