Establishment-Specific Data Release Strategic Plan, 45451-45455 [2016-16642]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 135 / Thursday, July 14, 2016 / Notices
Estimated annual number of
respondents: 7,200.
Estimated annual number of
responses per respondent: 1.5.
Estimated annual number of
responses: 10,800.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 4,618 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.)
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
also become a matter of public record.
Done in Washington, DC, this 8th day of
July 2016.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–16612 Filed 7–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2015–0099]
Availability of an Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for the Biological
Control of Cape-Ivy
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
We are advising the public
that the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has prepared a final
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact relative to the
field release of a gall-forming fly,
Parafreutreta regalis, into the
continental United States for the use as
a biological control agent to reduce the
severity of Cape-ivy, Delairea odorata.
Based on the finding of no significant
impact, we have determined that an
environmental impact statement need
not be prepared.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Robert Tichenor, Plant Health Programs,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 851–
2198.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Cape-ivy
(Delairea odorata), a native of South
Africa, has become one of the most
pervasive non-native plants to invade
the coastal west region of the United
States, particularly in California and
Oregon. Cape-ivy is a weedy vine that
prefers moist, partly-shaded
environments along the Pacific coast;
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Jul 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
however, there are reports of
infestations at inland riparian locations.
Fragments of the plant easily root,
which facilitates the spread of this
invasive plant. Overgrowth of Cape-ivy,
a climbing vine, causes native plants to
die. The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) is proposing
to issue permits for the field release of
a gall-forming fly, Parafreutreta regalis,
into the continental United States to
reduce the severity of Cape-ivy
infestations.
On March 24, 2016, we published in
the Federal Register (81 FR 15679–
15680, Docket No. APHIS–2015–0099) a
notice 1 in which we announced the
availability, for public review and
comment, of an environmental
assessment (EA) that examined the
potential environmental impacts
associated with the proposed release of
P. regalis into the continental United
States.
We solicited comments on the EA for
30 days ending April 25, 2016. We
received 23 comments by that date. The
comments were from a State native
plant society, plant preservation
entities, State departments of
agriculture, an organization of State
plant regulatory agencies, and private
citizens. Twenty-two commenters
supported this action.
One commenter raised a concern
about the possibility of P. regalis being
introduced to Hawaii by airplanes
commuting from California to Hawaii
and asked whether we considered the
biological risks associated with the
release of P. regalis in Hawaii. We have
prepared a response to this specific
concern in an appendix to the final EA.
In this document, we are advising the
public of our finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) regarding the release of
P. regalis into the continental United
States for use as a biological control
agent for Cape-ivy. The finding, which
is based on the final EA, reflects our
determination that release of this
biological control agent will not have a
significant impact on the quality of the
human environment.
The final EA and FONSI may be
viewed on Regulations.gov Web site (see
footnote 1). Copies of the EA and FONSI
are also available for public inspection
at USDA, Room 1141, South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except holidays. Persons wishing to
inspect copies are requested to call
1 To view the notice, the comments we received,
the final EA, and the FONSI, go to https://
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS2015-0099.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45451
ahead to (202) 799–7039 to facilitate
entry into the reading room. In addition,
copies may be obtained by calling or
writing to the individual listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
The EA and FONSI have been
prepared in accordance with: (1) The
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.); (2) regulations of the
Council on Environmental Quality for
implementing the procedural provisions
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508); (3)
USDA regulations implementing NEPA
(7 CFR part 1b); and (4) APHIS’ NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part
372).
Done in Washington, DC, this 8th day of
July 2016.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–16624 Filed 7–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS–2014–0032]
Establishment-Specific Data Release
Strategic Plan
Food Safety and Inspection
Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; response to comments.
AGENCY:
The Food Safety and
Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing
the availability of its final
Establishment-Specific Data Release
Strategic Plan (the Plan) for sharing data
on federally inspected meat and poultry
establishments with the public. FSIS is
also responding to comments received
on a draft version of the Plan that FSIS
posted on its Web site and announced
in January 2015 in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Daniel L. Engeljohn, Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy and
Program Development; Telephone: (202)
205–0495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
The Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS) administers a regulatory
program under the Federal Meat
Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), the Poultry Products Inspection
Act (PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.), and
the Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA)
(21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.) to protect the
health and welfare of consumers. The
Agency is responsible for ensuring that
the nation’s commercial supply of meat,
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
45452
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 135 / Thursday, July 14, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
poultry, and egg products is safe,
wholesome, not adulterated, and
correctly labeled and packaged.
FSIS inspects these products at
official slaughtering and processing
establishments, verifying that the
establishments meet regulatory
requirements and enforcing those
requirements as necessary.
Additionally, FSIS employees
(including inspectors, veterinarians,
laboratorians, and Enforcement,
Investigations, and Analysis Officers
(EIAOs)) perform a variety of activities,
including conducting inspections,
ensuring compliance with existing
regulations, and collecting and testing
microbiological and chemical residue
samples to verify that establishments are
maintaining Hazard Analysis and
Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans or
other food safety systems that address
these hazards.
While conducting these activities and
performing many other key functions,
FSIS collects a large volume of
establishment-specific data. Using the
data, FSIS produces reports for internal
use, and publicly shares data and
reports through the Agency’s Web site 1
and other public communication
venues. Most of the data that FSIS
shares with the public is aggregated or
in summary format; however, FSIS
releases a large volume of disaggregated,
establishment-specific data to the public
through formal Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) requests.2
In a notice published in the Federal
Register on January 15, 2015, FSIS
announced that the Agency had
developed a plan for sharing data on
federally inspected meat, poultry, and
processed egg product establishments
with the public (80 FR 2092). The
Agency developed the Plan in response
to policy documents issued by President
Obama and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), and to reduce the
administrative burden FOIA requests
have placed on the Agency.
In 2009, President Obama and OMB
released policy documents that called
for increased data sharing and greater
transparency in Federal agencies,
including President Obama’s January
21, 2009 ‘‘Memorandum on
Transparency and Open Government,’’ 3
1 For more information, please visit:
www.fsis.usda.gov.
2 The Freedom of Information Act 5 U.S.C. 552,
As Amended by Public Law 104–231, 110 Stat.
3048. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/oip/
amended-foia-redlined.pdf.
3 ‘‘Transparency and Open Government:
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive
Departments and Agencies’’. (74 FR 4685; Jan. 26,
2009), pp. 4685–4686. Available at: https://
www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/
TransparencyandOpenGovernment.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Jul 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
OMB’s February 24, 2009 memorandum
on ‘‘The President’s Memorandum on
Transparency and Open Government—
Interagency Collaboration’’ 4 and OMB’s
December 8, 2009 ‘‘Open Government
Directive.’’ 5 President Obama
subsequently issued policy documents
instructing agencies to develop plans for
making information on regulatory
compliance and enforcement activities
available in machine-readable format,
and accessible, downloadable, and
searchable online.6
Upon the recommendation of the
National Advisory Committee on Meat
and Poultry Inspection (NACMPI), FSIS
asked the National Research Council
(NRC) within the National Academies to
study the potential food safety benefits
and consequences of releasing
establishment-specific data to the
public. The NRC convened a committee
in 2011 and issued a report that
analyzed the costs and benefits of
releasing establishment-specific data,
recommending that FSIS develop a
strategic plan to guide the Agency’s
efforts to release the data.7
FSIS also convened an internal
committee to conduct its own in-depth
review of Federal data sharing
procedures and resources, which
culminated in the development of the
draft version of the Plan. NACMPI
reviewed the draft plan in January 2014
and FSIS incorporated its feedback in
the announced version of the draft Plan.
Final Revision of the Plan
After carefully reviewing the
submitted comments, FSIS made minor
changes to the draft Plan. These changes
include updated preliminary lists of
datasets identified for release and
considered for future release, as well as
an expanded explanation of how FSIS
4 ‘‘Memorandum for the Heads of Executive
Departments and Agencies: President’s
Memorandum on Transparency and Open
Government—Interagency Collaboration.’’
Memorandum Number: M–09–12. 24 February,
2009. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/
sites/default/files/omb/assets/memoranda_fy2009/
m09-12.pdf.
5 ‘‘Memorandum for the Heads of Executive
Departments and Agencies: President’s
Memorandum on Transparency and Open
Government—Interagency Collaboration.’’
Memorandum Number: M–10–06. 8 December,
2009. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/
open/documents/open-government-directive.
6 ‘‘Memorandum on Regulatory Compliance.’’ 76
FR 3825 (January 21, 2011); ‘‘Making Open and
Machine Readable the New Default for Government
Information.’’ Executive Order 13642. 78 FR 28111
(May 14, 2013).
7 National Research Council, Committee on a
Study of Food Safety and Other Consequences of
Publishing Establishment-Specific Data. ‘‘The
Potential Consequences of Public Release of Food
Safety and Inspection Service EstablishmentSpecific Data.’’ 2011. Available at: https://
www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13304.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will determine the level of aggregation
for each dataset. The final revision of
the Plan can be viewed on the Agency’s
Web site at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
wps/wcm/connect/0803f8a0-a3cc-494587b6-f992acdcfa9b/EstablishmentSpecific-Data-PlanFinal.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
The Plan establishes FSIS’s process
for releasing establishment-specific data
on Data.gov. The Plan includes an
overview of FSIS data collection
processes and structures, dataset
selection criteria, data release
procedures, a preliminary list of Agency
datasets for public release, and
performance measures for evaluating the
effectiveness of data release.
The preliminary list of Agency
datasets for public release includes a
‘‘demographic’’ dataset of all regulated
establishments that incorporates both
information currently included in the
Meat, Poultry and Egg Product
Inspection Directory (name, number,
address, grant date, slaughter and/or
processing, meat and/or poultry) and
additional information to facilitate data
analysis (e.g., variables specifically
created to allow different datasets to be
correctly combined). The preliminary
list also includes data on Listeria
monocytogenes and Salmonella in
ready-to-eat (RTE) products and
processed egg products; data on Shiga
Toxin-producing Escherichia coli
(STEC) and Salmonella in raw, nonintact beef products; data on Salmonella
and Campylobacter in young chickens
and young turkeys, comminuted
poultry, and chicken parts; routine
chemical residue testing data in meat
and poultry products; and advanced
meat recovery (AMR) testing data. Of
these, Salmonella in raw, non-intact
beef products; Listeria monocytogenes
and Salmonella in processed egg
products; and Salmonella and
Campylobacter in young chickens and
young turkeys, comminuted poultry,
and chicken parts are new additions to
the Plan.
Agency datasets identified for the first
release include the demographic dataset
and Listeria and Salmonella data in RTE
products. FSIS will release these
datasets by October 12, 2016. The
preliminary list of Agency datasets will
not all be released at the same time, and
before the release of final datasets, FSIS
intends to publish a Constituent Update
with a link to a sample dataset for
stakeholder review. For each dataset to
be released, FSIS will determine and
announce, on a case-by-case basis, the
appropriate level of aggregation. For
example, datasets could be aggregated at
the national level or not aggregated at
all, depending on FSIS’s determination.
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 135 / Thursday, July 14, 2016 / Notices
Besides the preliminary datasets that
the Agency intends for release, FSIS is
considering additional data sources for
future release of both aggregate and
individual establishment data. These
include: Individual establishment
inspection task data associated with
verification of compliance with each
regulation; humane handling task data;
and import sampling task data relating
to STEC, Salmonella, and residue
testing.
The following is a summary of the
comments received and FSIS’s
responses.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Summary of Comments and Responses
FSIS received 19 comments in
response to the January 2015 notice. The
comments were from trade groups
representing the meat and poultry
industry, consumer groups, animal
welfare groups, veterinary associations,
a corporation that produces meat and
poultry products, and three private
citizens.
National Research Council (NRC) Study
Comment: Several commenters stated
that the release of establishment-specific
data could damage the reputation of
product brands because consumers will
relate products to the specific
establishments producing those
products. These commenters suggested
that the data released could create
competitive disparity within the
industry or cause harm to the U.S. food
industry. Because of this, according to
the commenters, the release of
establishment-specific data would be
akin to FSIS’s endorsing certain brands
over others.
One commenter agreed that some
brands may develop an unwanted
reputation based on data released to the
public, but believed that this could
actually benefit FSIS by weeding out
bad actors.
Other commenters stated that the Plan
will have a limited impact on brand
reputation because consumers do not
relate products to the specific
establishments producing those
products.
Response: While consumers could
relate brands to the specific
establishments producing their
products, FSIS will not endorse certain
brands over others through sharing data.
FSIS maintains information on
establishments, not brand information.
When evaluating datasets for release,
FSIS will thoroughly examine whether
releasing datasets could have an adverse
impact on the industry, including
whether releasing the dataset would
create market disparity. However, the
NRC Committee thought that one
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Jul 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
potential benefit of releasing
establishment-specific data would be
that consumers would be able to make
more informed choices, and that
resulting consumer pressure could
motivate corporations to improve
performance in order to protect brand
reputation.
Criteria for Evaluating FSIS Datasets
for Public Posting
Comment: Some commenters stated
that data released under the Plan could
contain confidential information such as
Personally Identifiable Information (PII),
or proprietary information such as trade
secrets. Other commenters suggested
that the release of certain establishmentspecific data to the public could
incentivize foreign countries to erect
trade barriers against the United States
or individual companies. One
commenter noted that the release of
certain establishment-specific data
could expose establishments to
vulnerabilities in food defense. The
commenter also stated that the
publication of the establishment’s name,
address, and size, along with the types
of products produced, could direct
potential terrorists to more desirable
targets.
Response: FSIS will thoroughly
examine candidate datasets, using
multiple FSIS personnel, to ensure the
datasets do not contain PII, confidential
information or proprietary information.
The Agency will not release data that
contains confidential information,
including PII, on either FSIS staff or
establishment employees.
In addition, FSIS will consider
potential security risks associated with
release of data based on the evolving
threat landscape. The release of
establishment-specific demographic
data, such as the name, address, and
type of product produced, does not pose
a significant security risk to food
defense. Most of this information is
already available to the public in the
Meat, Poultry, and Egg Product
Directory. The Agency continues to
recommend that establishments
voluntarily adopt and implement food
defense measures to mitigate potential
vulnerabilities.
Comment: Several commenters stated
that the release of disaggregated,
establishment-specific data may mislead
the public if there is a lack of context.
For example, the public may
misconstrue the meaning and
significance of NRs received by
establishments if the corrective actions,
enforcement actions, and appeals are
not also provided. These commenters
worried that misinterpretation of the
data could be harmful to the image of
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45453
the individual establishments and the
industry as a whole.
Some commenters recommended
FSIS adopt a due-process mechanism to
prevent the release of data that can be
easily misinterpreted. These
commenters requested that the industry
be allowed to examine data and user
guides concerning the data before they
are released to the public. One
commenter recommended that FSIS
incorporate the user guides into the
same document containing the datasets
to increase the likelihood that the public
will consult the guides when reviewing
the data. Another commenter
recommended that FSIS use consumer
test panels to evaluate whether readers
understand the data. The same
commenter also recommended that FSIS
allow the industry to provide comments
along with the datasets to help give the
public some context in interpreting the
data.
Response: FSIS staff will thoroughly
evaluate every dataset to determine the
potential for misinterpretation. If it is
highly likely that the public will
misinterpret the released data, the
Agency will evaluate the dataset to
determine if additional explanatory or
contextual information would reduce
that likelihood. If additional
information will not reduce the
potential for misinterpretation, the
Agency will remove the dataset from
consideration for release.
In addition, the Plan provides a
thorough list of context-providing
documentation that will be included in
user guides with each dataset released,
including: (1) A dataset overview and
explanation; (2) database-specific
dictionaries; (3) historical information
on changes to sampling methods and
scheduling or collection to inform
changes to time-series; (4) the context in
which the data was collected; (5)
sources of variability and specificity of
methods used; (6) the dataset’s
relationship to other released datasets;
(7) data use limitations; and (8) links to
analyses conducting using the data to be
released. FSIS will share these user
guides with industry stakeholders prior
to the release of datasets to ensure the
accuracy of the information; however,
there is no plan at this time to include
industry comments with the released
datasets.
Comment: Some commenters stated
that the Plan did not articulate how the
release of establishment-specific data
aligns with FSIS’s goals. Specifically,
these commenters requested that FSIS
articulate how each data release aligns
with a public health objective.
Response: Every dataset released will
align with the primary mission of FSIS:
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
45454
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 135 / Thursday, July 14, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
To ensure that the Nation’s commercial
supply of meat, poultry, and egg
products is safe, wholesome, and
correctly labeled and packaged. Because
of its importance, for every dataset it
considers for release, FSIS will
separately evaluate whether the data
released will be used to benefit the
public’s health and reduce foodborne
illness.
Comment: Some commenters
expressed concern about the potential
cost for the Agency to implement the
Plan. One commenter stated that too
many FSIS resources would be
expended in implementing the Plan and
requested the inclusion of additional
information about cost savings.
Response: The monetary and
personnel costs associated with
implementing the Plan will be minimal.
Under the Plan, FSIS will consider both
the Agency’s personnel and monetary
costs when determining which datasets
to release. Accordingly, data that will
create a heavy administrative burden
through excessive documentation or
manual redaction will not be released.
To further reduce the administrative
costs, FSIS will develop an automated
algorithm that will identify and collect
datasets intended for release.
Prioritization for Data Release
Comment: Several commenters
identified additional datasets that
should be considered for release, such
as import inspection data, humane
handling task data, Food-Safety
Assessments (FSAs), codes for
inspections tasks that were not
performed and whether establishments
participate in the new poultry
inspection system.
A few commenters requested the
release of information on tissue residue
violations in cull dairy cows. These
commenters stated that the information,
which was published on the Agency’s
Web site until March 2011, is a valuable
resource for the dairy industry to target
outreach efforts and reduce the
probability that repeat violations will
occur.
Response: After considering these
comments, FSIS has decided to add
import inspection data, FSAs, and
inspection tasks that were not
performed to the preliminary list of data
sources to be considered for future
release. Humane handling task data is
already on the preliminary list. FSA
data will be limited to exclude free-text
fields that may include PII or
proprietary information.
FSIS announced in the 2016 Federal
Register Notice titled ‘‘New
Performance Standards for Salmonella
and Campylobacter in Not-Ready-to-Eat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Jul 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
Comminuted Chicken and Turkey
Products and Raw Chicken Parts . . .’’
that it will begin posting, based on FSIS
sampling results and depending on the
standard for the particular product,
whether an establishment meets the
FSIS pathogen reduction performance
standards, or what category an
establishment is in.
FSIS does not intend to resume the
publication of a monthly Residue
Violator List that includes the name of
any producer with at least one residue
violation in the previous 12-months.
The Agency stopped publishing the
monthly Residue Violator List in 2011
to prevent potential economic harm to
producers with only one violation.
Instead, FSIS will continue to publish a
weekly Residue Repeat Violator List,
which identifies producers with
multiple residue violations within a 12month period.8 FSIS notes that many
first time violators do not go on to
become repeat violators within the
designated 12-month period. In
addition, repeat violators have an
incentive to improve operations and
prevent violative residues in order to
remove their names from the Repeat
Violator List.
Comment: A few commenters
requested that FSIS release
noncompliance records (NRs) filed by
FSIS inspection personnel, subsequent
appeals, and their eventual resolutions.
Several commenters requested that
NRs not be released because consumers
could easily misinterpret their
significance and regulatory meaning.
Those same commenters argued that it
would waste FSIS resources to review
and redact each NR before releasing the
data.
Response: FSIS does not intend to
release NRs as a stand-alone data set at
this time. FSIS will consider releasing
the compliance status of individual
inspection tasks and regulations if FSIS
decides to release inspection task data
in the future. Free-text fields will never
be released because of the possible
presence of PII and because manual
redaction is costly. However, general
information, such as whether or not an
NR was recorded, the date the NR was
issued, which regulations it cited,
whether an appeal was filed, and
whether the appeal was granted, will be
considered for release.
Comment: One commenter
encouraged FSIS to release historical
data from older data systems in addition
to the Public Health Information System
(PHIS) data it currently plans to release.
8 The FSIS Repeat Residue Violator List can be
downloaded at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/
portal/fsis/topics/data-collection-and-reports/
chemistry/residue-chemistry.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Response: At this time, only data
collected since the implementation of
PHIS in 2012 will be considered for
release. The historical data from before
the implementation of PHIS would be
too burdensome for the Agency to
release. FSIS will consider releasing
historical data from older data systems
at a later date if Agency resources
permit.
Data Release Procedures
Comment: One commenter asked that
FSIS release data more frequently than
on a quarterly basis. The commenter
stated that because PHIS collects data in
real time, FSIS should be able to release
data every month.
Response: At this time, one new
dataset from the Priority List is
scheduled to be released no more
frequently than on a quarterly basis.
This will provide the Agency sufficient
time to select and verify the accuracy of
the data, as well as release a sample data
set and documentation through an FSIS
Constituent Update to interested
stakeholders for review.
Comment: Some commenters
recommended that FSIS ‘‘blind’’ or
aggregate the datasets. The blind or
aggregated data would allow interested
parties to see how industry and the
Agency are performing in various areas
without compromising individual
companies and creating market
disparity.
Response: As part of the review
process, FSIS will determine the most
appropriate level of aggregation for each
dataset. FSIS will continue to release at
a national level of aggregation datasets
that are currently so aggregated. For
other datasets, FSIS intends to assess
feedback from stakeholders and other
users of the data to determine if
additional levels of aggregation would
be useful. Also, for each dataset planned
for initial release, FSIS plans to release
establishment-specific information,
including the establishment’s name and
number.
Measurement of Effectiveness of Data
Release
Comment: One commenter stated that
some of the metrics presented in the
draft Plan to measure effectiveness are
too narrow to fully capture the ways in
which the data is used. For instance,
according to the commenter, a metric for
the number of presentations on related
data by FSIS staff at professional
meetings does not account for
presentations on other topics that use
the data as a portion of their
presentations. Similarly, the commenter
stated that a metric for the number of
peer-reviewed reports generated using
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 135 / Thursday, July 14, 2016 / Notices
the establishment-specific data does not
include papers that use the data that are
not peer-reviewed.
Another commenter recommended
that FSIS reassess the Plan after one
year. If after one year FSIS determines
that the data release program is not
achieving its intended goals, the Agency
should change the Plan.
Response: FSIS acknowledges that it
is impossible to anticipate every way in
which the released establishmentspecific data will be used. The Plan,
however, presents a framework of
performance measures that will
adequately inform future data releases.
This framework includes a combination
of the seven quantitative metrics listed,
along with qualitative measures, such as
assessments of how data are interpreted
and used by stakeholders. FSIS will
regularly review these metrics and use
them to guide future choices for data
release.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
USDA Nondiscrimination Statement
No agency, officer, or employee of the
USDA shall, on the grounds of race,
color, national origin, religion, sex,
gender identity, sexual orientation,
disability, age, marital status, family/
parental status, income derived from a
public assistance program, or political
beliefs, exclude from participation in,
deny the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination any person in the United
States under any program or activity
conducted by the USDA.
To file a complaint of discrimination,
complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, which
may be accessed online at https://
www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/
docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_
12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you
or your authorized representative.
Send your completed complaint form
or letter to USDA by mail, fax, or email:
Mail
U.S. Department of Agriculture Director,
Office of Adjudication, 1400
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–9410.
Fax
(202) 690–7442
Email
program.intake@usda.gov
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication
(Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)
should contact USDA’s TARGET Center
at (202)720–2600 (voice and TDD).
Additional Public Notification
FSIS will announce this notice online
through the FSIS Web page located at
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/federalregister.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Jul 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
FSIS will also make copies of this
Federal Register publication available
through the FSIS Constituent Update,
which is used to provide information
regarding FSIS policies, procedures,
regulations, Federal Register notices,
FSIS public meetings, and other types of
information that could affect or would
be of interest to constituents and
stakeholders. The Update is
communicated via Listserv, a free
electronic mail subscription service for
industry, trade groups, consumer
interest groups, health professionals,
and other individuals who have asked
to be included. The Update is also
available on the FSIS Web page. In
addition, FSIS offers an electronic mail
subscription service which provides
automatic and customized access to
selected food safety news and
information. This service is available at
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe.
Options range from recalls to export
information to regulations, directives,
and notices. Customers can add or
delete subscriptions themselves, and
have the option to password protect
their accounts.
Done at Washington, DC, on July 11, 2016.
Alfred V. Almanza,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016–16642 Filed 7–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P
45455
by incoming NAs. They are asked to
provide personal identifying data
including home address, date and place
of birth, employer name and address,
and basic security information. The data
provided by the collection instruments
is input into NAIS which automatically
populates the appropriate forms, and is
routed through the approval process.
NIST’s Office of Security receives
security forms through the NAIS process
and is able to allow preliminary access
to NIST for NAs. The data collected is
the basis for further security
investigations as necessary.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households.
Frequency: Once.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
This information collection request
may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow
the instructions to view Department of
Commerce collections currently under
review by OMB.
Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806.
Dated: July 8, 2016.
Glenna Mickelson,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016–16600 Filed 7–13–16; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BILLING CODE 3510–13–P
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
The Department of Commerce will
submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for clearance the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
Agency: National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST).
Title: NIST Associates Information
System (NAIS).
OMB Control Number: 0693–0067.
Form Number(s): None.
Type of Request: Regular submission
(extension).
Number of Respondents: 4,000.
Average Hours per Response: 30
minutes.
Burden Hours: 2,000.
Needs and Uses: NIST Associates
(NA) will include guest researchers,
research associates, contractors, and
other non-NIST employees that require
access to the NIST campuses or
resources. The NIST Associates
Information System (NAIS) information
collection instruments(s) are completed
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
International Trade Administration
[A–570–601]
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished,
From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results, Partial Rescission
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, and Preliminary Rescission of
New Shipper Review; 2014–2015
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) is conducting an
administrative review (AR) and a new
shipper review (NSR) of the
antidumping duty order on tapered
roller bearings and parts thereof,
finished and unfinished (TRBs), from
the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The AR covers four 1 exporters, of which
AGENCY:
1 This figure does not include one exporter for
which the Department is preliminarily rescinding
the administrative review.
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 135 (Thursday, July 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45451-45455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16642]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS-2014-0032]
Establishment-Specific Data Release Strategic Plan
AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing
the availability of its final Establishment-Specific Data Release
Strategic Plan (the Plan) for sharing data on federally inspected meat
and poultry establishments with the public. FSIS is also responding to
comments received on a draft version of the Plan that FSIS posted on
its Web site and announced in January 2015 in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Daniel L. Engeljohn, Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy and Program Development; Telephone:
(202) 205-0495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) administers a
regulatory program under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21
U.S.C. 451 et seq.), and the Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA) (21
U.S.C. 1031 et seq.) to protect the health and welfare of consumers.
The Agency is responsible for ensuring that the nation's commercial
supply of meat,
[[Page 45452]]
poultry, and egg products is safe, wholesome, not adulterated, and
correctly labeled and packaged.
FSIS inspects these products at official slaughtering and
processing establishments, verifying that the establishments meet
regulatory requirements and enforcing those requirements as necessary.
Additionally, FSIS employees (including inspectors, veterinarians,
laboratorians, and Enforcement, Investigations, and Analysis Officers
(EIAOs)) perform a variety of activities, including conducting
inspections, ensuring compliance with existing regulations, and
collecting and testing microbiological and chemical residue samples to
verify that establishments are maintaining Hazard Analysis and Critical
Control Point (HACCP) plans or other food safety systems that address
these hazards.
While conducting these activities and performing many other key
functions, FSIS collects a large volume of establishment-specific data.
Using the data, FSIS produces reports for internal use, and publicly
shares data and reports through the Agency's Web site \1\ and other
public communication venues. Most of the data that FSIS shares with the
public is aggregated or in summary format; however, FSIS releases a
large volume of disaggregated, establishment-specific data to the
public through formal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For more information, please visit: www.fsis.usda.gov.
\2\ The Freedom of Information Act 5 U.S.C. 552, As Amended by
Public Law 104-231, 110 Stat. 3048. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/oip/amended-foia-redlined.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a notice published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2015,
FSIS announced that the Agency had developed a plan for sharing data on
federally inspected meat, poultry, and processed egg product
establishments with the public (80 FR 2092). The Agency developed the
Plan in response to policy documents issued by President Obama and the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and to reduce the administrative
burden FOIA requests have placed on the Agency.
In 2009, President Obama and OMB released policy documents that
called for increased data sharing and greater transparency in Federal
agencies, including President Obama's January 21, 2009 ``Memorandum on
Transparency and Open Government,'' \3\ OMB's February 24, 2009
memorandum on ``The President's Memorandum on Transparency and Open
Government--Interagency Collaboration'' \4\ and OMB's December 8, 2009
``Open Government Directive.'' \5\ President Obama subsequently issued
policy documents instructing agencies to develop plans for making
information on regulatory compliance and enforcement activities
available in machine-readable format, and accessible, downloadable, and
searchable online.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Transparency and Open Government: Memorandum for the Heads
of Executive Departments and Agencies''. (74 FR 4685; Jan. 26,
2009), pp. 4685-4686. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment.
\4\ ``Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and
Agencies: President's Memorandum on Transparency and Open
Government--Interagency Collaboration.'' Memorandum Number: M-09-12.
24 February, 2009. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/memoranda_fy2009/m09-12.pdf.
\5\ ``Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and
Agencies: President's Memorandum on Transparency and Open
Government--Interagency Collaboration.'' Memorandum Number: M-10-06.
8 December, 2009. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/open/documents/open-government-directive.
\6\ ``Memorandum on Regulatory Compliance.'' 76 FR 3825 (January
21, 2011); ``Making Open and Machine Readable the New Default for
Government Information.'' Executive Order 13642. 78 FR 28111 (May
14, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upon the recommendation of the National Advisory Committee on Meat
and Poultry Inspection (NACMPI), FSIS asked the National Research
Council (NRC) within the National Academies to study the potential food
safety benefits and consequences of releasing establishment-specific
data to the public. The NRC convened a committee in 2011 and issued a
report that analyzed the costs and benefits of releasing establishment-
specific data, recommending that FSIS develop a strategic plan to guide
the Agency's efforts to release the data.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ National Research Council, Committee on a Study of Food
Safety and Other Consequences of Publishing Establishment-Specific
Data. ``The Potential Consequences of Public Release of Food Safety
and Inspection Service Establishment-Specific Data.'' 2011.
Available at: https://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13304.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FSIS also convened an internal committee to conduct its own in-
depth review of Federal data sharing procedures and resources, which
culminated in the development of the draft version of the Plan. NACMPI
reviewed the draft plan in January 2014 and FSIS incorporated its
feedback in the announced version of the draft Plan.
Final Revision of the Plan
After carefully reviewing the submitted comments, FSIS made minor
changes to the draft Plan. These changes include updated preliminary
lists of datasets identified for release and considered for future
release, as well as an expanded explanation of how FSIS will determine
the level of aggregation for each dataset. The final revision of the
Plan can be viewed on the Agency's Web site at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/0803f8a0-a3cc-4945-87b6-f992acdcfa9b/Establishment-Specific-Data-Plan-Final.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
The Plan establishes FSIS's process for releasing establishment-
specific data on Data.gov. The Plan includes an overview of FSIS data
collection processes and structures, dataset selection criteria, data
release procedures, a preliminary list of Agency datasets for public
release, and performance measures for evaluating the effectiveness of
data release.
The preliminary list of Agency datasets for public release includes
a ``demographic'' dataset of all regulated establishments that
incorporates both information currently included in the Meat, Poultry
and Egg Product Inspection Directory (name, number, address, grant
date, slaughter and/or processing, meat and/or poultry) and additional
information to facilitate data analysis (e.g., variables specifically
created to allow different datasets to be correctly combined). The
preliminary list also includes data on Listeria monocytogenes and
Salmonella in ready-to-eat (RTE) products and processed egg products;
data on Shiga Toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) and Salmonella in
raw, non-intact beef products; data on Salmonella and Campylobacter in
young chickens and young turkeys, comminuted poultry, and chicken
parts; routine chemical residue testing data in meat and poultry
products; and advanced meat recovery (AMR) testing data. Of these,
Salmonella in raw, non-intact beef products; Listeria monocytogenes and
Salmonella in processed egg products; and Salmonella and Campylobacter
in young chickens and young turkeys, comminuted poultry, and chicken
parts are new additions to the Plan.
Agency datasets identified for the first release include the
demographic dataset and Listeria and Salmonella data in RTE products.
FSIS will release these datasets by October 12, 2016. The preliminary
list of Agency datasets will not all be released at the same time, and
before the release of final datasets, FSIS intends to publish a
Constituent Update with a link to a sample dataset for stakeholder
review. For each dataset to be released, FSIS will determine and
announce, on a case-by-case basis, the appropriate level of
aggregation. For example, datasets could be aggregated at the national
level or not aggregated at all, depending on FSIS's determination.
[[Page 45453]]
Besides the preliminary datasets that the Agency intends for
release, FSIS is considering additional data sources for future release
of both aggregate and individual establishment data. These include:
Individual establishment inspection task data associated with
verification of compliance with each regulation; humane handling task
data; and import sampling task data relating to STEC, Salmonella, and
residue testing.
The following is a summary of the comments received and FSIS's
responses.
Summary of Comments and Responses
FSIS received 19 comments in response to the January 2015 notice.
The comments were from trade groups representing the meat and poultry
industry, consumer groups, animal welfare groups, veterinary
associations, a corporation that produces meat and poultry products,
and three private citizens.
National Research Council (NRC) Study
Comment: Several commenters stated that the release of
establishment-specific data could damage the reputation of product
brands because consumers will relate products to the specific
establishments producing those products. These commenters suggested
that the data released could create competitive disparity within the
industry or cause harm to the U.S. food industry. Because of this,
according to the commenters, the release of establishment-specific data
would be akin to FSIS's endorsing certain brands over others.
One commenter agreed that some brands may develop an unwanted
reputation based on data released to the public, but believed that this
could actually benefit FSIS by weeding out bad actors.
Other commenters stated that the Plan will have a limited impact on
brand reputation because consumers do not relate products to the
specific establishments producing those products.
Response: While consumers could relate brands to the specific
establishments producing their products, FSIS will not endorse certain
brands over others through sharing data. FSIS maintains information on
establishments, not brand information. When evaluating datasets for
release, FSIS will thoroughly examine whether releasing datasets could
have an adverse impact on the industry, including whether releasing the
dataset would create market disparity. However, the NRC Committee
thought that one potential benefit of releasing establishment-specific
data would be that consumers would be able to make more informed
choices, and that resulting consumer pressure could motivate
corporations to improve performance in order to protect brand
reputation.
Criteria for Evaluating FSIS Datasets for Public Posting
Comment: Some commenters stated that data released under the Plan
could contain confidential information such as Personally Identifiable
Information (PII), or proprietary information such as trade secrets.
Other commenters suggested that the release of certain establishment-
specific data to the public could incentivize foreign countries to
erect trade barriers against the United States or individual companies.
One commenter noted that the release of certain establishment-specific
data could expose establishments to vulnerabilities in food defense.
The commenter also stated that the publication of the establishment's
name, address, and size, along with the types of products produced,
could direct potential terrorists to more desirable targets.
Response: FSIS will thoroughly examine candidate datasets, using
multiple FSIS personnel, to ensure the datasets do not contain PII,
confidential information or proprietary information. The Agency will
not release data that contains confidential information, including PII,
on either FSIS staff or establishment employees.
In addition, FSIS will consider potential security risks associated
with release of data based on the evolving threat landscape. The
release of establishment-specific demographic data, such as the name,
address, and type of product produced, does not pose a significant
security risk to food defense. Most of this information is already
available to the public in the Meat, Poultry, and Egg Product
Directory. The Agency continues to recommend that establishments
voluntarily adopt and implement food defense measures to mitigate
potential vulnerabilities.
Comment: Several commenters stated that the release of
disaggregated, establishment-specific data may mislead the public if
there is a lack of context. For example, the public may misconstrue the
meaning and significance of NRs received by establishments if the
corrective actions, enforcement actions, and appeals are not also
provided. These commenters worried that misinterpretation of the data
could be harmful to the image of the individual establishments and the
industry as a whole.
Some commenters recommended FSIS adopt a due-process mechanism to
prevent the release of data that can be easily misinterpreted. These
commenters requested that the industry be allowed to examine data and
user guides concerning the data before they are released to the public.
One commenter recommended that FSIS incorporate the user guides into
the same document containing the datasets to increase the likelihood
that the public will consult the guides when reviewing the data.
Another commenter recommended that FSIS use consumer test panels to
evaluate whether readers understand the data. The same commenter also
recommended that FSIS allow the industry to provide comments along with
the datasets to help give the public some context in interpreting the
data.
Response: FSIS staff will thoroughly evaluate every dataset to
determine the potential for misinterpretation. If it is highly likely
that the public will misinterpret the released data, the Agency will
evaluate the dataset to determine if additional explanatory or
contextual information would reduce that likelihood. If additional
information will not reduce the potential for misinterpretation, the
Agency will remove the dataset from consideration for release.
In addition, the Plan provides a thorough list of context-providing
documentation that will be included in user guides with each dataset
released, including: (1) A dataset overview and explanation; (2)
database-specific dictionaries; (3) historical information on changes
to sampling methods and scheduling or collection to inform changes to
time-series; (4) the context in which the data was collected; (5)
sources of variability and specificity of methods used; (6) the
dataset's relationship to other released datasets; (7) data use
limitations; and (8) links to analyses conducting using the data to be
released. FSIS will share these user guides with industry stakeholders
prior to the release of datasets to ensure the accuracy of the
information; however, there is no plan at this time to include industry
comments with the released datasets.
Comment: Some commenters stated that the Plan did not articulate
how the release of establishment-specific data aligns with FSIS's
goals. Specifically, these commenters requested that FSIS articulate
how each data release aligns with a public health objective.
Response: Every dataset released will align with the primary
mission of FSIS:
[[Page 45454]]
To ensure that the Nation's commercial supply of meat, poultry, and egg
products is safe, wholesome, and correctly labeled and packaged.
Because of its importance, for every dataset it considers for release,
FSIS will separately evaluate whether the data released will be used to
benefit the public's health and reduce foodborne illness.
Comment: Some commenters expressed concern about the potential cost
for the Agency to implement the Plan. One commenter stated that too
many FSIS resources would be expended in implementing the Plan and
requested the inclusion of additional information about cost savings.
Response: The monetary and personnel costs associated with
implementing the Plan will be minimal. Under the Plan, FSIS will
consider both the Agency's personnel and monetary costs when
determining which datasets to release. Accordingly, data that will
create a heavy administrative burden through excessive documentation or
manual redaction will not be released. To further reduce the
administrative costs, FSIS will develop an automated algorithm that
will identify and collect datasets intended for release.
Prioritization for Data Release
Comment: Several commenters identified additional datasets that
should be considered for release, such as import inspection data,
humane handling task data, Food-Safety Assessments (FSAs), codes for
inspections tasks that were not performed and whether establishments
participate in the new poultry inspection system.
A few commenters requested the release of information on tissue
residue violations in cull dairy cows. These commenters stated that the
information, which was published on the Agency's Web site until March
2011, is a valuable resource for the dairy industry to target outreach
efforts and reduce the probability that repeat violations will occur.
Response: After considering these comments, FSIS has decided to add
import inspection data, FSAs, and inspection tasks that were not
performed to the preliminary list of data sources to be considered for
future release. Humane handling task data is already on the preliminary
list. FSA data will be limited to exclude free-text fields that may
include PII or proprietary information.
FSIS announced in the 2016 Federal Register Notice titled ``New
Performance Standards for Salmonella and Campylobacter in Not-Ready-to-
Eat Comminuted Chicken and Turkey Products and Raw Chicken Parts . .
.'' that it will begin posting, based on FSIS sampling results and
depending on the standard for the particular product, whether an
establishment meets the FSIS pathogen reduction performance standards,
or what category an establishment is in.
FSIS does not intend to resume the publication of a monthly Residue
Violator List that includes the name of any producer with at least one
residue violation in the previous 12-months. The Agency stopped
publishing the monthly Residue Violator List in 2011 to prevent
potential economic harm to producers with only one violation. Instead,
FSIS will continue to publish a weekly Residue Repeat Violator List,
which identifies producers with multiple residue violations within a
12-month period.\8\ FSIS notes that many first time violators do not go
on to become repeat violators within the designated 12-month period. In
addition, repeat violators have an incentive to improve operations and
prevent violative residues in order to remove their names from the
Repeat Violator List.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The FSIS Repeat Residue Violator List can be downloaded at
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/data-collection-and-reports/chemistry/residue-chemistry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: A few commenters requested that FSIS release noncompliance
records (NRs) filed by FSIS inspection personnel, subsequent appeals,
and their eventual resolutions.
Several commenters requested that NRs not be released because
consumers could easily misinterpret their significance and regulatory
meaning. Those same commenters argued that it would waste FSIS
resources to review and redact each NR before releasing the data.
Response: FSIS does not intend to release NRs as a stand-alone data
set at this time. FSIS will consider releasing the compliance status of
individual inspection tasks and regulations if FSIS decides to release
inspection task data in the future. Free-text fields will never be
released because of the possible presence of PII and because manual
redaction is costly. However, general information, such as whether or
not an NR was recorded, the date the NR was issued, which regulations
it cited, whether an appeal was filed, and whether the appeal was
granted, will be considered for release.
Comment: One commenter encouraged FSIS to release historical data
from older data systems in addition to the Public Health Information
System (PHIS) data it currently plans to release.
Response: At this time, only data collected since the
implementation of PHIS in 2012 will be considered for release. The
historical data from before the implementation of PHIS would be too
burdensome for the Agency to release. FSIS will consider releasing
historical data from older data systems at a later date if Agency
resources permit.
Data Release Procedures
Comment: One commenter asked that FSIS release data more frequently
than on a quarterly basis. The commenter stated that because PHIS
collects data in real time, FSIS should be able to release data every
month.
Response: At this time, one new dataset from the Priority List is
scheduled to be released no more frequently than on a quarterly basis.
This will provide the Agency sufficient time to select and verify the
accuracy of the data, as well as release a sample data set and
documentation through an FSIS Constituent Update to interested
stakeholders for review.
Comment: Some commenters recommended that FSIS ``blind'' or
aggregate the datasets. The blind or aggregated data would allow
interested parties to see how industry and the Agency are performing in
various areas without compromising individual companies and creating
market disparity.
Response: As part of the review process, FSIS will determine the
most appropriate level of aggregation for each dataset. FSIS will
continue to release at a national level of aggregation datasets that
are currently so aggregated. For other datasets, FSIS intends to assess
feedback from stakeholders and other users of the data to determine if
additional levels of aggregation would be useful. Also, for each
dataset planned for initial release, FSIS plans to release
establishment-specific information, including the establishment's name
and number.
Measurement of Effectiveness of Data Release
Comment: One commenter stated that some of the metrics presented in
the draft Plan to measure effectiveness are too narrow to fully capture
the ways in which the data is used. For instance, according to the
commenter, a metric for the number of presentations on related data by
FSIS staff at professional meetings does not account for presentations
on other topics that use the data as a portion of their presentations.
Similarly, the commenter stated that a metric for the number of peer-
reviewed reports generated using
[[Page 45455]]
the establishment-specific data does not include papers that use the
data that are not peer-reviewed.
Another commenter recommended that FSIS reassess the Plan after one
year. If after one year FSIS determines that the data release program
is not achieving its intended goals, the Agency should change the Plan.
Response: FSIS acknowledges that it is impossible to anticipate
every way in which the released establishment-specific data will be
used. The Plan, however, presents a framework of performance measures
that will adequately inform future data releases. This framework
includes a combination of the seven quantitative metrics listed, along
with qualitative measures, such as assessments of how data are
interpreted and used by stakeholders. FSIS will regularly review these
metrics and use them to guide future choices for data release.
USDA Nondiscrimination Statement
No agency, officer, or employee of the USDA shall, on the grounds
of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual
orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status,
income derived from a public assistance program, or political beliefs,
exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination any person in the United States under any program or
activity conducted by the USDA.
To file a complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, which may be accessed online at https://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you or your
authorized representative.
Send your completed complaint form or letter to USDA by mail, fax,
or email:
Mail
U.S. Department of Agriculture Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410.
Fax
(202) 690-7442
Email
program.intake@usda.gov
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for
communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact
USDA's TARGET Center at (202)720-2600 (voice and TDD).
Additional Public Notification
FSIS will announce this notice online through the FSIS Web page
located at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/federal-register.
FSIS will also make copies of this Federal Register publication
available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide
information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal
Register notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information
that could affect or would be of interest to constituents and
stakeholders. The Update is communicated via Listserv, a free
electronic mail subscription service for industry, trade groups,
consumer interest groups, health professionals, and other individuals
who have asked to be included. The Update is also available on the FSIS
Web page. In addition, FSIS offers an electronic mail subscription
service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food
safety news and information. This service is available at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe. Options range from recalls to export
information to regulations, directives, and notices. Customers can add
or delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password
protect their accounts.
Done at Washington, DC, on July 11, 2016.
Alfred V. Almanza,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-16642 Filed 7-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P