Animal Identificaiton Eartags

Request for Information (RFI), USDA APHIS (For Information Purposes Only) Purpose: The purpose of this RFI is to conduct market research to gain knowledge and help the Government understand the availability of solutions and tools able to satisfy the needs of the USDA APHIS Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) system to enhance animal disease tracing activities. Background: USDA APHIS ADT provides the livestock industries maximum flexibility in the choices available for official ID devices. Procedures are in place with States and Tribes to manage tag allocation and distribution activities for all official ID tags. However, with the exception of Radio Frequency Identification Devices (RFID) and some barcoded devices, retirement of official identification number of animals harvested presents data entry challenges. USDA APHIS is studying the use of other solution to automate the recording of the animal's official identification number from eartags collected at slaughter and rendering facilities to increase efficiencies and data accuracy. A possible solution to this data recording challenge is to have a direct part mark (DPM) of the official identification number imprinted on each visual-only official identification eartag or device during the manufacturing process. Request for Information: 1. Are there animal ID ear tag manufacturers that have the capability to apply a 2-D data matrix DPM to their tags? 2. Do any animal ID ear tag manufacturers have data on the longevity of DPMs under field conditions or under controlled laboratory testing? Does the type of metal or plastic affect DPM longevity? 3. What does the addition of a DPM add to the cost of an animal ID ear tag? Is there a difference if the ear tag material is plastic or metal? 4. What matrix standard is most appropriate for the use of DPM on livestock eartags? 5. Are there methods other than DPMs that would allow automated data collection of the official identification number from visual-only tags? How would the cost of each of these alternatives compare with DPMs? 6. Any other relevant information, recommendations, and/or comments beneficial to the Government 7. Name, Title, contact information, and organization name, as applicable Responses Due and Point of Contact: Interested manufactures should send a statement of capabilities, your company size standard (small or large business) via email to Leigh Eberhart at [email protected]