57200 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

sections of the NOSB Policy and 

Procedures Manual: Section IV 

(Establishing Ad-hoc Committees), 

Section V (NOP/NOSB Collaboration), 

and Section VIII (Recommendations on 

sunset Review Policy). Additionally, 

they will present a recommendation to 

update the NOSB New Member Guide. 

The Meeting Is Open to the Public. 

The NOSB has scheduled time for 

public input for Monday, October 25, 

2010, from 10 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and 

Wednesday, October 27, 2010 from 8 

a.m. to 5 p.m. Individuals and 

organizations wishing to make oral 

presentations at the meeting must 

forward their requests by e-mail, phone, 

or mail to Ms. Lisa Ahramjian (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

above). Individuals or organizations will 

be given one five-minute slot to present 

their views. All persons making oral 

presentations are requested to provide 

their comments in writing and indicate 

the topic of their comment, referencing 

specific NOSB recommendations/topics 

or noting if they plan to cover multiple 

topics. Written submissions may 

contain information other than that 

presented at the oral presentation. 

Anyone may submit written comments 

at the meeting. Persons submitting 

written comments are asked to provide 

30 copies. 

Interested persons may visit the 

NOSB portion of the NOP Web site at 

http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop to view 

available meeting documents prior to 

the meeting, or visit 

www.regulations.gov to submit and view 

comments (see ADDRESSES section 

above). Documents presented at the 

meeting will be posted for review on the 

NOP Web site approximately six weeks 

following the meeting. 

Dated: September 13, 2010. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23337 Filed 9–17–10; 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-2009-0031] 

RIN 0579-AD21 

National Poultry Improvement Plan and 

Auxiliary Provisions 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend 

the National Poultry Improvement Plan 

(the Plan) and its auxiliary provisions 

by providing new or modified sampling 

and testing procedures for Plan 

participants and participating flocks. 

The proposed changes were voted on 

and approved by the voting delegates at 

the Plan’s 2008 National Plan 

Conference. These changes would keep 

the provisions of the Plan current with 

changes in the poultry industry and 

provide for the use of new sampling and 

testing procedures. 

DATES: We will consider all comments 

that we receive on or before November 

19, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by either of the following methods: 

∑ Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

(http://www.regulations.gov/ 

fdmspublic/component/ 

main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS2009-0031) to submit or view comments 

and to view supporting and related 

materials available electronically. 

∑ Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 

Please send one copy of your comment 

to Docket No. APHIS-2009-0031, 

Regulatory Analysis and Development, 

PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 

River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 

20737-1238. Please state that your 

comment refers to Docket No. APHIS2009-0031. 

Reading Room: You may read any 

comments that we receive on this 

docket in our reading room. The reading 

room 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) 690-2817 before 

coming. 

Other Information: Additional 

information about APHIS and its 

programs is available on the Internet at 

(http://www.aphis.usda.gov). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Andrew R. Rhorer, Senior Coordinator, 

Poultry Improvement Staff, National 

Poultry Improvement Plan, Veterinary 

Services, APHIS, USDA, 1498 Klondike 

Road, Suite 101, Conyers, GA 30094- 

5104; (770) 922-3496. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The National Poultry Improvement 

Plan (NPIP, also referred to below as 

‘‘the Plan’’) is a cooperative FederalState-industry mechanism for 

controlling certain poultry diseases. The 

Plan consists of a variety of programs 

intended to prevent and control poultry 

diseases. Participation in all Plan 

programs is voluntary, but breeding 

flocks, hatcheries, and dealers must first 

qualify as ‘‘U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid 

Clean’’ as a condition for participating in 

the other Plan programs. 

The Plan identifies States, flocks, 

hatcheries, dealers, and slaughter plants 

that meet certain disease control 

standards specified in the Plan’s various 

programs. As a result, customers can 

buy poultry that has tested clean of 

certain diseases or that has been 

produced under disease-prevention 

conditions. 

The regulations in 9 CFR parts 145, 

146, and 147 (referred to below as the 

regulations) contain the provisions of 

the Plan. The Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS, also referred 

to as ‘‘the Service’’) of the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA, also 

referred to as ‘‘the Department’’) amends 

these provisions from time to time to 

incorporate new scientific information 

and technologies within the Plan. 

The proposed amendments discussed 

in this document are consistent with the 

recommendations approved by the 

voting delegates to the National Plan 

Conference that was held from June 5 

through June 7, 2008. Participants in the 

2008 National Plan Conference 

represented flockowners, breeders, 

hatcherymen, slaughter plants, and 

Official State Agencies from all 

cooperating States. The proposed 

amendments are discussed in detail 

below. 

Simplifying Indemnity Provisions in 

Part 56 

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 the H5 or H7 subtypes of low 

pathogenic avian influenza (H5/H7 

LPAI). Section 56.3 states that 

indemnity may be paid for destruction 

and disposal of poultry that were 

infected with or exposed to H5/H7 

LPAI, destruction of eggs for testing for 

H5/H7 LPAI, and cleaning and 

disinfection of premises, conveyances, 

and materials that came into contact 

with poultry that were infected with or 

exposed to H5/H7 LPAI (or destruction 

and disposal, if the cost of cleaning and 

disinfection would exceed the value of 

the materials or cleaning and 

disinfection would be impractical). 

Section 56.3 also sets the percentages 

of the costs of those activities that are 

eligible for indemnity. Specifically, 

paragraph (b) of § 56.3 indicates that the 

Administrator is authorized to pay 100 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57201 

percent indemnity for costs related to all 

poultry that are infected with or 

exposed to H5/H7 LPAI, unless those 

poultry do not participate in the avian 

influenza (AI) surveillance program 

provided for poultry in the regulations 

in 9 CFR part 145 or 146. For those 

poultry, the Administrator is authorized 

to pay indemnity for only 25 percent of 

costs. The payment of only 25 percent 

indemnity thus provides an incentive 

for producers to participate in AI 

surveillance programs. The specific 

poultry that are eligible for only 25 

percent indemnity, as listed in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6), are: 

∑ Egg-type breeding chickens from a 

flock that participates in any Plan 

program in 9 CFR part 145 but that does 

not participate in the U.S. Avian 

Influenza Clean program of the Plan in 

§ 145.23(h); 

∑ Meat-type breeding chickens from a 

flock that participates in any Plan 

program in 9 CFR part 145 but that does 

not participate in the U.S. Avian 

Influenza Clean program of the Plan in 

§ 145.33(l); 

∑ Breeding turkeys from a flock that 

participates in any Plan program in 9 

CFR part 145 but that does not 

participate in the U.S. H5/H7 Avian 

Influenza Clean program of the Plan in 

§ 145.43(g); 

∑ Commercial table-egg layers from a 

premises that has 75,000 or more birds 

and that does not participate in the U.S. 

H5/H7 Avian Influenza Monitored 

program of the Plan in § 146.23(a); 

∑ Commercial meat-type chickens that 

are associated with a slaughter plant 

that slaughters 200,000 or more meattype chickens per operating week and 

that does not participate in the U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Monitored program 

of the Plan in § 146.33(a); and 

∑ Commercial meat-type turkeys that 

are associated with a slaughter plant 

that slaughters 2 million or more meattype turkeys in a 12-month period and 

that does not participate in the U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Monitored program 

of the Plan in § 146.43(a). 

The regulations in paragraph (b)(7) 

also provide for the payment of 25 

percent indemnity for any poultry 

located in a State that does not 

participate in the diagnostic 

surveillance program for H5/H7 LPAI, 

as described in § 146.14, or that does not 

have an initial State response and 

containment plan for H5/H7 LPAI that 

is approved by APHIS under § 56.10, 

unless such poultry participate in the 

Plan with another State that does 

participate in the diagnostic 

surveillance program for H5/H7 LPAI 

and has an initial State response and 

containment plan for H5/H7 LPAI that 

is approved by APHIS. This provision is 

intended to provide States with an 

incentive to participate in the NPIP’s AI 

surveillance and control programs. 

Since the regulations in part 56 were 

established, an H5/H7 LPAI surveillance 

program has been added that covers 

new types of commercial poultry, 

namely the program for commercial 

upland game birds, commercial 

waterfowl, raised-for-release upland 

game birds, and raised-for-release 

waterfowl in § 146.53(a). The program 

in § 146.53(a) contains size thresholds 

for each of the various types of poultry 

included in the program. Slaughter 

plants and premises above these size 

thresholds are required to participate in 

the program in § 146.53(a) in order to 

participate in the Plan, similar to the 

size thresholds for slaughter plants and 

premises in the other subparts in 9 CFR 

part 146. In addition, in this document, 

we are proposing to add to 9 CFR part 

145 provisions for an AI surveillance 

program for meat-type waterfowl 

breeding flocks, in proposed § 145.93(c). 

(See the description under the heading 

‘‘New Provisions for Meat-Type 

Waterfowl Breeding Flocks and 

Products’’ later in this document.) 

Our general intention in establishing 

§ 56.3 was to provide an incentive to 

participate in NPIP AI surveillance 

programs for all poultry for which such 

programs are available. To ensure that 

§ 56.3 continues to provide such an 

incentive as new AI surveillance 

programs are added for new types of 

poultry, we are proposing to change the 

structure of § 56.3 to refer more 

generally to AI surveillance programs 

available to breeding poultry in 9 CFR 

part 145 and to commercial poultry in 

part 146. In order to do this, we would 

remove paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) 

from § 56.3, redesignate paragraph (b)(7) 

as paragraph (b)(3), and add two new 

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) to cover 

breeding poultry and commercial 

poultry, respectively. 

Paragraph (b)(1) would provide that 

poultry that are from a breeding flock 

that participates in any Plan program in 

9 CFR part 145 but that does not 

participate in the U.S. Avian Influenza 

Clean or the U.S. H5/H7 Avian 

Influenza Clean program of the Plan 

available to the flock in 9 CFR part 145 

would only be eligible for 25 percent 

indemnity. 

Paragraph (b)(2) would provide that 

poultry that are from a commercial flock 

or slaughter plant that does not 

participate in the U.S. Avian Influenza 

Monitored program available to the 

commercial flock or slaughter plant in 9 

CFR part 146 would only be eligible for 

25 percent indemnity. As part of this 

change, we are proposing to add a 

definition of commercial flock or 

slaughter plant to § 56.1, which sets out 

definitions of terms used in part 56. We 

would define commercial flock or 

slaughter plant as a commercial poultry 

flock or slaughter plant that is required 

because of its size to participate in the 

special provisions in 9 CFR part 146 in 

order to participate in the Plan. (Subpart 

A of part 146 contains the general 

provisions; subparts B through E 

contain special provisions for specific 

types of commercial poultry.) We would 

also remove the definitions of 

commercial meat-type flock, 

commercial table-egg layer flock, 

commercial table-egg layer premises, 

meat-type chicken, and meat-type 

turkey from § 56.1, as they would no 

longer be necessary. 

These changes would simplify the 

regulations and more clearly express the 

principle that, for certain poultry 

operations, participation in NPIP AI 

surveillance programs is required in 

order for the poultry to be eligible for 

100 percent indemnity in the event of 

an H5/H7 LPAI outbreak. 

Amendments to Flock Testing 

Requirements and Procedures for 

Mycoplasma Bacteria 

The regulations in § 145.14 set out 

testing requirements for breeding flocks 

participating in NPIP programs in part 

145. Paragraph (b) in § 145.14 sets out 

testing requirements for Mycoplasma 

gallisepticum and M. synoviae. We are 

proposing to make several changes to 

these testing requirements to update 

them and make them consistent with 

current best practices. 

We are proposing to amend paragraph 

(b) at several locations to indicate that 

these testing requirements apply to M. 

meleagridis as well as M. gallisepticum 

and M. synoviae. Currently, paragraph 

(c) of § 145.14 covers M. meleagridis; 

this paragraph refers the reader to 

§ 145.43(d)(2) for a list of official blood 

tests for M. meleagridis. (Paragraph 

(d)(3) of § 145.43 provides additional 

instructions on testing for M. 

meleagridis.) However, many of the 

testing procedures work for all three 

bacteria, and it makes sense to address 

testing for these bacteria together in 

§ 145.14(b) because they are also 

addressed together in § 147.6, which 

sets out a procedure for determining the 

status of flocks reacting to tests for these 

three bacteria. Accordingly, we are 

proposing to remove and reserve 

§§ 145.14(c) and 145.43(d)(2) and (d)(3). 

The testing provisions in paragraph 

(b) have referred to blood testing 

specifically. However, the regulations in 

§ 147.30 provide a molecular 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57202 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

examination procedure for M. 

gallisepticum and M. synoviae, and the 

regulations in § 147.31 provide another 

molecular examination procedure for M. 

gallisepticum. These molecular 

examination procedures do not involve 

blood testing. Therefore, we are 

proposing to make several changes in 

paragraph (b) to indicate that the 

regulations provide for testing 

procedures generally. 

Paragraph (b)(1) of § 145.14 currently 

provides for the use of the 

hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, 

the microhemagglutination inhibition 

test, and the enzyme-linked 

immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test to 

confirm the positive results of other 

serological tests. We are proposing to 

remove the ELISA test from this list. 

The ELISA test is a screening assay and 

should not be used to confirm positive 

serological results. 

Paragraph (b)(5) of § 145.14 currently 

provides that the official molecular 

examination procedures for M. 

gallisepticum and M. synoviae are the 

polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test 

described in § 147.30 and the real-time 

PCR test described in § 147.31. 

However, the real-time PCR test in 

§ 147.31 is approved only for M. 

gallisepticum. We are therefore 

proposing to remove the reference to the 

real-time PCR as an official molecular 

examination procedure for M. synoviae. 

If, at some point in the future, we 

expand the use of the molecular 

examination procedures in §§ 147.30 

and 147.31 to M. meleagridis and the 

use of the real-time PCR test in § 147.31 

to M. synoviae, we will amend 

§ 145.14(b)(5) accordingly. 

As noted earlier, § 147.6 sets out a 

procedure for determining the status of 

flocks reacting to tests for M. 

gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, and M. 

synoviae. We are proposing to make 

several updates to this section. 

The introductory text of § 147.6 

currently states that the official tests for 

Mycoplasma are the macroagglutination 

tests for Mycoplasma antibodies, as 

described in ‘‘Standard Methods for 

Testing Avian Sera for the Presence of 

Mycoplasma Gallisepticum Antibodies’’ 

published by the Agricultural Research 

Service, USDA, March 1966, and the 

microagglutination tests, as reported in 

the Proceedings, Sixteenth Annual 

Meeting of the American Association of 

Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, 

1973. The introductory text goes on to 

state that procedures for isolation and 

identification of Mycoplasma may be 

found in Isolation and Identification of 

Avian Pathogens, published by the 

American Association of Avian 

Pathologists, and §§ 147.15 and 147.16. 

However, as noted earlier, there are 

several official tests for Mycoplasma, 

not just the macroagglutination test in 

the 1966 Agricultural Research Service 

publication. In addition, § 145.14(b)(1) 

lists all the official tests; it is not 

necessary to do so again in § 147.6. 

Accordingly, we would remove the first 

sentence of the introductory text of 

§ 147.6. In addition, we would add to 

the list of procedures for isolation and 

identification of Mycoplasma a 

reference to the Manual of Diagnostic 

Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial 

Animals, which is published by the 

World Organization for Animal Health 

(OIE). These procedures are 

internationally recognized as 

efficacious. 

Paragraph (a)(1) of § 147.6 states that, 

if a flock is tested by the tube 

agglutination or the serum plate test and 

the test is negative, the flock’s status is 

negative for Mycoplasma. We would 

amend this paragraph to include the 

ELISA and the official molecular 

examination procedures. These tests are 

also effective at determining a flock’s 

status. 

Paragraph (a)(2) of § 147.6 states that, 

if the tube agglutination or the serum 

plate test is positive, the HI test and/or 

the serum plate dilution (SPD) test shall 

be conducted. However, for egg-type 

and meat-type chicken and waterfowl, 

exhibition poultry, and game bird 

flocks, if more than 50 percent of the 

samples are positive for either M. 

gallisepticum, M. synoviae, or both, 

paragraph (a)(2) requires the HI and/or 

the SPD test to be conducted on 10 

percent of the positive samples or 25 

positive samples, whichever is greater. 

We are amending the list of screening 

assays that require confirmation to 

include the ELISA, as listed in proposed 

paragraph (a)(1). We are removing the 

SPD test from the list of confirmatory 

tests for serological screening assays 

because there are currently no 

laboratories that use this test; the HI test 

is widely used and accepted as the 

preferred test. 

For that reason, we would also 

remove the SPD test from the list of 

confirmatory tests for the HI test when 

more than 50 percent of the samples 

from egg-type and meat-type chicken 

flocks and waterfowl, exhibition 

poultry, and game bird flocks are 

positive on the HI test. This change 

would provide for the use of only the HI 

test as a confirmatory test in this case. 

We would also remove the text 

indicating that this confirmatory 

procedure is required only for egg-type 

and meat-type chicken flocks and 

waterfowl, exhibition poultry, and game 

bird flocks, as the procedure is 

necessary any time more than 50 

percent of the samples are positive on 

the HI test, to confirm the validity of the 

test. 

Paragraph (a)(4) of § 147.6 states that, 

if HI titers of 1:40 or SPD titers of 1:5 

are found, the flock shall be considered 

suspicious and shall be retested in 

accordance with § 147.6(a)(6). Paragraph 

(a)(6) states that, 14 days after the 

previous bleeding date, all birds or a 

random sample comprised of 75 birds 

shall be tested by the serum plate or 

tube agglutination test, and that tested 

birds shall be identified by numbered 

bands. 

We are proposing to move this 

information into paragraph (a)(2), as it 

follows naturally from the other 

information about administering the HI 

test. We would also make some changes 

to it. First, we would remove all 

references to the SPD test, for reasons 

discussed earlier; under this proposal, 

paragraph (a)(2) would state only that HI 

titers of 1:40 or more may be interpreted 

as suspicious. We would replace the 

current procedure of testing with SPD or 

tube agglutination with a culture 

procedure. In this procedure, 

appropriate antigen detection samples 

would be taken promptly (within 7 days 

of the original sampling) from 30 

clinically affected birds and examined 

by an approved cultural technique 

individually, or pooled (up to 5 swabs 

per test) and used in a molecular 

examination procedure or in vivo 

bioassay. The molecular examination 

procedure and in vivo bioassay are 

widely accepted as confirmatory tests 

for this procedure. 

We are proposing to remove the 

requirement to identify tested birds by 

numbered bands because other means 

are available to identify birds that have 

been tested; Official State Agencies can 

work with producers to determine the 

most cost-effective method in individual 

cases. 

In § 145.14, paragraph (b)(1) states 

that HI titers of 1:40 or less may be 

interpreted as equivocal, and final 

judgment may be based on further 

samplings and/or culture of reactors. As 

noted earlier, § 147.6 refers to HI titers 

of 1:40 or less as ‘‘suspicious.’’ We are 

proposing to amend § 145.14(b)(1) to be 

consistent with § 147.6. 

Paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(15) of 

§ 147.6 provide extensive procedures for 

testing and retesting flocks that have 

been tested with HI in order to 

determine whether they are eligible for 

the classification for which they are 

tested. We are proposing to replace 

these paragraphs with new paragraphs 

(a)(3) and (a)(4), which would provide a 

much simpler procedure. Under 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57203 

1The guidelines may be viewed on the Internet 

at (http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/ 

en_chapitre_1.10.4.htm). 

proposed paragraph (a)(3), if the in vivo 

bioassay, molecular examination 

procedure, or culture procedure referred 

to in proposed paragraph (a)(2) is 

negative, the Official State Agency 

would be able to qualify the flock for the 

classification for which it was tested. In 

the event of contaminated cultures, we 

would require the molecular 

examination technique to be used to 

make a final determination. Under 

proposed paragraph (a)(4), if the in vivo 

bioassay, molecular examination 

procedures, or culture procedures are 

positive, the flock would be considered 

infected. These proposed provisions 

would greatly simplify the regulations 

and recognize the utility of the in vivo 

bioassay, molecular examination 

procedures, and culture procedures. 

Changes to AI Clean Programs for EggType and Meat-Type Chicken Breeding 

Flocks 

The regulations set out requirements 

for the U.S. Avian Influenza Clean 

classification for multiplier egg-type 

chicken breeding flocks, multiplier 

meat-type chicken breeding flocks, 

primary egg-type chicken breeding 

flocks, and primary meat-type chicken 

breeding flocks at §§ 145.23(h), 

145.33(l), 145.73(f), and 145.83(g) 

respectively. 

The current requirements for these 

U.S. Avian Influenza Clean 

classifications are nearly identical. The 

introductory text of §§ 145.23(h), 

145.33(l), 145.73(f), and 145.83(g) states 

that the U.S. Avian Influenza Clean 

program is intended to be the basis from 

which the breeding-hatchery industry 

may conduct a program for the 

prevention and control of avian 

influenza. It is intended to determine 

the presence of avian influenza in 

breeding chickens through routine 

serological surveillance of each 

participating breeding flock. A flock and 

the hatching eggs and chicks produced 

from it will qualify for this classification 

when the Official State Agency 

determines that they have met the 

requirements of the relevant paragraph 

listed earlier. 

Each of those paragraphs contains a 

subparagraph indicating that a flock is 

eligible for the classification if a 

minimum of 30 birds have been tested 

negative for antibodies to avian 

influenza when more than 4 months of 

age and prior to the onset of egg 

production. To retain this classification, 

a sample of at least 30 birds must be 

tested negative at intervals of 90 days, 

and primary spent fowl must be tested 

within 30 days prior to movement to 

slaughter. Alternatively, a sample of 

fewer than 30 birds may be tested, and 

found to be negative, at any one time if 

all pens are equally represented and a 

total of 30 birds is tested within each 

90-day period. (The only exception is 

for meat-type chicken multiplier 

breeding flocks, which are only required 

to have 15 birds tested, at the same 90- 

day interval, in order to be eligible for 

and to retain the classification.) 

We are proposing to make several 

changes to these classifications. First, 

we are proposing to remove the 

references to serological surveillance 

from the introductory text of the 

classifications, instead referring simply 

to ‘‘surveillance.’’ As we are proposing 

to refer in the regulatory text 

specifically to the AI testing procedures 

in § 145.14(d), referring to serological 

surveillance in the introductory text is 

not necessary. In addition, some of the 

tests in § 145.14(d) are not serological 

tests — for example, the real-time 

reverse transcriptase PCR assay in 

paragraph (d)(2)(i). 

We would continue to require a 

minimum of 30 birds to be tested 

negative for antibodies to avian 

influenza when more than 4 months of 

age and prior to the onset of egg 

production, and we would continue to 

provide the 2 options for retaining the 

U.S. Avian Influenza Clean 

classification that are found in the 

current regulations. We are proposing to 

add a third option by which flocks 

could retain the classification. Under 

this option, the flock could retain the 

classification if the flock is tested as 

provided in § 145.14(d) and found 

negative at intervals of 30 days or less, 

and a total of 30 (15 for meat-type 

multiplier breeding flocks) samples are 

collected and tested within each 90-day 

period. This option would provide 

additional flexibility to use the flock 

screening tests in § 145.14(d)(2). 

We are also proposing to put in place 

requirements for testing spent fowl for 

each of the options for retaining the U.S. 

Avian Influenza Clean classification. As 

noted earlier, under the current 

regulations, spent fowl are required to 

be tested only if the sample of 30 birds 

is being tested and found negative at 

intervals of 90 days. However, testing of 

spent fowl is a useful addition to 

surveillance for any of the options for 

retaining classification, both the existing 

options and the one we are proposing. 

Accordingly, we are proposing to 

require spent fowl testing as part of all 

of the options for retaining 

classification. Specifically, we would 

require in paragraphs §§ 145.23(h)(2), 

145.33(l)(2), 145.73(f)(2), and 

145.83(g)(2) that all spent fowl, up to a 

maximum of 30, be tested serologically 

and found negative within 21 days prior 

to movement to slaughter. 

We are proposing to reduce the 

number of days before slaughter within 

which spent fowl must be tested from 

30 to 21 to be consistent with testing 

requirement for the NPIP AI 

surveillance programs in part 146 in 

which poultry (meat-type chickens and 

meat-type turkeys) are moved to 

slaughter. A 21-day testing requirement 

would also be consistent with the 

guidelines for AI surveillance in the OIE 

Terrestrial Animal Health Code.1 We are 

proposing to require only a sample of a 

maximum of 30 spent fowl to be tested, 

rather than the current requirement to 

test all spent fowl, because it is not 

necessary to test more than 30 spent 

fowl in order to provide adequate 

assurance that the flock is free of AI; 

this is consistent with the general 

requirement to test 30 birds per flock. 

Changes to H5/H7 AI Clean Programs 

for Turkey Breeding Flocks and for 

Waterfowl, Exhibition Poultry, and 

Game Bird Breeding Flocks 

The regulations set out requirements 

for the U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza 

Clean classification for turkey breeding 

flocks and for waterfowl, exhibition 

poultry, and game bird breeding flocks 

in §§ 145.43(g) and 145.53(e), 

respectively. We are proposing to make 

some minor changes to the text of these 

classifications to standardize and clarify 

their language. We are also proposing to 

add spent fowl testing requirements for 

all surveillance options in these 

classifications. 

The introductory text of both 

§§ 145.43(g) and 145.53(e) is similar to 

that of the U.S. Avian Influenza Clean 

classifications discussed earlier, except 

that both refer to the H5 and H7 

subtypes of AI. We are proposing to 

change those references to refer to ‘‘the 

H5/H7 subtypes of avian influenza,’’ as 

that usage is consistent with our 

references to these two subtypes in 9 

CFR part 146. We are also proposing to 

remove the word ‘‘serological’’ from the 

same place as in the introductory text to 

the U.S. Avian Influenza Clean 

classifications for breeding chickens, for 

the same reasons discussed earlier with 

regard to those AI classifications. 

Within §§ 145.43(g) and 145.53(e), 

paragraphs (g)(1) and (e)(1) address 

primary breeding flocks for turkeys and 

for waterfowl, game birds, and 

exhibition poultry, respectively, while 

paragraphs (g)(2) and (e)(2) address 

multiplier breeding flocks. Each of these 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57204 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

paragraphs refers in its introductory text 

to testing using the agar gel 

immunodiffusion test in § 147.9. As all 

of the tests in § 145.14(d) are effective at 

testing for AI in turkeys and in 

waterfowl, exhibition poultry, and game 

birds, we are proposing to remove the 

specific references to agar gel 

immunodiffusion testing. Instead, we 

would add the words ‘‘as provided in 

§ 145.14(d)’’ to references to AI testing to 

direct the reader to the approved AI 

tests. 

We are proposing to put in place 

requirements for testing spent fowl for 

each of the options for retaining the U.S. 

H5/H7 Avian Influenza Clean 

classification for turkey breeding flocks 

and waterfowl, exhibition poultry, and 

game bird breeding flocks. Similar to the 

spent fowl testing requirements for 

chickens discussed earlier, spent fowl 

from turkey breeding flocks are 

currently required to be tested only if a 

sample of 30 birds is being tested and 

found negative at intervals of 90 days. 

However, testing of spent fowl is a 

useful addition to surveillance for any 

of the options for retaining the U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Clean classification. 

Accordingly, we are proposing to add a 

new paragraph § 145.43(g)(3) to require 

all spent fowl from turkey breeding 

flocks, up to a maximum of 30, to be 

tested serologically and found negative 

within 21 days prior to movement to 

slaughter for all of the surveillance 

options. (We would redesignate current 

paragraph (g)(3), which contains 

reporting requirements that apply if 

killed AI vaccine is used, as paragraph 

(g)(4).) 

The U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza 

Clean classification for waterfowl, 

exhibition poultry, and game bird 

breeding flocks does not currently 

include spent fowl testing requirements. 

However, testing any spent fowl that are 

produced by these flocks for AI would 

be a useful addition to surveillance for 

this classification as well. Therefore, we 

are proposing to add a new paragraph 

§ 145.53(e)(3) to require spent fowl to be 

tested for these flocks as well. 

The classification provisions for 

primary and multiplier turkey breeding 

flocks in § 145.43(g)(1) and (g)(2), 

respectively, require that flocks test 

negative for antibodies to type A AI 

virus. Positive results must be further 

tested by an authorized laboratory using 

the hemagglutination inhibition test to 

detect antibodies to the hemagglutinin 

subtypes H5 and H7 when more than 4 

months of age and prior to the onset of 

egg production. We are proposing to 

remove this 2-step process and instead 

require that a minimum of 30 birds test 

negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of AI. 

The testing procedures in § 145.14(d) set 

out the official tests for AI and indicate 

that the official determination of a flock 

as positive for the H5 or H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza may be made only by 

the National Veterinary Services 

Laboratories. It is appropriate to refer to 

these testing procedures, which apply to 

all poultry covered in 9 CFR part 145, 

rather than setting out a separate testing 

procedure in the turkey breeding flock 

U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Clean 

classification. This change would also 

make the provisions in § 145.43 

consistent with the other AI 

classifications in the regulations. 

The regulations in § 145.53(e)(1) and 

(e)(2) also refer to testing for antibodies 

to the H5 and H7 subtypes of AI. As 

other AI classifications refer to testing 

for the disease itself and not antibodies 

to the disease, we would remove 

references to testing for antibodies to 

make the regulations consistent. 

We are proposing to make one other 

change related to AI in part 145. In 

§ 145.1, we are proposing to add a 

definition of avian influenza. We would 

define AI as ‘‘an infection or disease of 

poultry caused by viruses in the family 

Orthomyxoviridae, genus Influenzavirus 

A.’’ Including this definition would 

provide additional clarity regarding AI. 

Salmonella Negative Status for Primary 

Meat-Type Chicken Breeding Flocks in 

the U.S. Salmonella Monitored 

Classification 

The regulations in § 145.83(f) set out 

provisions for the U.S. Salmonella 

Monitored classification for primary 

meat-type chicken breeding flocks and 

the hatching eggs and chicks produced 

from it. This classification requires 

participating flocks to be maintained in 

compliance with §§ 147.21, 147.24(a), 

and 147.26, requires feed to be 

processed, stored, and transported to 

prevent contamination with Salmonella, 

and requires chicks to be hatched in a 

hatchery meeting the requirements of 

§§ 147.23 and 147.24(b) and sanitized or 

fumigated. It also contains testing 

procedures designed to verify the flock’s 

Salmonella status. 

In recent years, trading partners have 

begun to require that baby chicks and 

hatching eggs originate from breeding 

flocks free of certain serotypes of 

Salmonella. The current provisions of 

the U.S. Salmonella Monitored 

classification do not provide for 

serotyping. Therefore, we are proposing 

to add a serotyping provision to 

paragraph (f)(1)(vi). This paragraph 

currently requires an Authorized Agent 

to take environmental samples as 

described in § 147.12 from each flock at 

4 months of age and every 30 days 

thereafter. An authorized laboratory for 

Salmonella must then examine the 

environmental samples 

bacteriologically. We are proposing to 

require all Salmonella isolates from a 

flock to be serogrouped and reported to 

the Official State Agency on a monthly 

basis. 

We are also proposing to amend 

paragraph (f)(1)(vii), which provides 

that owners of flocks may vaccinate 

with a paratyphoid vaccine if they leave 

a sample unvaccinated until the flock 

reaches 4 months of age, to indicate that 

this sample will allow for the 

serological testing that would be 

required under proposed paragraph 

(f)(1)(vi). 

Some trading partners’ import 

requirements separate the Salmonella 

status of the flock from the status of the 

hatchery containing the hatching eggs 

and chicks produced from it. A primary 

meat-type chicken breeding flock can 

thus be considered to be free of 

Salmonella, based on regular testing, 

even if there is environmental 

Salmonella contamination in the 

hatchery. However, the current U.S. 

Salmonella Monitored classification 

does not provide for this; it applies to 

both the flock and the hatching eggs and 

chicks produced from it. To provide 

flock owners with a means to 

demonstrate their flock’s Salmonellanegative status, we are proposing to add 

a new paragraph (f)(1)(viii) with 

provisions under which a flock could be 

considered ‘‘Salmonella negative.’’ 

Under proposed paragraph (f)(1)(viii), 

any flock entering the production period 

that is in compliance with all the 

requirements of § 145.83(f) with no 

history of Salmonella isolations would 

be considered ‘‘Salmonella negative’’ 

and could retain this definition as long 

as no environmental or bird salmonella 

isolations are identified and confirmed 

from the flock or flock environment by 

sampling on 4 separate collection dates 

over a minimum of a 2-week period. 

Sampling and testing would have to be 

performed as described in proposed 

paragraph (f)(1)(vi). An unconfirmed 

environmental Salmonella isolation 

would not change this Salmonella 

negative status, as the ‘‘Salmonella 

negative’’ status is intended to reflect 

only the status of the flock itself. 

These proposed provisions would 

provide participants in the U.S. 

Salmonella Monitored classification for 

primary meat-type breeding turkeys 

with new means to verify the flock’s 

Salmonella status for trading partners. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57205 

New Provisions for Meat-Type 

Waterfowl Breeding Flocks and Products 

We are proposing to add a new 

subpart I to 9 CFR part 145, which 

would consist of §§ 145.91 through 

145.94. This subpart would set out 

special provisions for the participation 

of meat-type waterfowl breeding flocks 

and products in the Plan. Although 

subpart E in 9 CFR part 145 provides 

special provisions for waterfowl, 

exhibition poultry, and game bird 

breeding flocks and products, these 

provisions are directed towards 

hobbyist and exhibition waterfowl and 

are not necessarily suited for meat-type 

waterfowl breeding flocks. Adding a 

new subpart I would allow the NPIP to 

address issues related to meat-type 

waterfowl breeding flocks specifically. 

We are proposing to amend subpart E 

to make it clear that meat-type 

waterfowl breeding flocks would no 

longer be covered under that subpart. 

We would amend the section heading of 

subpart E and the introductory text of 

§ 145.52, ‘‘Participation,’’ to indicate that 

the subpart’s applicability is limited to 

hobbyist and exhibition waterfowl. We 

would add a sentence to the 

introductory text of § 145.52 indicating 

that the special provisions that apply to 

meat-type waterfowl flocks are found in 

subpart I of part 145. We would also 

amend §§ 145.53 and 145.54 in a few 

places to reflect these changes. The 

amendments can be found in the 

proposed regulatory text at the end of 

this document. 

The structure of subpart I would be 

similar to the structure of subparts B 

through H in part 145. Section 145.91, 

‘‘Definitions,’’ would contain a 

definition of meat-type waterfowl 

breeding flocks. This term would be 

defined as: Flocks of domesticated duck 

or goose that are composed of stock that 

has been developed and is maintained 

for the primary purpose of producing 

baby poultry that will be raised under 

confinement for the primary purpose of 

producing meat for human 

consumption. 

Section 145.92, ‘‘Participation,’’ would 

state that participating flocks of meattype waterfowl and the eggs and baby 

poultry produced from them shall 

comply with the applicable general 

provisions of subpart A of part 145 and 

the special provisions of proposed 

subpart I. In addition: 

∑ Started poultry would lose their 

identity under Plan terminology when 

not maintained by Plan participants 

under the conditions prescribed in 

§ 145.5(a). 

∑ Hatching eggs produced by primary 

breeding flocks would have to be 

fumigated (see § 147.25) or otherwise 

sanitized. 

∑ Any nutritive material provided to 

baby poultry would have to be free of 

the avian pathogens that are officially 

represented in the Plan disease 

classifications listed in § 145.10. 

These conditions, which are similar to 

the conditions for participation in other 

subparts in part 145, would help to 

ensure that flocks that participate in the 

Plan are free of poultry diseases. 

Section 145.93, ‘‘Terminology and 

classification; flocks and products,’’ 

would set out conditions for two Plan 

classifications for meat-type breeding 

waterfowl, the U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid 

Clean classification and the U.S. Avian 

Influenza Clean classification. The 

provisions of these classifications are 

similar to those for other types of 

poultry in part 145. 

Paragraph (a) would be reserved, as it 

is in other subparts in part 145. 

Paragraph (b) would contain the 

requirements for the U.S. PullorumTyphoid Clean classification. A 

qualifying flock would be one in which 

freedom from pullorum and typhoid has 

been demonstrated to the Official State 

Agency under the criteria in one of 

proposed paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(b)(5). 

Proposed paragraph (b)(1) would 

provide that a flock would qualify if it 

has been officially blood tested within 

the past 12 months with no reactors. 

Proposed paragraph (b)(2) would 

provide that a flock would qualify if it 

is a multiplier breeding flock, or a 

breeding flock composed of progeny of 

a primary breeding flock which is 

intended solely for the production of 

multiplier breeding flocks, and meets 

the following specifications as 

determined by the Official State Agency 

and the Service: 

∑ The flock is located in a State where 

all persons performing poultry disease 

diagnostic services within the State are 

required to report to the Official State 

Agency within 48 hours the source of all 

poultry specimens from which S. 

pullorum or S. gallinarum is isolated; 

∑ The flock is composed entirely of 

birds that originated from U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean breeding 

flocks or from flocks that met equivalent 

requirements under official supervision; 

and 

∑ The flock is located on a premises 

where a flock not classified as U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean was located 

the previous year. In this circumstance, 

an Authorized Testing Agent would 

have to blood test up to 300 birds per 

flock, as described in § 145.14, if the 

Official State Agency determines that 

the flock has been exposed to pullorumtyphoid. In making determinations of 

exposure and setting the number of 

birds to be blood tested, the Official 

State Agency would evaluate the results 

of any blood tests, described in 

§ 145.14(a)(1), that were performed on 

an unclassified flock located on the 

premises during the previous year; the 

origins of the unclassified flock; and the 

probability of contacts between the flock 

for which qualification is being sought 

and infected wild birds, contaminated 

feed or waste, or birds, equipment, 

supplies, or personnel from flocks 

infected with pullorum-typhoid. 

(NOTE: In addition to requiring blood 

testing when a flock not classified as 

U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean was 

located on a premises the previous year, 

similar provisions in §§ 145.23(b)(2)(iii), 

145.33(b)(2)(iii), 145.43(b)(2)(iii), and 

145.53(b)(2)(iii) also require blood 

testing when no poultry has been 

located on the premises the previous 

year. Testing is not necessary in the 

latter circumstance, and we are 

proposing to remove the requirement to 

conduct blood testing on a flock when 

no poultry was located on the premises 

the previous year in each of these 

paragraphs.) 

Paragraph (b)(3) would provide that a 

flock would qualify if it is a multiplier 

breeding flock that originated from U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean breeding 

flocks or from flocks that met equivalent 

requirements under official supervision, 

and is located in a State in which it has 

been determined by the Service that: 

∑ All hatcheries within the State are 

qualified as ‘‘National Plan Hatcheries’’ 

or have met equivalent requirements for 

pullorum-typhoid control under official 

supervision; 

∑ All hatchery supply flocks within 

the State are qualified as U.S. PullorumTyphoid Clean or have met equivalent 

requirements for pullorum-typhoid 

control under official supervision. 

However, if other domesticated fowl are 

maintained on the same premises as the 

participating flock, freedom from 

pullorum-typhoid infection would be 

demonstrated by an official blood test of 

each of these fowl; 

∑ All shipments of products other 

than U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean, or 

equivalent, into the State are prohibited; 

∑ All persons performing poultry 

disease diagnostic services within the 

State are required to report to the 

Official State Agency within 48 hours 

the source of all poultry specimens from 

which S. pullorum or S. gallinarum is 

isolated; 

∑ All reports of any disease outbreak 

involving a disease covered under the 

Plan are promptly followed by an 

investigation by the Official State 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57206 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Agency to determine the origin of the 

infection. If the origin of the infection 

involves another State, or if there is 

exposure to poultry in another State 

from the infected flock, then the NPIP 

would conduct an investigation; 

∑ All flocks found to be infected with 

pullorum or typhoid are quarantined 

until marketed or destroyed under the 

supervision of the Official State Agency, 

or until subsequently blood tested, 

following the procedure for reacting 

flocks as contained in § 145.14(a)(5), 

and all birds fail to demonstrate 

pullorum or typhoid infection; and 

∑ All poultry, including exhibition, 

exotic, and game birds, but excluding 

waterfowl, going to public exhibition 

shall come from U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid 

Clean or equivalent flocks, or have had 

a negative pullorum-typhoid test within 

90 days of going to public exhibition. 

Discontinuation of any of these 

conditions or procedures, or the 

occurrence of repeated outbreaks of 

pullorum or typhoid in poultry breeding 

flocks within or originating within the 

State would be grounds for the Service 

to revoke its determination that such 

conditions and procedures have been 

met or complied with. Such action 

would not be taken until a thorough 

investigation has been made by the 

Service and the Official State Agency 

has been given an opportunity to 

present its views. 

Paragraph (b)(4) would provide that a 

flock would qualify if it is a multiplier 

breeding flock located in a State which 

has been determined by the Service to 

be in compliance with the provisions of 

proposed paragraph (a)(3), and in which 

pullorum disease or fowl typhoid is not 

known to exist nor to have existed in 

hatchery supply flocks within the State 

during the preceding 24 months. 

Paragraph (b)(5) would provide that a 

flock would qualify if it is a primary 

breeding flock located in a State 

determined to be in compliance with 

the provisions of paragraph (a)(4) of this 

section, and in which a sample of 300 

birds from flocks of more than 300, and 

each bird in flocks of 300 or less, has 

been officially tested for pullorumtyphoid within the past 12 months with 

no reactors. However, when a flock is a 

primary breeding flock located in a State 

which has been deemed to be a U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State for the 

past 3 years, and during which time no 

isolation of pullorum or typhoid has 

been made that can be traced to a source 

in that State, a bacteriological 

examination monitoring program or a 

serological examination monitoring 

program acceptable to the Official State 

Agency and approved by the Service 

could be used in lieu of annual blood 

testing. 

Compliance with any one of these 

provisions is sufficient to ensure that 

pullorum-typhoid is not present in a 

meat-type waterfowl breeding flock in 

the U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean 

classification, as evidenced by the 

success of these provisions when used 

for the classification in other types of 

poultry. 

Proposed paragraph (c) would set out 

the provisions of the U.S. Avian 

Influenza Clean classification. The 

intent of this program would be to serve 

as the basis from which the meat-type 

waterfowl breeding-hatchery industry 

may conduct a program for the 

prevention and control of H5/H7 AI. It 

would be intended to determine the 

presence of the H5/H7 AI in meat-type 

waterfowl breeding flocks through 

routine surveillance of each 

participating breeding flock. There 

would be separate surveillance 

provisions for primary breeding flocks 

and multiplier breeding flocks of meattype waterfowl. 

Paragraph (c)(1) would provide that a 

primary meat-type waterfowl breeding 

flock would qualify for the U.S. Avian 

Influenza Clean classification if a 

minimum of 30 birds from the flock 

have been tested negative to H5/H7 AI 

as provided in § 145.14(d) when more 

than 4 months of age. To retain this 

classification: 

∑ A sample of at least 30 birds would 

have to be tested negative at intervals of 

90 days; or 

∑ A sample of fewer than 30 birds 

could be tested, and found to be 

negative, at any one time if all pens 

were equally represented and a total of 

30 birds were tested within each 90-day 

period. 

Paragraph (c)(2) would provide that a 

multiplier meat-type waterfowl breeding 

flock would also qualify for the 

classification if a minimum of 30 birds 

from the flock have been tested negative 

to H5/H7 AI as provided in § 145.14(d) 

when more than 4 months of age. The 

options for retaining the classification 

would be identical to those for primary 

breeding flocks. 

Consistent with the changes proposed 

in this document to require testing of 

spent fowl in the AI programs for other 

types of poultry, paragraph (c)(3) would 

require that, during each 90-day period, 

all primary and multiplier spent fowl, 

up to a maximum of 30, be tested 

serologically and found negative within 

21 days prior to movement to slaughter. 

These provisions would be sufficient 

to determine whether H5/H7 AI is 

present in participating meat-type 

waterfowl breeding flocks. Similar 

provisions have been used successfully 

in other AI classifications in part 145. 

Section 145.94, ‘‘Terminology and 

classification; States,’’ would set out 

conditions for the U.S. PullorumTyphoid Clean State classification. 

Several of the subparts for specific types 

of poultry in part 145 contain provisions 

for this classification. To be declared a 

U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State, 

APHIS would have to determine that the 

following two requirements have been 

met: 

∑ The State is in compliance with the 

provisions contained in 

§§ 145.23(b)(3)(i) through (vii), 

145.33(b)(3)(i) through (vii), 

145.43(b)(3)(i) through (vi), 

145.53(b)(3)(i) through (vii), 

145.73(b)(2)(i), 145.83(b)(2)(i), and 

proposed 145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii). 

Compliance with these provisions 

ensures that the State has the 

infrastructure to detect and respond to 

outbreaks of pullorum-typhoid; and 

∑ No pullorum disease or fowl 

typhoid is known to exist nor to have 

existed in hatchery supply flocks within 

the State during the preceding 12 

months. However, pullorum disease or 

fowl typhoid found within the 

preceding 24 months in waterfowl, 

exhibition poultry, and game bird 

breeding flocks would not prevent a 

State that is otherwise eligible from 

qualifying. This exception is standard in 

the U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State 

classifications; while pullorum disease 

is found extremely rarely in the United 

States, it is most often found in these 

types of poultry, often outside a 

commercial poultry production setting, 

and it is not necessary to remove a U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State 

classification for such a finding. 

If these conditions are discontinued, 

or repeated outbreaks of pullorum or 

typhoid occur in hatchery supply flocks 

of this section, or if an infection spreads 

from the originating premises, APHIS 

would have grounds to revoke its 

determination that the State is entitled 

to this classification. Such action would 

not be taken until a thorough 

investigation has been made by the 

Service and the Official State Agency 

has been given an opportunity for a 

hearing in accordance with rules of 

practice adopted by the Administrator. 

As noted, several of the subparts for 

specific types of poultry in part 145 

contain provisions for the U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State 

classification. All of those subparts 

contain lists of the provisions with 

which the State must be in compliance. 

Some of these do not reflect the addition 

of relevant provisions in subparts G and 

H (for primary egg-type chicken and 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57207 

primary meat-type chicken breeding 

flocks, respectively); none of these 

include the provisions in 

§ 145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii) that we are 

proposing to add. We are therefore also 

proposing to update the lists of 

provisions with which a State must be 

in compliance in order to be declared a 

U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State in 

§§ 145.24(a)(1)(i), 145.34(a)(1)(i), 

145.44(a)(1)(i), and 145.54(a)(1)(i) to 

keep them up to date and to reflect the 

proposed changes. 

Definition of H5/H7 LPAI in Part 146 

In § 146.1, the term H5/H7 low 

pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) is 

defined as follows: ‘‘An infection of 

poultry caused by an influenza A virus 

of H5 or H7 subtype that has an 

intravenous pathogenicity index test in 

6-week-old chickens less than 1.2 or any 

infection with influenza A viruses of H5 

or H7 subtype for which nucleotide 

sequencing has not demonstrated the 

presence of multiple basic amino acids 

at the cleavage site of the 

hemagglutinin.’’ 

We added this definition to the 

regulations in an interim rule effective 

and published in the Federal Register 

on September 26, 2006 (71 FR 53601- 

56333, Docket No. APHIS-2005-0109). It 

was based on the OIE guidelines for AI 

that were current at the time of 

publication. 

Since then, the OIE has updated its AI 

guidelines, including the definition of 

H5/H7 LPAI. To ensure that our 

regulations continue to be consistent 

with the OIE guidelines, we are 

proposing to update the definition of 

H5/H7 LPAI. The new definition would 

read: ‘‘An infection of poultry caused by 

an influenza A virus of H5 or H7 

subtype that has an intravenous 

pathogenicity index in 6-week-old 

chickens less than 1.2 or less than 75 

percent mortality in 4- to 8-week-old 

chickens infected intravenously, or an 

infection with influenza A viruses of H5 

or H7 subtype with a cleavage site that 

is not consistent with a previously 

identified highly pathogenic avian 

influenza virus.’’ This change would 

keep the regulations up to date with 

international standards. 

Addition of Provisions for Commercial 

Table-Egg Layer Pullets 

Subpart B of part 146 (§§ 146.21 

through 146.24) contains special 

provisions for commercial table-egg 

layer flocks. We are proposing to add 

provisions for commercial table-egg 

layer pullets to subpart B. 

We would define a table-egg layer 

pullet in § 146.21 as a sexually 

immature domesticated chicken grown 

for the primary purpose of producing 

eggs for human consumption. By 

definition, because the table-egg layer 

pullet is not sexually mature, it cannot 

yet lay eggs. Pullets are typically less 

than 20 weeks of age. Table-egg layer 

pullets are moved to a layer house when 

they become sexually mature, after 

which they are called table-egg layers. 

The regulations in subpart B have 

focused on table-egg layer flocks 

themselves, but the introduction of 

table-egg layer pullets into a flock is a 

potential pathway for the introduction 

of diseases, particularly as table-egg 

layer flocks are often assembled from 

multiple pullet sources. Thus, we are 

proposing to include provisions in the 

special provisions for commercial tableegg layers in subpart B of part 146 to 

address the table-egg layer pullets that 

will ultimately be moved onto the tableegg layer premises. 

In addition, the definition of 

commercial table-egg layer flock in 

§ 146.1 reads: ‘‘All table-egg layers of 

one classification in one barn or house.’’ 

We are proposing to replace this with a 

new definition: ‘‘All table-egg layers of 

common age or pullet source on one 

premises.’’ Table-egg layer flocks are 

normally composed of birds of common 

age or pullet source, but the birds may 

be in one house or multiple houses; 

older table-egg layer premises are more 

likely to have one flock spread across 

multiple houses. By removing the 

requirement that a flock be contained in 

a single barn or house and instead 

designating a flock as a group of tableegg layers of common age or pullet 

source, we would more accurately 

reflect the organization of table-egg layer 

flocks. We would retain the definition of 

commercial table-egg layer premises in 

§ 146.1, which indicates that a premises 

includes all contiguous flocks of 

commercial table-egg layers under 

common ownership, to reflect the fact 

that a commercial table-egg layer 

premises may comprise many 

individual flocks. 

We would also add a definition of 

commercial table-egg layer pullet flock 

to § 146.1. This definition would read as 

follows: ‘‘A table-egg layer flock prior to 

the onset of egg production.’’ 

In § 146.23, paragraph (a) sets out the 

requirements of the U.S. H5/H7 Avian 

Influenza Monitored program for 

commercial table-egg layers. The 

introductory text of this paragraph states 

that this program is intended to be the 

basis from which the table-egg layer 

industry may conduct a program to 

monitor for the H5/H7 subtypes of AI. 

It is intended to determine the presence 

of the H5/H7 subtypes of AI in table-egg 

layers through routine serological 

surveillance of each participating 

commercial table-egg layer flock. 

We are proposing to amend this 

discussion to refer to commercial tableegg layer pullet flocks as well as 

commercial table-egg layer flocks. We 

are also proposing to remove the 

reference to serological testing 

specifically, for reasons similar to those 

given earlier for removing the specific 

references to serological testing from the 

U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Clean 

classification for turkey breeding flocks 

and for waterfowl, exhibition poultry, 

and game bird breeding flocks. 

Within paragraph (a), paragraphs 

(a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) set out the 

requirements for surveillance of 

commercial table-egg layers. We are 

proposing to add a new paragraph (a)(1) 

with requirements for table-egg layer 

pullet flocks and redesignate current 

(a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) as paragraphs 

(a)(2)(i), (a)(2)(ii), and (a)(2)(iii). In those 

paragraphs, we would remove 

references to testing negative for 

antibodies to H5/H7 AI and instead refer 

simply to testing negative for H5/H7 AI, 

for the reasons mentioned earlier with 

regard to similar changes to the U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Clean classification 

for turkey breeding flocks. We would 

also remove the current references to 

testing egg samples and add references 

to the official AI tests in § 146.13(b), for 

the reasons mentioned earlier with 

regard to similar changes to the U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Clean classification 

for waterfowl, game bird, and exhibition 

poultry breeding flocks. 

Proposed paragraph (a)(1) would 

provide two options by which table-egg 

layer pullet flocks could qualify for the 

U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Monitored 

classification. Such a flock would 

qualify if: 

∑ It is a commercial table-egg layer 

pullet flock in which a minimum of 11 

birds have been tested negative to the 

H5/H7 subtypes of AI as provided in 

§ 146.13(b) within 30 days prior to 

movement; or 

∑ It is a commercial table-egg layer 

pullet flock that has an ongoing active 

and diagnostic surveillance program for 

the H5/H7 subtypes of AI which the 

number of birds tested is equivalent to 

the number required in the other option 

and that is approved by the Official 

State Agency and the Service. 

Any ongoing active and diagnostic 

surveillance program that is approved 

by the Official State Agency and APHIS 

would have to test a number of birds 

equivalent to the first requirement, but 

this by itself would not be sufficient to 

secure approval for the program; the 

Official State Agency and APHIS would 

have to agree that the detailed testing 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57208 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

plan for the alternate program is 

sufficient to establish a level of 

confidence for the detection of AI that 

is equivalent to that of the first 

requirement. Allowing participating 

flocks to develop an alternative ongoing 

active and diagnostic surveillance 

program of equivalent efficacy would 

give the flock owners some flexibility. 

In § 146.24, paragraph (a) sets out the 

provisions for the U.S. H5/H7 Avian 

Influenza Monitored State, Layers 

classification. We would amend these 

provisions to indicate that this 

classification also includes table-egg 

layer pullet flocks. Under paragraph 

(a)(1)(i), in order for a State to qualify 

for the U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza 

Monitored State, Layers classification, 

all the commercial table-egg layer flocks 

that are not exempt from the special 

provisions of subpart B under § 146.22 

and all the commercial table-egg layer 

pullet flocks that supply those flocks 

within the State would have to be 

classified as U.S. H5/H7 Avian 

Influenza Monitored under § 146.23(a). 

Requirements for specimen reporting 

and subtyping in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) 

and (a)(1)(iv) would also apply to 

commercial table-egg layer pullet flocks 

as well as commercial table-egg layer 

flocks. Finally, under paragraph 

(a)(1)(v), all table-egg layer pullet flocks 

within the State that are found to be 

infected with H5/H7 AI would have to 

be quarantined, in accordance with an 

initial State response and containment 

plan as described in 9 CFR part 56 and 

under the supervision of the Official 

State Agency, the same as is currently 

required for table-egg layer flocks. 

These changes would expand the 

reach of the U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza 

Monitored classification for commercial 

table-egg layers and make it more 

effective. 

Testing Procedures for Other U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Monitored 

Classifications in Part 146 

Within part 146, § 146.33 contains the 

requirements for the U.S. H5/H7 Avian 

Influenza Monitored classification for 

meat-type chicken slaughter plants, 

§ 146.43 contains the requirements for 

that classification for meat-type turkey 

slaughter plants, § 146.53(a) contains 

the requirements for commercial 

waterfowl and commercial upland game 

bird slaughter plants, and § 146.53(b) 

contains the requirements for raised-forrelease upland game birds and raisedfor-release waterfowl. Similar to other 

classifications discussed earlier in this 

proposal, all of these classifications 

contain testing requirements for H5/H7 

LPAI but do not specify that testing 

must be conducted as provided in 

§ 146.13(b), which contains the official 

AI tests for part 146. We are proposing 

to amend these requirements to indicate 

that birds must be tested for these 

classifications as provided in 

§ 146.13(b). In addition, we are 

proposing to remove a reference to 

testing for antibodies to H5/H7 LPAI in 

§ 146.53(a)(2), for reasons identical to 

those given for similar changes 

described earlier in this document. 

Shoe Cover Sampling Technique for 

Collection of Salmonella Samples 

Section 147.12 sets out procedures for 

collection, isolation, and identification 

of Salmonella from environmental 

samples, cloacal swabs, chick box 

papers, and meconium samples. 

Paragraph (a) of § 147.12 sets out 

procedures specific to egg- and meattype chickens, waterfowl, exhibition 

poultry, and game birds. This paragraph 

includes various methods for collecting 

samples and a procedure for testing 

chick meconium. 

We are proposing to add a new 

sampling technique in a proposed new 

paragraph (a)(6). This technique uses 

absorbable shoe covers to collect 

samples. Absorbable fabric shoe covers 

involve the exposure of the bottom 

surface of shoe covers to the surface of 

floor litter and slat areas. The shoe cover 

sampling technique would involve 

wearing clean latex gloves and placing 

the shoe covers over footwear that is 

only worn inside the poultry house. 

This could be footwear dedicated to the 

facility or disposable overshoes. Each 

pair of shoe covers would be worn 

while walking at a normal pace over a 

distance of 305 meters (1000 feet). For 

flocks with fewer than 500 breeders, at 

least 1 pair of shoe covers would be 

worn to sample the floor of the bird 

area. For flocks with 500 or more 

breeders, at least 2 pairs of shoe covers 

would be worn to sample the floor of 

the bird area. After sampling, each shoe 

cover would be placed in a sterile 

container with 30 ml of double strength 

skim milk, to protect Salmonella 

viability during storage and shipment. 

The sterile containers would have to be 

sealed and promptly refrigerated at 2 to 

4 °C or place in a cooler with ice or ice 

packs, but not frozen. Samples would 

have to be stored at refrigerator 

temperatures of 2 to 4 °C no more than 

5 days prior to culturing. 

This procedure would provide an 

effective alternative means to collect 

Salmonella samples in poultry houses. 

Approved Tests 

Within § 147.52, paragraph (b) sets 

out a procedure by which diagnostic test 

kits that are not licensed by APHIS (e.g., 

bacteriological culturing kits) may be 

approved for use in the NPIP. We are 

proposing to list in a new paragraph (c) 

in § 147.52 the test kits that have been 

approved through this process. These 

are the test kits we are proposing to list: 

∑ Rapid Chek©Select TMSalmonella 

Test Kit, Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. 

Newark, DE 19713. 

∑ ADIAFOOD Rapid Pathogen 

Detection System for Salmonella spp., 

AES Chemunex Canada. Laval, QC 

(Canada) H7L4S3. 

∑ DuPont Qualicon BAX Polymerase 

Chain Reaction (PCR)-based assay for 

Salmonella, DuPont Qualicon, 

Wilmington, DE 19810. 

Updates 

The regulations in § 145.10 provide 

for the use of certain terms and 

illustrative designs to designate 

participants in NPIP programs for 

breeding poultry; the regulations in 

§ 146.9 do the same for commercial 

poultry. Both of these sections refer to 

certain subparts of parts 145 and 146, 

respectively, that include provisions for 

the programs; § 145.10 refers to subparts 

B, C, D, E, and F, while § 146.9 refers 

to subparts B, C, and D. However, these 

lists do not include subparts that have 

been added recently: Subparts G and H 

in part 145 and subpart E in part 146. 

To correct the errors and ensure that the 

regulations accommodate the addition 

of future subparts, we are removing the 

lists of subparts from §§ 145.10 and 

146.9 and instead referring generally to 

parts 145 and 146, respectively. 

Within §§ 145.10 and 146.9, we are 

also updating the lists of classifications 

eligible to use the various illustrative 

designs. These lists have become out of 

date as well. 

Section 147.45, ‘‘Official delegates,’’ 

provides that each cooperating State 

shall be entitled to one official delegate 

to the Plan Conference for each of the 

programs prescribed in subparts B, C, D, 

E, F, G, and H of part 145 and for each 

of the programs prescribed in subparts 

B, C, D, and E of part 146 in which it 

has one or more participants at the time 

of the conference. Rather than proposing 

to update this list to reflect the proposed 

addition of a new subpart I in part 145, 

we are proposing to simply refer to each 

of the programs prescribed in parts 145 

and 146, generally. In both parts 145 

and 146, subpart A sets out general 

provisions for participation in the NPIP, 

but not specific programs; thus, 

referring generally to the programs 

prescribed in parts 145 and 146 

includes all the necessary programs. 

Making this change would simplify the 

regulations. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57209 

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12866. The 

proposed rule has been determined to 

be not significant for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

In accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, we have analyzed the 

potential economic effects of this action 

on small entities. The analysis is 

summarized below. Copies of the full 

analysis are available by contacting the 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT or on the 

Regulations.gov Web site (see 

ADDRESSES above for instructions for 

accessing Regulations.gov). 

This rule would introduce a set of 

minor changes to the NPIP and would 

not involve significant changes in 

program operations. These changes are 

in line with the industry’s best practices 

and would likely involve no additional 

costs in order to meet these 

requirements. Additionally, the NPIP is 

a voluntary program established 

between the industry and State and 

Federal governments. Any person 

producing or dealing in products may 

participate in the NPIP when he or she 

has demonstrated that his or her 

facilities, personnel, and practices are 

adequate for carrying out the applicable 

provisions of the NPIP. NPIP 

participation allows for greater ease in 

moving hatching eggs, live birds, and 

commercial poultry products within a 

State, across State lines, and into other 

countries. Most countries will not 

accept hatching eggs, live birds, or 

commercial poultry products from a 

U.S. operation unless it can be shown to 

be an NPIP participant. The poultry 

industry plays an important role in the 

U.S. economy, and the proposed 

amendments would help to ensure the 

safety of the industry and benefit the 

economy. 

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 7 CFR part 

3015, subpart V.) 

Executive Order 12988 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is 

adopted: (1) No retroactive effect will be 

given to this rule; and (2) administrative 

proceedings will not be required before 

parties may file suit in court challenging 

this rule. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule contains no new 

information collection or recordkeeping 

requirements under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq.). 

List of Subjects 

9 CFR Part 56 

Animal diseases, Indemnity 

payments, Low pathogenic avian 

influenza, Poultry. 

9 CFR Parts 145, 146, and 147 

Animal diseases, Poultry and poultry 

products, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

■ Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 

CFR parts 56, 145, 146, and 147 as 

follows: 

PART 56—CONTROL OF H5/H7 LOW 

PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 9 CFR 

part 56 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301–8317; 7 CFR 2.22, 

2.80, and 371.4. 

■ 2. Section 56.1 is amended as follows: 

■ a. By removing the definitions of 

commercial meat-type flock, 

commercial table-egg layer flock, 

commercial table-egg layer premises, 

meat-type chicken, and meat-type 

turkey. 

■ b. By adding a definition of 

commercial flock or slaughter plant, in 

alphabetical order, to read as set forth 

below. 

§ 56.1 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Commercial flock or slaughter plant. 

A commercial poultry flock or slaughter 

plant that is required because of its size 

to participate in the special provisions 

in part 146 of this chapter in order to 

participate in the Plan. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 56.3 is amended as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (b) introductory text, 

by removing the word ‘‘(b)(7)’’ each time 

it occurs and adding the word ‘‘(b)(3)’’ in 

its place. 

■ b. By revising paragraphs (b)(1) and 

(b)(2) to read as set forth below. 

■ c. By removing paragraphs (b)(4) 

through (b)(6). 

■ d. By redesignating paragraph (b)(7) as 

paragraph (b)(3). 

§ 56.3 Payment of indemnity. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) The poultry are from a breeding 

flock that participates in any Plan 

program in part 145 of this chapter but 

that does not participate in the U.S. 

Avian Influenza Clean or the U.S. H5/ 

H7 Avian Influenza Clean program of 

the Plan available to the flock in part 

145 of this chapter; or 

(2) The poultry are from a commercial 

flock or slaughter plant, but the flock or 

slaughter plant does not participate in 

the U.S. Avian Influenza Monitored 

program available to the commercial 

flock or slaughter plant in part 146 of 

this chapter; or 

* * * * * 

PART 145–NATIONAL POULTRY 

IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR BREEDING 

POULTRY 

■ 4. 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. 

■ 5. Section 145.1 is amended by 

adding, in alphabetical order, a new 

definition of avian influenza to read as 

set forth below. 

§ 145.1 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Avian influenza. An infection or 

disease of poultry caused by viruses in 

the family Orthomyxoviridae, genus 

Influenzavirus A. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Section 145.10 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By revising the introductory text to 

read as set forth below. 

■ b. In paragraph (r), by removing the 

words ‘‘and 145.53(e)’’ and adding the 

words ‘‘145.63(b), 145.73(f), and 

145.83(g)’’ in their place. 

■ c. In paragraph (t), by removing the 

citation ‘‘§ 145.43(g)’’ and adding the 

words ‘‘§§ 145.43(g), 145.53(e), and 

145.93(b)’’ in its place. 

§ 145.10 Terminology and classification; 

flocks, products, and States. 

Participating flocks, products 

produced from them, and States that 

have met the requirements of a 

classification in this part may be 

designated by the corresponding 

illustrative design in this section. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 145.14 is amended as 

follows: 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57210 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

3Procedures 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. 

■ a. In the introductory text, in the first 

sentence, by removing the word ‘‘blood’’ 

each time it occurs. 

■ b. In the introductory text, in the 

second sentence, by removing the words 

‘‘Blood samples’’ and adding the word 

‘‘Samples’’ in its place; and by removing 

the word ‘‘drawn’’ and adding the word 

‘‘collected’’ in its place. 

■ c. By revising the introductory text of 

paragraph (b) and paragraph (b)(1) to 

read as set forth below. 

■ d. In paragraph (b)(2), by adding the 

word ‘‘serological’’ before the word 

‘‘tests’’; and by adding the words ‘‘, M. 

meleagridis,’’ after the word 

‘‘gallisepticum’’. 

■ e. By revising paragraph (b)(5) to read 

as set forth below. 

■ f. By removing and reserving 

paragraph (c). 

§ 145.14 Testing. 

* * * * * 

(b) For Mycoplasma gallisepticum, M. 

meleagridis, and M. synoviae. (1) The 

official blood tests for M. gallisepticum, 

M. meleagridis, and M. synoviae shall be 

the serum plate agglutination test, the 

tube agglutination test, the 

hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, 

the microhemagglutination inhibition 

test, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent 

assay (ELISA) test,3 a PCR-based test, or 

a combination of two or more of these 

tests. The HI test or the 

microhemagglutination inhibition test 

shall be used to confirm the positive 

results of other serological 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. 

* * * * * 

(5) The official molecular examination 

procedures for M. gallisepticum are the 

polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test 

described in § 147.30 of this subchapter 

and the real-time PCR test described in 

§ 147.31 of this subchapter. The official 

molecular examination procedure for M. 

synoviae is the PCR test described in 

§ 147.30 of this subchapter. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Section 145.23 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(2)(iii), in the first 

sentence, by removing the words ‘‘either 

no poultry or’’, and by removing the 

word ‘‘were’’ and adding the word ‘‘was’’ 

in its place. 

■ b. In paragraph (h) introductory text, 

by removing the words ‘‘serological’’ and 

‘‘one of’’. 

■ c. By adding a new paragraph (h)(1) 

and revising paragraph (h)(2) to read as 

set forth below. 

§ 145.23 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(1) It is a multiplier breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative for antibodies to avian 

influenza when more than 4 months of 

age. To retain this classification: 

(i) A sample of at least 30 birds must 

be tested negative at intervals of 90 

days; or 

(ii) A sample of fewer than 30 birds 

may be tested, and found to be negative, 

at any one time if all pens are equally 

represented and a total of 30 birds is 

tested within each 90-day period; or 

(iii) The flock is tested as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) at intervals of 30 days or less 

and found to be negative, and a total of 

30 samples are collected and tested 

within each 90-day period; and 

(2) During each 90-day period, all 

multiplier spent fowl, up to a maximum 

of 30, must be tested and found negative 

within 21 days prior to movement to 

slaughter. 

* * * * * 

§ 145.24 [Amended] 

■ 9. In § 145.24, paragraph (a)(1)(i) is 

amended by removing the word ‘‘and’’ 

and by adding the words ‘‘, and 

§ 145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii)’’ before the 

period at the end of the paragraph. 

■ 10. Section 145.33 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(2)(iii), in the first 

sentence, by removing the words ‘‘either 

no poultry or’’, and by removing the 

word ‘‘were’’ and adding the word ‘‘was’’ 

in its place. 

■ b. In paragraph (l) introductory text, 

by removing the words ‘‘serological’’ and 

‘‘one of’’. 

■ c. By adding a new paragraph (l)(1) 

and revising paragraph (l)(2) to read as 

set forth below. 

§ 145.33 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(l) * * * 

(1) It is a multiplier breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative for antibodies to avian 

influenza when more than 4 months of 

age. To retain this classification: 

(i) A sample of at least 15 birds must 

be tested negative at intervals of 90 

days; or 

(ii) A sample of fewer than 15 birds 

may be tested, and found to be negative, 

at any one time if all pens are equally 

represented and a total of 30 birds is 

tested within each 90-day period; or 

(iii) The flock is tested as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) at intervals of 30 days or less 

and found to be negative, and a total of 

15 samples are collected and tested 

within each 90-day period; and 

(2) During each 90-day period, all 

multiplier spent fowl, up to a maximum 

of 30, must be tested and found negative 

within 21 days prior to movement to 

slaughter. 

* * * * * 

§ 145.34 [Amended] 

■ 11. In § 145.34, paragraph (a)(1)(i) is 

amended by removing the word ‘‘and’’ 

and by adding the words ‘‘, and 

§ 145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii)’’ before the 

period at the end of the paragraph. 

■ 12. Section 145.43 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(2)(iii), in the first 

sentence, by removing the words ‘‘either 

no poultry or’’, and by removing the 

word ‘‘were’’ and adding the word ‘‘was’’ 

in its place. 

■ b. By removing and reserving 

paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3). 

■ c. In paragraph (f)(5), by redesignating 

footnote 6 as footnote 5. 

■ d. In paragraph (g) introductory text, 

by removing the words ‘‘H5 and H7’’ and 

adding the word ‘‘H5/H7’’ in their place 

each time they appear; and by removing 

the word ‘‘serological’’. 

■ e. By revising paragraph (g)(1) 

introductory text and paragraph (g)(2) 

introductory text to read as set forth 

below. 

■ f. In paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(2)(i), 

by removing the words ‘‘Provided, that 

primary spent fowl be tested within 30 

days prior to movement to disposal;’’. 

■ g. By redesignating paragraph (g)(3) as 

paragraph (g)(4). 

■ h. By adding a new paragraph (g)(3) to 

read as set forth below. 

§ 145.43 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) It is a primary breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza as provided in 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57211 

§ 145.14(d) when more than 4 months of 

age and prior to the onset of egg 

production. To retain this classification: 

* * * * * 

(2) It is a multiplier breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) when more than 4 months of 

age and prior to the onset of egg 

production. To retain this classification: 

* * * * * 

(3) During each 90-day period, all 

spent fowl, up to a maximum of 30, 

must be tested and found negative 

within 21 days prior to movement to 

slaughter. 

§ 145.44 [Amended] 

■ 13. In § 145.44, paragraph (a)(1)(i) is 

amended by removing the word ‘‘and’’; 

and by adding the words ‘‘, 

§ 145.73(b)(2)(i), § 145.83(b)(2)(i), and 

§ 145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii)’’ before the 

period at the end of the paragraph. 

Subpart E—Special Provisions for 

Hobbyist and Exhibition Waterfowl, 

Exhibition Poultry, and Game Bird 

Breeding Flocks and Products 

■ 14. The heading for subpart E is 

revised to read as set forth above. 

■ 15. In § 145.52, the introductory text 

is revised to read as follows: 

§ 145.52 Participation. 

Participating flocks of hobbyist and 

exhibition waterfowl, exhibition 

poultry, and game birds, and the eggs 

and baby poultry produced from them 

shall comply with the applicable 

general provisions of subpart A of this 

part and the special provisions of this 

subpart E. The special provisions that 

apply to meat-type waterfowl flocks are 

found in subpart I of this part. 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Section 145.53 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(2)(iii), in the first 

sentence, by removing the words ‘‘either 

no poultry or’’, and by removing the 

word ‘‘were’’ and adding the word ‘‘was’’ 

in its place. 

■ b. In paragraph (b)(5), by adding the 

words ‘‘hobbyist or exhibition’’ before 

the word ‘‘waterfowl’’. 

■ c. In paragraph (e) in the introductory 

text, second sentence, by adding the 

words ‘‘hobbyist or exhibition’’ before 

the word ‘‘waterfowl’’; and by removing 

the word ‘‘serological’’. 

■ d. In the introductory text of 

paragraph (e)(1), by removing the words 

‘‘for antibodies’’; and by removing the 

words ‘‘by the agar gel immunodiffusion 

test specified in § 147.9 of this chapter’’ 

and adding the words ‘‘as provided in 

§ 145.14(d)’’ in their place. 

■ e. In the introductory text of 

paragraph (e)(2), by removing the words 

‘‘for antibodies’’; and by removing the 

words ‘‘by the agar gel immunodiffusion 

test specified in § 147.9 of this chapter’’ 

and adding the words ‘‘as provided in 

§ 145.14(d)’’ in their place. 

■ f. By adding a new paragraph (e)(3) to 

read as set forth below. 

§ 145.53 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(3) During each 90-day period, all 

spent fowl, up to a maximum of 30, 

must be tested and found negative 

within 21 days prior to movement to 

slaughter. 

§ 145.54 [Amended] 

■ 17. In § 145.54, paragraph (a)(1)(i) is 

amended by removing the word ‘‘and’’; 

and by adding the words ‘‘, 

§ 145.73(b)(2)(i), § 145.83(b)(2)(i), and 

§ 145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii)’’ before the 

period at the end of the paragraph. 

■ 18. In § 145.73, paragraph (f) is 

amended as follows: 

■ a. In the introductory text, second 

sentence, by removing the word 

‘‘serological.’’ 

■ b. By revising paragraph (f)(1) and 

adding a new paragraph (f)(2) to read as 

set forth below. 

§ 145.73 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) It is a primary breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative for antibodies to avian 

influenza when more than 4 months of 

age. To retain this classification: 

(i) A sample of at least 30 birds must 

be tested negative at intervals of 90 

days; or 

(ii) A sample of fewer than 30 birds 

may be tested, and found to be negative, 

at any one time if all pens are equally 

represented and a total of 30 birds is 

tested within each 90-day period; or 

(iii) The flock is tested as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) at intervals of 30 days or less 

and found to be negative, and a total of 

30 samples are collected and tested 

within each 90-day period; and 

(2) During each 90-day period, all 

primary spent fowl, up to a maximum 

of 30, must be tested serologically and 

found negative within 21 days prior to 

movement to slaughter. 

■ 19. Section 145.83 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (f)(1)(vi), by removing 

the semicolon at the end of the 

paragraph and adding a period in its 

place; and by adding a new sentence at 

the end of the paragraph to read as set 

forth below. 

■ b. In paragraph (f)(1)(vii), by adding 

the words ‘‘to allow for the serological 

testing required under paragraph 

(f)(1)(vi) of this section’’ after the word 

‘‘age’’. 

■ c. By adding a new paragraph 

(f)(1)(viii) to read as set forth below. 

■ d. In paragraph (f)(3), by removing the 

words ‘‘this classification’’ and adding 

the words ‘‘paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through 

(f)(1)(vii) of this section’’ in their place. 

■ e. In the introductory text of 

paragraph (g), second sentence, by 

removing the word ‘‘serological.’’ 

■ f. By revising paragraph (g)(1) and 

adding a new paragraph (g)(2) to read as 

set forth below. 

§ 145.83 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(vi) * * *All salmonella isolates from 

a flock shall be serogrouped and shall be 

reported to the Official State Agency on 

a monthly basis; 

* * * * * 

(viii) Any flock entering the 

production period that is in compliance 

with all the requirements of § 145.83(f) 

with no history of Salmonella isolations 

shall be considered ‘‘Salmonella 

negative’’ and may retain this definition 

as long as no environmental or bird 

salmonella isolations are identified and 

confirmed from the flock or flock 

environment by sampling on 4 separate 

collection dates over a minimum of a 2- 

week period. Sampling and testing must 

be performed as described in paragraph 

(f)(1)(vi) of this section. An unconfirmed 

environmental Salmonella isolation 

shall not change this Salmonella 

negative status. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) It is a primary breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative for antibodies to avian 

influenza when more than 4 months of 

age. To retain this classification: 

(i) A sample of at least 30 birds must 

be tested negative at intervals of 90 

days; or 

(ii) A sample of fewer than 30 birds 

may be tested, and found to be negative, 

at any one time if all pens are equally 

represented and a total of 30 birds is 

tested within each 90-day period; or 

(iii) The flock is tested as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) at intervals of 30 days or less 

and found to be negative, and a total of 

30 samples are collected and tested 

within each 90-day period; and 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57212 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

(2) During each 90-day period, all 

primary spent fowl, up to a maximum 

of 30, must be tested serologically and 

found negative within 21 days prior to 

movement to slaughter. 

■ 20. A new subpart I, consisting of 

§§ 145.91 through 145.94, is added to 

read as follows: 

Subpart I— Special Provisions for MeatType Waterfowl Breeding Flocks and 

Products 

Sec. 

145.91 Definitions. 

145.92 Participation. 

145.93 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

145.94 Terminology and classification; 

States. 

Subpart I— Special Provisions for 

Meat-Type Waterfowl Breeding Flocks 

and Products 

§ 145.91 Definitions. 

Except where the context otherwise 

requires, for the purposes of this subpart 

the following term shall be construed to 

mean: 

Meat-type waterfowl breeding flocks. 

Flocks of domesticated duck or goose 

that are composed of stock that has been 

developed and is maintained for the 

primary purpose of producing baby 

poultry that will be raised under 

confinement for the primary purpose of 

producing meat for human 

consumption. 

§ 145.92 Participation. 

Participating flocks of meat-type 

waterfowl and the eggs and baby poultry 

produced from them shall comply with 

the applicable general provisions of 

subpart A of this part and the special 

provisions of this subpart I. 

(a) Started poultry shall lose their 

identity under Plan terminology when 

not maintained by Plan participants 

under the conditions prescribed in 

§ 145.5(a). 

(b) Hatching eggs produced by 

primary breeding flocks shall be 

fumigated (see § 147.25 of this chapter) 

or otherwise sanitized. 

(c) Any nutritive material provided to 

baby poultry must be free of the avian 

pathogens that are officially represented 

in the Plan disease classifications listed 

in § 145.10. 

§ 145.93 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

Participating flocks, and the eggs and 

baby poultry produced from them, that 

have met the respective requirements 

specified in this section may be 

designated by the following terms and 

the corresponding designs illustrated in 

§ 145.10. 

(a) [Reserved] 

(b) U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean. A 

flock in which freedom from pullorum 

and typhoid has been demonstrated to 

the Official State Agency under the 

criteria in one of the following 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) of this 

section (See § 145.14 relating to the 

official blood test where applicable.): 

(1) It has been officially blood tested 

within the past 12 months with no 

reactors. 

(2) It is a multiplier breeding flock, or 

a breeding flock composed of progeny of 

a primary breeding flock which is 

intended solely for the production of 

multiplier breeding flocks, and meets 

the following specifications as 

determined by the Official State Agency 

and the Service: 

(i) The flock is located in a State 

where all persons performing poultry 

disease diagnostic services within the 

State are required to report to the 

Official State Agency within 48 hours 

the source of all poultry specimens from 

which S. pullorum or S. gallinarum is 

isolated; 

(ii) The flock is composed entirely of 

birds that originated from U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean breeding 

flocks or from flocks that met equivalent 

requirements under official supervision; 

and 

(iii) The flock is located on a premises 

where a flock not classified as U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean was located 

the previous year; Provided, that an 

Authorized Testing Agent must blood 

test up to 300 birds per flock, as 

described in § 145.14, if the Official 

State Agency determines that the flock 

has been exposed to pullorum-typhoid. 

In making determinations of exposure 

and setting the number of birds to be 

blood tested, the Official State Agency 

shall evaluate the results of any blood 

tests, described in § 145.14(a)(1), that 

were performed on an unclassified flock 

located on the premises during the 

previous year; the origins of the 

unclassified flock; and the probability of 

contacts between the flock for which 

qualification is being sought and 

infected wild birds, contaminated feed 

or waste, or birds, equipment, supplies, 

or personnel from flocks infected with 

pullorum-typhoid. 

(3) It is a multiplier breeding flock 

that originated from U.S. PullorumTyphoid Clean breeding flocks or from 

flocks that met equivalent requirements 

under official supervision, and is 

located in a State in which it has been 

determined by the Service that: 

(i) All hatcheries within the State are 

qualified as ‘‘National Plan Hatcheries’’ 

or have met equivalent requirements for 

pullorum-typhoid control under official 

supervision; 

(ii) All hatchery supply flocks within 

the State are qualified as U.S. PullorumTyphoid Clean or have met equivalent 

requirements for pullorum-typhoid 

control under official supervision: 

Provided, That if other domesticated 

fowl are maintained on the same 

premises as the participating flock, 

freedom from pullorum-typhoid 

infection shall be demonstrated by an 

official blood test of each of these fowl; 

(iii) All shipments of products other 

than U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean, or 

equivalent, into the State are prohibited; 

(iv) All persons performing poultry 

disease diagnostic services within the 

State are required to report to the 

Official State Agency within 48 hours 

the source of all poultry specimens from 

which S. pullorum or S. gallinarum is 

isolated; 

(v) All reports of any disease outbreak 

involving a disease covered under the 

Plan are promptly followed by an 

investigation by the Official State 

Agency to determine the origin of the 

infection; Provided, That if the origin of 

the infection involves another State, or 

if there is exposure to poultry in another 

State from the infected flock, then the 

National Poultry Improvement Plan will 

conduct an investigation; 

(vi) All flocks found to be infected 

with pullorum or typhoid are 

quarantined until marketed or destroyed 

under the supervision of the Official 

State Agency, or until subsequently 

blood tested, following the procedure 

for reacting flocks as contained in 

§ 145.14(a)(5), and all birds fail to 

demonstrate pullorum or typhoid 

infection; 

(vii) All poultry, including exhibition, 

exotic, and game birds, but excluding 

waterfowl, going to public exhibition 

shall come from U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid 

Clean or equivalent flocks, or have had 

a negative pullorum-typhoid test within 

90 days of going to public exhibition; 

(viii) Discontinuation of any of the 

conditions or procedures described in 

paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), 

(vi), and (vii) of this section, or the 

occurrence of repeated outbreaks of 

pullorum or typhoid in poultry breeding 

flocks within or originating within the 

State shall be grounds for the Service to 

revoke its determination that such 

conditions and procedures have been 

met or complied with. Such action shall 

not be taken until a thorough 

investigation has been made by the 

Service and the Official State Agency 

has been given an opportunity to 

present its views. 

(4) It is a multiplier breeding flock 

located in a State which has been 

determined by the Service to be in 

compliance with the provisions of 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57213 

paragraph (a)(3) of this section, and in 

which pullorum disease or fowl typhoid 

is not known to exist nor to have existed 

in hatchery supply flocks within the 

State during the preceding 24 months. 

(5) It is a primary breeding flock 

located in a State determined to be in 

compliance with the provisions of 

paragraph (a)(4) of this section, and in 

which a sample of 300 birds from flocks 

of more than 300, and each bird in 

flocks of 300 or less, has been officially 

tested for pullorum-typhoid within the 

past 12 months with no reactors: 

Provided, That when a flock is a 

primary breeding flock located in a State 

which has been deemed to be a U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State for the 

past 3 years, and during which time no 

isolation of pullorum or typhoid has 

been made that can be traced to a source 

in that State, a bacteriological 

examination monitoring program or a 

serological examination monitoring 

program acceptable to the Official State 

Agency and approved by the Service 

may be used in lieu of annual blood 

testing. 

(c) U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza Clean. 

This program is intended to be the basis 

from which the breeding-hatchery 

industry may conduct a program for the 

prevention and control of the H5/H7 

subtypes of avian influenza. It is 

intended to determine the presence of 

the H5/H7 subtypes of avian influenza 

in meat-type waterfowl breeding flocks 

through routine surveillance of each 

participating breeding flock. A flock, 

and the hatching eggs and baby poultry 

produced from it, will qualify for this 

classification when the Official State 

Agency determines that it has met one 

of the following requirements: 

(1) It is a primary breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) when more than 4 months of 

age. To retain this classification: 

(i) A sample of at least 30 birds must 

be tested and found to be negative at 

intervals of 90 days; or 

(ii) A sample of fewer than 30 birds 

may be tested, and found to be negative, 

at any one time if all pens are equally 

represented and a total of 30 birds are 

tested within each 90-day period. 

(2) It is a multiplier breeding flock in 

which a minimum of 30 birds have been 

tested negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza as provided in 

§ 145.14(d) when more than 4 months of 

age. To retain this classification: 

(i) A sample of at least 30 birds must 

be tested negative at intervals of 180 

days; or 

(ii) A sample of fewer than 30 birds 

may be tested, and found to be negative, 

at any one time if all pens are equally 

represented and a total of 30 birds are 

tested within each 180-day period. 

(3) During each 90-day period, all 

spent fowl, up to a maximum of 30, 

must be tested serologically and found 

negative within 21 days prior to 

movement to slaughter. 

§ 145.94 Terminology and classification; 

States. 

(a) U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid Clean 

State. (1) A State will be declared a U.S. 

Pullorum-Typhoid Clean State when it 

has been determined by the Service that: 

(i) The State is in compliance with the 

provisions contained in 

§§ 145.23(b)(3)(i) through (vii), 

145.33(b)(3)(i) through (vii), 

145.43(b)(3)(i) through (vi), 

145.53(b)(3)(i) through (vii), 

145.73(b)(2)(i), 145.83(b)(2)(i), and 

145.93(b)(3)(i) through (vii). 

(ii) No pullorum disease or fowl 

typhoid is known to exist nor to have 

existed in hatchery supply flocks within 

the State during the preceding 12 

months: Provided, That pullorum 

disease or fowl typhoid found within 

the preceding 24 months in waterfowl, 

exhibition poultry, and game bird 

breeding flocks will not prevent a State 

that is otherwise eligible from 

qualifying. 

(2) Discontinuation of any of the 

conditions described in paragraph 

(a)(1)(i) of this section, or repeated 

outbreaks of pullorum or typhoid occur 

in hatchery supply flocks described in 

paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, or if 

an infection spreads from the 

originating premises, the Service shall 

have grounds to revoke its 

determination that the State is entitled 

to this classification. Such action shall 

not be taken until a thorough 

investigation has been made by the 

Service and the Official State Agency 

has been given an opportunity for a 

hearing in accordance with rules of 

practice adopted by the Administrator. 

(b) [Reserved] 

PART 146–NATIONAL POULTRY 

IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 

COMMERCIAL POULTRY 

■ 21. 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. 

■ 22. Section 146.1 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By revising the definitions of 

commercial table-egg layer flock and 

H5/H7 low pathogenic avian influenza 

(LPAI) to read as set forth below. 

■ b. By adding a new definition of 

commercial table-egg layer pullet flock 

to read as set forth below. 

§ 146.1 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Commercial table-egg layer flock. All 

table-egg layers of common age or pullet 

source on one premises. 

* * * * * 

Commercial table-egg layer pullet 

flock. A table-egg layer flock prior to the 

onset of egg production. 

* * * * * 

H5/H7 low pathogenic avian 

influenza (LPAI) . An infection of 

poultry caused by an influenza A virus 

of H5 or H7 subtype that has an 

intravenous pathogenicity index in 6- 

week-old chickens less than 1.2 or less 

than 75 percent mortality in 4- to 8- 

week-old chickens infected 

intravenously, or an infection with 

influenza A viruses of H5 or H7 subtype 

with a cleavage site that is not 

consistent with a previously identified 

highly pathogenic avian influenza virus. 

* * * * * 

■ 23. Section 146.9 is amended as 

follows. 

■ a. By revising the introductory text to 

read as set forth below. 

■ b. In paragraph (a), by removing the 

word ‘‘and’’ and by adding the words ‘‘, 

and 146.53(a)’’ before the period. 

§ 146.9 Terminology and classification; 

flocks, products, and States. 

Participating flocks, products 

produced from them, and States that 

have met the requirements of a 

classification in this part may be 

designated by the corresponding 

illustrative design in this section. 

* * * * * 

■ 24. Section 146.21 is amended by 

adding a new definition of table-egg 

layer pullet to read as set forth below. 

§ 146.21 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Table-egg layer pullet. A sexually 

immature domesticated chicken grown 

for the primary purpose of producing 

eggs for human consumption. 

■ 25. In § 146.23, paragraph (a) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 146.23 Terminology and classification; 

flocks and products. 

* * * * * 

(a) U.S. H5/H7 Avian Influenza 

Monitored. This program is intended to 

be the basis from which the table-egg 

layer industry may conduct a program 

to monitor for the H5/H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza. It is intended to 

determine the presence of the H5/H7 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
57214 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

subtypes of avian influenza in table-egg 

layers and table-egg layer pullets 

through routine surveillance of each 

participating commercial table-egg layer 

and table-egg layer pullet flock. A flock 

will qualify for this classification when 

the Official State Agency determines 

that it has met one of the following 

requirements: 

(1) Table-egg layer pullet flocks. (i) It 

is a commercial table-egg layer pullet 

flock in which a minimum of 11 birds 

have been tested negative to the H5/H7 

subtypes of avian influenza as provided 

in § 146.13(b) within 30 days prior to 

movement; or 

(ii) It is a commercial table-egg layer 

pullet flock that has an ongoing active 

and diagnostic surveillance program for 

the H5/H7 subtypes of avian influenza 

in which the number of birds tested is 

equivalent to the number required in 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) and that is approved 

by the Official State Agency and the 

Service. 

(2) Table-egg layer flocks. (i) It is a 

commercial table-egg layer flock in 

which a minimum of 11 birds have been 

tested negative to the H5/H7 subtypes of 

avian influenza as provided in 

§ 146.13(b) within 30 days prior to 

disposal; 

(ii) It is a commercial table-egg layer 

flock in which a minimum of 11 birds 

have been tested negative for the H5/H7 

subtypes of avian influenza as provided 

in § 146.13(b) within a 12-month period; 

or 

(iii) It is a commercial table-egg layer 

flock that has an ongoing active and 

diagnostic surveillance program for the 

H5/H7 subtypes of avian influenza in 

which the number of birds tested is 

equivalent to the number required in 

paragraph (a)(2)(i) or paragraph (a)(2)(ii) 

of this section and that is approved by 

the Official State Agency and the 

Service. 

* * * * * 

§ 146.24 [Amended] 

■ 26. Section 146.24 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(1)(i), by adding the 

words ‘‘and all commercial table-egg 

layer pullet flocks that supply those 

flocks’’ after the word ‘‘flocks’’. 

■ b. In paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) through 

(a)(1)(v), by adding the words ‘‘and 

table-egg layer pullet’’ after the word 

‘‘layer’’ each time it occurs. 

§ 146.33 [Amended] 

■ 27. In § 146.33, paragraphs (a)(1) and 

(a)(2) are amended by adding the words 

‘‘, as provided in § 146.13(b),’’ after the 

word ‘‘influenza,’’ each time it occurs. 

§ 146.43 [Amended] 

■ 28. In § 146.43, paragraph (a)(1) is 

amended by adding the words ‘‘, as 

provided in § 146.13(b),’’ after the word 

‘‘influenza’’ and by removing the word 

‘‘virus’’. 

§ 146.53 [Amended] 

■ 29. Section 146.53 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(1), by adding the 

words ‘‘, as provided in § 146.13(b),’’ 

after the word ‘‘influenza.’’ 

■ b. In paragraph (a)(2), by removing the 

words ‘‘antibodies to’’ and by adding the 

words ‘‘, as provided in § 146.13(b),’’ 

after the word ‘‘influenza.’’ 

■ c. In paragraph (b), in the last 

sentence, by adding the words ‘‘, as 

provided in § 146.13(b),’’ after the word 

‘‘influenza.’’ 

PART 147–AUXILIARY PROVISIONS 

ON NATIONAL POULTRY 

IMPROVEMENT PLAN 

■ 30. 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. 

■ 31. Section 147.6 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By revising the introductory text 

and paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) to 

read as set forth below. 

■ b. By removing paragraphs (a)(5) 

through (a)(15). 

§ 147.6 Procedures for determining the 

status of flocks reacting to test for 

Mycoplasma gallisepticum, Mycoplasma 

synoviae, and Mycoplasma melagridis. 

Procedures for isolation and 

identification of Mycoplasma may be 

found in Isolation and Identification of 

Avian Pathogens, published by the 

American Association of Avian 

Pathologists; Kleven, S.H., F.T.W. 

Jordan, and J.M. Bradbury, Avian 

Mycoplasmosis (Mycoplasma 

gallisepticum), Manual of Diagnostic 

Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial 

Animals, Fifth Ed., Office International 

des Epizooties, pp 842-855, 2004; and 

§§ 147.15 and 147.16. 

(a) * * * 

(1) If the tube agglutination test, 

enzyme-labeled immunosorbent assay 

(ELISA), official molecular examination 

procedure, or serum plate test is 

negative, the flock qualifies for the 

classification for which it was tested. 

(2) If the tube agglutination, ELISA, or 

serum plate test is positive, the 

hemaglutination inhibition (HI) test or a 

molecular examination procedure shall 

be conducted: Provided, for the HI test, 

that if more than 50 percent of the 

samples are positive for M. 

gallisepticum, M. meleagridis, or M. 

synoviae, the HI test shall be conducted 

on 10 percent of the positive samples or 

25 positive samples, whichever is 

greater. HI titers of 1:40 or more may be 

interpreted as suspicious and 

appropriate antigen detection samples 

should be taken promptly (within 7 

days of the original sampling) from 30 

clinically affected birds and examined 

by an approved cultural technique 

individually, or pooled (up to 5 swabs 

per test) and used in a molecular 

examination procedure or in vivo 

bioassay. 

(3) If the in vivo bioassay, molecular 

examination procedure, or culture 

procedure is negative, the Official State 

Agency may qualify the flock for the 

classification for which it was tested. In 

the event of contaminated cultures, the 

molecular examination technique must 

be used to make a final determination. 

(4) If the in vivo bioassay, molecular 

examination procedure, or culture 

procedure is positive, the flock will be 

considered infected. 

* * * * * 

§§ 147.12, 147.14, 147.15, 147.16, 147.30, 

and 147.31 [Amended] 

■ 32. In §§ 147.12, 147.14, 147.15, 

147.16, 147.30, and 147.31, footnotes 9 

through 21 are redesignated as footnotes 

10 through 22, respectively. 

■ 33. Section 147.12 is amended by 

adding a new paragraph (a)(6) to read as 

follows: 

§ 147.12 Procedures for collection, 

isolation, and identification of Salmonella 

from environmental samples, cloacal 

swabs, chick box papers, and meconium 

samples. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(6) Shoe cover sampling technique. 

Absorbable fabric shoe covers involve 

the exposure of the bottom surface of 

shoe covers to the surface of floor litter 

and slat areas. Wearing clean latex 

gloves, place the shoe covers over 

footwear that is only worn inside the 

poultry house. This can be footwear 

dedicated to the facility or disposable 

overshoes. Each pair of shoe covers 

should be worn while walking at a 

normal pace over a distance of 305 

meters (1000 feet). For flocks with fewer 

than 500 breeders, at least 1 pair of shoe 

covers should be worn to sample the 

floor of the bird area. For flocks with 

500 or more breeders, at least 2 pairs of 

shoe covers should be worn to sample 

the floor of the bird area. After 

sampling, place each shoe cover in a 

sterile container with 30 ml of double 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57215 

9Obtain procedure for preparing double strength 

skim milk from USDA-APHIS ‘‘Recommended 

Sample Collection Methods for Environmental 

Samples,’’ available from the National Poultry 

Improvement Plan, Veterinary Services, APHIS, 

USDA, 1498 Klondike Road, Suite 200, Conyers, GA 

30094. 

strength skim milk.9 Seal the sterile 

containers and promptly refrigerate 

them at 2 to 4 °C or place in a cooler 

with ice or ice packs. Do not freeze. 

Samples should be stored at refrigerator 

temperatures of 2 to 4 °C no more than 

5 days prior to culturing. 

* * * * * 

■ 34. In § 147.45, the first sentence is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 147.45 Official delegates. 

Each cooperating State shall be 

entitled to one official delegate for each 

of the programs prescribed in parts 145 

and 146 of this chapter in which it has 

one or more participants at the time of 

the Conference. * * * 

■ 35. In § 147.52, a new paragraph (c) is 

added to read as follows: 

§ 147.52 Approved tests. 

* * * * * 

(c) The following diagnostic test kits 

that are not licensed by the Service (e.g., 

bacteriological culturing kits) are 

approved for use in the NPIP: 

(1) Rapid Chek©Select TMSalmonella 

Test Kit, Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. 

Newark, DE 19713. 

(2) ADIAFOOD Rapid Pathogen 

Detection System for Salmonella spp., 

AES Chemunex Canada. Laval, QC 

(Canada) H7L4S3. 

(3) DuPont Qualicon BAX Polymerase 

Chain Reaction (PCR)-based assay for 

Salmonella, DuPont Qualicon, 

Wilmington, DE 19810. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day 

of September 2010. 

Kevin Shea 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23248 Filed 9–17–10: 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE: 3410–34–S 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0692; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–AEA–16] 

Proposed Establishment of Class E 

Airspace; Crewe, VA 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

establish Class E Airspace at Crewe, VA, 

to accommodate the additional airspace 

needed for the Standard Instrument 

Approach Procedures (SIAPs) 

developed for Crewe Municipal Airport. 

This action would enhance the safety 

and airspace management of Instrument 

Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the 

airport. 

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be 

received on or before November 4, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule 

to: U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey, SE., Washington, DC 

20590–0001; Telephone: 1–800–647– 

5527; Fax: 202–493–2251. You must 

identify the Docket Number FAA–2010– 

0692; Airspace Docket No. 10–AEA–16, 

at the beginning of your comments. You 

may also submit and review received 

comments through the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melinda Giddens, Operations Support 

Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal 

Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 

20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; 

telephone (404) 305–5610. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

comment on this rule by submitting 

such written data, views, or arguments, 

as they may desire. Comments that 

provide the factual basis supporting the 

views and suggestions presented are 

particularly helpful in developing 

reasoned regulatory decisions on the 

proposal. Comments are specifically 

invited on the overall regulatory, 

aeronautical, economic, environmental, 

and energy-related aspects of the 

proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– 

2010–0692; Airspace Docket No. 10– 

AEA–16) and be submitted in triplicate 

to the Docket Management System (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number). You may also submit 

comments through the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Comments wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. FAA–2010–0692; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–AEA–16.’’ The postcard 

will be date/time stamped and returned 

to the commenter. 

All communications received before 

the specified closing date for comments 

will be considered before taking action 

on the proposed rule. The proposal 

contained in this notice may be changed 

in light of the comments received. A 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerned with this rulemaking will be 

filed in the docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded from and 

comments submitted through http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Recently 

published rulemaking documents can 

also be accessed through the FAA’s Web 

page at http://www.faa.gov/ 

airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/ 

publications/airspace_amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see the 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the office of the 

Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation 

Administration, room 210, 1701 

Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 

30337. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRM’s should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, to request a copy of 

Advisory circular No. 11–2A, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking distribution 

System, which describes the application 

procedure. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is considering an 

amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish 

Class E airspace at Crewe, VA to provide 

controlled airspace required to support 

the SIAPs developed for Crewe 

Municipal Airport. Class E airspace 

extending upward from 700 feet above 

the surface would be established for the 

safety and management of IFR 

operations. 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA 

order 7400.9U, signed August 18, 2010, 

and effective September 15, 2010, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1