National Poultry Improvement Plan and Auxiliary Provisions, 15652-15660 [2016-06664]
Download as PDF
15652
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 57
Thursday, March 24, 2016
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
9 CFR Parts 56, 145, 146, and 147
[Docket No. APHIS–2014–0101]
RIN 0579–AE16
National Poultry Improvement Plan and
Auxiliary Provisions
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We are proposing to amend
the National Poultry Improvement Plan
(NPIP, the Plan), its auxiliary
provisions, and the indemnity
regulations for the control of H5 and H7
low pathogenic avian influenza to
clarify participation in the NPIP and
amend participation requirements,
amend definitions for poultry and
breeding stock, amend the approval
process for new diagnostic tests, and
amend laboratory inspection and testing
requirements. These changes would
align the regulations with international
standards and make them more
transparent to Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service stakeholders and the
general public. The proposed changes
were voted on and approved by the
voting delegates at the Plan’s 2014
National Plan Conference.
DATES: We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before May 23,
2016.
SUMMARY:
You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0101.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2014–0101, Regulatory Analysis
and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Supporting documents and any
comments we receive on this docket
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
may be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0101 or
in our reading room, which is located in
room 1141 of the USDA South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading
room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except
holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call (202) 799–7039
before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Denise Brinson, DVM, Director,
National Poultry Improvement Plan, VS,
APHIS, USDA, 1506 Klondike Road,
Suite 101, Conyers, GA 30094–5104;
(770) 922–3496.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Poultry Improvement
Plan (NPIP, also referred to below as
‘‘the Plan’’) is a cooperative FederalState-industry mechanism for
controlling certain poultry diseases. The
Plan consists of a variety of programs
intended to prevent and control poultry
diseases. Participation in all Plan
programs is voluntary, but breeding
flocks, hatcheries, and dealers must first
qualify as ‘‘U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid
Clean’’ as a condition for participating
in the other Plan programs.
The Plan identifies States, flocks,
hatcheries, dealers, and slaughter plants
that meet certain disease control
standards specified in the Plan’s various
programs. As a result, customers can
buy poultry that has tested clean of
certain diseases or that has been
produced under disease-prevention
conditions.
The regulations in 9 CFR parts 145,
146, and 147 (referred to below as the
regulations) contain the provisions of
the Plan. The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS, also referred
to as ‘‘the Service’’) of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA, also
referred to as ‘‘the Department’’) amends
these provisions from time to time to
incorporate new scientific information
and technologies within the Plan. In
addition, the regulations in 9 CFR part
56 set out conditions for the payment of
indemnity for costs associated with
poultry that are infected with or
exposed to H5/H7 low pathogenic avian
influenza (LPAI) and provisions for a
cooperative control program for the
disease.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The proposed amendments discussed
in this document are consistent with the
recommendations approved by the
voting delegates to the last National
Plan Conference, which was held on
July 10 through 12, 2014. Participants in
the National Plan Conference
represented flockowners, breeders,
hatcherymen, slaughter plants, poultry
veterinarians, laboratory personnel,
Official State Agencies from cooperating
States, and other poultry industry
affiliates. The proposed amendments are
discussed in the order they would
appear in the regulations.
Description of Plan Intention
The NPIP regulations in 9 CFR parts
145 and 146 contain requirements that
must be observed by flocks that
participate in the Plan. Currently,
§ 145.3 details the process by which a
person becomes eligible to participate in
the Plan. Any person producing or
dealing in products may participate
when he/she has demonstrated, to the
satisfaction of the Official State Agency,
that his/her facilities, personnel, and
practices are adequate for carrying out
the applicable provisions of the Plan,
and has signed an agreement with the
Official State Agency to comply with
the general and the applicable specific
provisions of the Plan and any
regulations of the Official State Agency
under § 145.2. Affiliated flockowners
may participate in the plan without
signing an agreement with the Official
State Agency. We are proposing to add
additional language to this section to
clarify that the NPIP is a cooperative
Federal-State-Industry program through
which new or existing diagnostic
technology can be effectively applied to
improve poultry and poultry products
by controlling or eliminating specific
poultry diseases. Because the Plan
consists of programs that identify States,
flocks, hatcheries, dealers, and slaughter
plants that meet specific disease control
standards specified in the Plan, we also
propose to clarify that recordkeeping is
important to demonstrate that
participants adhere to the disease
control programs in which they
participate. We are proposing to add
this language to paragraph (a) of § 145.3.
Revision of Records Retention
Requirement for Hatchery Inspections
The regulations in § 145.12 contain
requirements for the retention and
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
examination of records for all flocks
maintained primarily for hatching eggs.
Historically, testing records were
retained at the hatchery, which allowed
for examination of the records during
annual inspections. However, not many
commercial hatcheries currently keep
testing records for their breeder flocks at
the hatchery and may instead keep the
records at the corporate office.
Therefore, we are proposing a minor
change to the regulations to specify that
records for all breeder flock hatcheries
must be made available for annual
examination by a State inspector. This
change also maintains flexibility in who
must make the records available. Such
people may include the hatchery
manager, the quality assurance manager,
the laboratory manager, the breeder
manager, or the hatchery information
specialist.
Clarification of Official Testing
Requirements for Pullorum-Typhoid,
Mycoplasma gallisepticum, M.
meleagridis, and M. synoviae
The regulations in § 145.14 contain
requirements for conducting official
tests for pullorum-typhoid, Mycoplasma
gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, M.
synoviae, and avian influenza.
Paragraph (a) outlines specific testing
requirements for pullorum-typhoid.
Currently, paragraph (a)(5) states that
the official blood test for pullorumtyphoid shall include the testing of a
sample of blood from each bird in the
flock, provided that, under specified
conditions in §§ 145.23, 145.33, 145.43,
145.53, and 145.63, the testing of a
portion or sample of birds may be used
in lieu of testing each bird. We are
proposing to add §§ 145.73, 145.83, and
145.93 to the list of sections referenced
in § 145.14(a)(5) as those sections are
also applicable to pullorum-typhoid
blood testing.
Paragraph (b) outlines specific testing
requirements for M. gallisepticum, M.
meleagridis, and M. synoviae. Currently,
official tests for M. gallisepticum, M.
meleagridis, and M. synoviae include
the serum plate agglutination test, the
tube agglutination test, the
hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test,
the microhemagglutination inhibition
test, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assay, and the polymerase chain
reaction (PCR)-based test. We are
proposing to remove references to the
tube agglutination test because that test
is outdated and no longer in use. We are
also proposing to remove references to
the microhemagglutination test as the
term microhemagglutination is an
outdated term. In addition, we are
proposing to remove the reference to the
PCR test and replace it with the words
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
‘‘molecular based test.’’ This change is
necessary because there are other
molecular based tests in addition to the
PCR test. Also, changing the language in
the regulations to ‘‘molecular based
test’’ allows for greater testing flexibility
in the event that a better and more costeffective or efficient molecular based
test is developed in the future. Finally,
while the widely accepted industry
standard has been to use either the HI
test or a molecular based test to confirm
the positive results of serological
screening tests, this requirement has not
previously been included in our
regulations. Therefore, we are proposing
to amend the regulations to make that
clarification.
Requirements for Nest Clean Hatching
Eggs for Breeding Turkeys
In a final rule 1 published in the
Federal Register on July 9, 2014 (79 FR
38752–38768, Docket No. APHIS–2011–
0101), with an effective date of August
8, 2014, we amended the regulations by,
among other things, amending the
requirements for participation in the
Plan by multiplier egg-type breeding
chickens, multiplier meat-type breeding
chickens, primary egg-type breeding
chickens, and primary meat-type
breeding chickens to state that hatching
eggs produced by the relevant flocks
should be nest clean, and that they may
be fumigated in accordance with part
147 or otherwise sanitized. ‘‘Nest clean’’
eggs are eggs that are collected from
nests frequently to keep them clean
without further processing. These
changes were necessary because it has
become standard practice within the
industry to avoid sanitizing eggs and
instead insist on nest clean eggs, which
have been found to hatch better and
provide a better chick than other eggs,
even when they are sanitized. In
addition, removing the requirement for
fumigation and instead stating that
hatching eggs ‘‘may be’’ fumigated or
otherwise sanitized addresses changes
made due to health restrictions and
concerns related to staff safety, as well
as aligning with changes made to the
provisions for multiplier egg-type and
meat-type chicken breeding flocks and
primary egg-type and meat-type
breeding flocks, following the 2010
NPIP Plan Conference.
The regulations in § 145.42 outline
the requirements with which turkey
flocks, and the eggs and poults
produced from them, must comply in
order to participate in the Plan. Due to
the same restrictions and concerns for
1 To view the final rule and related documents,
go to https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0101.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15653
staff safety for workers in the turkey
industry and the same standard practice
and benefits of requiring nest clean eggs,
we are proposing to make the same
changes to paragraph (b) of this section
that were made in the July 2014 final
rule for §§ 145.22(b), 145.32(b),
145.72(b), and 145.82(b).
We are also proposing to amend the
definition of breeding flock in § 56.1 in
order to be more inclusive of both
chicken and turkey flocks. Currently,
the definition for breeding flock refers to
a ‘‘flock that is composed of stock that
has been developed for commercial egg
or meat production and is maintained
for the principal purpose of producing
chicks for the ultimate production of
eggs or meat for human consumption.’’
We propose to amend this definition to
remove the word ‘‘chicks’’ and replace
it with the word ‘‘progeny.’’ This change
is also consistent with the definition of
multiplier breeding flock in § 145.1.
Changes to U.S. M. gallisepticum Clean
and U.S. M. synoviae Clean
Classification for Breeding Flocks of
Hobbyist and Exhibition Waterfowl,
Exhibition Poultry, and Game Birds
The regulations in § 145.53 set out
classifications for hobbyist and
exhibition waterfowl, exhibition
poultry, and game bird breeding flocks
and products. Paragraph (c) in § 145.53
sets out the U.S. M. gallisepticum Clean
classification for such poultry while
paragraph (d) of that section sets out the
U.S. M. synoviae Clean classification for
such poultry.
We are proposing to require targeted
bird sampling of the choanal palatine
cleft/fissure area using appropriate
swabs as an alternative to the random
serum or egg yolk sampling currently
required for retention of the U.S. M.
gallisepticum Clean classification. The
choanal palatine cleft/fissure area is
easier to swab and is also a very reliable
site for detection of M. gallisepticum
and M. synoviae. The targeted sampling
of this area would provide a greater
likelihood of detecting the organism of
concern than either the random serum
or egg yolk sampling methods.
We are also proposing to change the
size of the sample for U.S. M.
gallisepticum testing from the current 5
percent of birds in the flock to at least
30 birds, or all birds in the flock if the
flock size is less than 30. We would
make the same change for a multiplier
breeding flock which originated as U.S.
M. gallisepticum Clean baby poultry
from primary breeding flocks. Currently,
sampling of such flocks must consist of
at least 2 percent of birds in the flock.
These changes would provide for a more
appropriate level of sampling for M.
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
15654
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
gallisepticum, particularly for those
flocks that contain fewer than 30 birds.
Because M. gallisepticum and M.
synoviae spread and infect birds
similarly, we are proposing to amend
the U.S. M. synoviae Clean classification
to require that retention of that
classification may also be obtained
either by random sampling of serum or
egg yolk or a targeted bird sample of the
choanal palatine cleft/fissure area using
appropriate swabs. Currently, the
regulations do not specify how sampling
is to be conducted. In addition, we are
proposing to change the size of the
sample for U.S. M. synoviae testing from
at least 150 birds in the flock to at least
30 birds, or all birds in the flock if the
flock size is less than 30. Finally, for a
multiplier breeding flock which
originated as U.S. M. synoviae Clean
baby poultry from primary breeding
flocks, we would remove the
requirement for sampling a minimum of
75 birds and instead require that a
random sample contain 50 percent of
the birds in the flock with a maximum
of 200 birds and a minimum of 30 birds,
or all birds in the flock if the flock is
less than 30 birds. This sampling would
have to be conducted on birds that are
at least 4 months of age or upon
reaching sexual maturity.
Assuming a normal distribution and
an infection rate of 1 percent, changing
the sample sizes as proposed does not
greatly affect the chance of detecting a
positive sample (confidence interval
approximately 95 percent). These
proposed sample size changes would
allow us to increase the efficiency of the
NPIP program by allowing resources to
be used elsewhere.
Changes to U.S. Salmonella Monitored
Certification Requirements
The regulations in § 145.83 set out the
requirements for the classification of
participating flocks, and the eggs and
chicks produced from them, with
respect to certain diseases. Paragraph (f)
of § 145.83 sets out requirements for
preventing and controlling Salmonella
in the breeding-hatching industry.
Currently, a flock may be designated as
U.S. Salmonella Monitored when,
among other things, feed used for the
flock, if containing animal proteins,
adheres to certain processing
requirements. We are proposing to
remove these requirements because we
believe that the rendering industry has
appropriate standards to deal with the
transmission of Salmonella through
poultry feed and, therefore, these
requirements are not necessary in the
NPIP regulations. In addition, most of
the primary meat type chicken industry
today does not use animal protein
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
products in their feed due to concerns
of disease transmission. Therefore, we
propose to amend the regulations in
paragraph (f)(1)(i) to instead state that
‘‘measures shall be implemented to
control Salmonella challenge through
the feed, feed storage, and feed
transport.’’ We also propose to remove
paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(1)(iii) and
renumber paragraphs (f)(1)(iv) through
(f)(1)(viii) as paragraphs (f)(1)(ii)
through (f)(1)(vi).
Revision to Sanitation Requirements for
Meat-Type Waterfowl
The regulations in §§ 145.91 and
145.92 set out special provisions for
meat-type waterfowl and the eggs and
baby poultry produced from them.
Currently, paragraph (b) of § 145.92
requires that hatching eggs produced by
primary breeding flocks be fumigated in
accordance with part 147 or otherwise
sanitized. We are proposing to remove
the requirement for fumigation and
instead state that hatching eggs should
be ‘‘nest clean’’ and that they ‘‘may be’’
fumigated or otherwise sanitized. We
would also extend these requirements to
multiplier breeding flocks, as these
proposed requirements are meant to
mirror the changes made to the
provisions for multiplier egg-type and
meat-type chicken breeding flocks and
primary egg-type and meat-type
breeding flocks, following the 2010
NPIP conference as well as the changes
we are proposing to the regulations for
breeding turkeys in § 145.42.
Revision to Sample Size for U.S. H5/H7
Avian Influenza Clean Classification
The regulations in § 145.93 set out
requirements for the classification of
participating flocks of meat-type
waterfowl and the eggs and baby poultry
produced from them, with respect to
certain diseases. Paragraph (c) of
§ 145.93 sets out requirements for the
classification of such flocks as U.S. H5/
H7 Avian Influenza Clean. Currently,
the regulations state that, in order for
multiplier breeding flocks to retain this
classification, a sample of at least 30
birds must either be tested negative for
avian influenza at intervals of 180 days,
a sample of fewer than 30 birds may be
tested and found negative for avian
influenza at any one time if all pens are
equally represented and a total of 30
birds are tested within each 180-day
period, or a sample of at least 30 birds
are tested and found negative to H5/H7
avian influenza within 21 days prior to
movement to slaughter.
In the July 2014 final rule, we
amended the regulations by changing
the number of breeding birds required to
be tested for avian influenza prior to
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
movement to slaughter in §§ 145.23,
145.33, and 145.73. Rather than
requiring 30 spent fowl to be tested, we
now require the testing of a sample of
11 birds prior to movement to slaughter.
This change was necessary because,
generally, the entire flock of egg-type
breeding chickens will be moved to
slaughter at one time. Testing 11 birds
per flock is also consistent with the
testing requirements for meat-type
commercial chickens moved to
slaughter under the U.S. H5/H7 Avian
Influenza Monitored program in
§ 146.33, and provides adequate
assurance that the flock is free of avian
influenza. We are proposing to make the
same change for meat-type waterfowl
breeding flocks. Aligning sample
numbers across similar flocks simplifies
plan participation.
Changes to the List of Commercial
Poultry Plan Participants
Part 146 of the regulations contains
the NPIP provisions for commercial
poultry. Section 146.3 provides
requirements for participation in the
Plan by commercial table-egg producers,
raised-for-release upland game bird or
waterfowl premises, commercial upland
game bird or waterfowl slaughter plants,
and meat-type chicken or turkey
slaughter plants. We propose to amend
the regulations to add commercial tableegg layer pullet flocks to the list of Plan
participants in paragraph (c)(1) of
§ 146.2 and paragraph (a) in § 146.3. A
commercial table-egg layer pullet flock
is currently defined in § 146.1 as a tableegg layer flock prior to the onset of egg
production. The inclusion of these flock
owners as Plan participants provides a
means for NPIP staff to identify
participation in the Plan and to help
facilitate the movement of birds within
States and across State lines.
Finally, we are proposing to amend
the definition of poultry in § 146.1 to
make it more inclusive of all
domesticated fowl bred for the purpose
of providing eggs or meat, including
waterfowl and game birds. This change
would be consistent with the poultry
definition in § 56.1 and § 145.1.
Amendment to Slaughter Plant
Inspection Requirements
Section 146.11 of the regulations sets
out the audit process for participating
slaughter plants. Paragraph (b) states
that flocks slaughtered at a slaughter
plant will be considered to be not
conforming to the required protocol of
the classifications if there are no test
results available, if the flock was not
tested within 21 days before slaughter,
or if the test results for the flocks were
not returned before slaughter. We are
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
proposing to amend paragraph (b) to
state that a flock will be considered to
be conforming to protocol if it meets the
requirements described in §§ 146.33(a),
146.43(a), or 146.53(a). This change
would correct problems inadvertently
caused by combining all allowed testing
requirements in 9 CFR part 146,
subparts C, D, and E for participating
slaughter plants into one set of testing
requirements. One such problem was
that the language in paragraph (b)
directly contradicted the requirement
allowing for testing at the slaughter
plant on a shift basis. This change
would also allow for future amendments
to testing requirements for each subpart
independent of one another and without
having to amend the regulations in
§ 146.11.
Addition of Testing Commercial TableEgg Producing Upland Game Birds and
Waterfowl for Avian Influenza
The regulations in §§ 146.51 through
146.53 contain special provisions
related to the participation in the NPIP
program by commercial upland game
birds, commercial waterfowl, raised-forrelease upland game birds, and raisedfor-release waterfowl and the
classification of such flocks as U.S. H5/
H7 Avian Influenza Monitored.
Commercial upland game birds and
waterfowl are sometimes grown for the
primary purpose of producing eggs for
human consumption, notably in
specialty markets, restaurants, and
health food outlets. Because a
significant number of these flocks are
large in size, we believe that the
creation of a mechanism for NPIP
participation and avian influenza
surveillance for such flocks would be
beneficial to the poultry industry as a
whole. Therefore, we are proposing to
amend the definition for commercial
upland game birds and commercial
waterfowl in § 146.51 to include birds
grown for egg production. Currently, the
definitions for these categories of birds
include only those birds grown for the
primary purpose of producing meat for
human consumption.
We are also proposing to add
commercial upland game birds and
commercial waterfowl producing eggs
for human consumption to the list of
Plan participants in paragraphs (a) and
(c) of § 146.52. We would also change
the word ‘‘purpose’’ under both the
definition for commercial upland game
birds and commercial waterfowl to
‘‘purposes.’’
Paragraph (a) of § 146.53 contains the
U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Monitored
classification for commercial waterfowl
and commercial upland game birds.
Currently, the commercial waterfowl
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
and commercial upland game bird
industry may earn U.S. H5/H7 Influenza
Monitored classification by
participating in routine surveillance for
H5/H7 avian influenza through
participating slaughter plants. We are
proposing to add provisions for the
regular surveillance of commercial
waterfowl and game bird egg-producing
flocks for avian influenza in new
paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5). These
provisions would require that a
minimum of 11 birds per flock be tested
negative to H5/H7 avian influenza as
provided in § 146.13 within 30 days of
disposal or within a 12 month period or
that the participating flock has an ongoing active and passive surveillance
program for H5/H7 avian influenza
approved by the Official State Agency
and the Service.
Amendments to Authorized Laboratory
Requirements
Subpart F of part 147 contains
provisions for authorized laboratories
and approved test and sanitation
procedures under the NPIP. Section
147.52 contains the current provisions
for approving authorized laboratories.
While these provisions currently require
laboratories to undergo an annual site
visit and recordkeeping audit by their
Official State Agency in order to
maintain authorization, laboratory
procedures and personnel generally do
not change on a yearly basis. In
addition, the need for Official State
Agencies to inspect laboratories in other
States serving industry members within
their own States has proven to
unnecessarily consume time and travel
funds best utilized in other areas of the
Plan. Therefore, we are proposing to
amend the regulations to require that
site visits take place at least once every
2 years.
Amendments to the Approval Process
for New Diagnostic Tests
Section 147.54 outlines the required
procedures for the approval of
diagnostic test kits that are not licensed
by APHIS. Current paragraph (a) states
that the sensitivity of the kit will be
estimated by testing known positive
samples, as determined by official NPIP
procedures found in the NPIP program
standards or via other procedures
approved by the Administrator. Because
it is difficult to define a minor test
modification versus a major test
modification and to determine what
data might be needed beforehand for a
new test, we are proposing to allow the
conditional use of a modified test side
by side with the approved versions
using field samples. This would make it
easier for laboratories to participate in
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15655
the test validation process. Field
samples would have to be composed of
those samples for which the presence or
absence of the target organism or analyte
has been determined by the current
NPIP test rather than spiked samples or
pure cultures. In addition, samples
would have to come from a variety of
field cases representing a range of low,
medium, and high analyte
concentrations. Spiked samples should
only be used in the event that no other
sample types are available. These
changes would ensure that samples
used for validation represent real
samples and contain the same analytes
and extraneous material that would be
found in clinical samples. Realistic
samples are critical to ensuring that a
test will perform adequately with
normal use. We are also proposing to
clarify that laboratories should only be
selected for their experience with
testing for the target organism or analyte
with the current NPIP approved test.
Finally, we are proposing to remove the
requirement that authorized laboratories
be selected by the Service and clarify
that the specificity of the kit will be
‘‘evaluated’’ rather than ‘‘estimated’’ in
both current paragraphs (a) and (b) to
provide more specific information on
test performance. We are proposing this
change because authorized NPIP
laboratories use the same standards and
guidelines. Therefore, any NPIPauthorized laboratory should be able to
be utilized by any company seeking
approval of a new test.
We are also proposing to revise the
regulations in current paragraph (c) to
remove the requirement for clinical
samples to be supplied by the
manufacturer of the test kit. Further, we
propose to require that at least 50
known negative samples be tested by
each laboratory rather than the currently
required 50 known negative clinical
samples. Because it can be difficult to
find clinical samples and to share
clinical samples for logistical reasons,
removing the requirements for clinical
samples and for samples to be supplied
by the test kit manufacturer would
allow any entity to provide clinical
samples. However, the negative samples
would have to contain relevant sample
matrices/extraneous material which
would be found in clinical samples. In
addition, requiring at least 50 known
negative samples rather than 50 known
negative samples is necessary because,
in the past, we have received fewer than
50 samples from a company when more
samples were unavailable. This change
would make it clearer that we view any
sample sets consisting of fewer than 50
samples as incomplete and that we
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15656
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
would not review such sample sets. We
are also proposing to add language
allowing cooperating laboratories to
perform a current NPIP procedure or
test on samples alongside the test kit for
comparison, and specific testing
procedures for Salmonella,
Mycoplasma, and avian influenza, as
well as molecular-based testing
procedures to better account for the
differences among the three agents.
Paragraph (d) states that laboratories
must submit assay response data to the
kit manufacturer along with the official
NPIP procedure. We are proposing to
require that a worksheet for diagnostic
test evaluation be submitted along with
the raw data from the assay response
and that the data and completed
worksheet be submitted to the NPIP
Senior Coordinator 4 months before the
next General Conference Committee
meeting, which is when test approval
would be sought. Worksheets would be
obtained by contacting the NPIP Senior
Coordinator. The diagnostic test
evaluation worksheet is intended to
provide a standardized template to
ensure that all needed data for test
evaluation has been prepared and that
the data is available in a uniform
manner. This would make review of the
data easier for the NPIP Technical
Committee, which would facilitate the
test approval process.
Paragraph (e) puts forth the process by
which the NPIP Technical Committee
will make their decision about whether
to approve a new diagnostic test. We
propose to clarify that a majority of the
members of the Technical Committee
would have to recommend whether to
approve the test kit and that this
recommendation would have to occur at
the next scheduled General Conference
Committee meeting.
Currently, the regulations do not
provide procedures for modifying or
removing diagnostic tests. Therefore, we
are proposing to redesignate the
introductory paragraph for § 147.54 as
paragraph (a) and the following
paragraphs (a) through (f) as paragraphs
(a)(1) through (6) and add a new
paragraph (b) to describe how diagnostic
tests may be modified or removed. The
proposed requirements would require
the submission of data in support of
modifying or removing the test in
question to the NPIP Technical
Committee in a manner similar to that
in place for the approval of new test kits
in current paragraph (e).
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
therefore, has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, we have analyzed the
potential economic effects of this action
on small entities. The analysis is
summarized below. Copies of the full
analysis are available by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT or on the
Regulations.gov Web site (see
ADDRESSES above for instructions for
accessing Regulations.gov).
The changes in this proposed rule are
recommended by the NPIP General
Conference Committee, which
represents cooperating State agencies
and poultry industry members and
advises the Secretary of Agriculture on
issues pertaining to poultry health. The
proposed amendments to these
regulations would improve the
regulatory environment for poultry and
poultry products.
This rulemaking would result in
various changes to 9 CFR parts 56 and
145–147, modifying provisions of the
NPIP. The proposed rule would clarify
participation in the NPIP and amend
participation requirements, amend
definitions for poultry and breeding
stock, amend the approval process for
new diagnostic tests, and amend
inspection and laboratory testing
requirements. The proposed
amendments to these regulations would
improve the regulatory environment for
poultry and poultry products.
The establishments that would be
affected by the proposed rule—
principally entities engaged in poultry
production and processing—are
predominantly small by Small Business
Administration standards. In those
instances in which an addition or
modification could potentially result in
a cost to certain entities, we do not
expect the costs to be significant. This
rule embodies changes decided upon by
the NPIP General Conference Committee
on behalf of Plan members, that is,
changes recognized by the poultry
industry as in their interest. We note
that NPIP membership is voluntary.
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12372
This program/activity is listed in the
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
under No. 10.025 and is subject to
Executive Order 12372, which requires
intergovernmental consultation with
State and local officials. (See 2 CFR
chapter IV.)
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(d) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information
collection or recordkeeping
requirements included in this proposed
rule have been submitted for approval to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Please send written comments
to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention:
Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington, DC
20503. Please state that your comments
refer to Docket No. APHIS–2014–0101.
Please send a copy of your comments to:
(1) APHIS, using one of the methods
described under ADDRESSES at the
beginning of this document, and (2)
Clearance Officer, OCIO, USDA, Room
404–W, 14th Street and Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. A
comment to OMB is best assured of
having its full effect if OMB receives it
within 30 days of publication of this
proposed rule.
We are proposing to amend the NPIP,
its auxiliary provisions, and the
indemnity regulations for the control of
H5 and H7 low pathogenic avian
influenza to clarify participation in the
NPIP and amend participation
requirements, amend definitions for
poultry and breeding stock, amend the
approval process for new diagnostic
tests, and amend laboratory inspection
and testing requirements. These changes
would align the regulations with
international standards and make them
more transparent to APHIS stakeholders
and the general public.
Implementing this rule will require
certain new information collection
activities such as Waterfowl and Game
Bird Surveillance and Diagnostic Test
Evaluation Worksheets. APHIS is asking
OMB to approve, for 3 years, its use of
these information collection activities in
connection with APHIS’ efforts to
continually improve the health of the
U.S. poultry population and the quality
of U.S. poultry products. The NPIP has
an existing information collection under
OMB control number 0579–0007. At the
next renewal of 0579–0007, we will
merge the activities added by this
proposed rule, subject to OMB approval.
We are soliciting comments from the
public (as well as affected agencies)
concerning our proposed information
collection and recordkeeping
requirements. These comments will
help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
information collection is necessary for
the proper performance of our agency’s
functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our
estimate of the burden of the proposed
information collection, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
information collection on those who are
to respond (such as through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting
burden for this collection of information
is estimated to average 1.8 hours per
response.
Respondents: Flock owners, breeders,
hatchery owners, table egg producers,
laboratory personnel, and State animal
health officials.
Estimated annual number of
respondents: 10.
Estimated annual number of
responses per respondent: 1.
Estimated annual number of
responses: 10.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 18 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours
may not equal the product of the annual
number of responses multiplied by the
reporting burden per response.)
Copies of this information collection
can be obtained from Ms. Kimberly
Hardy, APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 851–2727.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act
to promote the use of the Internet and
other information technologies, to
provide increased opportunities for
citizen access to Government
information and services, and for other
purposes. For information pertinent to
E-Government Act compliance related
to this proposed rule, please contact Ms.
Kimberly Hardy, APHIS’ Information
Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851–
2727.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects
9 CFR Part 56
Animal diseases, Indemnity
payments, Low pathogenic avian
influenza, Poultry.
9 CFR Parts 145, 146, and 147
Animal diseases, Poultry and poultry
products, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9
CFR parts 56, 145, 146, and 147 as
follows:
PART 56—CONTROL OF H5/H7 LOW
PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA
1. The authority citation for part 56
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
2. Section 56.1 is amended by revising
the definition of breeding flock to read
as follows:
■
§ 56.1
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Breeding flock. A flock that is
composed of stock that has been
developed for commercial egg or meat
production and is maintained for the
principal purpose of producing progeny
for the ultimate production of eggs or
meat for human consumption.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 145—NATIONAL POULTRY
IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR BREEDING
POULTRY
3. The authority citation for part 145
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
§ 145.2
[Amended]
4. In § 145.2, paragraph (d) is
amended by removing the words
‘‘§ 145.3(d)’’ and adding the words
‘‘§ 145.3(e)’’ in their place.
■ 5. Section 145.3 is amended as
follows:
■ a. By redesignating paragraphs (a)
through (f) as paragraphs (b) through (g),
respectively.
■ b. By adding a new paragraph (a).
The addition reads as follows:
■
§ 145.3
Participation.
(a) The National Poultry Improvement
Plan is a cooperative Federal-StateIndustry program through which new or
existing diagnostic technology can be
effectively applied to improve poultry
and poultry products by controlling or
eliminating specific poultry diseases.
The Plan consists of programs that
identify States, flocks, hatcheries,
dealers, and slaughter plants that meet
specific disease control standards
specified in the Plan. Participants shall
maintain records to demonstrate that
they adhere to the disease control
programs in which they participate.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 145.12
[Amended]
6. Section 145.12 is amended by
adding, in paragraph (b), the words
■
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15657
‘‘made available to and’’ before the word
‘‘examined’’.
■ 7. Section 145.14 is amended as
follows:
■ a. By revising paragraph (a)(5).
■ b. By revising paragraph (b)(1).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 145.14
Testing.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(5) The official blood test shall
include the testing of a sample of blood
from each bird in the flock: Provided,
That under specified conditions (see
applicable provisions of §§ 145.23,
145.33, 145.43, 145.53, 145.63, 145.73,
145.83, and 145.93) the testing of a
portion or sample of the birds may be
used in lieu of testing each bird.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) The official tests for M.
gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, and M.
synoviae shall be the serum plate
agglutination test, the hemagglutination
inhibition (HI) test, the enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test 3, or
a molecular based test. The HI test or
molecular based test shall be used to
confirm the positive results of other
serological screening tests. HI titers of
1:40 or more may be interpreted as
suspicious, and final judgment must be
based on further samplings and/or
culture of reactors. Tests must be
conducted in accordance with this
paragraph (b) and in accordance with
part 147 of this subchapter.
*
*
*
*
*
3 Procedures for the enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test are
set forth in the following publications:
A.A. Ansari, R.F. Taylor, T.S. Chang,
‘‘Application of Enzyme-Linked
Immunosorbent Assay for Detecting
Antibody to Mycoplasma
gallisepticum Infections in
Poultry,’’ Avian Diseases, Vol. 27,
No. 1, pp. 21–35, January-March
1983; and
H.M. Opitz, J.B. Duplessis, and M.J. Cyr,
‘‘Indirect Micro-Enzyme-Linked
Immunosorbent Assay for the
Detection of Antibodies to
Mycoplasma synoviae and M.
gallisepticum,’’ Avian Diseases,
Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 773–786, JulySeptember 1983; and
H.B. Ortmayer and R. Yamamoto,
‘‘Mycoplasma Meleagridis Antibody
Detection by Enzyme-Linked
Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA),’’
Proceedings, 30th Western Poultry
Disease Conference, pp. 63–66,
March 1981.
■ 8. In § 145.42, paragraph (b) is revised
to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
15658
§ 145.42
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Participation.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Hatching eggs should be nest
clean. They may be fumigated in
accordance with part 147 of this
subchapter or otherwise sanitized.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. Section 145.53 is amended as
follows:
■ a. By revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i),
(c)(1)(ii) introductory text, and
(c)(1)(ii)(A).
■ b. By revising paragraphs (d)(1)(i),
(d)(1)(ii) introductory text, and
(d)(1)(ii)(A).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 145.53 Terminology and classification;
flocks and products.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) It is a flock in which all birds or
a sample of at least 300 birds has been
tested for M. gallisepticum as provided
in § 145.14(b) when more than 4 months
of age or upon reaching sexual maturity:
Provided, That to retain this
classification, a random sample of
serum or egg yolk or a targeted bird
sample of the choanal palatine cleft/
fissure area using appropriate swabs
from all the birds in the flock if the flock
size is less than 30, but at least 30 birds,
shall be tested at intervals of not more
than 90 days: And provided further,
That a sample comprised of less than 30
birds may be tested at any one time,
with the approval of the Official State
Agency and the concurrence of the
Service, provided that a total of at least
30 birds, or all birds in the flock if flock
size is less than 30, is tested within each
90-day period; or
(ii) It is a multiplier breeding flock
which originated as U.S. M.
Gallisepticum Clean baby poultry from
primary breeding flocks and a random
sample comprised of 50 percent of the
birds in the flock, with a maximum of
200 birds and a minimum of 30 birds
per flock or all birds in the flock if the
flock size is less than 30 birds, has been
tested for M. gallisepticum as provided
in § 145.14(b) when more than 4 months
of age or upon reaching sexual maturity:
Provided, That to retain this
classification, the flock shall be
subjected to one of the following
procedures:
(A) At intervals of not more than 90
days, a random sample of serum or egg
yolk or a targeted bird sample of the
choanal palatine cleft/fissure area using
appropriate swabs from all the birds in
the flock if flock size is less than 30, but
at least 30 birds, shall be tested; or
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) It is a flock in which all birds or
a sample of at least 300 birds has been
tested for M. synoviae as provided in
§ 145.14(b) when more than 4 months of
age or upon reaching sexual maturity:
Provided, That to retain this
classification, a random sample of
serum or egg yolk or a targeted bird
sample of the choanal palatine cleft/
fissure area using appropriate swabs
(C.P. swabs) from all the birds in the
flock if flock size is less than 30, but at
least 30 birds, shall be tested at intervals
of not more than 90 days: And provided
further, That a sample comprised of less
than 30 birds may be tested at any one
time with the approval of the Official
State Agency and the concurrence of the
Service, provided that a total of at least
30 birds is tested within each 90-day
period; or
(ii) It is a multiplier breeding flock
that originated as U.S. M. Synoviae
Clean chicks from primary breeding
flocks and from which a random sample
comprised of 50 percent of the birds in
the flock, with a maximum of 200 birds
and a minimum of 30 birds per flock or
all birds in the flock if the flock is less
than 30 birds, has been tested for M.
synoviae as provided in § 145.14(b)
when more than 4 months of age or
upon reaching sexual maturity:
Provided, That to retain this
classification, the flock shall be
subjected to one of the following
procedures:
(A) At intervals of not more than 90
days, a random sample of serum or egg
yolk or a targeted bird sample of the
choanal palantine cleft/fissure area
using appropriate swabs from all the
birds in the flock if the flock size is less
than 30, but at least 30 birds shall be
tested: Provided, That a sample of fewer
than 30 birds may be tested at any one
time with the approval of the Official
State Agency and the concurrence of the
Service, provided that a total of at least
30 birds, or the entire flock if flock size
is less than 30, is tested each time and
a total of at least 30 birds is tested
within each 90-day period; or
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Section 145.83 is amended as
follows:
■ a. By revising paragraph (f)(1)(i).
■ b. By removing paragraphs (f)(1)(ii)
and (f)(1)(iii).
■ c. By redesignating paragraphs
(f)(1)(iv) through (f)(1)(viii) as
paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) through (f)(1)(vi).
■ d. In newly redesignated paragraphs
(f)(1)(v) and (f)(1)(vi) by removing the
words ‘‘(f)(1)(vi)’’ and adding the words
‘‘(f)(1)(iv)’’ in their place.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
■
e. By revising paragraph (f)(3).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 145.83 Terminology and classification;
flocks and products.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Measures shall be implemented to
control Salmonella challenge through
feed, feed storage, and feed transport.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) In order for a hatchery to sell
products of paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through
(f)(1)(vi) of this section, all products
handled shall meet the requirements of
the classification.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. In § 145.92, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 145.92
Participation.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Hatching eggs produced by
primary and multiplier breeding flocks
should be nest clean. They may be
fumigated in accordance with part 147
of this subchapter or otherwise
sanitized.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 145.93
[Amended]
12. In § 145.93, paragraph (c)(3) is
amended by removing the number ‘‘30’’
and adding the number ‘‘11’’ in its
place.
■
PART 146—NATIONAL POULTRY
IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR
COMMERCIAL POULTRY
13. The authority citation for part 146
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
14. Section 146.1 is amended by
revising the definition of poultry to read
as follows:
■
§ 146.1
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Poultry. Domesticated fowl, including
chickens, turkeys, waterfowl, and game
birds, except doves and pigeons, that are
bred for the primary purpose of
producing eggs or meat.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. Section 146.2 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 146.2
Administration.
*
*
*
*
*
(c)(1) An Official State Agency may
accept for participation a commercial
table-egg layer pullet flock, commercial
table-egg layer flock, or a commercial
meat-type flock (including an affiliated
flock) located in another participating
State under a mutual understanding and
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
agreement, in writing, between the two
Official State Agencies regarding
conditions of participation and
supervision.
(2) An Official State Agency may
accept for participation a commercial
table-egg layer pullet flock, commercial
table-egg layer flock, or a commercial
meat-type flock (including an affiliated
flock) located in a State that does not
participate in the Plan under a mutual
understanding and agreement, in
writing, between the owner of the flock
and the Official State Agency regarding
conditions of participation and
supervision.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 146.3
[Amended]
Inspections.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A flock will be considered to be
conforming to protocol if it meets the
requirements as described in
§ 145.33(a), § 146.43(a), or § 146.53(a) of
this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 146.51
[Amended]
18. Section 146.51 is amended as
follows:
■ a. In the definition of commercial
upland game birds by changing the
word ‘‘purpose’’ to ‘‘purposes’’ and
adding the words ‘‘eggs and/or’’ before
the word ‘‘meat’’.
■ b. In the definition of commercial
waterfowl, by changing the word
‘‘purpose’’ to ‘‘purposes’’ and adding
the words ‘‘eggs and/or’’ before the
word ‘‘meat’’.
■ 19. Section 146.52 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as
follows:
■
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 146.52
Participation.
(a) Participating commercial upland
game bird slaughter plants, commercial
waterfowl slaughter plants, raised-forrelease upland game bird premises,
raised-for-release waterfowl premises,
and commercial upland game bird and
commercial waterfowl producing eggs
for human consumption premises shall
comply with the applicable general
provisions of subpart A of this part and
the special provisions of this subpart E.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Raised-for-release upland game
bird premises, raised-for-release
waterfowl premises, and commercial
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 146.53 Terminology and classification;
slaughter plants and premises.
*
16. In § 146.3, paragraph (a) is
amended by adding the words
‘‘commercial table-egg layer pullet
flock,’’ before the words ‘‘table-egg
producer’’.
■ 17. In § 146.11, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 146.11
upland game bird and commercial
waterfowl producing eggs for human
consumption premises that raise fewer
than 25,000 birds annually are exempt
from the special provisions of this
subpart E.
■ 20. Section 146.53 is amended as
follows:
■ a. In paragraph (a) introductory text,
by adding the words ‘‘or, in the case of
egg-producing flocks, the regular
surveillance of these flocks’’ after the
words ‘‘participating slaughter plant’’.
■ b. By adding paragraphs (a)(4) and
(a)(5).
The additions read as follows:
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(4) It is a commercial upland game
bird or waterfowl flock that produces
eggs for human consumption where a
minimum of 11 birds per flock have
been tested negative to the H5/H7
subtypes of avian influenza as provided
in § 146.13 (b) within 30 days of
disposal or within a 12 month period.
(5) It is a commercial upland game
bird or waterfowl flock that has an ongoing active and passive surveillance
program for H5/H7 subtypes of avian
influenza that is approved by the
Official State Agency and the Service.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 147—AUXILIARY PROVISIONS
ON NATIONAL POULTRY
IMPROVEMENT PLAN
21. The authority citation for part 147
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
22. In § 147.52, paragraph (d) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 147.52
Authorized laboratories.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) State site visit. The Official State
Agency will conduct a site visit and
recordkeeping audit at least once every
2 years. This will include, but may not
be limited to, review of technician
training records, check test proficiency,
and test results. The information from
the site visit and recordkeeping audit
will be made available to the NPIP upon
request.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 23. Section 147.54 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 147.54 Approval of diagnostic test kits
not licensed by the Service.
(a) Diagnostic test kits that are not
licensed by the Service (e.g.,
bacteriological culturing kits) may be
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15659
approved through the following
procedure:
(1) The sensitivity of the kit will be
evaluated in at least three NPIP
authorized laboratories by testing
known positive samples, as determined
by the official NPIP procedures found in
the NPIP Program Standards or through
other procedures approved by the
Administrator. Field samples for which
the presence or absence of the target
organism or analyte has been
determined by the current NPIP test
should be used, not spiked samples or
pure cultures. Samples from a variety of
field cases representing a range of low,
medium, and high analyte
concentrations should be used. In some
cases it may be necessary to utilize
samples from experimentally infected
animals. Spiked samples (clinical
sample matrix with a known amount of
pure culture added) should only be used
in the event that no other sample types
are available. Pure cultures should
never be used. Additionally,
laboratories should be selected for their
experience with testing for the target
organism or analyte with the current
NPIP approved test. If certain conditions
or interfering substances are known to
affect the performance of the kit,
appropriate samples will be included so
that the magnitude and significance of
the effect(s) can be evaluated.
(2) The specificity of the kit will be
evaluated in at least three NPIP
authorized laboratories by testing
known negative samples, as determined
by tests conducted in accordance with
the NPIP Program Standards or other
procedures approved by the
Administrator in accordance with
§ 147.53(d)(1). If certain conditions or
interfering substances are known to
affect the performance of the kit,
appropriate samples will be included so
that the magnitude and significance of
the effect(s) can be evaluated.
(3) The kit will be provided to the
cooperating laboratories in its final form
and include the instructions for use.
The cooperating laboratories must
perform the assay exactly as stated in
the supplied instructions. Each
laboratory must test a panel of at least
25 known positive samples. In addition,
each laboratory will be asked to test at
least 50 known negative samples
obtained from several sources, to
provide a representative sampling of the
general population. The cooperating
laboratories must perform a current
NPIP procedure or NPIP approved test
on the samples alongside the test kit for
comparison.
(4) Cooperating laboratories will
submit to the kit manufacturer all raw
data regarding the assay response. Each
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15660
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
sample tested will be reported as
positive or negative, and the official
NPIP procedure used to classify the
sample must be submitted in addition to
the assay response value. A completed
worksheet for diagnostic test evaluation
is required to be submitted with the raw
data and may be obtained by contacting
the NPIP Senior Coordinator. Raw data
and the completed worksheet for
diagnostic test evaluation must be
submitted to the NPIP Senior
Coordinator 4 months prior to the next
scheduled General Conference
Committee meeting, which is when
approval will be sought.
(5) The findings of the cooperating
laboratories will be evaluated by the
NPIP Technical Committee, and the
Technical Committee will make a
majority recommendation whether to
approve the test kit to the General
Conference Committee at the next
scheduled General Conference
Committee meeting. If the Technical
Committee recommends approval, the
final approval will be granted in
accordance with the procedures
described in §§ 147.46, 147.47, and
147.48.
(6) Diagnostic test kits that are not
licensed by the Service (e.g.,
bacteriological culturing kits) and that
have been approved for use in the NPIP
in accordance with this section are
listed in the NPIP Program Standards.
(b) Approved tests modification and
removal. (1) The specific data required
for modifications of previously
approved tests will be taken on a caseby-case basis by the technical
committee.
(2) If the Technical Committee
determines that only additional field
data is needed at the time of submission
for a modification of a previously
approved test, allow for a conditional
approval for 60 days for data collection
side-by-side with a current test. The
submitting party must provide complete
protocol and study design, including
criteria for pass/fail to the Technical
Committee. The Technical Committee
must review the data prior to final
approval. This would only apply to the
specific situation where a modified test
needs additional field data with poultry
to be approved.
(3) Approved diagnostic tests may be
removed from the Plan by submission of
a proposed change from a participant,
Official State Agency, the Department,
or other interested person or industry
organization. The data in support of
removing an approved test will be
compiled and evaluated by the NPIP
Technical Committee, and the Technical
Committee will make a majority
recommendation whether to remove the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Mar 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
test kit to the General Conference
Committee at the next scheduled
General Conference Committee meeting.
If the Technical Committee recommends
removal, the final decision to remove
the test will be granted in accordance
with the procedures described in
§§ 147.46, 147.47, and 147.48.
Done in Washington, DC, this 18th day of
March 2016.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–06664 Filed 3–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 241
[Release No. 34–77407; File No. S7–03–16]
Notice of Proposed Commission
Interpretation Regarding Automated
Quotations Under Regulation NMS
Securities and Exchange
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed interpretation; request
for comment.
AGENCY:
The Securities and Exchange
Commission is publishing for comment
a proposed interpretation with respect
to the definition of automated quotation
under Rule 600(b)(3) of Regulation
NMS.
DATES: Comments should be received on
or before April 14, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
SUMMARY:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number S7–
03–16 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number S7–03–16. This file number
should be included on the subject line
if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/other.shtml). Comments are also
available for Web site viewing and
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Holley III, Assistant Director, at
(202) 551–5614, Michael Bradley,
Special Counsel, at (202) 551–5594, or
Michael Ogershok, Attorney-Advisor, at
202–551–5541, all in the Office of
Market Supervision, Division of Trading
and Markets, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–7010.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. IEX’s Form 1
On August 21, 2015, Investors’
Exchange LLC (‘‘IEX’’) submitted to the
Commission a Form 1 application
seeking registration as a national
securities exchange under Section 6 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’).1 On September 9, 2015, IEX
submitted Amendment No. 1 to its Form
1 application.2 Notice of IEX’s filing of
its Form 1 application, as amended, was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on September 22, 2015.3
Recently, IEX submitted three
additional amendments to its Form 1
application.4 Simultaneously with the
1 15
U.S.C. 78f.
Amendment No. 1, IEX submitted updated
portions of its Form 1 application, including
revised exhibits, a revised version of the proposed
IEX Rule Book, and revised Addenda C–2, C–3, C–
4, D–1, D–2, F–1, F–2, F–3, F–4, F–5, F–6, F–7, F–
8, F–9, F–10, F–11, F–12, and F–13. IEX’s Form 1
application, as amended, including all of the
Exhibits referenced above, is available online at
www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml as well as at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75925
(September 15, 2015), 80 FR 57261. On December
18, 2015, IEX consented to an extension of time to
March 21, 2016 for Commission consideration of its
Form 1 application. See Letter from Sophia Lee,
General Counsel, IEX, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated December 18, 2015.
4 In Amendment No. 2, filed on February 29,
2016, IEX proposed changes to its Form 1
application to, among other things, redesign its
outbound routing functionality to direct routable
orders first to the IEX router instead of directly to
the IEX matching engine. See Letter from Sophia
Lee, General Counsel, IEX, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated February 29, 2016, at
1. In this manner, the IEX router would ‘‘interact
with the IEX matching system over a 350
microsecond speed-bump in the same way an
independent third party broker would be subject to
a speed bump.’’ See id. In Amendment No. 3, filed
on March 4, 2016, IEX proposed changes to its Form
1 application to clarify and correct revisions to its
2 In
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 57 (Thursday, March 24, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15652-15660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06664]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2016 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 15652]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Parts 56, 145, 146, and 147
[Docket No. APHIS-2014-0101]
RIN 0579-AE16
National Poultry Improvement Plan and Auxiliary Provisions
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend the National Poultry Improvement
Plan (NPIP, the Plan), its auxiliary provisions, and the indemnity
regulations for the control of H5 and H7 low pathogenic avian influenza
to clarify participation in the NPIP and amend participation
requirements, amend definitions for poultry and breeding stock, amend
the approval process for new diagnostic tests, and amend laboratory
inspection and testing requirements. These changes would align the
regulations with international standards and make them more transparent
to Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service stakeholders and the
general public. The proposed changes were voted on and approved by the
voting delegates at the Plan's 2014 National Plan Conference.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May
23, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0101.
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to
Docket No. APHIS-2014-0101, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD,
APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1238.
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may
be viewed at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-
0101 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA
South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington,
DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Denise Brinson, DVM, Director,
National Poultry Improvement Plan, VS, APHIS, USDA, 1506 Klondike Road,
Suite 101, Conyers, GA 30094-5104; (770) 922-3496.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP, also referred to below
as ``the Plan'') is a cooperative Federal-State-industry mechanism for
controlling certain poultry diseases. The Plan consists of a variety of
programs intended to prevent and control poultry diseases.
Participation in all Plan programs is voluntary, but breeding flocks,
hatcheries, and dealers must first qualify as ``U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid
Clean'' as a condition for participating in the other Plan programs.
The Plan identifies States, flocks, hatcheries, dealers, and
slaughter plants that meet certain disease control standards specified
in the Plan's various programs. As a result, customers can buy poultry
that has tested clean of certain diseases or that has been produced
under disease-prevention conditions.
The regulations in 9 CFR parts 145, 146, and 147 (referred to below
as the regulations) contain the provisions of the Plan. The Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS, also referred to as ``the
Service'') of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA, also referred
to as ``the Department'') amends these provisions from time to time to
incorporate new scientific information and technologies within the
Plan. In addition, the regulations in 9 CFR part 56 set out conditions
for the payment of indemnity for costs associated with poultry that are
infected with or exposed to H5/H7 low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI)
and provisions for a cooperative control program for the disease.
The proposed amendments discussed in this document are consistent
with the recommendations approved by the voting delegates to the last
National Plan Conference, which was held on July 10 through 12, 2014.
Participants in the National Plan Conference represented flockowners,
breeders, hatcherymen, slaughter plants, poultry veterinarians,
laboratory personnel, Official State Agencies from cooperating States,
and other poultry industry affiliates. The proposed amendments are
discussed in the order they would appear in the regulations.
Description of Plan Intention
The NPIP regulations in 9 CFR parts 145 and 146 contain
requirements that must be observed by flocks that participate in the
Plan. Currently, Sec. 145.3 details the process by which a person
becomes eligible to participate in the Plan. Any person producing or
dealing in products may participate when he/she has demonstrated, to
the satisfaction of the Official State Agency, that his/her facilities,
personnel, and practices are adequate for carrying out the applicable
provisions of the Plan, and has signed an agreement with the Official
State Agency to comply with the general and the applicable specific
provisions of the Plan and any regulations of the Official State Agency
under Sec. 145.2. Affiliated flockowners may participate in the plan
without signing an agreement with the Official State Agency. We are
proposing to add additional language to this section to clarify that
the NPIP is a cooperative Federal-State-Industry program through which
new or existing diagnostic technology can be effectively applied to
improve poultry and poultry products by controlling or eliminating
specific poultry diseases. Because the Plan consists of programs that
identify States, flocks, hatcheries, dealers, and slaughter plants that
meet specific disease control standards specified in the Plan, we also
propose to clarify that recordkeeping is important to demonstrate that
participants adhere to the disease control programs in which they
participate. We are proposing to add this language to paragraph (a) of
Sec. 145.3.
Revision of Records Retention Requirement for Hatchery Inspections
The regulations in Sec. 145.12 contain requirements for the
retention and
[[Page 15653]]
examination of records for all flocks maintained primarily for hatching
eggs. Historically, testing records were retained at the hatchery,
which allowed for examination of the records during annual inspections.
However, not many commercial hatcheries currently keep testing records
for their breeder flocks at the hatchery and may instead keep the
records at the corporate office. Therefore, we are proposing a minor
change to the regulations to specify that records for all breeder flock
hatcheries must be made available for annual examination by a State
inspector. This change also maintains flexibility in who must make the
records available. Such people may include the hatchery manager, the
quality assurance manager, the laboratory manager, the breeder manager,
or the hatchery information specialist.
Clarification of Official Testing Requirements for Pullorum-Typhoid,
Mycoplasma gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, and M. synoviae
The regulations in Sec. 145.14 contain requirements for conducting
official tests for pullorum-typhoid, Mycoplasma gallisepticum, M.
meleagridis, M. synoviae, and avian influenza. Paragraph (a) outlines
specific testing requirements for pullorum-typhoid. Currently,
paragraph (a)(5) states that the official blood test for pullorum-
typhoid shall include the testing of a sample of blood from each bird
in the flock, provided that, under specified conditions in Sec. Sec.
145.23, 145.33, 145.43, 145.53, and 145.63, the testing of a portion or
sample of birds may be used in lieu of testing each bird. We are
proposing to add Sec. Sec. 145.73, 145.83, and 145.93 to the list of
sections referenced in Sec. 145.14(a)(5) as those sections are also
applicable to pullorum-typhoid blood testing.
Paragraph (b) outlines specific testing requirements for M.
gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, and M. synoviae. Currently, official
tests for M. gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, and M. synoviae include the
serum plate agglutination test, the tube agglutination test, the
hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, the microhemagglutination
inhibition test, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and the
polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based test. We are proposing to remove
references to the tube agglutination test because that test is outdated
and no longer in use. We are also proposing to remove references to the
microhemagglutination test as the term microhemagglutination is an
outdated term. In addition, we are proposing to remove the reference to
the PCR test and replace it with the words ``molecular based test.''
This change is necessary because there are other molecular based tests
in addition to the PCR test. Also, changing the language in the
regulations to ``molecular based test'' allows for greater testing
flexibility in the event that a better and more cost-effective or
efficient molecular based test is developed in the future. Finally,
while the widely accepted industry standard has been to use either the
HI test or a molecular based test to confirm the positive results of
serological screening tests, this requirement has not previously been
included in our regulations. Therefore, we are proposing to amend the
regulations to make that clarification.
Requirements for Nest Clean Hatching Eggs for Breeding Turkeys
In a final rule \1\ published in the Federal Register on July 9,
2014 (79 FR 38752-38768, Docket No. APHIS-2011-0101), with an effective
date of August 8, 2014, we amended the regulations by, among other
things, amending the requirements for participation in the Plan by
multiplier egg-type breeding chickens, multiplier meat-type breeding
chickens, primary egg-type breeding chickens, and primary meat-type
breeding chickens to state that hatching eggs produced by the relevant
flocks should be nest clean, and that they may be fumigated in
accordance with part 147 or otherwise sanitized. ``Nest clean'' eggs
are eggs that are collected from nests frequently to keep them clean
without further processing. These changes were necessary because it has
become standard practice within the industry to avoid sanitizing eggs
and instead insist on nest clean eggs, which have been found to hatch
better and provide a better chick than other eggs, even when they are
sanitized. In addition, removing the requirement for fumigation and
instead stating that hatching eggs ``may be'' fumigated or otherwise
sanitized addresses changes made due to health restrictions and
concerns related to staff safety, as well as aligning with changes made
to the provisions for multiplier egg-type and meat-type chicken
breeding flocks and primary egg-type and meat-type breeding flocks,
following the 2010 NPIP Plan Conference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the final rule and related documents, go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulations in Sec. 145.42 outline the requirements with which
turkey flocks, and the eggs and poults produced from them, must comply
in order to participate in the Plan. Due to the same restrictions and
concerns for staff safety for workers in the turkey industry and the
same standard practice and benefits of requiring nest clean eggs, we
are proposing to make the same changes to paragraph (b) of this section
that were made in the July 2014 final rule for Sec. Sec. 145.22(b),
145.32(b), 145.72(b), and 145.82(b).
We are also proposing to amend the definition of breeding flock in
Sec. 56.1 in order to be more inclusive of both chicken and turkey
flocks. Currently, the definition for breeding flock refers to a
``flock that is composed of stock that has been developed for
commercial egg or meat production and is maintained for the principal
purpose of producing chicks for the ultimate production of eggs or meat
for human consumption.'' We propose to amend this definition to remove
the word ``chicks'' and replace it with the word ``progeny.'' This
change is also consistent with the definition of multiplier breeding
flock in Sec. 145.1.
Changes to U.S. M. gallisepticum Clean and U.S. M. synoviae Clean
Classification for Breeding Flocks of Hobbyist and Exhibition
Waterfowl, Exhibition Poultry, and Game Birds
The regulations in Sec. 145.53 set out classifications for
hobbyist and exhibition waterfowl, exhibition poultry, and game bird
breeding flocks and products. Paragraph (c) in Sec. 145.53 sets out
the U.S. M. gallisepticum Clean classification for such poultry while
paragraph (d) of that section sets out the U.S. M. synoviae Clean
classification for such poultry.
We are proposing to require targeted bird sampling of the choanal
palatine cleft/fissure area using appropriate swabs as an alternative
to the random serum or egg yolk sampling currently required for
retention of the U.S. M. gallisepticum Clean classification. The
choanal palatine cleft/fissure area is easier to swab and is also a
very reliable site for detection of M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae.
The targeted sampling of this area would provide a greater likelihood
of detecting the organism of concern than either the random serum or
egg yolk sampling methods.
We are also proposing to change the size of the sample for U.S. M.
gallisepticum testing from the current 5 percent of birds in the flock
to at least 30 birds, or all birds in the flock if the flock size is
less than 30. We would make the same change for a multiplier breeding
flock which originated as U.S. M. gallisepticum Clean baby poultry from
primary breeding flocks. Currently, sampling of such flocks must
consist of at least 2 percent of birds in the flock. These changes
would provide for a more appropriate level of sampling for M.
[[Page 15654]]
gallisepticum, particularly for those flocks that contain fewer than 30
birds.
Because M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae spread and infect birds
similarly, we are proposing to amend the U.S. M. synoviae Clean
classification to require that retention of that classification may
also be obtained either by random sampling of serum or egg yolk or a
targeted bird sample of the choanal palatine cleft/fissure area using
appropriate swabs. Currently, the regulations do not specify how
sampling is to be conducted. In addition, we are proposing to change
the size of the sample for U.S. M. synoviae testing from at least 150
birds in the flock to at least 30 birds, or all birds in the flock if
the flock size is less than 30. Finally, for a multiplier breeding
flock which originated as U.S. M. synoviae Clean baby poultry from
primary breeding flocks, we would remove the requirement for sampling a
minimum of 75 birds and instead require that a random sample contain 50
percent of the birds in the flock with a maximum of 200 birds and a
minimum of 30 birds, or all birds in the flock if the flock is less
than 30 birds. This sampling would have to be conducted on birds that
are at least 4 months of age or upon reaching sexual maturity.
Assuming a normal distribution and an infection rate of 1 percent,
changing the sample sizes as proposed does not greatly affect the
chance of detecting a positive sample (confidence interval
approximately 95 percent). These proposed sample size changes would
allow us to increase the efficiency of the NPIP program by allowing
resources to be used elsewhere.
Changes to U.S. Salmonella Monitored Certification Requirements
The regulations in Sec. 145.83 set out the requirements for the
classification of participating flocks, and the eggs and chicks
produced from them, with respect to certain diseases. Paragraph (f) of
Sec. 145.83 sets out requirements for preventing and controlling
Salmonella in the breeding-hatching industry. Currently, a flock may be
designated as U.S. Salmonella Monitored when, among other things, feed
used for the flock, if containing animal proteins, adheres to certain
processing requirements. We are proposing to remove these requirements
because we believe that the rendering industry has appropriate
standards to deal with the transmission of Salmonella through poultry
feed and, therefore, these requirements are not necessary in the NPIP
regulations. In addition, most of the primary meat type chicken
industry today does not use animal protein products in their feed due
to concerns of disease transmission. Therefore, we propose to amend the
regulations in paragraph (f)(1)(i) to instead state that ``measures
shall be implemented to control Salmonella challenge through the feed,
feed storage, and feed transport.'' We also propose to remove
paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(1)(iii) and renumber paragraphs
(f)(1)(iv) through (f)(1)(viii) as paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) through
(f)(1)(vi).
Revision to Sanitation Requirements for Meat-Type Waterfowl
The regulations in Sec. Sec. 145.91 and 145.92 set out special
provisions for meat-type waterfowl and the eggs and baby poultry
produced from them. Currently, paragraph (b) of Sec. 145.92 requires
that hatching eggs produced by primary breeding flocks be fumigated in
accordance with part 147 or otherwise sanitized. We are proposing to
remove the requirement for fumigation and instead state that hatching
eggs should be ``nest clean'' and that they ``may be'' fumigated or
otherwise sanitized. We would also extend these requirements to
multiplier breeding flocks, as these proposed requirements are meant to
mirror the changes made to the provisions for multiplier egg-type and
meat-type chicken breeding flocks and primary egg-type and meat-type
breeding flocks, following the 2010 NPIP conference as well as the
changes we are proposing to the regulations for breeding turkeys in
Sec. 145.42.
Revision to Sample Size for U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Clean
Classification
The regulations in Sec. 145.93 set out requirements for the
classification of participating flocks of meat-type waterfowl and the
eggs and baby poultry produced from them, with respect to certain
diseases. Paragraph (c) of Sec. 145.93 sets out requirements for the
classification of such flocks as U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Clean.
Currently, the regulations state that, in order for multiplier breeding
flocks to retain this classification, a sample of at least 30 birds
must either be tested negative for avian influenza at intervals of 180
days, a sample of fewer than 30 birds may be tested and found negative
for avian influenza at any one time if all pens are equally represented
and a total of 30 birds are tested within each 180-day period, or a
sample of at least 30 birds are tested and found negative to H5/H7
avian influenza within 21 days prior to movement to slaughter.
In the July 2014 final rule, we amended the regulations by changing
the number of breeding birds required to be tested for avian influenza
prior to movement to slaughter in Sec. Sec. 145.23, 145.33, and
145.73. Rather than requiring 30 spent fowl to be tested, we now
require the testing of a sample of 11 birds prior to movement to
slaughter. This change was necessary because, generally, the entire
flock of egg-type breeding chickens will be moved to slaughter at one
time. Testing 11 birds per flock is also consistent with the testing
requirements for meat-type commercial chickens moved to slaughter under
the U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Monitored program in Sec. 146.33, and
provides adequate assurance that the flock is free of avian influenza.
We are proposing to make the same change for meat-type waterfowl
breeding flocks. Aligning sample numbers across similar flocks
simplifies plan participation.
Changes to the List of Commercial Poultry Plan Participants
Part 146 of the regulations contains the NPIP provisions for
commercial poultry. Section 146.3 provides requirements for
participation in the Plan by commercial table-egg producers, raised-
for-release upland game bird or waterfowl premises, commercial upland
game bird or waterfowl slaughter plants, and meat-type chicken or
turkey slaughter plants. We propose to amend the regulations to add
commercial table-egg layer pullet flocks to the list of Plan
participants in paragraph (c)(1) of Sec. 146.2 and paragraph (a) in
Sec. 146.3. A commercial table-egg layer pullet flock is currently
defined in Sec. 146.1 as a table-egg layer flock prior to the onset of
egg production. The inclusion of these flock owners as Plan
participants provides a means for NPIP staff to identify participation
in the Plan and to help facilitate the movement of birds within States
and across State lines.
Finally, we are proposing to amend the definition of poultry in
Sec. 146.1 to make it more inclusive of all domesticated fowl bred for
the purpose of providing eggs or meat, including waterfowl and game
birds. This change would be consistent with the poultry definition in
Sec. 56.1 and Sec. 145.1.
Amendment to Slaughter Plant Inspection Requirements
Section 146.11 of the regulations sets out the audit process for
participating slaughter plants. Paragraph (b) states that flocks
slaughtered at a slaughter plant will be considered to be not
conforming to the required protocol of the classifications if there are
no test results available, if the flock was not tested within 21 days
before slaughter, or if the test results for the flocks were not
returned before slaughter. We are
[[Page 15655]]
proposing to amend paragraph (b) to state that a flock will be
considered to be conforming to protocol if it meets the requirements
described in Sec. Sec. 146.33(a), 146.43(a), or 146.53(a). This change
would correct problems inadvertently caused by combining all allowed
testing requirements in 9 CFR part 146, subparts C, D, and E for
participating slaughter plants into one set of testing requirements.
One such problem was that the language in paragraph (b) directly
contradicted the requirement allowing for testing at the slaughter
plant on a shift basis. This change would also allow for future
amendments to testing requirements for each subpart independent of one
another and without having to amend the regulations in Sec. 146.11.
Addition of Testing Commercial Table-Egg Producing Upland Game Birds
and Waterfowl for Avian Influenza
The regulations in Sec. Sec. 146.51 through 146.53 contain special
provisions related to the participation in the NPIP program by
commercial upland game birds, commercial waterfowl, raised-for-release
upland game birds, and raised-for-release waterfowl and the
classification of such flocks as U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Monitored.
Commercial upland game birds and waterfowl are sometimes grown for the
primary purpose of producing eggs for human consumption, notably in
specialty markets, restaurants, and health food outlets. Because a
significant number of these flocks are large in size, we believe that
the creation of a mechanism for NPIP participation and avian influenza
surveillance for such flocks would be beneficial to the poultry
industry as a whole. Therefore, we are proposing to amend the
definition for commercial upland game birds and commercial waterfowl in
Sec. 146.51 to include birds grown for egg production. Currently, the
definitions for these categories of birds include only those birds
grown for the primary purpose of producing meat for human consumption.
We are also proposing to add commercial upland game birds and
commercial waterfowl producing eggs for human consumption to the list
of Plan participants in paragraphs (a) and (c) of Sec. 146.52. We
would also change the word ``purpose'' under both the definition for
commercial upland game birds and commercial waterfowl to ``purposes.''
Paragraph (a) of Sec. 146.53 contains the U.S. H5/H7 Avian
Influenza Monitored classification for commercial waterfowl and
commercial upland game birds. Currently, the commercial waterfowl and
commercial upland game bird industry may earn U.S. H5/H7 Influenza
Monitored classification by participating in routine surveillance for
H5/H7 avian influenza through participating slaughter plants. We are
proposing to add provisions for the regular surveillance of commercial
waterfowl and game bird egg-producing flocks for avian influenza in new
paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5). These provisions would require that a
minimum of 11 birds per flock be tested negative to H5/H7 avian
influenza as provided in Sec. 146.13 within 30 days of disposal or
within a 12 month period or that the participating flock has an on-
going active and passive surveillance program for H5/H7 avian influenza
approved by the Official State Agency and the Service.
Amendments to Authorized Laboratory Requirements
Subpart F of part 147 contains provisions for authorized
laboratories and approved test and sanitation procedures under the
NPIP. Section 147.52 contains the current provisions for approving
authorized laboratories. While these provisions currently require
laboratories to undergo an annual site visit and recordkeeping audit by
their Official State Agency in order to maintain authorization,
laboratory procedures and personnel generally do not change on a yearly
basis. In addition, the need for Official State Agencies to inspect
laboratories in other States serving industry members within their own
States has proven to unnecessarily consume time and travel funds best
utilized in other areas of the Plan. Therefore, we are proposing to
amend the regulations to require that site visits take place at least
once every 2 years.
Amendments to the Approval Process for New Diagnostic Tests
Section 147.54 outlines the required procedures for the approval of
diagnostic test kits that are not licensed by APHIS. Current paragraph
(a) states that the sensitivity of the kit will be estimated by testing
known positive samples, as determined by official NPIP procedures found
in the NPIP program standards or via other procedures approved by the
Administrator. Because it is difficult to define a minor test
modification versus a major test modification and to determine what
data might be needed beforehand for a new test, we are proposing to
allow the conditional use of a modified test side by side with the
approved versions using field samples. This would make it easier for
laboratories to participate in the test validation process. Field
samples would have to be composed of those samples for which the
presence or absence of the target organism or analyte has been
determined by the current NPIP test rather than spiked samples or pure
cultures. In addition, samples would have to come from a variety of
field cases representing a range of low, medium, and high analyte
concentrations. Spiked samples should only be used in the event that no
other sample types are available. These changes would ensure that
samples used for validation represent real samples and contain the same
analytes and extraneous material that would be found in clinical
samples. Realistic samples are critical to ensuring that a test will
perform adequately with normal use. We are also proposing to clarify
that laboratories should only be selected for their experience with
testing for the target organism or analyte with the current NPIP
approved test. Finally, we are proposing to remove the requirement that
authorized laboratories be selected by the Service and clarify that the
specificity of the kit will be ``evaluated'' rather than ``estimated''
in both current paragraphs (a) and (b) to provide more specific
information on test performance. We are proposing this change because
authorized NPIP laboratories use the same standards and guidelines.
Therefore, any NPIP-authorized laboratory should be able to be utilized
by any company seeking approval of a new test.
We are also proposing to revise the regulations in current
paragraph (c) to remove the requirement for clinical samples to be
supplied by the manufacturer of the test kit. Further, we propose to
require that at least 50 known negative samples be tested by each
laboratory rather than the currently required 50 known negative
clinical samples. Because it can be difficult to find clinical samples
and to share clinical samples for logistical reasons, removing the
requirements for clinical samples and for samples to be supplied by the
test kit manufacturer would allow any entity to provide clinical
samples. However, the negative samples would have to contain relevant
sample matrices/extraneous material which would be found in clinical
samples. In addition, requiring at least 50 known negative samples
rather than 50 known negative samples is necessary because, in the
past, we have received fewer than 50 samples from a company when more
samples were unavailable. This change would make it clearer that we
view any sample sets consisting of fewer than 50 samples as incomplete
and that we
[[Page 15656]]
would not review such sample sets. We are also proposing to add
language allowing cooperating laboratories to perform a current NPIP
procedure or test on samples alongside the test kit for comparison, and
specific testing procedures for Salmonella, Mycoplasma, and avian
influenza, as well as molecular-based testing procedures to better
account for the differences among the three agents.
Paragraph (d) states that laboratories must submit assay response
data to the kit manufacturer along with the official NPIP procedure. We
are proposing to require that a worksheet for diagnostic test
evaluation be submitted along with the raw data from the assay response
and that the data and completed worksheet be submitted to the NPIP
Senior Coordinator 4 months before the next General Conference
Committee meeting, which is when test approval would be sought.
Worksheets would be obtained by contacting the NPIP Senior Coordinator.
The diagnostic test evaluation worksheet is intended to provide a
standardized template to ensure that all needed data for test
evaluation has been prepared and that the data is available in a
uniform manner. This would make review of the data easier for the NPIP
Technical Committee, which would facilitate the test approval process.
Paragraph (e) puts forth the process by which the NPIP Technical
Committee will make their decision about whether to approve a new
diagnostic test. We propose to clarify that a majority of the members
of the Technical Committee would have to recommend whether to approve
the test kit and that this recommendation would have to occur at the
next scheduled General Conference Committee meeting.
Currently, the regulations do not provide procedures for modifying
or removing diagnostic tests. Therefore, we are proposing to
redesignate the introductory paragraph for Sec. 147.54 as paragraph
(a) and the following paragraphs (a) through (f) as paragraphs (a)(1)
through (6) and add a new paragraph (b) to describe how diagnostic
tests may be modified or removed. The proposed requirements would
require the submission of data in support of modifying or removing the
test in question to the NPIP Technical Committee in a manner similar to
that in place for the approval of new test kits in current paragraph
(e).
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have analyzed
the potential economic effects of this action on small entities. The
analysis is summarized below. Copies of the full analysis are available
by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
or on the Regulations.gov Web site (see ADDRESSES above for
instructions for accessing Regulations.gov).
The changes in this proposed rule are recommended by the NPIP
General Conference Committee, which represents cooperating State
agencies and poultry industry members and advises the Secretary of
Agriculture on issues pertaining to poultry health. The proposed
amendments to these regulations would improve the regulatory
environment for poultry and poultry products.
This rulemaking would result in various changes to 9 CFR parts 56
and 145-147, modifying provisions of the NPIP. The proposed rule would
clarify participation in the NPIP and amend participation requirements,
amend definitions for poultry and breeding stock, amend the approval
process for new diagnostic tests, and amend inspection and laboratory
testing requirements. The proposed amendments to these regulations
would improve the regulatory environment for poultry and poultry
products.
The establishments that would be affected by the proposed rule--
principally entities engaged in poultry production and processing--are
predominantly small by Small Business Administration standards. In
those instances in which an addition or modification could potentially
result in a cost to certain entities, we do not expect the costs to be
significant. This rule embodies changes decided upon by the NPIP
General Conference Committee on behalf of Plan members, that is,
changes recognized by the poultry industry as in their interest. We
note that NPIP membership is voluntary.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Executive Order 12372
This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.)
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection or
recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Please send written comments to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington,
DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket No. APHIS-
2014-0101. Please send a copy of your comments to: (1) APHIS, using one
of the methods described under ADDRESSES at the beginning of this
document, and (2) Clearance Officer, OCIO, USDA, Room 404-W, 14th
Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. A comment to
OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within
30 days of publication of this proposed rule.
We are proposing to amend the NPIP, its auxiliary provisions, and
the indemnity regulations for the control of H5 and H7 low pathogenic
avian influenza to clarify participation in the NPIP and amend
participation requirements, amend definitions for poultry and breeding
stock, amend the approval process for new diagnostic tests, and amend
laboratory inspection and testing requirements. These changes would
align the regulations with international standards and make them more
transparent to APHIS stakeholders and the general public.
Implementing this rule will require certain new information
collection activities such as Waterfowl and Game Bird Surveillance and
Diagnostic Test Evaluation Worksheets. APHIS is asking OMB to approve,
for 3 years, its use of these information collection activities in
connection with APHIS' efforts to continually improve the health of the
U.S. poultry population and the quality of U.S. poultry products. The
NPIP has an existing information collection under OMB control number
0579-0007. At the next renewal of 0579-0007, we will merge the
activities added by this proposed rule, subject to OMB approval.
We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and
recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
[[Page 15657]]
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 1.8 hours per response.
Respondents: Flock owners, breeders, hatchery owners, table egg
producers, laboratory personnel, and State animal health officials.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 10.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.
Estimated annual number of responses: 10.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 18 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of
the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per
response.)
Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Ms.
Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301)
851-2727.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2727.
List of Subjects
9 CFR Part 56
Animal diseases, Indemnity payments, Low pathogenic avian
influenza, Poultry.
9 CFR Parts 145, 146, and 147
Animal diseases, Poultry and poultry products, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR parts 56, 145, 146, and 147
as follows:
PART 56--CONTROL OF H5/H7 LOW PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA
0
1. The authority citation for part 56 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
0
2. Section 56.1 is amended by revising the definition of breeding flock
to read as follows:
Sec. 56.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Breeding flock. A flock that is composed of stock that has been
developed for commercial egg or meat production and is maintained for
the principal purpose of producing progeny for the ultimate production
of eggs or meat for human consumption.
* * * * *
PART 145--NATIONAL POULTRY IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR BREEDING POULTRY
0
3. The authority citation for part 145 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
Sec. 145.2 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 145.2, paragraph (d) is amended by removing the words
``Sec. 145.3(d)'' and adding the words ``Sec. 145.3(e)'' in their
place.
0
5. Section 145.3 is amended as follows:
0
a. By redesignating paragraphs (a) through (f) as paragraphs (b)
through (g), respectively.
0
b. By adding a new paragraph (a).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 145.3 Participation.
(a) The National Poultry Improvement Plan is a cooperative Federal-
State-Industry program through which new or existing diagnostic
technology can be effectively applied to improve poultry and poultry
products by controlling or eliminating specific poultry diseases. The
Plan consists of programs that identify States, flocks, hatcheries,
dealers, and slaughter plants that meet specific disease control
standards specified in the Plan. Participants shall maintain records to
demonstrate that they adhere to the disease control programs in which
they participate.
* * * * *
Sec. 145.12 [Amended]
0
6. Section 145.12 is amended by adding, in paragraph (b), the words
``made available to and'' before the word ``examined''.
0
7. Section 145.14 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (a)(5).
0
b. By revising paragraph (b)(1).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 145.14 Testing.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) The official blood test shall include the testing of a sample
of blood from each bird in the flock: Provided, That under specified
conditions (see applicable provisions of Sec. Sec. 145.23, 145.33,
145.43, 145.53, 145.63, 145.73, 145.83, and 145.93) the testing of a
portion or sample of the birds may be used in lieu of testing each
bird.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) The official tests for M. gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, and M.
synoviae shall be the serum plate agglutination test, the
hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assay (ELISA) test \3\, or a molecular based test. The HI test or
molecular based test shall be used to confirm the positive results of
other serological screening tests. HI titers of 1:40 or more may be
interpreted as suspicious, and final judgment must be based on further
samplings and/or culture of reactors. Tests must be conducted in
accordance with this paragraph (b) and in accordance with part 147 of
this subchapter.
* * * * *
\3\ Procedures for the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)
test are set forth in the following publications:
A.A. Ansari, R.F. Taylor, T.S. Chang, ``Application of Enzyme-Linked
Immunosorbent Assay for Detecting Antibody to Mycoplasma gallisepticum
Infections in Poultry,'' Avian Diseases, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 21-35,
January-March 1983; and
H.M. Opitz, J.B. Duplessis, and M.J. Cyr, ``Indirect Micro-Enzyme-
Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Detection of Antibodies to
Mycoplasma synoviae and M. gallisepticum,'' Avian Diseases, Vol. 27,
No. 3, pp. 773-786, July-September 1983; and
H.B. Ortmayer and R. Yamamoto, ``Mycoplasma Meleagridis Antibody
Detection by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA),'' Proceedings,
30th Western Poultry Disease Conference, pp. 63-66, March 1981.
0
8. In Sec. 145.42, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 15658]]
Sec. 145.42 Participation.
* * * * *
(b) Hatching eggs should be nest clean. They may be fumigated in
accordance with part 147 of this subchapter or otherwise sanitized.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 145.53 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii) introductory text, and
(c)(1)(ii)(A).
0
b. By revising paragraphs (d)(1)(i), (d)(1)(ii) introductory text, and
(d)(1)(ii)(A).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 145.53 Terminology and classification; flocks and products.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) It is a flock in which all birds or a sample of at least 300
birds has been tested for M. gallisepticum as provided in Sec.
145.14(b) when more than 4 months of age or upon reaching sexual
maturity: Provided, That to retain this classification, a random sample
of serum or egg yolk or a targeted bird sample of the choanal palatine
cleft/fissure area using appropriate swabs from all the birds in the
flock if the flock size is less than 30, but at least 30 birds, shall
be tested at intervals of not more than 90 days: And provided further,
That a sample comprised of less than 30 birds may be tested at any one
time, with the approval of the Official State Agency and the
concurrence of the Service, provided that a total of at least 30 birds,
or all birds in the flock if flock size is less than 30, is tested
within each 90-day period; or
(ii) It is a multiplier breeding flock which originated as U.S. M.
Gallisepticum Clean baby poultry from primary breeding flocks and a
random sample comprised of 50 percent of the birds in the flock, with a
maximum of 200 birds and a minimum of 30 birds per flock or all birds
in the flock if the flock size is less than 30 birds, has been tested
for M. gallisepticum as provided in Sec. 145.14(b) when more than 4
months of age or upon reaching sexual maturity: Provided, That to
retain this classification, the flock shall be subjected to one of the
following procedures:
(A) At intervals of not more than 90 days, a random sample of serum
or egg yolk or a targeted bird sample of the choanal palatine cleft/
fissure area using appropriate swabs from all the birds in the flock if
flock size is less than 30, but at least 30 birds, shall be tested; or
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) It is a flock in which all birds or a sample of at least 300
birds has been tested for M. synoviae as provided in Sec. 145.14(b)
when more than 4 months of age or upon reaching sexual maturity:
Provided, That to retain this classification, a random sample of serum
or egg yolk or a targeted bird sample of the choanal palatine cleft/
fissure area using appropriate swabs (C.P. swabs) from all the birds in
the flock if flock size is less than 30, but at least 30 birds, shall
be tested at intervals of not more than 90 days: And provided further,
That a sample comprised of less than 30 birds may be tested at any one
time with the approval of the Official State Agency and the concurrence
of the Service, provided that a total of at least 30 birds is tested
within each 90-day period; or
(ii) It is a multiplier breeding flock that originated as U.S. M.
Synoviae Clean chicks from primary breeding flocks and from which a
random sample comprised of 50 percent of the birds in the flock, with a
maximum of 200 birds and a minimum of 30 birds per flock or all birds
in the flock if the flock is less than 30 birds, has been tested for M.
synoviae as provided in Sec. 145.14(b) when more than 4 months of age
or upon reaching sexual maturity: Provided, That to retain this
classification, the flock shall be subjected to one of the following
procedures:
(A) At intervals of not more than 90 days, a random sample of serum
or egg yolk or a targeted bird sample of the choanal palantine cleft/
fissure area using appropriate swabs from all the birds in the flock if
the flock size is less than 30, but at least 30 birds shall be tested:
Provided, That a sample of fewer than 30 birds may be tested at any one
time with the approval of the Official State Agency and the concurrence
of the Service, provided that a total of at least 30 birds, or the
entire flock if flock size is less than 30, is tested each time and a
total of at least 30 birds is tested within each 90-day period; or
* * * * *
0
10. Section 145.83 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (f)(1)(i).
0
b. By removing paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(1)(iii).
0
c. By redesignating paragraphs (f)(1)(iv) through (f)(1)(viii) as
paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) through (f)(1)(vi).
0
d. In newly redesignated paragraphs (f)(1)(v) and (f)(1)(vi) by
removing the words ``(f)(1)(vi)'' and adding the words ``(f)(1)(iv)''
in their place.
0
e. By revising paragraph (f)(3).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 145.83 Terminology and classification; flocks and products.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Measures shall be implemented to control Salmonella challenge
through feed, feed storage, and feed transport.
* * * * *
(3) In order for a hatchery to sell products of paragraphs
(f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(vi) of this section, all products handled
shall meet the requirements of the classification.
* * * * *
0
11. In Sec. 145.92, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 145.92 Participation.
* * * * *
(b) Hatching eggs produced by primary and multiplier breeding
flocks should be nest clean. They may be fumigated in accordance with
part 147 of this subchapter or otherwise sanitized.
* * * * *
Sec. 145.93 [Amended]
0
12. In Sec. 145.93, paragraph (c)(3) is amended by removing the number
``30'' and adding the number ``11'' in its place.
PART 146--NATIONAL POULTRY IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR COMMERCIAL POULTRY
0
13. The authority citation for part 146 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
0
14. Section 146.1 is amended by revising the definition of poultry to
read as follows:
Sec. 146.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Poultry. Domesticated fowl, including chickens, turkeys, waterfowl,
and game birds, except doves and pigeons, that are bred for the primary
purpose of producing eggs or meat.
* * * * *
0
15. Section 146.2 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 146.2 Administration.
* * * * *
(c)(1) An Official State Agency may accept for participation a
commercial table-egg layer pullet flock, commercial table-egg layer
flock, or a commercial meat-type flock (including an affiliated flock)
located in another participating State under a mutual understanding and
[[Page 15659]]
agreement, in writing, between the two Official State Agencies
regarding conditions of participation and supervision.
(2) An Official State Agency may accept for participation a
commercial table-egg layer pullet flock, commercial table-egg layer
flock, or a commercial meat-type flock (including an affiliated flock)
located in a State that does not participate in the Plan under a mutual
understanding and agreement, in writing, between the owner of the flock
and the Official State Agency regarding conditions of participation and
supervision.
* * * * *
Sec. 146.3 [Amended]
0
16. In Sec. 146.3, paragraph (a) is amended by adding the words
``commercial table-egg layer pullet flock,'' before the words ``table-
egg producer''.
0
17. In Sec. 146.11, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 146.11 Inspections.
* * * * *
(b) A flock will be considered to be conforming to protocol if it
meets the requirements as described in Sec. 145.33(a), Sec.
146.43(a), or Sec. 146.53(a) of this chapter.
* * * * *
Sec. 146.51 [Amended]
0
18. Section 146.51 is amended as follows:
0
a. In the definition of commercial upland game birds by changing the
word ``purpose'' to ``purposes'' and adding the words ``eggs and/or''
before the word ``meat''.
0
b. In the definition of commercial waterfowl, by changing the word
``purpose'' to ``purposes'' and adding the words ``eggs and/or'' before
the word ``meat''.
0
19. Section 146.52 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to
read as follows:
Sec. 146.52 Participation.
(a) Participating commercial upland game bird slaughter plants,
commercial waterfowl slaughter plants, raised-for-release upland game
bird premises, raised-for-release waterfowl premises, and commercial
upland game bird and commercial waterfowl producing eggs for human
consumption premises shall comply with the applicable general
provisions of subpart A of this part and the special provisions of this
subpart E.
* * * * *
(c) Raised-for-release upland game bird premises, raised-for-
release waterfowl premises, and commercial upland game bird and
commercial waterfowl producing eggs for human consumption premises that
raise fewer than 25,000 birds annually are exempt from the special
provisions of this subpart E.
0
20. Section 146.53 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, by adding the words ``or, in the
case of egg-producing flocks, the regular surveillance of these
flocks'' after the words ``participating slaughter plant''.
0
b. By adding paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5).
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 146.53 Terminology and classification; slaughter plants and
premises.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) It is a commercial upland game bird or waterfowl flock that
produces eggs for human consumption where a minimum of 11 birds per
flock have been tested negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of avian
influenza as provided in Sec. 146.13 (b) within 30 days of disposal or
within a 12 month period.
(5) It is a commercial upland game bird or waterfowl flock that has
an on-going active and passive surveillance program for H5/H7 subtypes
of avian influenza that is approved by the Official State Agency and
the Service.
* * * * *
PART 147--AUXILIARY PROVISIONS ON NATIONAL POULTRY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0
21. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
0
22. In Sec. 147.52, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 147.52 Authorized laboratories.
* * * * *
(d) State site visit. The Official State Agency will conduct a site
visit and recordkeeping audit at least once every 2 years. This will
include, but may not be limited to, review of technician training
records, check test proficiency, and test results. The information from
the site visit and recordkeeping audit will be made available to the
NPIP upon request.
* * * * *
0
23. Section 147.54 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 147.54 Approval of diagnostic test kits not licensed by the
Service.
(a) Diagnostic test kits that are not licensed by the Service
(e.g., bacteriological culturing kits) may be approved through the
following procedure:
(1) The sensitivity of the kit will be evaluated in at least three
NPIP authorized laboratories by testing known positive samples, as
determined by the official NPIP procedures found in the NPIP Program
Standards or through other procedures approved by the Administrator.
Field samples for which the presence or absence of the target organism
or analyte has been determined by the current NPIP test should be used,
not spiked samples or pure cultures. Samples from a variety of field
cases representing a range of low, medium, and high analyte
concentrations should be used. In some cases it may be necessary to
utilize samples from experimentally infected animals. Spiked samples
(clinical sample matrix with a known amount of pure culture added)
should only be used in the event that no other sample types are
available. Pure cultures should never be used. Additionally,
laboratories should be selected for their experience with testing for
the target organism or analyte with the current NPIP approved test. If
certain conditions or interfering substances are known to affect the
performance of the kit, appropriate samples will be included so that
the magnitude and significance of the effect(s) can be evaluated.
(2) The specificity of the kit will be evaluated in at least three
NPIP authorized laboratories by testing known negative samples, as
determined by tests conducted in accordance with the NPIP Program
Standards or other procedures approved by the Administrator in
accordance with Sec. 147.53(d)(1). If certain conditions or
interfering substances are known to affect the performance of the kit,
appropriate samples will be included so that the magnitude and
significance of the effect(s) can be evaluated.
(3) The kit will be provided to the cooperating laboratories in its
final form and include the instructions for use. The cooperating
laboratories must perform the assay exactly as stated in the supplied
instructions. Each laboratory must test a panel of at least 25 known
positive samples. In addition, each laboratory will be asked to test at
least 50 known negative samples obtained from several sources, to
provide a representative sampling of the general population. The
cooperating laboratories must perform a current NPIP procedure or NPIP
approved test on the samples alongside the test kit for comparison.
(4) Cooperating laboratories will submit to the kit manufacturer
all raw data regarding the assay response. Each
[[Page 15660]]
sample tested will be reported as positive or negative, and the
official NPIP procedure used to classify the sample must be submitted
in addition to the assay response value. A completed worksheet for
diagnostic test evaluation is required to be submitted with the raw
data and may be obtained by contacting the NPIP Senior Coordinator. Raw
data and the completed worksheet for diagnostic test evaluation must be
submitted to the NPIP Senior Coordinator 4 months prior to the next
scheduled General Conference Committee meeting, which is when approval
will be sought.
(5) The findings of the cooperating laboratories will be evaluated
by the NPIP Technical Committee, and the Technical Committee will make
a majority recommendation whether to approve the test kit to the
General Conference Committee at the next scheduled General Conference
Committee meeting. If the Technical Committee recommends approval, the
final approval will be granted in accordance with the procedures
described in Sec. Sec. 147.46, 147.47, and 147.48.
(6) Diagnostic test kits that are not licensed by the Service
(e.g., bacteriological culturing kits) and that have been approved for
use in the NPIP in accordance with this section are listed in the NPIP
Program Standards.
(b) Approved tests modification and removal. (1) The specific data
required for modifications of previously approved tests will be taken
on a case-by-case basis by the technical committee.
(2) If the Technical Committee determines that only additional
field data is needed at the time of submission for a modification of a
previously approved test, allow for a conditional approval for 60 days
for data collection side-by-side with a current test. The submitting
party must provide complete protocol and study design, including
criteria for pass/fail to the Technical Committee. The Technical
Committee must review the data prior to final approval. This would only
apply to the specific situation where a modified test needs additional
field data with poultry to be approved.
(3) Approved diagnostic tests may be removed from the Plan by
submission of a proposed change from a participant, Official State
Agency, the Department, or other interested person or industry
organization. The data in support of removing an approved test will be
compiled and evaluated by the NPIP Technical Committee, and the
Technical Committee will make a majority recommendation whether to
remove the test kit to the General Conference Committee at the next
scheduled General Conference Committee meeting. If the Technical
Committee recommends removal, the final decision to remove the test
will be granted in accordance with the procedures described in
Sec. Sec. 147.46, 147.47, and 147.48.
Done in Washington, DC, this 18th day of March 2016.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-06664 Filed 3-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P