Approval of Laboratories To Conduct Official Testing; Consolidation of Regulations, 25013-25018 [2019-11278]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
9 CFR Parts 71, 75, 80, and 93
[Docket No. APHIS–2016–0054]
RIN 0579–AE46
Approval of Laboratories To Conduct
Official Testing; Consolidation of
Regulations
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We are proposing to
consolidate the regulations governing
diagnostic laboratory approval
authorities for select animal diseases
into a single regulation and establish a
set of standard procedures which we
may use to conduct future diagnostic
laboratory approvals. The consolidated
regulations would provide consistent
inspection protocols, proficiency testing
methods, quality system guidelines, and
definitions. This would also facilitate
the approval of additional laboratories
in emergency situations. The
consolidated regulations would serve to
simplify regulatory oversight and
compliance.
SUMMARY:
We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before July 29,
2019.
DATES:
You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0054.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2016–0054, Regulatory Analysis
and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Supporting documents and any
comments we receive on this docket
may be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;
D=APHIS-2016-0054 or in our reading
room, which is located in room 1141 of
the USDA South Building, 14th Street
and Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC. Normal reading room
hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except holidays. To be
sure someone is there to help you,
please call (202) 799–7039 before
coming.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
Dr.
Randall L. Levings, Scientific Advisor,
Diagnostics and Biologics, VS, APHIS,
1920 Dayton Ave., Ames, IA 50010–
9602; (515) 337–7601.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
Background
This proposed rule would remove the
regulations governing the approval of
animal diagnostic laboratories to
conduct disease-specific testing,
currently found in 9 CFR parts 75
(equine infectious anemia), 80 (Johne’s
disease), and 93 (contagious equine
metritis). In their place, it would add a
new section to the regulations, 9 CFR
71.22. This section, which would be
titled ‘‘Approval of laboratories to
conduct official testing,’’ would contain
regulations describing the requirement
for laboratories to perform official
testing for select animal diseases in the
United States.
In 2015, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
issued a concept paper suggesting
consolidation of the existing diagnostic
laboratory approval authorities for select
animal diseases into a single regulation.
The comment period for the concept
paper was 60 days. By the close of the
comment period, we had received 16
comments, from State veterinary
diagnostic laboratory personnel and
State and Federal animal health
officials. Suggestions in these comments
were used in order to inform our
discussions on the proposed
requirements detailed below.
As parts of the regulations in 9 CFR
parts 75, 80, and 93 currently do, the
proposed regulations would provide a
method by which animal diagnostic
laboratories would be approved.
Differing requirements would no longer
be found in these disparate, diseasespecific regulations. Rather, the
consolidated regulations would provide
a uniform standard, resulting in
enhanced transparency and regulatory
efficiency. As noted, the consolidated
requirements would be added in a new
§ 71.22 (Approval of laboratories to
conduct official testing) and the existing
regulations associated with laboratory
approval would be removed from the
disease-specific regulations and
replaced with a reference to the new
section. All currently approved
laboratories would maintain their
approved status until the first renewal
date. Any renewing or new laboratories
requesting approval would be required
to meet the consolidated requirements.
Definitions
In 9 CFR 71.1, we are proposing to
add definitions for approved laboratory,
National Animal Health Laboratory
Network (NAHLN), and official testing.
The definition of approved laboratory
would be established as ‘‘A laboratory
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25013
approved by the Administrator to
conduct official testing in accordance
with the regulations in § 71.22.’’ The
definition of National Animal Health
Laboratory Network (NAHLN) would be
established as ‘‘A nationally
coordinated network and partnership of
Federal, State, and university-associated
animal health laboratories that provide
animal health diagnostic testing,
methods research and development, and
expertise for education and extension to
detect biological threats to the nation’s
animal agriculture, thus protecting
animal health, public health, and the
nation’s food supply.’’ The definition of
official testing would be established as
‘‘Testing to determine the disease status
of animals for use in State-Federal
programs. Tests are approved by the
Administrator and conducted by
qualified analysts in an approved
laboratory.’’
Approval of Laboratories To Conduct
Official Testing
In § 71.22(a), we would establish that
laboratories must obtain APHIS
approval under the requirements of the
section in order to conduct official
testing for those diseases covered by 9
CFR subchapters B (Cooperative Control
and Eradication of Livestock or Poultry
Diseases), C (Interstate Transportation of
Animals (Including Poultry) and Animal
Products), and D (Exportation and
Importation of Animals (Including
Poultry) and Animal Products).
The requirements governing diseases
covered by the regulations have been
built up over time and are supported by
our expertise and experience. They
represent diseases for which required
testing protocols are most effective and
well understood.
Facilities
Section 71.22(b) would require that
official testing be performed in
laboratory facilities with controlled
conditions, instrumentation appropriate
for the testing being conducted, and
biosecurity measures commensurate
with the disease of diagnostic concern.
Approved laboratories would have to
agree to periodic, unannounced
inspection by APHIS personnel or other
APHIS-approved inspectors following
an APHIS-approved checklist. These
requirements would ensure that all
approved laboratories have and
maintain the materials and standards we
deem necessary to identify and prevent
the spread of the disease or vector
outside of the laboratory.
Quality System
In § 71.22(c), we would state that
approved laboratories must operate
E:\FR\FM\30MYP1.SGM
30MYP1
25014
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Proposed Rules
under a quality system acceptable to
APHIS. A quality system is comprised
of those coordinated activities that
direct and control an organization to
maintain a required standard.
Quality systems may be comprised of
elements such as documentation of
procedures, recordkeeping, training,
reporting, and corrective actions taken if
standards and procedures are not
reached or maintained. Adherence to
certain nationally or internationally
established quality systems recognized
by APHIS could also be used to meet all
or part of this requirement. Quality
system records would be subject to
review during facility inspections.
Those quality systems acceptable to
APHIS would be determined based on
criteria that would vary somewhat based
on the disease testing in question, but
could be comprised of Federal and
international standards such as
International Organization for
Standardization Standard 17025—
General requirements for the
competence of testing and calibration
laboratories and American Association
of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians
standards. Specifics of the required
quality system would be provided for
each test and disease via established
protocols. APHIS and APHIS-approved
trainers would provide individual
instruction and assistance to help
laboratories meet the required
standards. We have successfully used
this approach elsewhere in our
regulations, particularly in 9 CFR
subchapter E, which concerns viruses,
serums, toxins, and analogous products;
organisms and vectors.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Procedures
Section 71.22(d) would require that
all official testing be conducted using
APHIS-approved assay methods, which
may include standard operating
procedures recognized by the National
Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL)
or NAHLN, and/or diagnostic test kits
licensed by the USDA. A list of
approved assay methods would be made
available on the APHIS Laboratory
Portal 1 website and in the protocols
developed for individual test types. This
would ensure consistency of testing
over time and allow us to easily assess
test results.
Training
In § 71.22(e) we would stipulate that
official testing be conducted only by
those individuals who have completed
APHIS-approved training and have
passed proficiency tests administered by
1 You may view the APHIS Laboratory Portal on
the internet at https://www.nahln.org.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
APHIS or its official designee. These
tests would be administered annually or
at an interval stipulated by APHIS.
Supervisory oversight of official testing
would be performed by qualified
individuals, as determined by APHIS.
Standardized training would be
necessary to ensure that all tests are run
consistently and correctly.
This process would improve
efficiency of inspections and approvals
by establishing the need for inspection
only for those laboratories that meet
established planning requirements. It
would also provide entities whose
applications were initially denied with
the information necessary to improve
their chances of future approval.
Reporting
Maintenance of Approved Status
In § 71.22(h), we would stipulate that
any previously approved laboratories
that wish to maintain their approved
status would be required to reapply for
APHIS approval at least 1 month before
their approval term expires, or at least
every 2 years, whichever comes first.
Laboratories wishing to maintain
approved status would have to submit a
renewal application form, as supplied
by APHIS, to the NVSL Director. This
would allow laboratories with existing
approvals to transition more slowly to
the new, streamlined approval process
and avoid creating unnecessary burden
for currently approved facilities.
Laboratories not electing to renew their
approvals would be removed by the
NVSL Director when their current
approvals expire.
Approved laboratories would also be
required to have at least one individual
with the required training and
unexpired proficiency certification in
their employ at all times. This would
allow for uninterrupted consistency and
competency in testing.
Finally, the minimum number of tests
to maintain proficiency, as stipulated by
APHIS in the protocols developed for
individual test types, would have to be
performed. This would be necessary to
ensure that approved laboratories
maintain familiarity with required
testing procedures over the course of
time to guarantee testing accuracy.
In § 71.22(f) we would require
approved laboratories to report test
results to APHIS and State animal
health officials using an individualized
(by disease) timeline established by
APHIS at the time of laboratory
approval. Timelines would be
determined by the urgency of necessary
actions in light of a positive test result
for the disease in question and/or
APHIS’ reporting obligations. Approved
laboratories would benefit from a clear
and consistent testing and reporting
timeline.
Applications for Approval
Section 71.22(g) would establish the
procedures by which laboratories would
request APHIS approval to conduct
official testing and the notification
process APHIS would follow as a result
of those requests. The application and
approval process would be as follows:
• Laboratories would be required to
use APHIS application forms, including
an agreement to meet the obligations to
APHIS listed in the section, and submit
completed forms to the NVSL Director.
The Director would make a preliminary
determination of the application’s
acceptability, based on initial review of
submitted materials and, when
appropriate, a needs assessment for
diagnostic capacity. These
determinations would be made on an
annual basis, or as needed based on the
number of applications received;
• Applicants would be informed of
the preliminary determination. If
positive, applicants would then be able
to request a facility inspection and
personnel training, conducted in
accordance with the section. If negative,
APHIS would provide a rationale for the
denial. Denied applicants would be able
to appeal any such denials in
accordance with proposed § 71.22(j);
• When all approval requirements
have been met, the NVSL Director
would issue a final approval. Approvals
would be specific to those lab personnel
working at the inspected, approved
laboratory who have met the eligibility
and proficiency requirements. Denied
applicants would be able to appeal any
such denials in accordance with
proposed § 71.22(j).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Probation, Suspension, and Rescission
of Laboratory Approval
Paragraph (i) of § 71.22 would outline
the conditions under which approved
laboratories would enter probation or
have their approvals suspended or
removed.
Laboratories not conducting the
minimum number of tests as required in
proposed § 71.22(h)(3) during a single
reporting period would be assigned
probationary status. A reporting period
would be less than or equal to the time
for which the laboratory has been
approved to conduct testing by APHIS.
Laboratories on probation could
continue to conduct official testing. If
the minimum number of tests are not
performed during two consecutive
reporting periods, the laboratory would
not be eligible for renewal of APHIS
E:\FR\FM\30MYP1.SGM
30MYP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Proposed Rules
approval. Exceptions to this
requirement may be granted by the
NVSL Director upon request. This
would allow us to deal with laboratories
on a more individualized basis as well
as allowing those laboratories with
probationary status to regain full status
without having to reapply. A tiered
system of approval, probation, and
suspension would establish needed
flexibility in the process while
maintaining APHIS oversight.
Approval to conduct official testing
would be suspended in the event that a
laboratory experiences changes that may
impact the ability to provide quality
testing services. These changes include,
but are not limited to, no longer
employing an individual approved to
conduct official testing, a move to
different facilities, or a natural disaster
that impacts power or water systems.
Laboratories with suspended status
would no longer be approved to conduct
official testing. Laboratories would be
restored to approved status upon
training and/or testing new personnel,
successful inspection of new facilities,
and/or correction of noncompliance
issues. Reapproval would involve
resubmitting those sections of the
application materials required by the
NVSL Director. This would allow us to
quickly address noncompliant
laboratories, while giving affected
entities opportunity to take necessary
steps to retain their approved status
without having to go through full
reapplication.
Approval may be rescinded at any
time, at the discretion of the NVSL
Director, if a laboratory fails to meet its
obligations to APHIS, as detailed by the
agreement signed by the laboratory
during the application process. The
NVSL Director would issue a notice to
the laboratory, providing the
justification for the proposed removal.
Laboratories would have 30 days to
respond in writing to the concerns
provided before the NVSL Director
finalizes the removal decision. While
we anticipate that most issues with
approved laboratories that arise would
be resolved through the suspension
process, it is also important to codify
our policy concerning approval
removal. The decision about whether to
carry out a suspension or a removal
would be made on a case-by-case basis
after full consideration of the individual
issues of concern.
Appeals
Finally, § 71.22(j) would describe the
process by which laboratories would be
able to appeal the decision of the NVSL
Director with regard to denials,
probations, suspensions, or rescissions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
Appeals would have to be made in
writing to the APHIS Administrator or
the Administrator’s official designee
within 30 days of the laboratory’s
receipt of the NVSL Director’s decision.
Responses to these appeals would be
provided within 60 days of receipt by
APHIS. The appeals process would
provide clarity concerning roles and
responsibilities for APHIS and the
approved laboratory.
Other Changes
In addition to removing the
regulations governing the approval of
animal diagnostic laboratories to
conduct disease-specific testing as
previously explained, we are also
proposing to make other changes to the
regulations in parts 75, 80, and 93 in
response to the proposed addition of
§ 71.22.
In several places we propose to
replace references to those parts of the
regulations that contained diseasespecific laboratory approval
requirements with references to the
consolidated regulations in § 71.22. We
are also updating references to the
locations where stakeholders can access
a list of approved laboratories.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13771 and
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and,
therefore, has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget. This
proposed rule is not expected to be an
Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this proposed rule is not
significant under Executive Order
12866.
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, we have analyzed the
potential economic effects of this action
on small entities. The analysis is
summarized below. Copies of the full
analysis are available by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT or on the
Regulations.gov website (see ADDRESSES
above for instructions for accessing
Regulations.gov).
This proposed rule would consolidate
existing diagnostic laboratory approval
authorities for select animal diseases
into a single regulation and establish a
set of standard procedures we may use
to conduct future diagnostic laboratory
approvals. The consolidated regulations
would serve to simplify regulatory
oversight and compliance, saving time
and resources. For both the laboratories
and APHIS, consolidating and
standardizing the process would create
an easier-to-understand and more userfriendly approval process; improve
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25015
efficiency in obtaining approvals to
conduct testing for single or multiple
diseases; reduce the administrative
burden associated with obtaining and
tracking laboratory approvals; and
simplify the steps required to renew an
existing approval.
There are over 400 APHIS-approved
laboratories. The laboratories range
widely in size, from one-person
practices to large, State-wide systems.
They are classified within the
Veterinary Services industry, for which
the Small Business Administration’s
small-entity standard is annual receipts
of not more than $7.5 million. For the
industry overall in 2012, there were
27,939 establishments that operated
throughout the year. Ninety-nine
percent (27,605 establishments) had
receipts of less than $5 million. Thus,
most of these entities are small.
Cost savings because of this rule
would be realized mainly by
approximately 50 larger laboratories due
to the multiple tests they perform. In
accordance with guidance on complying
with Executive Order 13771, the single
primary estimate of the yearly savings
that would be provided by this
proposed rule is $1.1 million, the midpoint estimate annualized in perpetuity
using a 7 percent discount rate.
This proposed rule would lessen the
administrative burden for affected
laboratories, benefiting rather than
having any negative impact on them.
Under these circumstances, the
Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has
determined that this action would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12372
This program/activity is listed in the
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
under No. 10.025 and is subject to
Executive Order 12372, which requires
intergovernmental consultation with
State and local officials. (See 2 CFR
chapter IV.)
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is
adopted: (1) All State and local laws and
regulations that are inconsistent with
this rule will be preempted; (2) no
retroactive effect will be given to this
rule; and (3) administrative proceedings
will not be required 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.), reporting and
E:\FR\FM\30MYP1.SGM
30MYP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
25016
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Proposed Rules
recordkeeping requirements included in
this proposed rule have been submitted
for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Please
send comments on the Information
Collection Request (ICR) to OMB’s
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs via email to oira_submissions@
omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for
APHIS, Washington, DC 20503. Please
state that your comments refer to Docket
No. APHIS–2016–0054. Please send a
copy of your comments to the USDA
using one of the methods described
under ADDRESSES at the beginning of
this document.
The Animal Health Protection Act is
the primary Federal law governing the
protection of animal health. The law
gives the Secretary of Agriculture broad
authority to detect, control, or eradicate
pests or diseases of livestock or poultry.
The Secretary may also prohibit or
restrict import or export of any animal
or related material if necessary to
prevent the spread of any livestock or
poultry pest or disease. Disease
prevention is the most effective method
for maintaining a healthy animal
population and enhancing the ability of
U.S. producers to compete in the global
market of animal and animal product
trade.
The regulations require APHIS
approval or certification for laboratories
conducting tests for disease
management as well as live animal
interstate movement, import, and
export. To facilitate the approval or
certification of laboratories, APHIS will
require information collection activities
such as notifications for intent to
request approval; applications for
APHIS approval; inspections; checklists
and agreements; documentation of
accreditation status; documentation of
implemented quality system; quality
document verifications; quality
assurance/control plans; notifications of
proposed changes to assay protocols;
test exemptions; submission of sample
copies of diagnostic reports; requests for
removal of approved status; appeal of
approval denial, suspension, or
removal; reporting; and recordkeeping.
We are soliciting comments from the
public (as well as affected agencies)
concerning our proposed information
collection and recordkeeping
requirements. These comments will
help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
information collection is necessary for
the proper performance of our agency’s
functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our
estimate of the burden of the proposed
information collection, including the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
information collection on those who are
to respond (such as through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public burden for
this collection of information is
estimated to average 7.1 hours per
response.
Respondents: State animal health
officials and laboratory directors.
Estimated annual number of
respondents: 402.
Estimated annual number of
responses per respondent: 13.
Estimated annual number of
responses: 5,306.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 37,697 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours
may not equal the product of the annual
number of responses multiplied by the
estimate of burden.)
A copy of the information collection
may be viewed on the Regulations.gov
website or in our reading room. (A link
to Regulations.gov and information on
the location and hours of the reading
room are provided under the heading
ADDRESSES at the beginning of this
proposed rule.) Copies can also be
obtained from Ms. Kimberly Hardy,
APHIS’ Information Collection
Coordinator, at (301) 851–2483. APHIS
will respond to any ICR-related
comments in the final rule. All
comments will also become a matter of
public record.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act
to promote the use of the internet and
other information technologies, to
provide increased opportunities for
citizen access to Government
information and services, and for other
purposes. For information pertinent to
E-Government Act compliance related
to this proposed rule, please contact Ms.
Kimberly Hardy, APHIS’ Information
Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851–
2483.
List of Subjects
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Animal diseases, Horses, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
9 CFR Part 80
Animal diseases, Livestock,
Transportation.
9 CFR Part 93
Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,
Poultry and poultry products, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9
CFR parts 71, 75, 80, and 93 as follows:
PART 71—GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
2. Section 71.1 is amended by adding,
in alphabetical order, definitions for
Approved laboratory, National Animal
Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN),
and Official testing to read as follows:
■
§ 71.1
Sfmt 4702
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Approved laboratory. A laboratory
approved by the Administrator to
conduct official testing in accordance
with the regulations in § 71.22.
*
*
*
*
*
National Animal Health Laboratory
Network (NAHLN). The NAHLN is a
nationally coordinated network and
partnership of Federal, State, and
university-associated animal health
laboratories that provide animal health
diagnostic testing, methods research and
development, and expertise for
education and extension to detect
biological threats to the nation’s animal
agriculture, thus protecting animal
health, public health, and the nation’s
food supply.
*
*
*
*
*
Official testing. Testing to determine
the disease status of animals for use in
State-Federal programs. Tests are
approved by the Administrator and
conducted by qualified analysts in an
approved laboratory.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 71.20
[Amended]
3. Section 71.20 is amended by
redesignating footnote 7 as footnote 1.
■
§ 71.21
9 CFR Part 71
Animal diseases, Livestock, Poultry
and poultry products, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
PO 00000
9 CFR Part 75
[Amended]
4. Section 71.21 is amended by
redesignating footnotes 8 and 9 as
footnotes 2 and 3, respectively.
■ 5. Section 71.22 is added to read as
follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\30MYP1.SGM
30MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Proposed Rules
§ 71.22 Approval of laboratories to
conduct official testing.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
(a) Approvals. State, university, and
private laboratories must obtain APHIS
approval to conduct official testing for
those diseases covered by subchapters
B, C, and D of this chapter. Laboratories
seeking approval must meet the
requirements of this section.
(b) Facilities. Official testing must be
performed in laboratory facilities with
controlled conditions, instrumentation
appropriate for the testing being
conducted, and biosecurity measures
commensurate with the disease of
diagnostic concern. Approved
laboratories must agree to periodic,
unannounced inspection by APHIS
personnel or other APHIS-approved
inspectors following an APHISapproved checklist.
(c) Quality system. Laboratories must
operate under a quality system
acceptable to APHIS. Components of
such systems include acceptable
documentation of procedures,
recordkeeping, training, reporting, and
corrective actions taken if standards and
procedures are not reached or
maintained. Adherence to certain
nationally or internationally established
and quality systems recognized by
APHIS may be used to meet all or part
of this requirement.4 Quality system
records are subject to review during
facility inspections.
(d) Procedures. All official testing
must be conducted using APHISapproved assay methods,5 which may
include standard operating procedures
recognized by the National Veterinary
Services Laboratories (NVSL) or
National Animal Health Laboratory
Network, and/or diagnostic test kits
licensed by the USDA.
(e) Training. Official testing must be
conducted only by those individuals
who have completed APHIS-approved
training and have passed proficiency
tests administered by APHIS or its
official designee. These tests will be
administered annually or as necessary at
an interval stipulated by APHIS.
Supervisory oversight of official testing
must be performed by qualified
individuals, as determined by APHIS.
(f) Reporting. Approved laboratories
must report test results to APHIS and
State animal health officials using an
individualized (by disease) timeline
4 A list of established quality systems recognized
by APHIS is available on the internet at https://
www.nahln.org.
5 A list of approved assay methods is available on
the APHIS Laboratory Portal website at https://
www.nahln.org and at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/
aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-diseaseinformation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
established by APHIS at the time of
laboratory approval.
(g) Applications for approval. (1)
Laboratories must use APHIS
application forms, including an
agreement to meet the obligations to
APHIS listed in this section, and submit
completed forms to the NVSL Director.
The Director will make a preliminary
determination of the application’s
acceptability, based on initial review of
submitted materials and, when
appropriate, a needs assessment for
diagnostic capacity. These
determinations are made on an annual
basis, or as needed based on the number
of applications received.
(2) Applicants will be informed of the
preliminary determination. If positive,
applicants will then be able to request
a facility inspection and personnel
training, conducted in accordance with
this section. If negative, APHIS will
provide a rationale for the denial.
Denied applicants may appeal any
denials in accordance with the
regulations in paragraph (j) of this
section;
(3) When all requirements in this
section have been met, the NVSL
Director will issue a final approval.
Approvals are specific to those lab
personnel working at the inspected,
approved laboratory who have met the
eligibility and proficiency requirements.
Denied applicants may appeal any
denials in accordance with the
regulations in paragraph (j) of this
section.
(h) Maintenance of approved status.
(1) Previously approved laboratories
that wish to maintain their approved
status must reapply for APHIS approval
at least 1 month before their approval
term expires, or at least every 2 years,
whichever comes first. Laboratories
wishing to maintain approved status
must submit a renewal application form,
as supplied by APHIS, to the NVSL
Director.
(2) Approved laboratories must have
at least one individual with the required
training and unexpired proficiency
certification in their employ at all times.
(3) Approved laboratories must
perform the minimum number of tests
to maintain proficiency, as stipulated by
APHIS in the guidance documents
developed for individual test types.
(i) Probation, suspension, and
rescission of laboratory approval. (1)
Laboratories not conducting the
minimum number of tests as required by
paragraph (h)(3) of this section during a
single reporting period will be assigned
probationary status. A reporting period
is less than or equal to the time for
which the laboratory has been approved
to conduct testing by APHIS.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25017
Laboratories on probation may continue
to conduct official testing. If the
minimum required number of tests are
not performed during two consecutive
reporting periods, the laboratory will
not be eligible for renewal of APHIS
approval. Exceptions to this
requirement may be granted by the
NVSL Director upon request.
(2) Approval to conduct official
testing will be suspended in the event
that a laboratory experiences changes
that may impact its ability to provide
quality testing services. These changes
include: No longer employing an
individual approved to conduct official
testing, a move to different facilities, or
a natural disaster that impacts power or
water systems. Laboratories with
suspended status will not be approved
to conduct official testing. Laboratories
will be restored to approved status upon
training and/or testing new personnel,
successful inspection of new facilities,
and/or correction of noncompliance
issues. Reapproval will involve
resubmitting those sections of the
application materials required by the
NVSL Director.
(3) Approval may be rescinded at any
time, at the discretion of the NVSL
Director, if a laboratory fails to meet its
obligations to APHIS, as listed in the
agreement signed by the laboratory
during the application process. The
NVSL Director will issue a notice to the
laboratory, providing the justification
for the proposed removal. Laboratories
will have 30 days to respond in writing
to the concerns provided before the
NVSL Director finalizes the removal
decision.
(j) Appeals. Appeal of any denial,
probation, suspension, or rescission of
laboratory approval must be made in
writing to the APHIS Administrator or
the Administrator’s official designee
within 30 days of the laboratory’s
receipt of the NVSL Director’s decision.
Responses to these appeals will be
provided within 60 days of receipt by
APHIS.
PART 75—COMMUNICABLE
DISEASES IN HORSES, ASSES,
PONIES, MULES, AND ZEBRAS
6. The authority citation for part 75
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
7. Section 75.4 is amended as follows:
a. By revising the section heading;
b. In paragraph (a), by removing the
definition of Official test and by revising
the definition of Reactor; and
■ c. By removing paragraphs (c) and (d).
The revisions read as follows:
■
■
■
E:\FR\FM\30MYP1.SGM
30MYP1
25018
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2019 / Proposed Rules
§ 75.4 Interstate movement of equine
infectious anemia reactors.
CANADA [Amended]
(a) * * *
Reactor. Any horse, ass, mule, pony
or zebra which is subjected to an official
test in accordance with the regulations
in § 71.22 of this subchapter and found
positive.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 80—JOHNE’S DISEASE IN
DOMESTIC ANIMALS
8. The authority citation for part 80
continues to read as follows:
■
Done in Washington, DC, this 24th day of
May 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–11278 Filed 5–29–19; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
Benjamin M. Litchfield, Staff Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, 1775 Duke
Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314, or by
telephone at (703) 518–6540.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
14. The undesignated center heading
‘‘CANADA’’ immediately preceding
§ 93.315 is amended by redesignating
footnote 16 as footnote 14.
■
CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE WEST
INDIES [Amended]
15. The undesignated center heading
‘‘CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE WEST
INDIES’’ immediately preceding
§ 93.319 is amended by redesignating
footnote 17 as footnote 15.
■
MEXICO [Amended]
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22,
2.80, and 371.4.
9. In § 80.1, the definition of Official
Johne’s disease test is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 80.1
Comments on Public Unit and
Nonmember Shares Proposed Rule’’ in
the email subject line.
• Fax: (703) 518–6319. Use the
subject line described above for email.
• Mail: Address to Gerard Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board, National Credit
Union Administration, 1775 Duke
Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314–
3428.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as
mail address.
Public inspection: All public
comments are available on the agency’s
website at https://www.ncua.gov/
RegulationsOpinionsLaws/comments as
submitted, except as may not be
possible for technical reasons. Public
comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information.
Paper copies of comments may be
inspected in NCUA’s law library, at
1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia
22314, by appointment weekdays
between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. To
make an appointment, call (703) 518–
6540 or send an email to OGCMail@
ncua.gov.
Definitions.
16. The undesignated center heading
‘‘MEXICO’’ immediately preceding
§ 93.321 is amended by redesignating
footnote 18 as footnote 16.
■
§ 93.324
[Amended]
17. Section 93.324 is amended by
redesignating footnote 19 as footnote 17.
■
*
*
*
*
*
Official Johne’s disease test. An
organism detection test approved by the
Administrator and conducted in a
laboratory approved by the
Administrator.1
*
*
*
*
*
PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN
ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND
POULTRY, AND CERTAIN ANIMAL,
BIRD, AND POULTRY PRODUCTS;
REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF
CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING
CONTAINERS
10. The authority citation for part 93
continues to read as follows:
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Parts 701 and 741
RIN 3313–AF00
■
Public Unit and Nonmember Shares
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301–8317;
21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7
CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
§ 93.301
[Amended]
11. Section 93.301 is amended as
follows:
■ a. In paragraphs (e)(2)(iii) and (e)(5)(i),
by removing the words ‘‘paragraph (i) of
this section’’ and adding the words
‘‘§ 71.22 of this chapter’’ in their place;
and
■ b. By removing and reserving
paragraph (i).
■
§ 93.303
[Amended]
12. Section 93.303 is amended by
redesignating footnote 12 as footnote 10.
■
§ 93.308
[Amended]
13. Section 93.308 is amended by
redesignating footnotes 13, 14, and 15 as
footnotes 11, 12, and 13, respectively.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
■
1The list of approved laboratories is available on
the internet at https://www.nahln.org or upon
request from the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, National
Veterinary Services Laboratories, P.O. Box 844,
Ames, IA 50010–0844.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 May 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The NCUA Board (Board) is
proposing to amend the NCUA’s public
unit and nonmember share rule to allow
Federal credit unions (FCU) to receive
public unit and nonmember shares up
to 50 percent of the credit union’s paidin and unimpaired capital and surplus
less any public unit and nonmember
shares.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
July 29, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods (Please
send comments by one method only):
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• NCUA website: https://
www.ncua.gov/
RegulationsOpinionsLaws/proposed_
regs/proposed_regs.html. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: Address to regcomments@
ncua.gov. Include ‘‘[Your name]
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
I. Background
II. Legal Authority
III. Summary of the Proposed Rule
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
V. Regulatory Procedures
I. Background
Section 107(6) of the Federal Credit
Union Act (FCU Act) permits an FCU to
receive payment on shares from
nonmembers under certain
circumstances.1 An FCU may receive
payment on shares from nonmember
credit unions.2 An FCU may also
receive payment on shares from
nonmember public units and their
political subdivisions.3 The term
‘‘public unit’’ generally refers to ‘‘the
United States, any state of the United
States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Panama Canal Zone, any territory or
possession of the United States, any
county, municipality, or political
subdivision thereof, or any Indian tribe
as defined in section 3(c) of the Indian
Financing Act of 1974.’’ 4
Moreover, an FCU that predominantly
serves low-income members may
1 12
U.S.C. 1757(6).
2 Id.
3 Id.
4 12
CFR 745.1(c).
E:\FR\FM\30MYP1.SGM
30MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25013-25018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11278]
[[Page 25013]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Parts 71, 75, 80, and 93
[Docket No. APHIS-2016-0054]
RIN 0579-AE46
Approval of Laboratories To Conduct Official Testing;
Consolidation of Regulations
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to consolidate the regulations governing
diagnostic laboratory approval authorities for select animal diseases
into a single regulation and establish a set of standard procedures
which we may use to conduct future diagnostic laboratory approvals. The
consolidated regulations would provide consistent inspection protocols,
proficiency testing methods, quality system guidelines, and
definitions. This would also facilitate the approval of additional
laboratories in emergency situations. The consolidated regulations
would serve to simplify regulatory oversight and compliance.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July
29, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0054.
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to
Docket No. APHIS-2016-0054, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD,
APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1238.
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may
be viewed at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-
0054 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA
South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC.
Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Randall L. Levings, Scientific
Advisor, Diagnostics and Biologics, VS, APHIS, 1920 Dayton Ave., Ames,
IA 50010-9602; (515) 337-7601.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This proposed rule would remove the regulations governing the
approval of animal diagnostic laboratories to conduct disease-specific
testing, currently found in 9 CFR parts 75 (equine infectious anemia),
80 (Johne's disease), and 93 (contagious equine metritis). In their
place, it would add a new section to the regulations, 9 CFR 71.22. This
section, which would be titled ``Approval of laboratories to conduct
official testing,'' would contain regulations describing the
requirement for laboratories to perform official testing for select
animal diseases in the United States.
In 2015, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) issued a concept paper
suggesting consolidation of the existing diagnostic laboratory approval
authorities for select animal diseases into a single regulation.
The comment period for the concept paper was 60 days. By the close
of the comment period, we had received 16 comments, from State
veterinary diagnostic laboratory personnel and State and Federal animal
health officials. Suggestions in these comments were used in order to
inform our discussions on the proposed requirements detailed below.
As parts of the regulations in 9 CFR parts 75, 80, and 93 currently
do, the proposed regulations would provide a method by which animal
diagnostic laboratories would be approved. Differing requirements would
no longer be found in these disparate, disease-specific regulations.
Rather, the consolidated regulations would provide a uniform standard,
resulting in enhanced transparency and regulatory efficiency. As noted,
the consolidated requirements would be added in a new Sec. 71.22
(Approval of laboratories to conduct official testing) and the existing
regulations associated with laboratory approval would be removed from
the disease-specific regulations and replaced with a reference to the
new section. All currently approved laboratories would maintain their
approved status until the first renewal date. Any renewing or new
laboratories requesting approval would be required to meet the
consolidated requirements.
Definitions
In 9 CFR 71.1, we are proposing to add definitions for approved
laboratory, National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN), and
official testing.
The definition of approved laboratory would be established as ``A
laboratory approved by the Administrator to conduct official testing in
accordance with the regulations in Sec. 71.22.'' The definition of
National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN) would be established
as ``A nationally coordinated network and partnership of Federal,
State, and university-associated animal health laboratories that
provide animal health diagnostic testing, methods research and
development, and expertise for education and extension to detect
biological threats to the nation's animal agriculture, thus protecting
animal health, public health, and the nation's food supply.'' The
definition of official testing would be established as ``Testing to
determine the disease status of animals for use in State-Federal
programs. Tests are approved by the Administrator and conducted by
qualified analysts in an approved laboratory.''
Approval of Laboratories To Conduct Official Testing
In Sec. 71.22(a), we would establish that laboratories must obtain
APHIS approval under the requirements of the section in order to
conduct official testing for those diseases covered by 9 CFR
subchapters B (Cooperative Control and Eradication of Livestock or
Poultry Diseases), C (Interstate Transportation of Animals (Including
Poultry) and Animal Products), and D (Exportation and Importation of
Animals (Including Poultry) and Animal Products).
The requirements governing diseases covered by the regulations have
been built up over time and are supported by our expertise and
experience. They represent diseases for which required testing
protocols are most effective and well understood.
Facilities
Section 71.22(b) would require that official testing be performed
in laboratory facilities with controlled conditions, instrumentation
appropriate for the testing being conducted, and biosecurity measures
commensurate with the disease of diagnostic concern. Approved
laboratories would have to agree to periodic, unannounced inspection by
APHIS personnel or other APHIS-approved inspectors following an APHIS-
approved checklist. These requirements would ensure that all approved
laboratories have and maintain the materials and standards we deem
necessary to identify and prevent the spread of the disease or vector
outside of the laboratory.
Quality System
In Sec. 71.22(c), we would state that approved laboratories must
operate
[[Page 25014]]
under a quality system acceptable to APHIS. A quality system is
comprised of those coordinated activities that direct and control an
organization to maintain a required standard.
Quality systems may be comprised of elements such as documentation
of procedures, recordkeeping, training, reporting, and corrective
actions taken if standards and procedures are not reached or
maintained. Adherence to certain nationally or internationally
established quality systems recognized by APHIS could also be used to
meet all or part of this requirement. Quality system records would be
subject to review during facility inspections.
Those quality systems acceptable to APHIS would be determined based
on criteria that would vary somewhat based on the disease testing in
question, but could be comprised of Federal and international standards
such as International Organization for Standardization Standard 17025--
General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration
laboratories and American Association of Veterinary Laboratory
Diagnosticians standards. Specifics of the required quality system
would be provided for each test and disease via established protocols.
APHIS and APHIS-approved trainers would provide individual instruction
and assistance to help laboratories meet the required standards. We
have successfully used this approach elsewhere in our regulations,
particularly in 9 CFR subchapter E, which concerns viruses, serums,
toxins, and analogous products; organisms and vectors.
Procedures
Section 71.22(d) would require that all official testing be
conducted using APHIS-approved assay methods, which may include
standard operating procedures recognized by the National Veterinary
Services Laboratories (NVSL) or NAHLN, and/or diagnostic test kits
licensed by the USDA. A list of approved assay methods would be made
available on the APHIS Laboratory Portal \1\ website and in the
protocols developed for individual test types. This would ensure
consistency of testing over time and allow us to easily assess test
results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ You may view the APHIS Laboratory Portal on the internet at
https://www.nahln.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training
In Sec. 71.22(e) we would stipulate that official testing be
conducted only by those individuals who have completed APHIS-approved
training and have passed proficiency tests administered by APHIS or its
official designee. These tests would be administered annually or at an
interval stipulated by APHIS. Supervisory oversight of official testing
would be performed by qualified individuals, as determined by APHIS.
Standardized training would be necessary to ensure that all tests are
run consistently and correctly.
Reporting
In Sec. 71.22(f) we would require approved laboratories to report
test results to APHIS and State animal health officials using an
individualized (by disease) timeline established by APHIS at the time
of laboratory approval. Timelines would be determined by the urgency of
necessary actions in light of a positive test result for the disease in
question and/or APHIS' reporting obligations. Approved laboratories
would benefit from a clear and consistent testing and reporting
timeline.
Applications for Approval
Section 71.22(g) would establish the procedures by which
laboratories would request APHIS approval to conduct official testing
and the notification process APHIS would follow as a result of those
requests. The application and approval process would be as follows:
Laboratories would be required to use APHIS application
forms, including an agreement to meet the obligations to APHIS listed
in the section, and submit completed forms to the NVSL Director. The
Director would make a preliminary determination of the application's
acceptability, based on initial review of submitted materials and, when
appropriate, a needs assessment for diagnostic capacity. These
determinations would be made on an annual basis, or as needed based on
the number of applications received;
Applicants would be informed of the preliminary
determination. If positive, applicants would then be able to request a
facility inspection and personnel training, conducted in accordance
with the section. If negative, APHIS would provide a rationale for the
denial. Denied applicants would be able to appeal any such denials in
accordance with proposed Sec. 71.22(j);
When all approval requirements have been met, the NVSL
Director would issue a final approval. Approvals would be specific to
those lab personnel working at the inspected, approved laboratory who
have met the eligibility and proficiency requirements. Denied
applicants would be able to appeal any such denials in accordance with
proposed Sec. 71.22(j).
This process would improve efficiency of inspections and approvals
by establishing the need for inspection only for those laboratories
that meet established planning requirements. It would also provide
entities whose applications were initially denied with the information
necessary to improve their chances of future approval.
Maintenance of Approved Status
In Sec. 71.22(h), we would stipulate that any previously approved
laboratories that wish to maintain their approved status would be
required to reapply for APHIS approval at least 1 month before their
approval term expires, or at least every 2 years, whichever comes
first. Laboratories wishing to maintain approved status would have to
submit a renewal application form, as supplied by APHIS, to the NVSL
Director. This would allow laboratories with existing approvals to
transition more slowly to the new, streamlined approval process and
avoid creating unnecessary burden for currently approved facilities.
Laboratories not electing to renew their approvals would be removed by
the NVSL Director when their current approvals expire.
Approved laboratories would also be required to have at least one
individual with the required training and unexpired proficiency
certification in their employ at all times. This would allow for
uninterrupted consistency and competency in testing.
Finally, the minimum number of tests to maintain proficiency, as
stipulated by APHIS in the protocols developed for individual test
types, would have to be performed. This would be necessary to ensure
that approved laboratories maintain familiarity with required testing
procedures over the course of time to guarantee testing accuracy.
Probation, Suspension, and Rescission of Laboratory Approval
Paragraph (i) of Sec. 71.22 would outline the conditions under
which approved laboratories would enter probation or have their
approvals suspended or removed.
Laboratories not conducting the minimum number of tests as required
in proposed Sec. 71.22(h)(3) during a single reporting period would be
assigned probationary status. A reporting period would be less than or
equal to the time for which the laboratory has been approved to conduct
testing by APHIS. Laboratories on probation could continue to conduct
official testing. If the minimum number of tests are not performed
during two consecutive reporting periods, the laboratory would not be
eligible for renewal of APHIS
[[Page 25015]]
approval. Exceptions to this requirement may be granted by the NVSL
Director upon request. This would allow us to deal with laboratories on
a more individualized basis as well as allowing those laboratories with
probationary status to regain full status without having to reapply. A
tiered system of approval, probation, and suspension would establish
needed flexibility in the process while maintaining APHIS oversight.
Approval to conduct official testing would be suspended in the
event that a laboratory experiences changes that may impact the ability
to provide quality testing services. These changes include, but are not
limited to, no longer employing an individual approved to conduct
official testing, a move to different facilities, or a natural disaster
that impacts power or water systems. Laboratories with suspended status
would no longer be approved to conduct official testing. Laboratories
would be restored to approved status upon training and/or testing new
personnel, successful inspection of new facilities, and/or correction
of noncompliance issues. Reapproval would involve resubmitting those
sections of the application materials required by the NVSL Director.
This would allow us to quickly address noncompliant laboratories, while
giving affected entities opportunity to take necessary steps to retain
their approved status without having to go through full reapplication.
Approval may be rescinded at any time, at the discretion of the
NVSL Director, if a laboratory fails to meet its obligations to APHIS,
as detailed by the agreement signed by the laboratory during the
application process. The NVSL Director would issue a notice to the
laboratory, providing the justification for the proposed removal.
Laboratories would have 30 days to respond in writing to the concerns
provided before the NVSL Director finalizes the removal decision. While
we anticipate that most issues with approved laboratories that arise
would be resolved through the suspension process, it is also important
to codify our policy concerning approval removal. The decision about
whether to carry out a suspension or a removal would be made on a case-
by-case basis after full consideration of the individual issues of
concern.
Appeals
Finally, Sec. 71.22(j) would describe the process by which
laboratories would be able to appeal the decision of the NVSL Director
with regard to denials, probations, suspensions, or rescissions.
Appeals would have to be made in writing to the APHIS Administrator
or the Administrator's official designee within 30 days of the
laboratory's receipt of the NVSL Director's decision. Responses to
these appeals would be provided within 60 days of receipt by APHIS. The
appeals process would provide clarity concerning roles and
responsibilities for APHIS and the approved laboratory.
Other Changes
In addition to removing the regulations governing the approval of
animal diagnostic laboratories to conduct disease-specific testing as
previously explained, we are also proposing to make other changes to
the regulations in parts 75, 80, and 93 in response to the proposed
addition of Sec. 71.22.
In several places we propose to replace references to those parts
of the regulations that contained disease-specific laboratory approval
requirements with references to the consolidated regulations in Sec.
71.22. We are also updating references to the locations where
stakeholders can access a list of approved laboratories.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13771 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This proposed rule is
not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because
this proposed rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have analyzed
the potential economic effects of this action on small entities. The
analysis is summarized below. Copies of the full analysis are available
by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
or on the Regulations.gov website (see ADDRESSES above for instructions
for accessing Regulations.gov).
This proposed rule would consolidate existing diagnostic laboratory
approval authorities for select animal diseases into a single
regulation and establish a set of standard procedures we may use to
conduct future diagnostic laboratory approvals. The consolidated
regulations would serve to simplify regulatory oversight and
compliance, saving time and resources. For both the laboratories and
APHIS, consolidating and standardizing the process would create an
easier-to-understand and more user-friendly approval process; improve
efficiency in obtaining approvals to conduct testing for single or
multiple diseases; reduce the administrative burden associated with
obtaining and tracking laboratory approvals; and simplify the steps
required to renew an existing approval.
There are over 400 APHIS-approved laboratories. The laboratories
range widely in size, from one-person practices to large, State-wide
systems. They are classified within the Veterinary Services industry,
for which the Small Business Administration's small-entity standard is
annual receipts of not more than $7.5 million. For the industry overall
in 2012, there were 27,939 establishments that operated throughout the
year. Ninety-nine percent (27,605 establishments) had receipts of less
than $5 million. Thus, most of these entities are small.
Cost savings because of this rule would be realized mainly by
approximately 50 larger laboratories due to the multiple tests they
perform. In accordance with guidance on complying with Executive Order
13771, the single primary estimate of the yearly savings that would be
provided by this proposed rule is $1.1 million, the mid-point estimate
annualized in perpetuity using a 7 percent discount rate.
This proposed rule would lessen the administrative burden for
affected laboratories, benefiting rather than having any negative
impact on them. Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this
action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Executive Order 12372
This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.)
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is adopted: (1) All State
and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule
will be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this
rule; and (3) administrative proceedings will not be required 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.), reporting and
[[Page 25016]]
recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Please send comments on the Information Collection Request (ICR) to
OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to
[email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS,
Washington, DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket
No. APHIS-2016-0054. Please send a copy of your comments to the USDA
using one of the methods described under ADDRESSES at the beginning of
this document.
The Animal Health Protection Act is the primary Federal law
governing the protection of animal health. The law gives the Secretary
of Agriculture broad authority to detect, control, or eradicate pests
or diseases of livestock or poultry. The Secretary may also prohibit or
restrict import or export of any animal or related material if
necessary to prevent the spread of any livestock or poultry pest or
disease. Disease prevention is the most effective method for
maintaining a healthy animal population and enhancing the ability of
U.S. producers to compete in the global market of animal and animal
product trade.
The regulations require APHIS approval or certification for
laboratories conducting tests for disease management as well as live
animal interstate movement, import, and export. To facilitate the
approval or certification of laboratories, APHIS will require
information collection activities such as notifications for intent to
request approval; applications for APHIS approval; inspections;
checklists and agreements; documentation of accreditation status;
documentation of implemented quality system; quality document
verifications; quality assurance/control plans; notifications of
proposed changes to assay protocols; test exemptions; submission of
sample copies of diagnostic reports; requests for removal of approved
status; appeal of approval denial, suspension, or removal; reporting;
and recordkeeping.
We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected
agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and
recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).
Estimate of burden: Public burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 7.1 hours per response.
Respondents: State animal health officials and laboratory
directors.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 402.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 13.
Estimated annual number of responses: 5,306.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 37,697 hours. (Due to
averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of
the annual number of responses multiplied by the estimate of burden.)
A copy of the information collection may be viewed on the
Regulations.gov website or in our reading room. (A link to
Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the
reading room are provided under the heading ADDRESSES at the beginning
of this proposed rule.) Copies can also be obtained from Ms. Kimberly
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.
APHIS will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule. All
comments will also become a matter of public record.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to
compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the internet
and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities
for citizen access to Government information and services, and for
other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act
compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Ms. Kimberly
Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.
List of Subjects
9 CFR Part 71
Animal diseases, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products,
Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
9 CFR Part 75
Animal diseases, Horses, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
9 CFR Part 80
Animal diseases, Livestock, Transportation.
9 CFR Part 93
Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Poultry and poultry products,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR parts 71, 75, 80, and 93 as
follows:
PART 71--GENERAL PROVISIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
0
2. Section 71.1 is amended by adding, in alphabetical order,
definitions for Approved laboratory, National Animal Health Laboratory
Network (NAHLN), and Official testing to read as follows:
Sec. 71.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Approved laboratory. A laboratory approved by the Administrator to
conduct official testing in accordance with the regulations in Sec.
71.22.
* * * * *
National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN). The NAHLN is a
nationally coordinated network and partnership of Federal, State, and
university-associated animal health laboratories that provide animal
health diagnostic testing, methods research and development, and
expertise for education and extension to detect biological threats to
the nation's animal agriculture, thus protecting animal health, public
health, and the nation's food supply.
* * * * *
Official testing. Testing to determine the disease status of
animals for use in State-Federal programs. Tests are approved by the
Administrator and conducted by qualified analysts in an approved
laboratory.
* * * * *
Sec. 71.20 [Amended]
0
3. Section 71.20 is amended by redesignating footnote 7 as footnote 1.
Sec. 71.21 [Amended]
0
4. Section 71.21 is amended by redesignating footnotes 8 and 9 as
footnotes 2 and 3, respectively.
0
5. Section 71.22 is added to read as follows:
[[Page 25017]]
Sec. 71.22 Approval of laboratories to conduct official testing.
(a) Approvals. State, university, and private laboratories must
obtain APHIS approval to conduct official testing for those diseases
covered by subchapters B, C, and D of this chapter. Laboratories
seeking approval must meet the requirements of this section.
(b) Facilities. Official testing must be performed in laboratory
facilities with controlled conditions, instrumentation appropriate for
the testing being conducted, and biosecurity measures commensurate with
the disease of diagnostic concern. Approved laboratories must agree to
periodic, unannounced inspection by APHIS personnel or other APHIS-
approved inspectors following an APHIS-approved checklist.
(c) Quality system. Laboratories must operate under a quality
system acceptable to APHIS. Components of such systems include
acceptable documentation of procedures, recordkeeping, training,
reporting, and corrective actions taken if standards and procedures are
not reached or maintained. Adherence to certain nationally or
internationally established and quality systems recognized by APHIS may
be used to meet all or part of this requirement.\4\ Quality system
records are subject to review during facility inspections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A list of established quality systems recognized by APHIS is
available on the internet at https://www.nahln.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Procedures. All official testing must be conducted using APHIS-
approved assay methods,\5\ which may include standard operating
procedures recognized by the National Veterinary Services Laboratories
(NVSL) or National Animal Health Laboratory Network, and/or diagnostic
test kits licensed by the USDA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ A list of approved assay methods is available on the APHIS
Laboratory Portal website at https://www.nahln.org and at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-disease-information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) Training. Official testing must be conducted only by those
individuals who have completed APHIS-approved training and have passed
proficiency tests administered by APHIS or its official designee. These
tests will be administered annually or as necessary at an interval
stipulated by APHIS. Supervisory oversight of official testing must be
performed by qualified individuals, as determined by APHIS.
(f) Reporting. Approved laboratories must report test results to
APHIS and State animal health officials using an individualized (by
disease) timeline established by APHIS at the time of laboratory
approval.
(g) Applications for approval. (1) Laboratories must use APHIS
application forms, including an agreement to meet the obligations to
APHIS listed in this section, and submit completed forms to the NVSL
Director. The Director will make a preliminary determination of the
application's acceptability, based on initial review of submitted
materials and, when appropriate, a needs assessment for diagnostic
capacity. These determinations are made on an annual basis, or as
needed based on the number of applications received.
(2) Applicants will be informed of the preliminary determination.
If positive, applicants will then be able to request a facility
inspection and personnel training, conducted in accordance with this
section. If negative, APHIS will provide a rationale for the denial.
Denied applicants may appeal any denials in accordance with the
regulations in paragraph (j) of this section;
(3) When all requirements in this section have been met, the NVSL
Director will issue a final approval. Approvals are specific to those
lab personnel working at the inspected, approved laboratory who have
met the eligibility and proficiency requirements. Denied applicants may
appeal any denials in accordance with the regulations in paragraph (j)
of this section.
(h) Maintenance of approved status. (1) Previously approved
laboratories that wish to maintain their approved status must reapply
for APHIS approval at least 1 month before their approval term expires,
or at least every 2 years, whichever comes first. Laboratories wishing
to maintain approved status must submit a renewal application form, as
supplied by APHIS, to the NVSL Director.
(2) Approved laboratories must have at least one individual with
the required training and unexpired proficiency certification in their
employ at all times.
(3) Approved laboratories must perform the minimum number of tests
to maintain proficiency, as stipulated by APHIS in the guidance
documents developed for individual test types.
(i) Probation, suspension, and rescission of laboratory approval.
(1) Laboratories not conducting the minimum number of tests as required
by paragraph (h)(3) of this section during a single reporting period
will be assigned probationary status. A reporting period is less than
or equal to the time for which the laboratory has been approved to
conduct testing by APHIS. Laboratories on probation may continue to
conduct official testing. If the minimum required number of tests are
not performed during two consecutive reporting periods, the laboratory
will not be eligible for renewal of APHIS approval. Exceptions to this
requirement may be granted by the NVSL Director upon request.
(2) Approval to conduct official testing will be suspended in the
event that a laboratory experiences changes that may impact its ability
to provide quality testing services. These changes include: No longer
employing an individual approved to conduct official testing, a move to
different facilities, or a natural disaster that impacts power or water
systems. Laboratories with suspended status will not be approved to
conduct official testing. Laboratories will be restored to approved
status upon training and/or testing new personnel, successful
inspection of new facilities, and/or correction of noncompliance
issues. Reapproval will involve resubmitting those sections of the
application materials required by the NVSL Director.
(3) Approval may be rescinded at any time, at the discretion of the
NVSL Director, if a laboratory fails to meet its obligations to APHIS,
as listed in the agreement signed by the laboratory during the
application process. The NVSL Director will issue a notice to the
laboratory, providing the justification for the proposed removal.
Laboratories will have 30 days to respond in writing to the concerns
provided before the NVSL Director finalizes the removal decision.
(j) Appeals. Appeal of any denial, probation, suspension, or
rescission of laboratory approval must be made in writing to the APHIS
Administrator or the Administrator's official designee within 30 days
of the laboratory's receipt of the NVSL Director's decision. Responses
to these appeals will be provided within 60 days of receipt by APHIS.
PART 75--COMMUNICABLE DISEASES IN HORSES, ASSES, PONIES, MULES, AND
ZEBRAS
0
6. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
0
7. Section 75.4 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising the section heading;
0
b. In paragraph (a), by removing the definition of Official test and by
revising the definition of Reactor; and
0
c. By removing paragraphs (c) and (d).
The revisions read as follows:
[[Page 25018]]
Sec. 75.4 Interstate movement of equine infectious anemia reactors.
(a) * * *
Reactor. Any horse, ass, mule, pony or zebra which is subjected to
an official test in accordance with the regulations in Sec. 71.22 of
this subchapter and found positive.
* * * * *
PART 80--JOHNE'S DISEASE IN DOMESTIC ANIMALS
0
8. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301-8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
0
9. In Sec. 80.1, the definition of Official Johne's disease test is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 80.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
Official Johne's disease test. An organism detection test approved
by the Administrator and conducted in a laboratory approved by the
Administrator.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The list of approved laboratories is available on the
internet at https://www.nahln.org or upon request from the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, National
Veterinary Services Laboratories, P.O. Box 844, Ames, IA 50010-0844.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 93--IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND POULTRY,
AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND POULTRY PRODUCTS; REQUIREMENTS FOR
MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING CONTAINERS
0
10. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a;
31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.
Sec. 93.301 [Amended]
0
11. Section 93.301 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraphs (e)(2)(iii) and (e)(5)(i), by removing the words
``paragraph (i) of this section'' and adding the words ``Sec. 71.22 of
this chapter'' in their place; and
0
b. By removing and reserving paragraph (i).
Sec. 93.303 [Amended]
0
12. Section 93.303 is amended by redesignating footnote 12 as footnote
10.
Sec. 93.308 [Amended]
0
13. Section 93.308 is amended by redesignating footnotes 13, 14, and 15
as footnotes 11, 12, and 13, respectively.
CANADA [Amended]
0
14. The undesignated center heading ``CANADA'' immediately preceding
Sec. 93.315 is amended by redesignating footnote 16 as footnote 14.
CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE WEST INDIES [Amended]
0
15. The undesignated center heading ``CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE WEST
INDIES'' immediately preceding Sec. 93.319 is amended by redesignating
footnote 17 as footnote 15.
MEXICO [Amended]
0
16. The undesignated center heading ``MEXICO'' immediately preceding
Sec. 93.321 is amended by redesignating footnote 18 as footnote 16.
Sec. 93.324 [Amended]
0
17. Section 93.324 is amended by redesignating footnote 19 as footnote
17.
Done in Washington, DC, this 24th day of May 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-11278 Filed 5-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P