National Organic Program (NOP); Amendments to the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (Livestock), 70479-70486 [E7-23915]
Download as PDF
70479
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 238
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 205
[Docket Number AMS–TM–07–0123; TM–03–
04]
RIN 0581–AC62
National Organic Program (NOP);
Amendments to the National List of
Allowed and Prohibited Substances
(Livestock)
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the
U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA) National List of Allowed and
Prohibited Substances (National List)
regulations to enact recommendations
submitted to the Secretary of
Agriculture (Secretary) by the National
Organic Standards Board (NOSB) from
October 30, 2000, through March 3,
2005. Consistent with the
recommendations from the NOSB, this
final rule adds two defined terms and
nine substances, along with any
restrictive annotations, and a category of
substances to the National List.
DATES: Effective Dates: This final rule
becomes effective December 13, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Pooler, Agricultural Marketing
Specialist, National Organic Program,
USDA/AMS/TM/NOP, Room 4008–So.,
Ag Stop 0268, 1400 Independence Ave.,
SW., Washington, DC 20250. Phone:
(202) 720–3252.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
I. Background
On December 21, 2000, the Secretary
established, within the NOP [7 CFR part
205], the National List regulations
§§ 205.600 through 205.607. This
National List identifies the synthetic
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
substances that may be used and the
nonsynthetic (natural) substances that
may not be used in organic production.
The National List also identifies
synthetic, nonsynthetic nonagricultural
and nonorganic agricultural substances
that may be used in organic handling.
The Organic Foods Production Act of
1990 (OFPA), as amended, (7 U.S.C.
6501 et seq.), and NOP regulations, in
§ 205.105, specifically prohibit the use
of any synthetic substance for organic
production and handling unless the
synthetic substance is on the National
List. Section 205.105 also requires that
any nonorganic agricultural,
nonsynthetic nonagricultural substance
used in organic handling must also be
on the National List.
Under the authority of the OFPA, the
National List can be amended by the
Secretary based on substance
recommendations developed by the
NOSB. This final rule amends the
National List to enact recommendations
submitted to the Secretary by the NOSB
from November 15, 2000, through
March 3, 2005.
II. Overview of Amendments
The following provides an overview
of the amendments to designated
sections of the National List regulations:
Section 205.2 Terms Defined
This final rule amends § 205.2 of the
NOP regulations by adding the
following terms:
AMDUCA. The Animal Medicinal
Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (Pub.
L. 103–396).
Excipients. Any ingredients that are
intentionally added to livestock
medications but do not exert therapeutic
or diagnostic effects at the intended
dosage, although they may act to
improve product delivery (e.g.,
enhancing absorption or controlling
release of the drug substance). Examples
of such ingredients include fillers,
extenders, diluents, wetting agents,
solvents, emulsifiers, preservatives,
flavors, absorption enhancers,
sustained-release matrices, and coloring
agents.
Section 205.603 Synthetic Substances
Allowed for Use in Organic Livestock
Production
This final rule amends paragraph (a)
of § 205.603 of the National List
regulations by adding the following
substances:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Atropine (CAS #–51–55–8)—federal
law restricts this drug to use by or on
the lawful written or oral order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530
of the Food and Drug Administration
regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by
or on the lawful written order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA; and (2) a meat
withdrawal period of at least 56 days
after administering to livestock intended
for slaughter; and a milk discard period
of at least 12 days after administering to
dairy animals.
Butorphanol (CAS #–42408–82–2)—
federal law restricts this drug to use by
or on the lawful written or oral order of
a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug
Administration regulations. Also, for
use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP
requires: (1) Use by or on the lawful
written order of a licensed veterinarian,
in full compliance with the AMDUCA;
and (2) a meat withdrawal period of at
least 42 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a
milk discard period of at least 8 days
after administering to dairy animals.
Flunixin (CAS #–38677–85–9)—in
accordance with approved labeling;
except that for use under 7 CFR part
205, the NOP requires a withdrawal
period of at least two-times that
required by the FDA.
Furosemide (CAS #–54–31–9)—in
accordance with approved labeling;
except that for use under 7 CFR part
205, the NOP requires a withdrawal
period of at least two-times that
required by the FDA.
Magnesium hydroxide (CAS #–1309–
42–8)—federal law restricts this drug to
use by or on the lawful written or oral
order of a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug
Administration regulations. Also, for
use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP
requires use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA.
Peroxyacetic/Peracetic acid (CAS #–
79–21–0)—for sanitizing facility and
processing equipment.
Poloxalene (CAS #–9003–11–6)—for
use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP
requires that poloxalene only be used
for the emergency treatment of bloat.
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
70480
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Tolazoline (CAS #–59–98–3)—federal
law restricts this drug to use by or on
the lawful written or oral order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530
of the Food and Drug Administration
regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by
or on the lawful written order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA; (2) use only to
reverse the effects of sedation and
analgesia caused by Xylazine; and (3) a
meat withdrawal period of at least 8
days after administering to livestock
intended for slaughter; and a milk
discard period of at least 4 days after
administering to dairy animals.
Xylazine (CAS #–7361–61–7)—federal
law restricts this drug to use by or on
the lawful written or oral order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530
of the Food and Drug Administration
regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by
or on the lawful written order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA; (2) the existence of
an emergency; and (3) a meat
withdrawal period of at least 8 days
after administering to livestock intended
for slaughter; and a milk discard period
of at least 4 days after administering to
dairy animals.
This final rule amends § 205.603 of
the National List regulations by adding
a new paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Excipients, only for use in the
manufacture of drugs used to treat
organic livestock when the excipient is:
Identified by the FDA as Generally
Recognized As Safe; Approved by the
FDA as a food additive; or Included in
the FDA review and approval of a New
Animal Drug Application or New Drug
Application.
This final rule also makes a technical
correction to § 205.603 paragraph (e) by
removing the word ‘‘a’’ from between
‘‘or’’ and ‘‘synthetic’’.
III. Related Documents
Six notices were published regarding
the meetings of the NOSB and its
deliberations on recommendations and
substances petitioned for amending the
National List. Substances and
recommendations included in this final
rule were announced for NOSB
deliberation in the following Federal
Register Notices: (1) 65 FR 64657,
October 30, 2000, (Calcium
borogluconate); (2) 66 FR 10873,
February 20, 2001, (Poloxalene); (3) 67
FR 54784, August 26, 2002, (Activated
charcoal, Bismuth subsalicylate,
Butorphanol, Epinephrine, Kaolin
pectin, Magnesium hydroxide,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
Potassium sorbate, Propylene glycol,
Tolazoline, and Xylazine); (4) 67 FR
62949, October 9, 2002, (Excipients and
Flunixin); (5) 68 FR 23277, May 1, 2003,
(Atropine, Calcium propionate,
Furosemide, and Mineral oil); and (6) 69
FR 18036, April 6, 2004, (Moxidectin).
The proposed rule for this final rule was
published on July 17, 2006 (71 FR
40624).
IV. Statutory and Regulatory Authority
The OFPA, as amended (7 U.S.C. 6501
et seq.), authorizes the Secretary to
make amendments to the National List
based on substance recommendations
developed by the NOSB. Sections
6518(k)(2) and 6518(n) of OFPA
authorize the NOSB to develop
substance recommendations to the
National List for submission to the
Secretary and establish a petition
process by which persons may petition
the NOSB for the purpose of having
substances evaluated for inclusion on or
deletion from the National List. The
National List petition process is
implemented under § 205.607 of the
NOP regulations. The current petition
process (72 FR 2167) can be accessed
through the NOP Web site at https://
www.ams.usda.gov/nop.
A. Executive Order 12866
This action has been determined not
significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866, and therefore, has not
been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
B. Executive Order 12988
Executive Order 12988 instructs each
executive agency to adhere to certain
requirements in the development of new
and revised regulations in order to avoid
unduly burdening the court system.
This final rule is not intended to have
a retroactive effect.
States and local jurisdictions are
preempted under the OFPA from
creating programs of accreditation for
private persons or State officials who
want to become certifying agents of
organic farms or handling operations. A
governing State official would have to
apply to USDA to be accredited as a
certifying agent, as described in
§ 2115(b) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C.
6514(b)). States are also preempted
under §§ 2104 through 2108 of the
OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6503 through 6507)
from creating certification programs to
certify organic farms or handling
operations unless the State programs
have been submitted to, and approved
by, the Secretary as meeting the
requirements of the OFPA.
Pursuant to § 2108(b)(2) of the OFPA
(7 U.S.C. 6507(b)(2)), a State organic
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
certification program may contain
additional requirements for the
production and handling of organically
produced agricultural products that are
produced in the State and for the
certification of organic farm and
handling operations located within the
State under certain circumstances. Such
additional requirements must: (a)
Further the purposes of the OFPA, (b)
not be inconsistent with the OFPA, (c)
not be discriminatory toward
agricultural commodities organically
produced in other States, and (d) not be
effective until approved by the
Secretary.
Pursuant to § 2120(f) of the OFPA (7
U.S.C. 6519(f)), this final rule would not
alter the authority of the Secretary
under the Federal Meat Inspection Act
(21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry
Products Inspections Act (21 U.S.C. 451
et seq.), or the Egg Products Inspection
Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.), concerning
meat, poultry, and egg products, nor any
of the authorities of the Secretary of
Health and Human Services under the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.), nor the authority
of the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq.).
Section 2121 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C.
6520) provides for the Secretary to
establish an expedited administrative
appeals procedure under which persons
may appeal an action of the Secretary,
the applicable governing State official,
or a certifying agent under this title that
adversely affects such person or is
inconsistent with the organic
certification program established under
this title. The OFPA also provides that
the U.S. District Court for the district in
which a person is located has
jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s
decision.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires agencies
to consider the economic impact of each
rule on small entities and evaluate
alternatives that would accomplish the
objectives of the rule without unduly
burdening small entities or erecting
barriers that would restrict their ability
to compete in the market. The purpose
is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
businesses subject to the action. Section
605 of the RFA allows an agency to
certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an
analysis, if the rulemaking is not
expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the RFA, the Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS) performed an economic
impact analysis on small entities in the
final rule published in the Federal
Register on December 21, 2000 (65 FR
80548). The AMS has also considered
the economic impact of this action on
small entities. The impact on entities
affected by this final rule would not be
significant. The effect of this final rule
would be to allow the use of additional
substances in agricultural production
and handling. This action would modify
the regulations to provide small entities
with more tools to use in day-to-day
operations. The AMS concludes that the
economic impact of this addition of
allowed substances, if any, would be
minimal and entirely beneficial to small
agricultural service firms. Accordingly,
USDA certifies that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Small agricultural service firms,
which include producers, handlers, and
accredited certifying agents, have been
defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201)
as those having annual receipts of less
than $6,500,000 and small agricultural
producers are defined as those having
annual receipts of less than $750,000.
This final rule would have an impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. organic industry at the end
of 2001 included nearly 6,949 certified
organic crop and livestock operations.
Data on the numbers of certified organic
handling operations (any operation that
transforms raw product into processed
products using organic ingredients)
were not available at the time of survey
in 2001; but they were estimated to be
in the thousands. By the end of 2006,
the number of certified organic crop,
livestock, and handling operations
totaled over 14,800 operations based on
reports by certifying agents to the NOP
as part of their annual reporting
requirements. AMS believes that most of
these entities would be considered
small entities under the criteria
established by SBA.
U.S. sales of organic food and
beverages have grown from $1 billion in
1990 to nearly $17 billion in 2006.
Organic food sales are projected to reach
$23.8 billion for 2010. The organic
industry is viewed as the fastest growing
sector of agriculture, currently
representing nearly 3 percent of overall
food and beverage sales. Since 1990,
organic retail sales have historically
demonstrated a growth rate between 20
to 24 percent each year including a 22
percent increase in 2006.
In addition, 95 certifying agents are
currently accredited by USDA to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
provide certification services to
producers and handlers under the NOP.
A complete list of names and addresses
of accredited certifying agents may be
found on the NOP web site, at https://
www.ams.usda.gov/nop. AMS believes
that most of these entities would be
considered small entities under the
criteria established by the SBA.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the OFPA, no additional
collection or recordkeeping
requirements are imposed on the public
by this final rule. Accordingly, OMB
clearance is not required by section
350(h) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., or
OMB’s implementing regulation at 5
CFR part 1320.
AMS is committed to compliance
with the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act (GPEA), which requires
Government agencies in general to
provide the public the option of
submitting information or transacting
business electronically to the maximum
extent possible.
E. Received Comments on Proposed
Rule TM–03–04
AMS received 79 comments on
proposed rule TM–03–04. Comments
were received from organic livestock
producers, veterinarians, accredited
certifying agents, consumers, retailers,
trade associations, manufacturers of
animal medications, and public interest
groups. A number of comments
expressed total opposition to all
amendments proposed in TM–03–04
and asserted that such amendments
weakened the NOP regulations. A few
comments supported the addition of all
the proposed amendments without
changes. Many comments indicated
conditional support for some of the
proposed amendments; however, they
suggested modifications be made to
their inclusion on the National List.
Such comments conveyed that the
proposed amendments altered the
original intent for how the NOSB
recommended the substance be used in
organic livestock production. Some of
those comments proposed that if the
substance was not to be listed as
recommended by the NOSB, then the
proposed amendment should not be
added to the National List.
Additional comments raised concern
regarding USDA’s decision not to
include certain substances on the
National List. These substances include
activated charcoal, calcium
borogluconate, calcium propionate,
kaolin pectin, mineral oil, propylene
glycol, and epinephrine. Comments also
indicated that a few of the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70481
amendments required further
clarification or correction to avoid
misinterpretation of the regulations and
misapplication of the substance.
Changes Made Based On Comments
The following changes are made
based upon comments received.
Calcium propionate as a mold
inhibitor in dry formulated herbal
products. Some comments expressed
opposition to the proposed amendment
to add Calcium propionate as a mold
inhibitor in dry herbal products to
§ 205.603(d). At their May 2003
meeting, the NOSB recommended
adding Calcium propionate as a mold
inhibitor in dry formulated herbal
‘‘remedies.’’ Comments on Calcium
propionate concluded that the NOSB
did not recommend Calcium propionate
to be added onto the National List as a
livestock feed additive under
§ 205.603(d); rather, these comments
argued that the NOSB recommended
Calcium propionate be included as a
‘‘medical treatment’’ and listed under
§ 205.603(a). Comments further
suggested that if calcium propionate
could not be listed under § 205.603(a)
that it should not be included on the
National List because the authorization
for the substance could be
misinterpreted to allow its use for
organic livestock feed, which was not
the intent of the proposal or the NOSB
recommendation.
We agree with these comments that
the proposed amendment for Calcium
propionate did not correspond with the
NOSB recommendation. Based on the
consultation between USDA and FDA,
we were informed that ‘‘dry formulated
herbal remedies’’ are not recognized as
a ‘‘medical treatment’’ for animal illness
and could not be authorized as such in
the Federal Register and under
§ 205.603(a) of the National List without
having been approved by FDA through
a New Animal Drug Application
(NADA).
As a result, USDA researched the
most appropriate way to include the
substance on the National List to reflect
the NOSB’s recommendation. To that
effect, we recognized that Calcium
propionate did not have any approved
uses as a medical treatment under the
FDA regulations. However, under 21
CFR 582.3221 (Animal Drugs, Feeds,
and Related Products), it is approved as
a chemical preservative that is Generally
Recognized as Safe. Therefore, since
‘‘dry formulated herbal remedies’’ are
not recognized as medical treatments
under the FDA’s regulations and could
not be prescribed as such in the
National List, the USDA believed that it
could implement the recommendation
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
70482
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
and intent of the NOSB by permitting
the use of Calcium propionate as a mold
inhibitor in dry formulated ‘‘products’’
(instead of ‘‘remedies’’) by authorizing it
as a feed. We concluded that herbs
(agricultural products) would be fed to
an animal and would therefore be
considered part of the feed provisions of
the National List.
In addition to the general public
comments received on Calcium
propionate, we received comments from
the FDA concerning the proposed
language to authorize the use of Calcium
propionate as a ‘‘mold inhibitor.’’ The
FDA shared that Calcium propionate is
not authorized for use as a ‘‘mold
inhibitor,’’ but a ‘‘chemical
preservative.’’ Therefore, it must only be
recognized for use within the
parameters for which it has been
authorized. The FDA also commented
that the AMDUCA does not apply to
Calcium propionate and cannot be used
to attempt broader uses than authorized
by the FDA.
As a result, based on comments
received on Calcium propionate’s
proposed addition to § 205.603(d) of the
National List and information shared by
the FDA, we have decided not to add
Calcium propionate to the National List.
Instead, we are referring this substance
back to the NOSB for the purpose of
reconsidering its placement on the
National List (i.e. § 205.603(d)), as it
relates to the regulatory provisions of
the FDA).
Incorrect CAS number for
Butorphanol. One commenter observed
that the proposed rule included an
incorrect CAS number for Butorphanol.
The proposed rule listed Butorphanol’s
CAS number as 14887–18–9. This
comment indicated that the proper CAS
number is 42408–82–2. NOP research
confirmed the CAS number provided
within the comment is accurate.
Therefore, we agree with this comment
and have inserted the proper CAS
number into the final rule.
Extended Withdrawal Periods. Many
commenters disagreed with USDA’s
decision to omit the NOSB’s
recommendations to extend the
withdrawal periods for a number of
proposed livestock medications (e.g.
Atropine, Butorphanol, Flunixin,
Furosemide, Tolazoline, and Xylazine).
Commenters argued that the NOP has
the authority to require stricter
standards for animal drug use than
those specified by the FDA. According
to the commenters, all drugs permitted
for use in organic farming are subject to
stricter standards than those used by
nonorganic farmers, because they are
subject to certifiers’ review and
approval in an Organic System Plan
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
(OSP). Commenters also noted that there
are currently several livestock
medications (Ivermectin, Lidocaine, and
Procaine) on the National List whose
withdrawal periods already extend
beyond that required by FDA.
Commenters expressed that USDA
should either accept the NOSB’s
recommendation to extend the
withdrawal period of the proposed
livestock medications or not amend the
National List at all. Without the
extended withdrawal period, according
to these commenters, the NOSB’s
recommendations would be weakened
and the synthetic substances would be
allowed to be used in ways that the
NOSB did not intend.
As a proposed compromise to satisfy
the intent of the NOSB, many
commenters suggested that USDA
should consider amending the
annotations of Atropine, Butorphanol,
Flunixin, Furosemide, Tolazoline, and
Xylazine by establishing extended
withdrawal periods, calculated using
withdrawal times from the Food Animal
Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD).
The FARAD is a National Food Safety
Project administered through the USDA
Cooperative State Research, Education,
and Extension Service. It is a system
designed to provide livestock producers,
extension specialists, and veterinarians
with practical information on how to
avoid drug, pesticide and environmental
contaminant residue problems. FARAD
is a repository of comprehensive residue
avoidance information. It is also
sanctioned to provide ‘‘withholding
period’’ (also known as withdrawal
period) estimates to the U.S.
Pharmacopeia-Drug Information (USP–
DI) Veterinary Medicine Advisory
Committee. Commenters suggested that
USDA account for an extra margin of at
least double the withdrawal times of
FARAD to safely capture the intent of
the NOSB.
USDA agrees with the position stated
in the comments. Since many of the
aforementioned livestock medications
are being authorized for use under
AMDUCA and do not have formal FDA
approved labels for the use
recommended by the NOSB,
veterinarians who are authorized to
administer the medical treatment to
organic livestock would be responsible
for establishing a substantially extended
withdrawal period prior to the
marketing of milk, meat, eggs, or other
edible products. The FDA requires that
these withdrawal periods be supported
by appropriate scientific information, if
applicable. The FDA also requires that
the veterinarian take appropriate
measures to assure the assigned
timeframes for withdrawal are met and
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that no illegal drug residues occur in
any food-producing animal subjected to
extra-label treatment (21 CFR
530.20(a)(2)(ii); (iv)). Therefore, in an
effort to ensure uniformity and
consistency regarding the application of
withdrawal periods, USDA has
amended the annotations of Atropine,
Butorphanol, Tolazine, and Xylazine to
reflect minimum withdrawal periods
that are double the FARAD withdrawal
period suggested for the administration
of the referenced livestock medication.
With respect to the withdrawal
periods for Flunixin and Furosemide,
however, these drugs do have FDA
approved labels for the use
recommended by the NOSB and were
not proposed for use in organic
livestock production under AMDUCA
but rather existing FDA approved
animal drug use and labeling, 21 CFR
part 520. As a result, the withdrawal
period associated with the use of these
substances under the NOP would be
based upon the withdrawal period
established by the FDA, as opposed to
a FARAD withdrawal period.
Based on public comment, USDA
consulted further with the FDA,
concerning the ability to extend the
withdrawal period on these approved
drugs. Based on our consultations,
USDA agreed to clarify the rationale for
extending the FDA established
withdrawal period. Secondly, USDA
agreed to clarify the language used to
authorize the use of the substances by
indicating the extended withdrawal
periods (at least two-times that required
by the FDA) were only relevant for use
of the substances under the NOP
regulations.
Therefore, to clarify our rationale for
extending the withdrawal periods
established by the FDA, we
acknowledge that this determination
was not based on scientific research or
risk assessments. The decision to extend
the FDA withdrawal periods (or any
other withdrawal period) for the use of
Flunixin and Furosemide (and other
substances) was based on consumer
preference and the recommendations of
the NOSB. FDA exercises full
responsibility for determining and
enforcing the withdrawal intervals for
animal drugs. No food safety arguments
are used or implied to support the use
of extended withdrawal periods
authorized under the NOP regulations.
Rather, we determined that extended
withdrawal periods are more compatible
with consumer expectations of
organically raised animals.
Verification of lawful order of a
licensed veterinarian. Federal law
restricts Atropine, Butorphanol,
Magnesium hydroxide, Tolazine, and
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Xylazine to use by or on the lawful
written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the
AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the
Food and Drug Administration
regulations. For use under 7 CFR part
205, the NOP is requiring use by or on
the lawful written order of a licensed
veterinarian. Further, under the NOP, a
written order is necessary for the
livestock producer to prove compliance
with paragraph (b) of § 205.238
Livestock health care practice standard.
Written orders will also facilitate
compliance with the recordkeeping
provisions of § 205.103.
Other use restrictions for Tolazine
and Xylazine. In addition to the use
restrictions noted above, in response to
comments, the NOP has added the
following use restrictions. For Tolazine,
the NOP has added the requirement that
Tolazine only be used to reverse the
effects of sedation and analgesia caused
by Xylazine as originally recommended
by the NOSB at its September 17–19,
2002, meeting in Washington, DC. For
Xylazine, the NOP has added the
requirement for the existence of an
emergency as originally recommended
by the NOSB at its September 17–19,
2002, meeting in Washington, DC.
Excipients. Commenters suggested
that the proposed amendment to
include excipients onto the National
List was too broad or needed further
clarification to reduce possible
confusion for producers, certifying
agents, and consumers. Commenters
asserted that the proposed language
could lead readers to believe that
excipients are permitted for use in
livestock feed or feed supplements.
We do not agree that the proposed
language is so misleading to readers.
However, we do believe that a definition
of excipients would help clarify its
meaning. Therefore, we have amended
the regulations to include the following
definition for excipients: ‘‘any
ingredients intentionally added to
livestock medications but that do not
exert therapeutic or diagnostic effects at
the intended dosage, although they may
act to improve product delivery (e.g.,
enhancing absorption or controlling
release of the drug substance). Examples
include fillers, extenders, diluents,
wetting agents, solvents, emulsifiers,
preservatives, flavors, absorption
enhancers, sustained-release matrices,
and coloring agents.’’
Poloxalene annotation. A number of
comments objected to USDA omitting
the NOSB’s recommendation to
authorize the use of Poloxalene with the
annotation ‘‘only be used for emergency
treatment of bloat.’’ With regard to
Poloxalene and the proposed language
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
in TM–03–04, commenters expressed
concern that the proposed language
would allow routine use of Poloxalene.
As a result, commenters believed the
proposed language for Poloxalene
represents the use of a substance that
was not approved by the NOSB.
We agree that the proposed language
in TM–03–04, authorizing the use of
Poloxalene, did not restrict its use for
only the ‘‘emergency treatment of
bloat,’’ as the NOSB had recommended.
Based on our initial consultations with
the FDA, we originally proposed the use
of the substance as follows ‘‘in
accordance with approved labeling.’’
However, after reviewing the comments
and further consultation with the FDA,
we have modified the authorizing
language to (1) reflect the intent of the
NOSB and (2) clarify the language used
to authorize the use of the substance by
indicating that the restricted use of
Poloxalene (only for the emergency
treatment of bloat) is only relevant for
use of the substance under the NOP.
Exclusion of Moxidectin. A number of
commenters requested that USDA
include Moxidectin on the National
List, as the NOSB had recommended (to
control internal parasites). We did not
propose to add Moxidectin to the
National List because the substance is a
macrolide antibiotic and does not
comply with the April 22, 2005, NOP
policy statement on antibiotic use in
livestock production. The statement
provides that the use of antibiotics and
other prohibited substances is not
allowed for organically produced
livestock or their edible products once
a producer is certified organic.
Commenters stated that USDA’s
rationale for not adding Moxidectin to
the National List was arbitrary and
without scientific or regulatory basis.
Commenters argued that Moxidectin
should not be considered an antibiotic,
but a parasiticide, and therefore should
be allowed for use as medication to treat
organic livestock. One commenter
presented information that attempted to
delineate the difference between an
antibiotic and a parasiticide. The
comment argued that the defining
feature of an antibiotic is its ability to
inhibit the growth of microorganisms or
kill them outright. It included that
Moxidectin does not have this capacity.
Instead, Moxidectin targets parasites,
rather than bacterial infections.
We have verified the information
shared through public comment and
agree that Moxidectin, even though an
animal drug that is a macrolide
antibiotic, does not function as an
antibiotic (targeting bacterial infections),
but as a parasiticide (targeting parasites/
helminthes, e.g., roundworms,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70483
lungworms, hookworms, flatworms,
etc.). As a result, we will initiate
proposed rulemaking to authorize
Moxidectin as a livestock medication to
control internal parasites.
Removal of Bismuth subsalicylate
(CAS #–14887–18–9). Bismuth
subsalicylate was proposed for
inclusion on the National List. It was
proposed for use as a drug restricted to
use by or on the lawful written or oral
order of a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the FDA regulations. In
the proposed rule, the NOP shared that
consultations with the FDA revealed
that Bismuth subsalicylate is approved
as a drug for use in humans (FDA,
‘‘Approved Drug Products with
Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,
2005’’) and that New Animal Drug
Application (NADA) approvals for
Bismuth subsalicylate were not
identified. The NOP further stated that
despite the absence of a NADA approval
for Bismuth subsalicylate, the substance
could be permitted for use in livestock
production if used in full compliance
with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530
of the FDA regulations, ‘‘Provision
permitting extra-label use of animal
drugs.’’ This action was based on the
rationale that Bismuth subsalicylate was
an approved human drug and qualified
for use under the provisions of
AMDUCA.
However, in response to the proposed
rule, the FDA informed the NOP that
Bismuth subsalicylate could not be
authorized for use in livestock
production under the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the FDA regulations,
because Bismuth subsalicylate is not
approved as an independent, active
ingredient for use as a human drug, but
only in combination with Metronidazole
and Tetracycline hydrochloride. The
FDA further commented that over-thecounter medications do not qualify for
use under the provisions of AMDUCA
and 21 CFR part 530. As a result, they
advised the NOP to remove Bismuth
subsalicylate from the proposed
amendments to the National List;
Bismuth subsalicylate has been removed
from inclusion.
Other Changes Made
Several of the new substance listings
contain the term ‘‘AMDUCA.’’ For the
convenience of persons using the NOP
regulations we have added a definition
of AMDUCA to § 205.2. That definition
reads: ‘‘AMDUCA. The Animal
Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of
1994 (Pub. L. 103–396).’’
While preparing this final rule, we
noted a technical error in the wording
of § 205.603(e). Accordingly, this final
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
70484
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
rule also makes a technical correction to
§ 205.603 paragraph (e) by removing the
word ‘‘a’’ from between ‘‘or’’ and
‘‘synthetic’’. Section 205.603(e) now
reads: ‘‘As synthetic inert ingredients as
classified by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), for use with
nonsynthetic substances or synthetic
substances listed in this section and
used as an active pesticide ingredient in
accordance with any limitations on the
use of such substances.’’
Changes Requested But Not Made
A number of commenters opposed the
addition of any of the proposed
amendments to the National List. The
majority of these comments did not
provide any evidence under the OFPA
and NOP regulations that would support
the position stated. Instead, these
commenters stated the addition of any
of the proposed amendments weakened
the NOP regulations and compromised
the integrity of organic foods. We
considered these comments but have
determined that the record supports the
need for livestock medications in the
interest of humane treatment of
livestock. We believe commenters’
concerns have been addressed by
including double withdrawal periods
and other use restrictions.
Six non-accepted substances. Several
comments, including a number from
organic dairy farmers, supported adding
Activated charcoal, Calcium
borogluconate, Calcium propionate (as a
medical treatment for milk fever),
Kaolin pectin, Mineral oil, and
Propylene glycol onto § 205.603(a) as
substances that should be allowed for
use as medical treatments in organic
livestock production. These substances
were not included as amendments to the
National List in the proposed rule. The
NOSB recommended that the Secretary
include these substances onto the
National List, in § 205.603, as veterinary
treatments in organic livestock
production. Comments in support of
including these substances onto the
National List argued that these
substances were essential tools for dairy
farmers, effective in restoring animal
health, and widely available and
commonly used by livestock producers
and veterinarians, with no significant
environmental impacts. Additionally, a
few of these commenters argued that
FDA considers these drugs to be a low
regulatory priority or ‘‘allowed by
regulatory discretion.’’
As stated in the proposed rule,
consultation with the FDA revealed that
Activated charcoal, Calcium
borogluconate, Calcium propionate,
Kaolin pectin, Mineral oil, and
Propylene glycol have not received
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
approval through the FDA drug
approval process to be authorized as
medical treatments for livestock.
Consultation also revealed that the
proposed substances could not qualify
for extra-label use by a licensed
veterinarian under AMDUCA. As a
result, the synthetic forms of these
substances remain prohibited for use in
organic livestock production.
One commenter asserted that USDA
should have not stated that the six
substances could not be used in organic
livestock production, because some of
the substances could be sourced and
used in nonsynthetic form. USDA agrees
that nonsynthetic forms of the
medication would not be prohibited
from use in organic livestock
production. The proposed rule did not
address the nonsynthetic forms of the
medications because the NOSB’s
recommendations only addressed the
synthetic forms. As a result, we reiterate
that the prohibited use of the six
substances was made in the context of
the synthetic form of the substances, not
the nonsynthetic form.
Epinephrine as a prohibited
nonsynthetic substance. A few
comments were received concerning
USDA’s decision not to include
Epinephrine as a prohibited
nonsynthetic substance on the National
List. Some comments were in favor of
the proposed action on Epinephrine,
while a few did not favor USDA’s
decision to exclude the substance from
the National List. We also received one
comment that recommended USDA,
with respect to the FDA restriction on
the use of Epinephrine, consult with the
NOSB to see if there is still a need to
identify the substance as a prohibited
nonsynthetic on the National List.
The proposed rule acknowledged that
Epinephrine is a nonsynthetic
substance; and it emphasized that
nonsynthetic substances are allowed in
organic production, unless prohibited.
For instance, under the NOP
regulations, a livestock producer may
not administer animal drugs in violation
of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act. The proposed rule also noted that
the FDA regulations currently restrict
the use of the medication to the
emergency treatment of anaphylactic
shock in cattle, horses, sheep, and
swine, which is what the NOSB had
recommended. As a result, we did not
see a clear need to include the substance
on the National List. USDA will consult
with the NOSB to see if there is still a
need to identify Epinephrine as a
prohibited nonsynthetic on the National
List.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
F. Effective Date.
This final rule reflects
recommendations submitted to the
Secretary by the NOSB. The substances
being added to the National List were
based on petitions from the industry
and evaluated by the NOSB using
criteria in the Act and the regulations.
Because these substances are crucial to
organic livestock production operations,
producers should be able to use them in
their operations as soon as possible.
Accordingly, AMS finds that good cause
exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for not
postponing the effective date of this rule
until 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 205.
Administrative practice and
procedure, Agriculture, Animals,
Archives and records, Imports, Labeling,
Organically produced products, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Seals and insignia, Soil
conservation.
I For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 205, subpart G is
amended as follows:
PART 205—NATIONAL ORGANIC
PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 205 continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501–6522.
2. Section 205.2 is amended by adding
two new terms in alphabetical order to
read as follows:
I
§ 205.2
Terms defined.
*
*
*
*
*
AMDUCA. The Animal Medicinal
Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (Pub.
L. 103–396).
*
*
*
*
*
Excipients. Any ingredients that are
intentionally added to livestock
medications but do not exert therapeutic
or diagnostic effects at the intended
dosage, although they may act to
improve product delivery (e.g.,
enhancing absorption or controlling
release of the drug substance). Examples
of such ingredients include fillers,
extenders, diluents, wetting agents,
solvents, emulsifiers, preservatives,
flavors, absorption enhancers,
sustained-release matrices, and coloring
agents.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. Section 205.603 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 205.603 Synthetic substances allowed
for use in organic livestock production.
In accordance with restrictions
specified in this section the following
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
synthetic substances may be used in
organic livestock production:
(a) As disinfectants, sanitizer, and
medical treatments as applicable.
(1) Alcohols.
(i) Ethanol-disinfectant and sanitizer
only, prohibited as a feed additive.
(ii) Isopropanol-disinfectant only.
(2) Aspirin-approved for health care
use to reduce inflammation.
(3) Atropine (CAS #–51–55–8)—
federal law restricts this drug to use by
or on the lawful written or oral order of
a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug
Administration regulations. Also, for
use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian; and
(ii) A meat withdrawal period of at
least 56 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a
milk discard period of at least 12 days
after administering to dairy animals.
(4) Biologics—Vaccines.
(5) Butorphanol (CAS #–42408–82–
2)—federal law restricts this drug to use
by or on the lawful written or oral order
of a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug
Administration regulations. Also, for
use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian; and
(ii) A meat withdrawal period of at
least 42 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a
milk discard period of at least 8 days
after administering to dairy animals.
(6) Chlorhexidine—Allowed for
surgical procedures conducted by a
veterinarian. Allowed for use as a teat
dip when alternative germicidal agents
and/or physical barriers have lost their
effectiveness.
(7) Chlorine materials—disinfecting
and sanitizing facilities and equipment.
Residual chlorine levels in the water
shall not exceed the maximum residual
disinfectant limit under the Safe
Drinking Water Act.
(i) Calcium hypochlorite.
(ii) Chlorine dioxide.
(iii) Sodium hypochlorite.
(8) Electrolytes—without antibiotics.
(9) Flunixin (CAS #–38677–85–9)—in
accordance with approved labeling;
except that for use under 7 CFR Part
205, the NOP requires a withdrawal
period of at least two-times that
required by the FDA.
(10) Furosemide (CAS #–54–31–9)—
in accordance with approved labeling;
except that for use under 7 CFR Part
205, the NOP requires a withdrawal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
period of at least two-times that
required that required by the FDA.
(11) Glucose.
(12) Glycerine—Allowed as a
livestock teat dip, must be produced
through the hydrolysis of fats or oils.
(13) Hydrogen peroxide.
(14) Iodine.
(15) Magnesium hydroxide (CAS #–
1309–42–8)—federal law restricts this
drug to use by or on the lawful written
or oral order of a licensed veterinarian,
in full compliance with the AMDUCA
and 21 CFR part 530 of the Food and
Drug Administration regulations. Also,
for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP
requires use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian.
(16) Magnesium sulfate.
(17) Oxytocin—use in postparturition
therapeutic applications.
(18) Paraciticides. Ivermectin—
prohibited in slaughter stock, allowed in
emergency treatment for dairy and
breeder stock when organic system
plan-approved preventive management
does not prevent infestation. Milk or
milk products from a treated animal
cannot be labeled as provided for in
subpart D of this part for 90 days
following treatment. In breeder stock,
treatment cannot occur during the last
third of gestation if the progeny will be
sold as organic and must not be used
during the lactation period for breeding
stock.
(19) Peroxyacetic/peracetic acid (CAS
#–79–21–0)—for sanitizing facility and
processing equipment.
(20) Phosphoric acid—allowed as an
equipment cleaner, Provided, That, no
direct contact with organically managed
livestock or land occurs.
(21) Poloxalene (CAS #–9003–11–6)—
for use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires that poloxalene only be used
for the emergency treatment of bloat.
(22) Tolazoline (CAS #–59–98–3)—
federal law restricts this drug to use by
or on the lawful written or oral order of
a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug
Administration regulations. Also, for
use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian;
(ii) Use only to reverse the effects of
sedation and analgesia caused by
Xylazine; and
(iii) A meat withdrawal period of at
least 8 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a
milk discard period of at least 4 days
after administering to dairy animals.
(23) Xylazine (CAS #–7361–61–7)—
federal law restricts this drug to use by
or on the lawful written or oral order of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70485
a licensed veterinarian, in full
compliance with the AMDUCA and 21
CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug
Administration regulations. Also, for
use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian;
(ii) The existence of an emergency;
and
(iii) A meat withdrawal period of at
least 8 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a
milk discard period of at least 4 days
after administering to dairy animals.
(b) As topical treatment, external
parasiticide or local anesthetic as
applicable.
(1) Copper sulfate.
(2) Iodine.
(3) Lidocaine—as a local anesthetic.
Use requires a withdrawal period of 90
days after administering to livestock
intended for slaughter and 7 days after
administering to dairy animals.
(4) Lime, hydrated—as an external
pest control, not permitted to cauterize
physical alterations or deodorize animal
wastes.
(5) Mineral oil—for topical use and as
a lubricant.
(6) Procaine—as a local anesthetic,
use requires a withdrawal period of 90
days after administering to livestock
intended for slaughter and 7 days after
administering to dairy animals.
(7) Sucrose octanoate esters (CAS #s–
42922–74–7; 58064–47–4)—in
accordance with approved labeling.
(c) As feed supplements—None.
(d) As feed additives.
(1) DL–Methionine, DL–Methionine—
hydroxy analog, and DL–Methionine—
hydroxy analog calcium (CAS #–59–51–
8; 63–68–3; 348–67–4)—for use only in
organic poultry production until
October 1, 2008.
(2) Trace minerals, used for
enrichment or fortification when FDA
approved.
(3) Vitamins, used for enrichment or
fortification when FDA approved.
(e) As synthetic inert ingredients as
classified by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), for use with
nonsynthetic substances or synthetic
substances listed in this section and
used as an active pesticide ingredient in
accordance with any limitations on the
use of such substances.
(1) EPA List 4—Inerts of Minimal
Concern.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) Excipients, only for use in the
manufacture of drugs used to treat
organic livestock when the excipient is:
Identified by the FDA as Generally
Recognized As Safe; Approved by the
FDA as a food additive; or Included in
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
70486
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
the FDA review and approval of a New
Animal Drug Application or New Drug
Application.
(g)–(z) [Reserved]
Dated: December 5, 2007.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E7–23915 Filed 12–11–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 220
[Regulation T; Docket No. R–1301]
Credit by Brokers and Dealers
Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Final rule; correcting
amendment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System (Board) is
amending Regulation T (Credit by
Brokers and Dealers) to correct a crossreference in one of its interpretations.
DATES: Effective Date: December 12,
2007.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Holz, Senior Counsel, Legal
Division (202–452–2966). For users of
the Telecommunications Device (TDD)
only, please call 202–263–4869.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
National Securities Markets
Improvement Act of 1996 (NSMIA).
(Pub. L. 104–290, 110 Stat. 3416)
amended section 7 of the Securities
Exchange of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78g) to
limit the Board’s authority to impose
restrictions on credit extended,
maintained, or arranged to or for a
member of a national securities
exchange or a registered broker or
dealer, a substantial portion of whose
business consists of transactions with
persons other than brokers or dealers, or
to finance its activities as a market
maker or an underwriter. Restrictions on
these types of credit were found at that
time in Regulations G, T and U (12 CFR
Parts 207, 220, and 221, respectively).
NSMIA gave the Board the authority
to maintain or adopt restrictions on
these types of credit if it determines that
such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest or for the
protection of investors. In November
1996, the Board adopted an
interpretation of its margin regulations
(1996 interpretation), indicating that the
Board had not made such a finding (61
FR 60166, November 26, 1996). The
1996 interpretation stated the Board’s
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:38 Dec 11, 2007
Jkt 214001
belief that the restrictions on these types
of credit found in the Regulations G, T
and U had been superseded by NSMIA.
NSMIA also repealed section 8(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
dealing with extensions of credit to
brokers and dealers collateralized with
exchange-traded securities. The Board’s
1996 interpretation indicated that the
provisions in Regulations G, T and U
adopted to implement section 8(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 were
without effect in light of NSMIA.
The text of the 1996 interpretation
was published as part of Regulation G,
and Regulations T and U were amended
with interpretations that referred to the
text of the 1996 interpretation appearing
in Regulation G.
In 1998, the Board adopted regulatory
amendments to remove the restrictions
that conflicted with NSMIA (63 FR
2806, January 16, 1998). As part of this
process, the Board amended the 1996
interpretation to delete references to the
conflict between the regulations and
NSMIA. The remaining provisions of
Regulation G, including the amended
1996 interpretation, were incorporated
into Regulation U. However, the
reference in Regulation T to the text of
the 1996 interpretation was
inadvertently not changed to reflect the
elimination of Regulation G. Today’s
action will correct this cross-reference
by amending Regulation T to reflect the
fact that the text of the amended 1996
interpretation now appears in
Regulation U.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 220
Banks, banking, Brokers, Credit,
Federal Reserve System, Margin, Margin
requirements, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, part 220 is amended to read
as follows:
I
PART 220—CREDIT BY BROKERS
AND DEALERS (REGULATION T)
1. The authority citation for part 220
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78g, 78q, and
78w.
§ 220.132
[Amended]
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 26, 121, and 129
[Docket No. FAA–2005–21693; Amendment
Nos. 26–1, 121–337, 129–44]
RIN 2120–AI32
Damage Tolerance Data for Repairs
and Alterations
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This final rule requires
holders of design approvals to make
available to operators damage tolerance
data for repairs and alterations to fatigue
critical airplane structure. This rule will
support operator compliance with the
Aging Airplane Safety final rule with
respect to the requirement to
incorporate into the maintenance
program, a means for addressing the
adverse effects repairs and alterations
may have on fatigue critical structure.
The intent of this final rule is to ensure
the continued airworthiness of fatigue
critical airplane structure by requiring
design approval holders to support
operator compliance with specified
damage tolerance requirements.
DATES: These amendments become
effective January 11, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have technical questions about this
action, contact Greg Schneider, ANM–
115, Airframe and Cabin Safety, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057–3356, telephone: (425–227–
2116); facsimile (425–227–1232); e-mail
greg.schneider@faa.gov. Direct any legal
questions to Doug Anderson, ANM–7,
Office of Regional Counsel, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356;
telephone (425) 227–2166; facsimile
(425) 227–1007; e-mail
Douglas.Anderson@faa.gov.
Authority for This Rulemaking
By order of the Secretary of the Board,
acting pursuant to delegated authority for the
Frm 00008
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
2. In § 220.132, introductory
paragraph, replace the phrase
‘‘§ 207.114’’ with ‘‘§ 221.125.’’
I
PO 00000
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, December 7, 2007.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7–24052 Filed 12–11–07; 8:45 am]
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
E:\FR\FM\12DER1.SGM
12DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 12, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70479-70486]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-23915]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 12, 2007 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 70479]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 205
[Docket Number AMS-TM-07-0123; TM-03-04]
RIN 0581-AC62
National Organic Program (NOP); Amendments to the National List
of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (Livestock)
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(USDA) National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National
List) regulations to enact recommendations submitted to the Secretary
of Agriculture (Secretary) by the National Organic Standards Board
(NOSB) from October 30, 2000, through March 3, 2005. Consistent with
the recommendations from the NOSB, this final rule adds two defined
terms and nine substances, along with any restrictive annotations, and
a category of substances to the National List.
DATES: Effective Dates: This final rule becomes effective December 13,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pooler, Agricultural Marketing
Specialist, National Organic Program, USDA/AMS/TM/NOP, Room 4008-So.,
Ag Stop 0268, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250. Phone:
(202) 720-3252.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On December 21, 2000, the Secretary established, within the NOP [7
CFR part 205], the National List regulations Sec. Sec. 205.600 through
205.607. This National List identifies the synthetic substances that
may be used and the nonsynthetic (natural) substances that may not be
used in organic production. The National List also identifies
synthetic, nonsynthetic nonagricultural and nonorganic agricultural
substances that may be used in organic handling. The Organic Foods
Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), as amended, (7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), and
NOP regulations, in Sec. 205.105, specifically prohibit the use of any
synthetic substance for organic production and handling unless the
synthetic substance is on the National List. Section 205.105 also
requires that any nonorganic agricultural, nonsynthetic nonagricultural
substance used in organic handling must also be on the National List.
Under the authority of the OFPA, the National List can be amended
by the Secretary based on substance recommendations developed by the
NOSB. This final rule amends the National List to enact recommendations
submitted to the Secretary by the NOSB from November 15, 2000, through
March 3, 2005.
II. Overview of Amendments
The following provides an overview of the amendments to designated
sections of the National List regulations:
Section 205.2 Terms Defined
This final rule amends Sec. 205.2 of the NOP regulations by adding
the following terms:
AMDUCA. The Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994
(Pub. L. 103-396).
Excipients. Any ingredients that are intentionally added to
livestock medications but do not exert therapeutic or diagnostic
effects at the intended dosage, although they may act to improve
product delivery (e.g., enhancing absorption or controlling release of
the drug substance). Examples of such ingredients include fillers,
extenders, diluents, wetting agents, solvents, emulsifiers,
preservatives, flavors, absorption enhancers, sustained-release
matrices, and coloring agents.
Section 205.603 Synthetic Substances Allowed for Use in Organic
Livestock Production
This final rule amends paragraph (a) of Sec. 205.603 of the
National List regulations by adding the following substances:
Atropine (CAS -51-55-8)--federal law restricts this drug
to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by or on the lawful written order
of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA; and (2)
a meat withdrawal period of at least 56 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard period of at least
12 days after administering to dairy animals.
Butorphanol (CAS -42408-82-2)--federal law restricts this
drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by or on the lawful written order
of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA; and (2)
a meat withdrawal period of at least 42 days after administering to
livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard period of at least
8 days after administering to dairy animals.
Flunixin (CAS -38677-85-9)--in accordance with approved
labeling; except that for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires a
withdrawal period of at least two-times that required by the FDA.
Furosemide (CAS -54-31-9)--in accordance with approved
labeling; except that for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires a
withdrawal period of at least two-times that required by the FDA.
Magnesium hydroxide (CAS -1309-42-8)--federal law
restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of
a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR
part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use
under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA.
Peroxyacetic/Peracetic acid (CAS -79-21-0)--for sanitizing
facility and processing equipment.
Poloxalene (CAS -9003-11-6)--for use under 7 CFR part 205,
the NOP requires that poloxalene only be used for the emergency
treatment of bloat.
[[Page 70480]]
Tolazoline (CAS -59-98-3)--federal law restricts this drug
to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by or on the lawful written order
of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA; (2) use
only to reverse the effects of sedation and analgesia caused by
Xylazine; and (3) a meat withdrawal period of at least 8 days after
administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard
period of at least 4 days after administering to dairy animals.
Xylazine (CAS -7361-61-7)--federal law restricts this drug
to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
part 205, the NOP requires: (1) Use by or on the lawful written order
of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA; (2) the
existence of an emergency; and (3) a meat withdrawal period of at least
8 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a
milk discard period of at least 4 days after administering to dairy
animals.
This final rule amends Sec. 205.603 of the National List
regulations by adding a new paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Excipients, only for use in the manufacture of drugs used to treat
organic livestock when the excipient is: Identified by the FDA as
Generally Recognized As Safe; Approved by the FDA as a food additive;
or Included in the FDA review and approval of a New Animal Drug
Application or New Drug Application.
This final rule also makes a technical correction to Sec. 205.603
paragraph (e) by removing the word ``a'' from between ``or'' and
``synthetic''.
III. Related Documents
Six notices were published regarding the meetings of the NOSB and
its deliberations on recommendations and substances petitioned for
amending the National List. Substances and recommendations included in
this final rule were announced for NOSB deliberation in the following
Federal Register Notices: (1) 65 FR 64657, October 30, 2000, (Calcium
borogluconate); (2) 66 FR 10873, February 20, 2001, (Poloxalene); (3)
67 FR 54784, August 26, 2002, (Activated charcoal, Bismuth
subsalicylate, Butorphanol, Epinephrine, Kaolin pectin, Magnesium
hydroxide, Potassium sorbate, Propylene glycol, Tolazoline, and
Xylazine); (4) 67 FR 62949, October 9, 2002, (Excipients and Flunixin);
(5) 68 FR 23277, May 1, 2003, (Atropine, Calcium propionate,
Furosemide, and Mineral oil); and (6) 69 FR 18036, April 6, 2004,
(Moxidectin). The proposed rule for this final rule was published on
July 17, 2006 (71 FR 40624).
IV. Statutory and Regulatory Authority
The OFPA, as amended (7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), authorizes the
Secretary to make amendments to the National List based on substance
recommendations developed by the NOSB. Sections 6518(k)(2) and 6518(n)
of OFPA authorize the NOSB to develop substance recommendations to the
National List for submission to the Secretary and establish a petition
process by which persons may petition the NOSB for the purpose of
having substances evaluated for inclusion on or deletion from the
National List. The National List petition process is implemented under
Sec. 205.607 of the NOP regulations. The current petition process (72
FR 2167) can be accessed through the NOP Web site at https://
www.ams.usda.gov/nop.
A. Executive Order 12866
This action has been determined not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866, and therefore, has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
B. Executive Order 12988
Executive Order 12988 instructs each executive agency to adhere to
certain requirements in the development of new and revised regulations
in order to avoid unduly burdening the court system. This final rule is
not intended to have a retroactive effect.
States and local jurisdictions are preempted under the OFPA from
creating programs of accreditation for private persons or State
officials who want to become certifying agents of organic farms or
handling operations. A governing State official would have to apply to
USDA to be accredited as a certifying agent, as described in Sec.
2115(b) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6514(b)). States are also preempted under
Sec. Sec. 2104 through 2108 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6503 through 6507)
from creating certification programs to certify organic farms or
handling operations unless the State programs have been submitted to,
and approved by, the Secretary as meeting the requirements of the OFPA.
Pursuant to Sec. 2108(b)(2) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6507(b)(2)), a
State organic certification program may contain additional requirements
for the production and handling of organically produced agricultural
products that are produced in the State and for the certification of
organic farm and handling operations located within the State under
certain circumstances. Such additional requirements must: (a) Further
the purposes of the OFPA, (b) not be inconsistent with the OFPA, (c)
not be discriminatory toward agricultural commodities organically
produced in other States, and (d) not be effective until approved by
the Secretary.
Pursuant to Sec. 2120(f) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6519(f)), this
final rule would not alter the authority of the Secretary under the
Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry
Products Inspections Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.), or the Egg Products
Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.), concerning meat, poultry, and
egg products, nor any of the authorities of the Secretary of Health and
Human Services under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.
301 et seq.), nor the authority of the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.).
Section 2121 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6520) provides for the Secretary
to establish an expedited administrative appeals procedure under which
persons may appeal an action of the Secretary, the applicable governing
State official, or a certifying agent under this title that adversely
affects such person or is inconsistent with the organic certification
program established under this title. The OFPA also provides that the
U.S. District Court for the district in which a person is located has
jurisdiction to review the Secretary's decision.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires agencies to consider the economic impact of each rule on small
entities and evaluate alternatives that would accomplish the objectives
of the rule without unduly burdening small entities or erecting
barriers that would restrict their ability to compete in the market.
The purpose is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses
subject to the action. Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to
certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the rulemaking is
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
[[Page 70481]]
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the RFA, the Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) performed an economic impact analysis on small
entities in the final rule published in the Federal Register on
December 21, 2000 (65 FR 80548). The AMS has also considered the
economic impact of this action on small entities. The impact on
entities affected by this final rule would not be significant. The
effect of this final rule would be to allow the use of additional
substances in agricultural production and handling. This action would
modify the regulations to provide small entities with more tools to use
in day-to-day operations. The AMS concludes that the economic impact of
this addition of allowed substances, if any, would be minimal and
entirely beneficial to small agricultural service firms. Accordingly,
USDA certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small agricultural service firms, which include producers,
handlers, and accredited certifying agents, have been defined by the
Small Business Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) as those having
annual receipts of less than $6,500,000 and small agricultural
producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than
$750,000. This final rule would have an impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
The U.S. organic industry at the end of 2001 included nearly 6,949
certified organic crop and livestock operations. Data on the numbers of
certified organic handling operations (any operation that transforms
raw product into processed products using organic ingredients) were not
available at the time of survey in 2001; but they were estimated to be
in the thousands. By the end of 2006, the number of certified organic
crop, livestock, and handling operations totaled over 14,800 operations
based on reports by certifying agents to the NOP as part of their
annual reporting requirements. AMS believes that most of these entities
would be considered small entities under the criteria established by
SBA.
U.S. sales of organic food and beverages have grown from $1 billion
in 1990 to nearly $17 billion in 2006. Organic food sales are projected
to reach $23.8 billion for 2010. The organic industry is viewed as the
fastest growing sector of agriculture, currently representing nearly 3
percent of overall food and beverage sales. Since 1990, organic retail
sales have historically demonstrated a growth rate between 20 to 24
percent each year including a 22 percent increase in 2006.
In addition, 95 certifying agents are currently accredited by USDA
to provide certification services to producers and handlers under the
NOP. A complete list of names and addresses of accredited certifying
agents may be found on the NOP web site, at https://www.ams.usda.gov/
nop. AMS believes that most of these entities would be considered small
entities under the criteria established by the SBA.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the OFPA, no additional collection or recordkeeping
requirements are imposed on the public by this final rule. Accordingly,
OMB clearance is not required by section 350(h) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., or OMB's implementing
regulation at 5 CFR part 1320.
AMS is committed to compliance with the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act (GPEA), which requires Government agencies in general
to provide the public the option of submitting information or
transacting business electronically to the maximum extent possible.
E. Received Comments on Proposed Rule TM-03-04
AMS received 79 comments on proposed rule TM-03-04. Comments were
received from organic livestock producers, veterinarians, accredited
certifying agents, consumers, retailers, trade associations,
manufacturers of animal medications, and public interest groups. A
number of comments expressed total opposition to all amendments
proposed in TM-03-04 and asserted that such amendments weakened the NOP
regulations. A few comments supported the addition of all the proposed
amendments without changes. Many comments indicated conditional support
for some of the proposed amendments; however, they suggested
modifications be made to their inclusion on the National List. Such
comments conveyed that the proposed amendments altered the original
intent for how the NOSB recommended the substance be used in organic
livestock production. Some of those comments proposed that if the
substance was not to be listed as recommended by the NOSB, then the
proposed amendment should not be added to the National List.
Additional comments raised concern regarding USDA's decision not to
include certain substances on the National List. These substances
include activated charcoal, calcium borogluconate, calcium propionate,
kaolin pectin, mineral oil, propylene glycol, and epinephrine. Comments
also indicated that a few of the proposed amendments required further
clarification or correction to avoid misinterpretation of the
regulations and misapplication of the substance.
Changes Made Based On Comments
The following changes are made based upon comments received.
Calcium propionate as a mold inhibitor in dry formulated herbal
products. Some comments expressed opposition to the proposed amendment
to add Calcium propionate as a mold inhibitor in dry herbal products to
Sec. 205.603(d). At their May 2003 meeting, the NOSB recommended
adding Calcium propionate as a mold inhibitor in dry formulated herbal
``remedies.'' Comments on Calcium propionate concluded that the NOSB
did not recommend Calcium propionate to be added onto the National List
as a livestock feed additive under Sec. 205.603(d); rather, these
comments argued that the NOSB recommended Calcium propionate be
included as a ``medical treatment'' and listed under Sec. 205.603(a).
Comments further suggested that if calcium propionate could not be
listed under Sec. 205.603(a) that it should not be included on the
National List because the authorization for the substance could be
misinterpreted to allow its use for organic livestock feed, which was
not the intent of the proposal or the NOSB recommendation.
We agree with these comments that the proposed amendment for
Calcium propionate did not correspond with the NOSB recommendation.
Based on the consultation between USDA and FDA, we were informed that
``dry formulated herbal remedies'' are not recognized as a ``medical
treatment'' for animal illness and could not be authorized as such in
the Federal Register and under Sec. 205.603(a) of the National List
without having been approved by FDA through a New Animal Drug
Application (NADA).
As a result, USDA researched the most appropriate way to include
the substance on the National List to reflect the NOSB's
recommendation. To that effect, we recognized that Calcium propionate
did not have any approved uses as a medical treatment under the FDA
regulations. However, under 21 CFR 582.3221 (Animal Drugs, Feeds, and
Related Products), it is approved as a chemical preservative that is
Generally Recognized as Safe. Therefore, since ``dry formulated herbal
remedies'' are not recognized as medical treatments under the FDA's
regulations and could not be prescribed as such in the National List,
the USDA believed that it could implement the recommendation
[[Page 70482]]
and intent of the NOSB by permitting the use of Calcium propionate as a
mold inhibitor in dry formulated ``products'' (instead of ``remedies'')
by authorizing it as a feed. We concluded that herbs (agricultural
products) would be fed to an animal and would therefore be considered
part of the feed provisions of the National List.
In addition to the general public comments received on Calcium
propionate, we received comments from the FDA concerning the proposed
language to authorize the use of Calcium propionate as a ``mold
inhibitor.'' The FDA shared that Calcium propionate is not authorized
for use as a ``mold inhibitor,'' but a ``chemical preservative.''
Therefore, it must only be recognized for use within the parameters for
which it has been authorized. The FDA also commented that the AMDUCA
does not apply to Calcium propionate and cannot be used to attempt
broader uses than authorized by the FDA.
As a result, based on comments received on Calcium propionate's
proposed addition to Sec. 205.603(d) of the National List and
information shared by the FDA, we have decided not to add Calcium
propionate to the National List. Instead, we are referring this
substance back to the NOSB for the purpose of reconsidering its
placement on the National List (i.e. Sec. 205.603(d)), as it relates
to the regulatory provisions of the FDA).
Incorrect CAS number for Butorphanol. One commenter observed that
the proposed rule included an incorrect CAS number for Butorphanol. The
proposed rule listed Butorphanol's CAS number as 14887-18-9. This
comment indicated that the proper CAS number is 42408-82-2. NOP
research confirmed the CAS number provided within the comment is
accurate. Therefore, we agree with this comment and have inserted the
proper CAS number into the final rule.
Extended Withdrawal Periods. Many commenters disagreed with USDA's
decision to omit the NOSB's recommendations to extend the withdrawal
periods for a number of proposed livestock medications (e.g. Atropine,
Butorphanol, Flunixin, Furosemide, Tolazoline, and Xylazine).
Commenters argued that the NOP has the authority to require stricter
standards for animal drug use than those specified by the FDA.
According to the commenters, all drugs permitted for use in organic
farming are subject to stricter standards than those used by nonorganic
farmers, because they are subject to certifiers' review and approval in
an Organic System Plan (OSP). Commenters also noted that there are
currently several livestock medications (Ivermectin, Lidocaine, and
Procaine) on the National List whose withdrawal periods already extend
beyond that required by FDA.
Commenters expressed that USDA should either accept the NOSB's
recommendation to extend the withdrawal period of the proposed
livestock medications or not amend the National List at all. Without
the extended withdrawal period, according to these commenters, the
NOSB's recommendations would be weakened and the synthetic substances
would be allowed to be used in ways that the NOSB did not intend.
As a proposed compromise to satisfy the intent of the NOSB, many
commenters suggested that USDA should consider amending the annotations
of Atropine, Butorphanol, Flunixin, Furosemide, Tolazoline, and
Xylazine by establishing extended withdrawal periods, calculated using
withdrawal times from the Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank
(FARAD). The FARAD is a National Food Safety Project administered
through the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension
Service. It is a system designed to provide livestock producers,
extension specialists, and veterinarians with practical information on
how to avoid drug, pesticide and environmental contaminant residue
problems. FARAD is a repository of comprehensive residue avoidance
information. It is also sanctioned to provide ``withholding period''
(also known as withdrawal period) estimates to the U.S. Pharmacopeia-
Drug Information (USP-DI) Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee.
Commenters suggested that USDA account for an extra margin of at least
double the withdrawal times of FARAD to safely capture the intent of
the NOSB.
USDA agrees with the position stated in the comments. Since many of
the aforementioned livestock medications are being authorized for use
under AMDUCA and do not have formal FDA approved labels for the use
recommended by the NOSB, veterinarians who are authorized to administer
the medical treatment to organic livestock would be responsible for
establishing a substantially extended withdrawal period prior to the
marketing of milk, meat, eggs, or other edible products. The FDA
requires that these withdrawal periods be supported by appropriate
scientific information, if applicable. The FDA also requires that the
veterinarian take appropriate measures to assure the assigned
timeframes for withdrawal are met and that no illegal drug residues
occur in any food-producing animal subjected to extra-label treatment
(21 CFR 530.20(a)(2)(ii); (iv)). Therefore, in an effort to ensure
uniformity and consistency regarding the application of withdrawal
periods, USDA has amended the annotations of Atropine, Butorphanol,
Tolazine, and Xylazine to reflect minimum withdrawal periods that are
double the FARAD withdrawal period suggested for the administration of
the referenced livestock medication.
With respect to the withdrawal periods for Flunixin and Furosemide,
however, these drugs do have FDA approved labels for the use
recommended by the NOSB and were not proposed for use in organic
livestock production under AMDUCA but rather existing FDA approved
animal drug use and labeling, 21 CFR part 520. As a result, the
withdrawal period associated with the use of these substances under the
NOP would be based upon the withdrawal period established by the FDA,
as opposed to a FARAD withdrawal period.
Based on public comment, USDA consulted further with the FDA,
concerning the ability to extend the withdrawal period on these
approved drugs. Based on our consultations, USDA agreed to clarify the
rationale for extending the FDA established withdrawal period.
Secondly, USDA agreed to clarify the language used to authorize the use
of the substances by indicating the extended withdrawal periods (at
least two-times that required by the FDA) were only relevant for use of
the substances under the NOP regulations.
Therefore, to clarify our rationale for extending the withdrawal
periods established by the FDA, we acknowledge that this determination
was not based on scientific research or risk assessments. The decision
to extend the FDA withdrawal periods (or any other withdrawal period)
for the use of Flunixin and Furosemide (and other substances) was based
on consumer preference and the recommendations of the NOSB. FDA
exercises full responsibility for determining and enforcing the
withdrawal intervals for animal drugs. No food safety arguments are
used or implied to support the use of extended withdrawal periods
authorized under the NOP regulations. Rather, we determined that
extended withdrawal periods are more compatible with consumer
expectations of organically raised animals.
Verification of lawful order of a licensed veterinarian. Federal
law restricts Atropine, Butorphanol, Magnesium hydroxide, Tolazine, and
[[Page 70483]]
Xylazine to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. For use under 7 CFR part
205, the NOP is requiring use by or on the lawful written order of a
licensed veterinarian. Further, under the NOP, a written order is
necessary for the livestock producer to prove compliance with paragraph
(b) of Sec. 205.238 Livestock health care practice standard. Written
orders will also facilitate compliance with the recordkeeping
provisions of Sec. 205.103.
Other use restrictions for Tolazine and Xylazine. In addition to
the use restrictions noted above, in response to comments, the NOP has
added the following use restrictions. For Tolazine, the NOP has added
the requirement that Tolazine only be used to reverse the effects of
sedation and analgesia caused by Xylazine as originally recommended by
the NOSB at its September 17-19, 2002, meeting in Washington, DC. For
Xylazine, the NOP has added the requirement for the existence of an
emergency as originally recommended by the NOSB at its September 17-19,
2002, meeting in Washington, DC.
Excipients. Commenters suggested that the proposed amendment to
include excipients onto the National List was too broad or needed
further clarification to reduce possible confusion for producers,
certifying agents, and consumers. Commenters asserted that the proposed
language could lead readers to believe that excipients are permitted
for use in livestock feed or feed supplements.
We do not agree that the proposed language is so misleading to
readers. However, we do believe that a definition of excipients would
help clarify its meaning. Therefore, we have amended the regulations to
include the following definition for excipients: ``any ingredients
intentionally added to livestock medications but that do not exert
therapeutic or diagnostic effects at the intended dosage, although they
may act to improve product delivery (e.g., enhancing absorption or
controlling release of the drug substance). Examples include fillers,
extenders, diluents, wetting agents, solvents, emulsifiers,
preservatives, flavors, absorption enhancers, sustained-release
matrices, and coloring agents.''
Poloxalene annotation. A number of comments objected to USDA
omitting the NOSB's recommendation to authorize the use of Poloxalene
with the annotation ``only be used for emergency treatment of bloat.''
With regard to Poloxalene and the proposed language in TM-03-04,
commenters expressed concern that the proposed language would allow
routine use of Poloxalene. As a result, commenters believed the
proposed language for Poloxalene represents the use of a substance that
was not approved by the NOSB.
We agree that the proposed language in TM-03-04, authorizing the
use of Poloxalene, did not restrict its use for only the ``emergency
treatment of bloat,'' as the NOSB had recommended. Based on our initial
consultations with the FDA, we originally proposed the use of the
substance as follows ``in accordance with approved labeling.'' However,
after reviewing the comments and further consultation with the FDA, we
have modified the authorizing language to (1) reflect the intent of the
NOSB and (2) clarify the language used to authorize the use of the
substance by indicating that the restricted use of Poloxalene (only for
the emergency treatment of bloat) is only relevant for use of the
substance under the NOP.
Exclusion of Moxidectin. A number of commenters requested that USDA
include Moxidectin on the National List, as the NOSB had recommended
(to control internal parasites). We did not propose to add Moxidectin
to the National List because the substance is a macrolide antibiotic
and does not comply with the April 22, 2005, NOP policy statement on
antibiotic use in livestock production. The statement provides that the
use of antibiotics and other prohibited substances is not allowed for
organically produced livestock or their edible products once a producer
is certified organic. Commenters stated that USDA's rationale for not
adding Moxidectin to the National List was arbitrary and without
scientific or regulatory basis. Commenters argued that Moxidectin
should not be considered an antibiotic, but a parasiticide, and
therefore should be allowed for use as medication to treat organic
livestock. One commenter presented information that attempted to
delineate the difference between an antibiotic and a parasiticide. The
comment argued that the defining feature of an antibiotic is its
ability to inhibit the growth of microorganisms or kill them outright.
It included that Moxidectin does not have this capacity. Instead,
Moxidectin targets parasites, rather than bacterial infections.
We have verified the information shared through public comment and
agree that Moxidectin, even though an animal drug that is a macrolide
antibiotic, does not function as an antibiotic (targeting bacterial
infections), but as a parasiticide (targeting parasites/helminthes,
e.g., roundworms, lungworms, hookworms, flatworms, etc.). As a result,
we will initiate proposed rulemaking to authorize Moxidectin as a
livestock medication to control internal parasites.
Removal of Bismuth subsalicylate (CAS #-14887-18-9). Bismuth
subsalicylate was proposed for inclusion on the National List. It was
proposed for use as a drug restricted to use by or on the lawful
written or oral order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance
with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the FDA regulations. In the
proposed rule, the NOP shared that consultations with the FDA revealed
that Bismuth subsalicylate is approved as a drug for use in humans
(FDA, ``Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence
Evaluations, 2005'') and that New Animal Drug Application (NADA)
approvals for Bismuth subsalicylate were not identified. The NOP
further stated that despite the absence of a NADA approval for Bismuth
subsalicylate, the substance could be permitted for use in livestock
production if used in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part
530 of the FDA regulations, ``Provision permitting extra-label use of
animal drugs.'' This action was based on the rationale that Bismuth
subsalicylate was an approved human drug and qualified for use under
the provisions of AMDUCA.
However, in response to the proposed rule, the FDA informed the NOP
that Bismuth subsalicylate could not be authorized for use in livestock
production under the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the FDA regulations,
because Bismuth subsalicylate is not approved as an independent, active
ingredient for use as a human drug, but only in combination with
Metronidazole and Tetracycline hydrochloride. The FDA further commented
that over-the-counter medications do not qualify for use under the
provisions of AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530. As a result, they advised the
NOP to remove Bismuth subsalicylate from the proposed amendments to the
National List; Bismuth subsalicylate has been removed from inclusion.
Other Changes Made
Several of the new substance listings contain the term ``AMDUCA.''
For the convenience of persons using the NOP regulations we have added
a definition of AMDUCA to Sec. 205.2. That definition reads: ``AMDUCA.
The Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-
396).''
While preparing this final rule, we noted a technical error in the
wording of Sec. 205.603(e). Accordingly, this final
[[Page 70484]]
rule also makes a technical correction to Sec. 205.603 paragraph (e)
by removing the word ``a'' from between ``or'' and ``synthetic''.
Section 205.603(e) now reads: ``As synthetic inert ingredients as
classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for use with
nonsynthetic substances or synthetic substances listed in this section
and used as an active pesticide ingredient in accordance with any
limitations on the use of such substances.''
Changes Requested But Not Made
A number of commenters opposed the addition of any of the proposed
amendments to the National List. The majority of these comments did not
provide any evidence under the OFPA and NOP regulations that would
support the position stated. Instead, these commenters stated the
addition of any of the proposed amendments weakened the NOP regulations
and compromised the integrity of organic foods. We considered these
comments but have determined that the record supports the need for
livestock medications in the interest of humane treatment of livestock.
We believe commenters' concerns have been addressed by including double
withdrawal periods and other use restrictions.
Six non-accepted substances. Several comments, including a number
from organic dairy farmers, supported adding Activated charcoal,
Calcium borogluconate, Calcium propionate (as a medical treatment for
milk fever), Kaolin pectin, Mineral oil, and Propylene glycol onto
Sec. 205.603(a) as substances that should be allowed for use as
medical treatments in organic livestock production. These substances
were not included as amendments to the National List in the proposed
rule. The NOSB recommended that the Secretary include these substances
onto the National List, in Sec. 205.603, as veterinary treatments in
organic livestock production. Comments in support of including these
substances onto the National List argued that these substances were
essential tools for dairy farmers, effective in restoring animal
health, and widely available and commonly used by livestock producers
and veterinarians, with no significant environmental impacts.
Additionally, a few of these commenters argued that FDA considers these
drugs to be a low regulatory priority or ``allowed by regulatory
discretion.''
As stated in the proposed rule, consultation with the FDA revealed
that Activated charcoal, Calcium borogluconate, Calcium propionate,
Kaolin pectin, Mineral oil, and Propylene glycol have not received
approval through the FDA drug approval process to be authorized as
medical treatments for livestock. Consultation also revealed that the
proposed substances could not qualify for extra-label use by a licensed
veterinarian under AMDUCA. As a result, the synthetic forms of these
substances remain prohibited for use in organic livestock production.
One commenter asserted that USDA should have not stated that the
six substances could not be used in organic livestock production,
because some of the substances could be sourced and used in
nonsynthetic form. USDA agrees that nonsynthetic forms of the
medication would not be prohibited from use in organic livestock
production. The proposed rule did not address the nonsynthetic forms of
the medications because the NOSB's recommendations only addressed the
synthetic forms. As a result, we reiterate that the prohibited use of
the six substances was made in the context of the synthetic form of the
substances, not the nonsynthetic form.
Epinephrine as a prohibited nonsynthetic substance. A few comments
were received concerning USDA's decision not to include Epinephrine as
a prohibited nonsynthetic substance on the National List. Some comments
were in favor of the proposed action on Epinephrine, while a few did
not favor USDA's decision to exclude the substance from the National
List. We also received one comment that recommended USDA, with respect
to the FDA restriction on the use of Epinephrine, consult with the NOSB
to see if there is still a need to identify the substance as a
prohibited nonsynthetic on the National List.
The proposed rule acknowledged that Epinephrine is a nonsynthetic
substance; and it emphasized that nonsynthetic substances are allowed
in organic production, unless prohibited. For instance, under the NOP
regulations, a livestock producer may not administer animal drugs in
violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The proposed rule
also noted that the FDA regulations currently restrict the use of the
medication to the emergency treatment of anaphylactic shock in cattle,
horses, sheep, and swine, which is what the NOSB had recommended. As a
result, we did not see a clear need to include the substance on the
National List. USDA will consult with the NOSB to see if there is still
a need to identify Epinephrine as a prohibited nonsynthetic on the
National List.
F. Effective Date.
This final rule reflects recommendations submitted to the Secretary
by the NOSB. The substances being added to the National List were based
on petitions from the industry and evaluated by the NOSB using criteria
in the Act and the regulations. Because these substances are crucial to
organic livestock production operations, producers should be able to
use them in their operations as soon as possible. Accordingly, AMS
finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for not
postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 205.
Administrative practice and procedure, Agriculture, Animals,
Archives and records, Imports, Labeling, Organically produced products,
Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seals and insignia,
Soil conservation.
0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 205, subpart G is
amended as follows:
PART 205--NATIONAL ORGANIC PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 205 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501-6522.
0
2. Section 205.2 is amended by adding two new terms in alphabetical
order to read as follows:
Sec. 205.2 Terms defined.
* * * * *
AMDUCA. The Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994
(Pub. L. 103-396).
* * * * *
Excipients. Any ingredients that are intentionally added to
livestock medications but do not exert therapeutic or diagnostic
effects at the intended dosage, although they may act to improve
product delivery (e.g., enhancing absorption or controlling release of
the drug substance). Examples of such ingredients include fillers,
extenders, diluents, wetting agents, solvents, emulsifiers,
preservatives, flavors, absorption enhancers, sustained-release
matrices, and coloring agents.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 205.603 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 205.603 Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic
livestock production.
In accordance with restrictions specified in this section the
following
[[Page 70485]]
synthetic substances may be used in organic livestock production:
(a) As disinfectants, sanitizer, and medical treatments as
applicable.
(1) Alcohols.
(i) Ethanol-disinfectant and sanitizer only, prohibited as a feed
additive.
(ii) Isopropanol-disinfectant only.
(2) Aspirin-approved for health care use to reduce inflammation.
(3) Atropine (CAS -51-55-8)--federal law restricts this
drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
Part 205, the NOP requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed
veterinarian; and
(ii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 56 days after
administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard
period of at least 12 days after administering to dairy animals.
(4) Biologics--Vaccines.
(5) Butorphanol (CAS -42408-82-2)--federal law restricts
this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a
licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR
part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use
under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed
veterinarian; and
(ii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 42 days after
administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard
period of at least 8 days after administering to dairy animals.
(6) Chlorhexidine--Allowed for surgical procedures conducted by a
veterinarian. Allowed for use as a teat dip when alternative germicidal
agents and/or physical barriers have lost their effectiveness.
(7) Chlorine materials--disinfecting and sanitizing facilities and
equipment. Residual chlorine levels in the water shall not exceed the
maximum residual disinfectant limit under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
(i) Calcium hypochlorite.
(ii) Chlorine dioxide.
(iii) Sodium hypochlorite.
(8) Electrolytes--without antibiotics.
(9) Flunixin (CAS -38677-85-9)--in accordance with
approved labeling; except that for use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires a withdrawal period of at least two-times that required by the
FDA.
(10) Furosemide (CAS -54-31-9)--in accordance with
approved labeling; except that for use under 7 CFR Part 205, the NOP
requires a withdrawal period of at least two-times that required that
required by the FDA.
(11) Glucose.
(12) Glycerine--Allowed as a livestock teat dip, must be produced
through the hydrolysis of fats or oils.
(13) Hydrogen peroxide.
(14) Iodine.
(15) Magnesium hydroxide (CAS -1309-42-8)--federal law
restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of
a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR
part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use
under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires use by or on the lawful written
order of a licensed veterinarian.
(16) Magnesium sulfate.
(17) Oxytocin--use in postparturition therapeutic applications.
(18) Paraciticides. Ivermectin--prohibited in slaughter stock,
allowed in emergency treatment for dairy and breeder stock when organic
system plan-approved preventive management does not prevent
infestation. Milk or milk products from a treated animal cannot be
labeled as provided for in subpart D of this part for 90 days following
treatment. In breeder stock, treatment cannot occur during the last
third of gestation if the progeny will be sold as organic and must not
be used during the lactation period for breeding stock.
(19) Peroxyacetic/peracetic acid (CAS -79-21-0)--for
sanitizing facility and processing equipment.
(20) Phosphoric acid--allowed as an equipment cleaner, Provided,
That, no direct contact with organically managed livestock or land
occurs.
(21) Poloxalene (CAS -9003-11-6)--for use under 7 CFR Part
205, the NOP requires that poloxalene only be used for the emergency
treatment of bloat.
(22) Tolazoline (CAS -59-98-3)--federal law restricts this
drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
Part 205, the NOP requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed
veterinarian;
(ii) Use only to reverse the effects of sedation and analgesia
caused by Xylazine; and
(iii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 8 days after
administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard
period of at least 4 days after administering to dairy animals.
(23) Xylazine (CAS -7361-61-7)--federal law restricts this
drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed
veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of
the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR
Part 205, the NOP requires:
(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed
veterinarian;
(ii) The existence of an emergency; and
(iii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 8 days after
administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard
period of at least 4 days after administering to dairy animals.
(b) As topical treatment, external parasiticide or local anesthetic
as applicable.
(1) Copper sulfate.
(2) Iodine.
(3) Lidocaine--as a local anesthetic. Use requires a withdrawal
period of 90 days after administering to livestock intended for
slaughter and 7 days after administering to dairy animals.
(4) Lime, hydrated--as an external pest control, not permitted to
cauterize physical alterations or deodorize animal wastes.
(5) Mineral oil--for topical use and as a lubricant.
(6) Procaine--as a local anesthetic, use requires a withdrawal
period of 90 days after administering to livestock intended for
slaughter and 7 days after administering to dairy animals.
(7) Sucrose octanoate esters (CAS s-42922-74-7; 58064-47-
4)--in accordance with approved labeling.
(c) As feed supplements--None.
(d) As feed additives.
(1) DL-Methionine, DL-Methionine--hydroxy analog, and DL-
Methionine--hydroxy analog calcium (CAS -59-51-8; 63-68-3;
348-67-4)--for use only in organic poultry production until October 1,
2008.
(2) Trace minerals, used for enrichment or fortification when FDA
approved.
(3) Vitamins, used for enrichment or fortification when FDA
approved.
(e) As synthetic inert ingredients as classified by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for use with nonsynthetic
substances or synthetic substances listed in this section and used as
an active pesticide ingredient in accordance with any limitations on
the use of such substances.
(1) EPA List 4--Inerts of Minimal Concern.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) Excipients, only for use in the manufacture of drugs used to
treat organic livestock when the excipient is: Identified by the FDA as
Generally Recognized As Safe; Approved by the FDA as a food additive;
or Included in
[[Page 70486]]
the FDA review and approval of a New Animal Drug Application or New
Drug Application.
(g)-(z) [Reserved]
Dated: December 5, 2007.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. E7-23915 Filed 12-11-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P