National Poultry Improvement Plan and Auxiliary Provisions, 53247-53252 [2016-19245]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
This final rule adopts the proposed
rule without change, and therefore Dairy
Board importer representation is
decreased from two importer members
to one importer member.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found
and determined that good cause exists
for not postponing the effective date of
this rule until 30 days after publication
in the Federal Register because this rule
should be in effect as soon as possible
to appoint Dairy Board members for the
2016–2019 term.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1150
Dairy products, Milk, Promotion,
Research.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 1150 is amended
as follows:
PART 1150—DAIRY PROMOTION
PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 1150 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 4501–4514 and 7
U.S.C. 7401.
2. In § 1150.131, paragraph (c) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 1150.131 Establishment and
membership.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) One member of the board shall be
an importer who is subject to
assessments under § 1150.152(b).
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 8, 2016.
Elanor Starmer,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016–19140 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
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: Final rule.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
We are amending the National
Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP), its
auxiliary provisions, and the indemnity
regulations for the control of H5 and H7
low pathogenic avian influenza.
Specifically, we are clarifying who may
participate in the NPIP, amending
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:21 Aug 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
participation requirements, amending
definitions for poultry and breeding
stock, amending the approval process
for new diagnostic tests, and amending
slaughter plant inspection and
laboratory inspection and testing
requirements. These changes will align
the regulations with international
standards and make them more
transparent to Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service stakeholders and the
general public. The changes in this final
rule were voted on and approved by the
voting delegates at the Plan’s 2014
National Plan Conference.
DATES: Effective September 12, 2016.
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 (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 and provisions for a
cooperative control program for the
disease.
On March 24, 2016, we published in
the Federal Register (81 FR 15652–
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
53247
15660, Docket No. APHIS–2014–0101) a
proposal 1 to amend the regulations by
clarifying who may participate in the
NPIP and amending participation
requirements. In addition, we proposed
to amend definitions of poultry and
breeding stock, amend the approval
process for new diagnostic tests, and
amend slaughter plant inspection and
laboratory inspection and testing
requirements.
We solicited comments concerning
our proposal for 60 days ending May 23,
2016. We received one comment by that
date. It was from an individual. The
issues raised by the commenter are
discussed below.
In the March 2016 proposed rule, we
proposed to amend the definition of
breeding flock in § 56.1 to remove the
word ‘‘chicks’’ and replace it with the
word ‘‘progeny.’’ The commenter
objected to this change, suggesting that
many people would not know the
meaning of the latter term and would
find it confusing.
We are not making any changes to the
final rule in response to this comment.
As stated in the March 2016 proposed
rule, the term ‘‘progeny’’ is more
accurate than ‘‘chicks’’ in this context
because it is more inclusive of both
chicken and turkey flocks. Young
turkeys are known as poults rather than
chicks. In addition, as we noted in the
proposed rule, the change in
terminology also makes our definition of
breeding flock in § 56.1 consistent with
our definition of multiplier breeding
flock in § 145.1.
The March 2016 proposed rule
included a minor change to § 145.12,
which contains requirements for the
retention and examination of records for
all flocks maintained primarily for
hatching eggs. We proposed to specify,
in paragraph (b) of that section, that
records for all breeder flock hatcheries
must be made available for annual
examination by a State inspector.
Historically, testing records were
retained at the hatchery, which allowed
for examination of the records during
annual inspections, but that is no longer
the case. Many commercial hatcheries
now keep testing records at the
corporate office or another site. Our
proposed amendment to § 145.12 was
intended to reflect this change in
recordkeeping practices in the industry
and also to allow flexibility in the
regulations regarding who may make the
records available to the State inspector.
The commenter objected to this
proposed change, stating that the
1 To view the proposed rule and the comment we
received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0101.
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
53248
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
records should be kept at the hatchery
with the flocks so that taxpayers do not
have to incur additional costs due to the
need for inspectors to travel to different
locations.
We do not agree with this comment.
As noted above, we are amending the
regulations to reflect current practices in
the industry. By allowing hatcheries the
discretion to maintain records where
they would most readily be accessible
when needed, we are relieving a
regulatory burden. The commenter
provides no evidence to support the
claim that having the records kept at
sites other than the hatcheries will
result in additional costs to taxpayers.
The commenter also stated that the
proposed rule would have the effect of
loosening testing standards, thereby
increasing the risk of the spread of
disease.
We did not propose to loosen existing
testing standards, as the commenter
claims. We proposed instead to make
some editorial changes to § 145.14(b) to
remove references to tests that are no
longer being used, update terminology
that is no longer current, and otherwise
clarify the testing requirements in that
section.
Finally, the commenter objected to
our proposed changes to the slaughter
plant inspection requirements in
§ 146.11.
We will not be making any changes to
the final rule in response to this
comment. The commenter did not offer
a rationale for opposing the proposed
amendments to § 146.11, which were
intended to clarify our slaughter plant
inspection requirements and remove
language that conflicted with
requirements set out elsewhere in part
146.
Miscellaneous
In this final rule, we are making one
minor editorial change to correct an
error in the regulatory text of the
proposed rule.
Part 146 of the regulations contains
the NPIP provisions for commercial
poultry. Currently, the only disease
addressed in this part is H5/H7 low
pathogenic avian influenza; under part
146, table-egg layer flocks, meat-type
chicken slaughter plants, meat-type
turkey slaughter plants, and certain
types of game birds and waterfowl may
participate in U.S. H5/H7 Avian
Influenza Monitored classifications.
Section 146.11 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:21 Aug 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
flock was not tested within 21 days
before slaughter, or if the test results for
the flocks were not returned before
slaughter. We intended to amend
paragraph (b) to state that ‘‘a flock will
be considered to be conforming to
protocol if it meets the requirements as
described in §§ 146.33(a), 146.43(a),
146.53(a).’’ However, we inadvertently
referred to § 145.33(a) instead of
§ 146.33(a). In this final rule, we are
correcting that error.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the
proposed rule and in this document, we
are adopting the proposed rule as a final
rule, with the change discussed in this
document.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Flexibility Act
This final 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 on the
Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1
in this document for a link to
Regulations.gov) or by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
We are amending the NPIP, its
auxiliary provisions, and the indemnity
regulations for the control of H5 and H7
low pathogenic avian influenza to align
the regulations with international
standards and make them more
transparent to stakeholders and the
general public. The changes in this final
rule were voted on and approved by the
voting delegates at the 2014 NPIP
National Plan Conference.
The establishments that will be
affected by the rule—principally entities
engaged in poultry production and
processing—are predominantly small by
Small Business Administration
standards. In those instances in which
an addition to or modification of
requirements could potentially result in
a cost to certain entities, we do not
expect the costs to be significant. NPIP
membership is voluntary. The changes
contained in this final rule were
decided upon by the NPIP General
Conference Committee on behalf of Plan
members; that is, the changes were
recognized by the poultry industry as
being in their interest.
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action will not
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.)
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts
all State and local laws and regulations
that are in conflict with this rule; (2) has
no retroactive effect; and (3) does not
require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court
challenging this rule.
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 final rule,
which were filed under 0579–0445,
have been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). When OMB notifies us of its
decision, if approval is denied, we will
publish a document in the Federal
Register providing notice of what action
we plan to take.
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 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 are amending 9 CFR
parts 56, 145, 146, and 147 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
a. By revising paragraph (a)(5).
b. By revising paragraph (b)(1).
The revisions read as follows:
PART 56—CONTROL OF H5/H7 LOW
PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA
■
■
1. The authority citation for part 56
continues to read as follows:
§ 145.14
■
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 reference
‘‘§ 145.3(d)’’ and adding the reference
‘‘§ 145.3(e)’’ in its 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.
*
*
*
*
*
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 145.12
[Amended]
6. Section 145.12 is amended by
adding, in paragraph (b), the words
‘‘made available to and’’ before the word
‘‘examined’’.
■ 7. Section 145.14 is amended as
follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:21 Aug 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. In § 145.42, paragraph (b) is revised
to read as follows:
§ 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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 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).
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
53249
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.
*
*
*
*
*
(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
*
*
*
*
*
(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
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
53250
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
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.
■ e. By revising paragraph (f)(3).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 145.83 Terminology and classification;
flocks and products.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:21 Aug 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
(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:
and the Official State Agency regarding
conditions of participation and
supervision.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 146.3
[Amended]
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:
■
§ 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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 146.11
Inspections.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A flock will be considered to be
conforming to protocol if it meets the
requirements as described in
§ 146.33(a), § 146.43(a), or § 146.53(a).
*
*
*
*
*
§ 146.51
[Amended]
18. Section 146.51 is amended as
follows:
■ a. In the definition of commercial
upland game birds by removing the
word ‘‘purpose’’ and adding in its place
‘‘purposes’’ and adding the words ‘‘eggs
and/or’’ before the word ‘‘meat’’.
■ b. In the definition of commercial
waterfowl, by removing the word
‘‘purpose’’ and adding in its place
‘‘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:
■
§ 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
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’’.
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
b. By adding paragraphs (a)(4) and
(a)(5).
The additions read as follows:
■
§ 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 § 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:
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:21 Aug 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
53251
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
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.
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
53252
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of
August 2016.
Jere L. Dick,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–19245 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Examining the AD Docket
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–5465; Directorate
Identifier 2015–NM–041–AD; Amendment
39–18609; AD 2016–16–11]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are superseding
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2010–10–
13, for all BAE Systems (Operations)
Limited Model BAe 146 and Avro 146
series airplanes. AD 2010–10–13
required repetitive inspections of the
wing fixed leading edge and front spar
structure for corrosion and cracking,
and repair if necessary. This new AD
requires revised inspection procedures
that terminate a previously approved
inspection procedure. This AD was
prompted by revised inspection
procedures issued by the Design
Approval Holder (DAH). We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct corrosion
and cracking of the wing fixed leading
edge and front spar structure, which
could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective September
16, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of September 16, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain other publication listed in
this AD as of June 21, 2010 (75 FR
27419, May 17, 2010).
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer
Information Department, Prestwick
International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9
2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom;
telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44
1292 675704; email RApublications@
baesystems.com; Internet https://
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:21 Aug 11, 2016
www.baesystems.com/Businesses/
RegionalAircraft/index.htm. You may
view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA,
call 425–227–1221. It is also available
on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
5465.
Jkt 238001
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
5465; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527)
is Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1175;
fax 425–227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2010–10–13,
Amendment 39–16292 (75 FR 27419,
May 17, 2010) (‘‘AD 2010–10–13’’). AD
2010–10–13 applied to all BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited Model BAe 146
and Avro 146 series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal
Register on April 20, 2016 (81 FR
23208) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM was
prompted by revised inspection
procedures issued by the DAH. The
NPRM proposed to continue to require
repetitive inspections of the wing fixed
leading edge and front spar structure for
corrosion and cracking, and repair if
necessary. The NPRM also proposed to
require revised inspection procedures
that terminate a previously approved
inspection procedure. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct corrosion
and cracking of the wing fixed leading
edge and front spar structure, which
could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness
Directive 2014–0047; corrected February
26, 2015 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’); to correct
an unsafe condition. The MCAI states:
Corrosion of the wing fixed leading edge
structure was detected on a BAe 146
aeroplane during removal of wing removable
edge for a repair. The review of available
scheduled tasks intended to detect
environmental and fatigue deteriorations of
the wing revealed that they may not have
been sufficient to identify corrosion or
fatigue damage in the affected structural area.
This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to degradation of the
structural integrity of the wing.
To address this potential unsafe condition,
EASA issued AD 2009–0014 [which
corresponds to FAA AD 2010–10–13] to
require repetitive inspections of fixed wing
leading edge and front spar structure [for
cracking and corrosion, and repair if
necessary] in accordance with BAE Systems
(Operations) Ltd Inspection Service Bulletin
(ISB) ISB.57–072 which incorporated two
possible inspection procedures, either
method 1, a combination of a detailed visual
inspection (DVI) and a visual inspection (VI)
after removal of the outer fixed leading edge
only, or method 2, a DVI only, after removal
of the inner, centre and outer fixed leading
edges.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, BAE
Systems (Operations) Ltd issued ISB.57–072
Revision 1 to correct a material reference
number, Revision 2, which removed method
1 as an available inspection procedure to
detect fatigue and environmental damage of
the wing structure and Revision 3 to delete
the requirement to install weights if the
engines were removed when the leading
edges were removed.
For the reasons described above, this
[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA
AD 2009–0014, which is superseded, but
requires accomplishment of the [repetitive]
inspections in accordance with updated
inspection procedures, i.e. method 2 only.
This [EASA] AD is re-published to correct
a typographical error in Table 1, restoring a
compliance time as previously required by
EASA AD 2009–0014.
The repetitive inspection interval for
the detailed visual inspection for
cracking and corrosion of the wing fixed
leading edge and front spar structure is:
• 12 years or 36,000 flight cycles,
whichever occurs earlier, for airplanes
on which the enhanced corrosion
protection has not been accomplished.
• 6 years or 36,000 flight cycles,
whichever occurs earlier, for airplanes
on which the enhanced corrosion
protection has been accomplished.
You may examine the MCAI in the
AD docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM
12AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53247-53252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19245]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP),
its auxiliary provisions, and the indemnity regulations for the control
of H5 and H7 low pathogenic avian influenza. Specifically, we are
clarifying who may participate in the NPIP, amending participation
requirements, amending definitions for poultry and breeding stock,
amending the approval process for new diagnostic tests, and amending
slaughter plant inspection and laboratory inspection and testing
requirements. These changes will align the regulations with
international standards and make them more transparent to Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service stakeholders and the general public.
The changes in this final rule were voted on and approved by the voting
delegates at the Plan's 2014 National Plan Conference.
DATES: Effective September 12, 2016.
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 (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 and
provisions for a cooperative control program for the disease.
On March 24, 2016, we published in the Federal Register (81 FR
15652-15660, Docket No. APHIS-2014-0101) a proposal \1\ to amend the
regulations by clarifying who may participate in the NPIP and amending
participation requirements. In addition, we proposed to amend
definitions of poultry and breeding stock, amend the approval process
for new diagnostic tests, and amend slaughter plant inspection and
laboratory inspection and testing requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the proposed rule and the comment we received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
May 23, 2016. We received one comment by that date. It was from an
individual. The issues raised by the commenter are discussed below.
In the March 2016 proposed rule, we proposed to amend the
definition of breeding flock in Sec. 56.1 to remove the word
``chicks'' and replace it with the word ``progeny.'' The commenter
objected to this change, suggesting that many people would not know the
meaning of the latter term and would find it confusing.
We are not making any changes to the final rule in response to this
comment. As stated in the March 2016 proposed rule, the term
``progeny'' is more accurate than ``chicks'' in this context because it
is more inclusive of both chicken and turkey flocks. Young turkeys are
known as poults rather than chicks. In addition, as we noted in the
proposed rule, the change in terminology also makes our definition of
breeding flock in Sec. 56.1 consistent with our definition of
multiplier breeding flock in Sec. 145.1.
The March 2016 proposed rule included a minor change to Sec.
145.12, which contains requirements for the retention and examination
of records for all flocks maintained primarily for hatching eggs. We
proposed to specify, in paragraph (b) of that section, that records for
all breeder flock hatcheries must be made available for annual
examination by a State inspector. Historically, testing records were
retained at the hatchery, which allowed for examination of the records
during annual inspections, but that is no longer the case. Many
commercial hatcheries now keep testing records at the corporate office
or another site. Our proposed amendment to Sec. 145.12 was intended to
reflect this change in recordkeeping practices in the industry and also
to allow flexibility in the regulations regarding who may make the
records available to the State inspector.
The commenter objected to this proposed change, stating that the
[[Page 53248]]
records should be kept at the hatchery with the flocks so that
taxpayers do not have to incur additional costs due to the need for
inspectors to travel to different locations.
We do not agree with this comment. As noted above, we are amending
the regulations to reflect current practices in the industry. By
allowing hatcheries the discretion to maintain records where they would
most readily be accessible when needed, we are relieving a regulatory
burden. The commenter provides no evidence to support the claim that
having the records kept at sites other than the hatcheries will result
in additional costs to taxpayers.
The commenter also stated that the proposed rule would have the
effect of loosening testing standards, thereby increasing the risk of
the spread of disease.
We did not propose to loosen existing testing standards, as the
commenter claims. We proposed instead to make some editorial changes to
Sec. 145.14(b) to remove references to tests that are no longer being
used, update terminology that is no longer current, and otherwise
clarify the testing requirements in that section.
Finally, the commenter objected to our proposed changes to the
slaughter plant inspection requirements in Sec. 146.11.
We will not be making any changes to the final rule in response to
this comment. The commenter did not offer a rationale for opposing the
proposed amendments to Sec. 146.11, which were intended to clarify our
slaughter plant inspection requirements and remove language that
conflicted with requirements set out elsewhere in part 146.
Miscellaneous
In this final rule, we are making one minor editorial change to
correct an error in the regulatory text of the proposed rule.
Part 146 of the regulations contains the NPIP provisions for
commercial poultry. Currently, the only disease addressed in this part
is H5/H7 low pathogenic avian influenza; under part 146, table-egg
layer flocks, meat-type chicken slaughter plants, meat-type turkey
slaughter plants, and certain types of game birds and waterfowl may
participate in U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Monitored classifications.
Section 146.11 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
intended to amend paragraph (b) to state that ``a flock will be
considered to be conforming to protocol if it meets the requirements as
described in Sec. Sec. 146.33(a), 146.43(a), 146.53(a).'' However, we
inadvertently referred to Sec. 145.33(a) instead of Sec. 146.33(a).
In this final rule, we are correcting that error.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the proposed rule and in this
document, we are adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with the
change discussed in this document.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final 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
on the Regulations.gov Web site (see footnote 1 in this document for a
link to Regulations.gov) or by contacting the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
We are amending the NPIP, its auxiliary provisions, and the
indemnity regulations for the control of H5 and H7 low pathogenic avian
influenza to align the regulations with international standards and
make them more transparent to stakeholders and the general public. The
changes in this final rule were voted on and approved by the voting
delegates at the 2014 NPIP National Plan Conference.
The establishments that will be affected by the rule--principally
entities engaged in poultry production and processing--are
predominantly small by Small Business Administration standards. In
those instances in which an addition to or modification of requirements
could potentially result in a cost to certain entities, we do not
expect the costs to be significant. NPIP membership is voluntary. The
changes contained in this final rule were decided upon by the NPIP
General Conference Committee on behalf of Plan members; that is, the
changes were recognized by the poultry industry as being in their
interest.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will
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.)
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws
and regulations that are in conflict with this rule; (2) has no
retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
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 final rule, which were
filed under 0579-0445, have been submitted for approval to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). When OMB notifies us of its decision,
if approval is denied, we will publish a document in the Federal
Register providing notice of what action we plan to take.
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 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 are amending 9 CFR parts 56, 145, 146, and 147 as
follows:
[[Page 53249]]
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 reference
``Sec. 145.3(d)'' and adding the reference ``Sec. 145.3(e)'' in its
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:
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
[[Page 53250]]
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
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. 146.33(a), Sec.
146.43(a), or Sec. 146.53(a).
* * * * *
Sec. 146.51 [Amended]
0
18. Section 146.51 is amended as follows:
0
a. In the definition of commercial upland game birds by removing the
word ``purpose'' and adding in its place ``purposes'' and adding the
words ``eggs and/or'' before the word ``meat''.
0
b. In the definition of commercial waterfowl, by removing the word
``purpose'' and adding in its place ``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''.
[[Page 53251]]
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 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.
[[Page 53252]]
Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of August 2016.
Jere L. Dick,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-19245 Filed 8-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P