I understand from the letter that accompanied the rule change proposal, that you want the AMHA horse to be:
1. at least three years of age
2. it's height verified (I am assuming that it must be 38" or under?)
3. inspected for obvious faults, such as height or conformation, and only be allowed registration status if it is free of obvious faults.
However, I don't think the proposal as written covers the last item. If you want the horse to be examined for quality, then it needs to be stated in the proposal, and it would need to say exactly what traits/soundness issues would be grounds for denying the registration application.
You mention soundness in the letter, if a horse was unsound due to an injury, would that be grounds to deny it registration when it would not be an inheritable defect?
The other problem is in the way the proposal is written. It says, "...A copy of the AMHA papers along with the Height Verification form (measured and filled out by an ASPC/AMHR/ASPR Steward and examined by an ASPC/AMHR/ASPR Judge) must be submitted along with the application..."
By putting the parenthesis around the section that refers to measuring and filling out the form, and since it appears immediately after referring to the Height Verification form, the rule can be interpreted that the Height Verification form is what is then examined by the Judge, not the horse.
Even if it wasn't interpreted that way, the rule does not state what the horse is to be 'examined' for... such as "obvious faults in conformation". And, it doesn't say that the horse must meet any particular 'standard' to be granted registration, only that it be examined.
I understand what you are trying to accomplish and can see the merit in the idea, but I don't think this proposal will get the full result that you are aiming for.