BILL ANALYSIS



C.S.H.B. 669
By: Gutierrez
2-22-95
Committee Report (Substituted)


BACKGROUND

Currently, the law states that a veterinarian may quarantine an
animal that he or she suspects to be rabid only if that animal has
already exposed an individual to rabies.  In a recent event in
Edinburg, Texas, a veterinarian who suspected an animal of having
rabies had no legal recourse to impound that animal.  The owners,
who had insisted on taking the animal home with them, were both
eventually infected with rabies.

PURPOSE

This bill would allow a veterinarian legal recourse to impound an
animal he or she suspects of having rabies before anyone is
infected.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly
delegate rulemaking authority to a state officer, institution, or
agency.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1.  Amends Section 826.042, Health and Safety Code,
QUARANTINE OF ANIMALS, as follows:

     (b) The local health authority shall quarantine any animal
     that the authority has probable cause to believe may be rabid,
     and not just those which are believed to have exposed a person
     to rabies.

     (c) An owner must submit for quarantine an animal that the
     owner knows or suspects is rabid or has exposed an individual
     to rabies.

     (d) Adds the requirement that a veterinarian shall submit for
     quarantine an animal that: (1) is in the possession of the
     veterinarian; and (2) the veterinarian knows or suspects is
     rabid or has exposed an individual to rabies.

     (e) Requires the veterinarian or the owner, instead of just
the owner, to submit the
     suspected animal to the local health authority.

SECTION 2.  Emergency clause.

COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE

Unlike the original bill, the committee substitute does not add the
stipulation that the Board of Health establish a quarantine period
between 15 to 30 days in duration. Therefore, the substitute does
not alter existing rulemaking authority granted to the Texas Board
of Health, as did the original bill. The substitute also requires
the bill to go into effect upon passage, instead of September 1,
1995, as stipulated in the original bill.
SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION

H.B. 669 was considered in public hearing February 14, 1995.
Testifying for the bill was A. Brent Branham, Deputy City Manager
of McAllen, Texas. No one testified against the bill. Other
witnesses testifying on the bill were Dr. Keith Clark, Texas
Department of Health, and John Herron, Texas Parks and Wildlife.
The Chair laid out a committee substitute for H.B. 669, and it was
approved without objection. H.B. 669 was referred to subcommittee,
which held a formal meeting on February 20, 1995. A motion that
H.B. 669 as substituted be reported back to the full committee with
the recommendation that it do pass and be sent to Calendars was
approved without objection. The full committee met in a formal
meeting February 22, 1995, and recalled H.B. 669 from subcommittee.
The bill was then pending before the committee with the substitute
adopted on February 14, 1995. A motion to report H.B. 669 to the
full House as substituted with the recommendation that it do pass
was approved with 8 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 PNV, and 1 Absent.