This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

44067

Vol. 62, No. 160

Tuesday, August 19, 1997

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Parts 145 and 147

[Docket No. 96–070–2]

National Poultry Improvement Plan and

Auxiliary Provisions

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the National

Poultry Improvement Plan (the Plan)

and its auxiliary provisions to establish

new program classifications and provide

new or modified sampling and testing

procedures for Plan participants and

participating flocks. These changes,

which were voted on and approved by

the voting delegates at the Plan’s 1994

and 1996 National Plan Conferences,

will keep the provisions of the Plan

current with changes in the poultry

industry and provide for the use of new

sampling and testing procedures.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 18, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Andrew R. Rhorer, Senior

Coordinator, Poultry Improvement Staff,

National Poultry Improvement Plan,

Veterinary Services, APHIS, USDA,

1500 Klondike Road, Suite A–102,

Conyers, GA 30207; (770) 922–3496.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The National Poultry Improvement

Plan (referred to below as ‘‘the Plan’’) is

a cooperative Federal-State-industry

mechanism for controlling certain

poultry diseases. The Plan consists of a

variety of programs intended to prevent

and control egg-transmitted, hatcherydisseminated poultry diseases.

Participation in all Plan programs is

voluntary, but flocks, hatcheries, and

dealers must qualify as ‘‘U.S. PullorumTyphoid Clean’’ before participating in

any other Plan program. Also, the

regulations in 9 CFR part 82, subpart C,

which provide for certain testing,

restrictions on movement, and other

restrictions on certain chickens, eggs,

and other articles due to the presence of

Salmonella enteritidis, require that no

hatching eggs or newly hatched chicks

from egg-type chicken breeding flocks

may be moved interstate unless they are

classified ‘‘U.S. S. Enteritidis

Monitored’’ under the Plan or they meet

the requirements of a State classification

plan that the Administrator of the

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS) has determined to be

equivalent to the Plan, in accordance

with 9 CFR 145.23(d).

The Plan identifies States, flocks,

hatcheries, and dealers 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 diseaseprevention conditions.

The regulations in 9 CFR parts 145

and 147 (referred to below as the

regulations) contain the provisions of

the Plan. APHIS amends these

provisions from time to time to

incorporate new scientific information

and technologies within the Plan. On

March 11, 1997, we published in the

Federal Register (62 FR 11111–11117,

Docket No. 96–070–1) a proposal to

amend the regulations to:

1. Standardize the time frame for the

retesting of U.S. Pullorum-Typhoid

Clean breeding flocks retained for more

than 12 months by requiring the

retesting to occur a minimum of 4 weeks

after the induction of molt;

2. Establish a ‘‘U.S. Salmonella

Monitored’’ program for primary meattype chicken breeding flocks;

3. Establish a ‘‘U.S. M. Gallisepticum

Monitored’’ classification for multiplier

meat-type chicken breeding flocks that

are not participating in the ‘‘U.S. M.

Gallisepticum Clean’’ classification;

4. Establish a ‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae

Monitored’’ classification for multiplier

meat-type chicken breeding flocks that

are not participating in the ‘‘U.S. M.

Synoviae Clean’’ classification;

5. Amend the ‘‘U.S. M. Gallisepticum

Clean’’ and ‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae Clean’’

classifications for meat-type chicken

breeding flocks by augmenting testing

when adding (spiking) males;

6. Add a procedure for swabbing or

collecting chick papers for

bacteriological examination for

salmonella;

7. Add a 4 to 6 week surveillance test

for M. gallisepticum to the ‘‘U.S. M.

Gallisepticum Clean’’ classification for

turkeys;

8. Make the qualification test sample

size for ‘‘U.S. M. Meleagridis Clean’’

consistent with that for the ‘‘U.S. M.

Gallisepticum Clean’’ and ‘‘U.S. M.

Synoviae Clean’’ classifications for

turkeys;

9. Simplify the description of the

procedure for determining the status of

flocks reacting to tests for M.

gallisepticum, M. synoviae, and M.

meleagridis;

10. Amend the ‘‘U.S. Sanitation

Monitored, Turkeys’’ classification to

remove the requirement for the

environmental sampling of a laying

house following the removal of a flock

from the house;

11. Establish a ‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae

Clean’’ classification for waterfowl,

exhibition poultry and game birds; and

12. Raise from 75 to 150 the number

of birds to be tested to qualify flocks for

‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae Clean’’ status.

We solicited comments concerning

the proposed rule for 60 days ending

May 12, 1997. We received no

comments by that date. Therefore, based

on the rationale set forth in the

proposed rule, we are adopting the

provisions of the proposal as a final rule

without change.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. The 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.

The changes contained in this

document are based on the

recommendations of representatives of

member States, hatcheries, dealers,

flockowners, and breeders who took

part in the Plan’s 1994 and 1996

National Plan Conferences. The changes

will amend the Plan and its auxiliary

provisions by establishing new program

classifications and providing new or

modified sampling and testing

procedures for Plan participants and

participating flocks. These changes will

keep the provisions of the Plan current

with changes in the poultry industry
44068 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 160 / Tuesday, August 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

and provide for the use of new sampling

and testing procedures.

The Plan serves as a ‘‘seal of

approval’’ for egg and poultry producers

in the sense that tests and procedures

recommended by the Plan are

considered optimal for the industry. In

all cases, the changes in this document

have been generated by the industry

itself with the goal of reducing disease

risk and increasing product

marketability.

Because participation in the Plan is

voluntary, individuals are likely to

remain in the program as long as the

costs of implementing the program are

lower than the added benefits they

receive from the program. Nine of the 12

amendments involve minor procedural

changes that will have negligible

economic consequences. Plan

participants may realize some cost

savings because the testing requirements

for the new ‘‘U.S. M. Gallisepticum

Monitored’’ and ‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae

Monitored’’ classifications are not as

stringent as the testing requirements for

the ‘‘clean’’ classifications for M.

gallisepticum and M. synoviae. These

savings will, however, likely be offset by

the amendments to the ‘‘U.S. M.

Gallisepticum Clean’’ and ‘‘U.S. M.

Synoviae Clean’’ programs that will

require additional tests for meat-type

chicken breeding flocks when spiking

males are introduced. Of the 3,979

pullorum-typhoid clean flocks currently

participating in the Plan, 2,842 flocks

are classified as ‘‘U.S. M. Gallisepticum

Clean’’ and ‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae Clean;’’

the remaining 1,137 flocks are eligible

for the new ‘‘U.S. M. Gallisepticum

Monitored’’ and ‘‘U.S. M. Synoviae

Monitored’’ programs. However,

because participation in Plan programs

is voluntary, the Agency cannot

estimate the number of producers who

may participate in the two new

‘‘monitored’’ classifications or use the

new tests.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

under No. 10.025 and is subject to

Executive Order 12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part

3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State

and local laws and regulations that are

in conflict with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not

require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court

challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This 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 in 9 CFR Parts 145 and

147

Animal diseases, Poultry and poultry

products, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Accordingly, 9 CFR parts 145 and 147

are amended as follows:

PART 145—NATIONAL POULTRY

IMPROVEMENT PLAN

1. The authority citation for part 145

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 429; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80,

and 371.2(d).

2. Section 145.10 is amended as

follows:

a. In paragraph (e), the words ‘‘and

§ 145.43(e)’’ are removed and the words

‘‘145.43(e), and § 145.53(d)’’ are added

in their place.

b. New paragraphs (o), (p), and (q) are

added to read as set forth below.

§ 145.10 Terminology and classification;

flocks, products, and States.

* * * * *

(o) U.S. Salmonella Monitored. (See

§ 145.33(i).)

BILLING CODE 3410–34–U

(p) U.S. M. Gallisepticum Monitored.

(See § 145.33(j).)

(q) U.S. M. Synoviae Monitored. (See

§ 145.33(k).)

BILLING CODE 3410–34–C

§ 145.23 [Amended]

3. Section 145.23 is amended as

follows:

a. In paragraph (b), in the introductory

text, the words ‘‘at the discretion of the

Official State Agency with the

concurrence of the Service’’ are

removed and the words ‘‘conducted a

minimum of 4 weeks after the induction

of molt’’ are added in their place.

b. In paragraph (e)(1)(ii), in the

introductory text, the words ‘‘75 birds’’

are removed and the words ‘‘150 birds’’

are added in their place.

4. Section 145.33 is amended as

follows:

a. In paragraph (b), in the introductory

text, the words ‘‘at the discretion of the

official State agency with the

concurrence of the Service’’ are

removed and the words ‘‘conducted a

minimum of 4 weeks after the induction

of molt’’ are added in their place.

b. A new paragraph (c)(4) is added to

read as set forth below.

c. In paragraph (e)(1)(ii), in the

introductory text, the words ‘‘75 birds’’

are removed and the words ‘‘150 birds’’

are added in their place.

d. A new paragraph (e)(4) is added to

read as set forth below.

e. New paragraphs (i), (j), and (k) are

added to read as set forth below.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 160 / Tuesday, August 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 44069

§ 145.33 Terminology and classification;

flocks and products.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(4) Before male breeding birds may be

added to a participating multiplier

breeding flock, a sample of at least 3

percent of the birds to be added, with

a minimum of 10 birds per pen, shall be

tested for M. gallisepticum as provided

in § 145.14(b) or by a polymerase chain

reaction (PCR)-based procedure

approved by the Department. The male

birds shall be tested no more than 14

days prior to their intended

introduction into the flock. If the

serologic testing of the birds yields

hemagglutination inhibition titers of

1:40 or higher, or if the PCR testing is

positive for M. gallisepticum, the male

birds may not be added to the flock and

must be either retested or destroyed.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(4) Before male breeding birds may be

added to a participating multiplier

breeding flock, a sample of at least 3

percent of the birds to be added, with

a minimum of 10 birds per pen, shall be

tested for M. synoviae as provided in

§ 145.14(b) or by a polymerase chain

reaction (PCR)-based procedure

approved by the Department. The male

birds shall be tested no more than 14

days prior to their intended

introduction into the flock. If the

serologic testing of the birds yields

hemagglutination inhibition titers of

1:40 or higher, or if the PCR testing is

positive for M. synoviae, the male birds

may not be added to the flock and must

be either retested or destroyed.

* * * * *

(i) U.S. Salmonella Monitored. This

program is intended to be the basis from

which the breeding-hatching industry

may conduct a program for the

prevention and control of

Salmonellosis. It is intended to reduce

the incidence of Salmonella organisms

in hatching eggs and chicks through an

effective and practical sanitation

program at the breeder farm and in the

hatchery. This will afford other

segments of the poultry industry an

opportunity to reduce the incidence of

Salmonella in their products.

(1) A flock and the hatching eggs and

chicks produced from it that have met

the following requirements, as

determined by the Official State Agency:

(i) The flock shall originate from a

source where sanitation and

management practices, as outlined in

§ 145.33(d)(1), are conducted;

(ii) The flock is maintained in

compliance with §§ 147.21, 147.24(a),

and 147.26 of this chapter;

(iii) If feed contains animal protein,

the protein products should be

purchased from participants in the

Animal Protein Products Industry

(APPI) Salmonella Education/Reduction

Program. The protein products must

have a minimum moisture content of

14.5 percent and must have been heated

throughout to a minimum temperature

of 190 °F or above, or to a minimum

temperature of 165 °F for at least 20

minutes, or to a minimum temperature

of 184 °F under 70 lbs. pressure during

the manufacturing process;

(iv) Feed shall be stored and

transported in a manner to prevent

possible contamination;

(v) Chicks shall be hatched in a

hatchery meeting the requirements of

§§ 147.23 and 147.24(b) and sanitized or

fumigated (see § 147.25 of this chapter).

(vi) An Authorized Agent shall take

environmental samples from the

hatchery every 30 days; i.e., meconium

and chick papers. An authorized

laboratory for Salmonella shall examine

the samples bacteriologically;

(vii) An Authorized Agent shall take

environmental samples as described in

§ 147.12 of this chapter from each flock

at 4 months of age and every 30 days

thereafter. An authorized laboratory for

Salmonella shall examine the

environmental samples

bacteriologically;

(viii) Owners of flocks may vaccinate

with a paratyphoid vaccine: Provided,

That a sample of 350 birds, which will

be banded for identification, shall

remain unvaccinated until the flock

reaches at least 4 months of age.

(2) The Official State Agency may use

the procedures described in § 147.14 of

this chapter to monitor the effectiveness

of the egg sanitation practices.

(3) In order for a hatchery to sell

products of this classification, all

products handled shall meet the

requirements of the classification.

(4) This classification may be revoked

by the Official State Agency if the

participant fails to follow recommended

corrective measures.

(j) U.S. M. Gallisepticum Monitored.

(1) A multiplier breeding flock in which

all birds or a sample of at least 20 birds

per house has been tested for M.

gallisepticum as provided in § 145.14(b)

when more than 4 months of age:

Provided, birds per house shall be tested

again at 36 to 38 weeks and at 48 to 50

weeks at a minimum: And provided

further, That each 20-bird sample

should come from two locations within

the house (10 from the front half of the

house and 10 from the back half of the

house). A representative sample of

males and females should be sampled.

The samples shall be marked ‘‘male’’ or

‘‘female.’’

(2) A participant handling U.S. M.

Gallisepticum Monitored products shall

keep these products separate from other

products in a manner satisfactory to the

Official State Agency: Provided, That

U.S. M. Gallisepticum Monitored chicks

from multiplier breeding flocks shall be

produced in incubators and hatchers in

which only eggs from flocks qualified

under paragraph (j)(1) of this section are

set. Eggs from U.S. M. Gallisepticum

Monitored multiplier breeding flocks

shall not be set in hatchers or incubators

in which eggs from U.S. M.

Gallisepticum Clean primary breeding

flocks qualified under paragraph (c)(1)(i)

of this section are set.

(3) U.S. M. Gallisepticum Monitored

chicks shall be boxed in clean boxes and

delivered in trucks that have been

cleaned and disinfected as described in

§ 147.24(a) of this chapter.

(k) U.S. M. Synoviae Monitored. (1) A

multiplier breeding flock in which all

birds or a sample of at least 20 birds per

house has been tested for M. synoviae as

provided in § 145.14(b) when more than

4 months of age: Provided, That to retain

this classification, a minimum of 20

birds per house shall be tested again at

36 to 38 weeks and at 48 to 50 weeks

at a minimum: And provided further,

That each 20-bird sample should come

from two locations within the house (10

from the front half of the house and 10

from the back half of the house). A

representative sample of males and

females should be sampled. The

samples shall be marked ‘‘male’’ or

‘‘female.’’

(2) A participant handling U.S. M.

Synoviae Monitored products shall keep

these products separate from other

products in a manner satisfactory to the

Official State Agency: Provided, That

U.S. M. Synoviae Monitored chicks

from multiplier breeding flocks shall be

produced in incubators and hatchers in

which only eggs from flocks qualified

under paragraph (k)(1) of this section

are set. Eggs from U.S. M. Synoviae

Monitored multiplier breeding flocks

shall not be set in hatchers or incubators

in which eggs from U.S. M. Synoviae

Clean primary breeding flocks qualified

under paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section

are set.

(3) U.S. M. Synoviae Monitored

chicks shall be boxed in clean boxes and

delivered in trucks that have been

cleaned and disinfected as described in

§ 147.24(a) of this chapter.

(Approved by the Office of Management and

Budget under control number 0579–0007)
44070 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 160 / Tuesday, August 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

§ 145.43 [Amended]

5. Section 145.43 is amended as

follows:

a. In paragraph (b), in the introductory

text, the words ‘‘at the discretion of the

official State agency with the

concurrence of the Service’’ are

removed and the words ‘‘conducted a

minimum of 4 weeks after the induction

of molt’’ are added in their place.

b. In paragraph (c)(1), at the end of the

paragraph, the words ‘‘and at 4–6 week

intervals thereafter’’ are added

immediately after the words ‘‘28–30

weeks of age’’.

c. In paragraph (d)(1)(i), the words

‘‘60 birds’’ are removed and the words

‘‘100 birds’’ are added in their place.

d. In paragraph (d)(2), at the end of

the paragraph, the words ‘‘of this

chapter’’ are added immediately after

the citation ‘‘§ 147.6(b)’’.

e. Paragraph (f)(7) is removed and

paragraph (f)(8) is redesignated as

paragraph (f)(7).

6. Section 145.53 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (d) to read as

follows:

§ 145.53 Terminology and classification;

flocks and products.

* * * * *

(d) U.S. M. Synoviae Clean. (1) A

flock maintained in compliance with

the provisions of § 147.26 of this chapter

and in which freedom from

Mycoplasma synoviae has been

demonstrated under the criteria

specified in paragraph (d)(1)(i) or

(d)(1)(ii) of this section.

(i) It is a flock in which a minimum

of 300 birds has been tested for M.

synoviae as provided in § 145.14(b)

when more than 4 months of age:

Provided, That to retain this

classification, a sample of at least 150

birds shall be tested at intervals of not

more than 90 days: And provided

further, That a sample comprised of

fewer than 150 birds may be tested at

any one time with the approval of the

Official State Agency and the

concurrence of the Service, provided

that a minimum of 150 birds is tested

within each 90-day period; or

(ii) It is a multiplier breeding flock

that originated as U.S. M. Synoviae

Clean chicks from primary breeding

flocks and from which a sample

comprised of a minimum of 75 birds has

been tested for M. synoviae as provided

in § 145.14(b) when more than 4 months

of age: Provided, That to retain this

classification, the flock shall be

subjected to one of the following

procedures:

(A) At intervals of not more than 90

days, a sample of 50 birds shall be

tested: Provided, That a sample of fewer

than 50 birds may be tested at any one

time, provided that a minimum of 30

birds per flock with a minimum of 15

birds per pen, whichever is greater, is

tested each time and a total of at least

50 birds is tested within each 90-day

period; or

(B) At intervals of not more than 30

days, egg yolk testing shall be

conducted in accordance with § 147.8 of

this chapter.

(2) A participant handling U.S. M.

Synoviae Clean products shall keep

those products separate from other

products in a manner satisfactory to the

Official State Agency: Provided, That

U.S. M. Synoviae Clean chicks from

primary breeding flocks shall be

produced in incubators and hatchers in

which only eggs from flocks qualified

under paragraph (d)(1)(i) or (d)(1)(ii) of

this section are set.

(3) U.S. M. Synoviae Clean chicks

shall be boxed in clean boxes and

delivered in trucks that have been

cleaned and disinfected as described in

§ 147.24(a) of this chapter.

(Approved by the Office of Management and

Budget under control number 0579–0007)

PART 147—AUXILIARY PROVISIONS

ON NATIONAL POULTRY

IMPROVEMENT PLAN

7. The authority citation for part 147

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 429; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80,

and 371.2(d).

8. Section 147.6 is amended as

follows:

a. Paragraph (a) is removed and

paragraph (b) is redesignated as

paragraph (a).

b. The introductory text of newly

redesignated paragraph (a) is revised to

read as set forth below.

c. In newly redesignated paragraph

(a)(2), the words ‘‘paragraphs (b)(3),

(b)(4), and (b)(5)’’ are removed and the

words ‘‘paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), and

(a)(5)’’ are added in their place.

d. In newly redesignated paragraphs

(a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(9), and (a)(10),

the words ‘‘paragraph (b)(6)’’ are

removed and the words ‘‘paragraph

(a)(6)’’ are added in their place.

e. In newly redesignated paragraph

(a)(5), in the first sentence, the words

‘‘in conjunction with any of the criteria

described in paragraph (a)(1) of this

section,’’ are removed and, in the

second sentence, the words ‘‘but none of

the criteria described in paragraph (a)(1)

of this section are evident,’’ are

removed.

f. In newly redesignated paragraph

(a)(13), the word ‘‘both’’ is removed.

g. A new paragraph (b) is added and

reserved.

§ 147.6 Procedure for determining the

status of flocks reacting to tests for

Mycoplasma gallisepticum, Mycoplasma

synoviae, and Mycoplasma meleagridis.

* * * * *

(a) The status of a flock for

Mycoplasma shall be determined

according to the following criteria:

* * * * *

9. Section 147.12 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (c) to read as

follows:

§ 147.12 Procedures for collecting

environmental samples and cloacal swabs

for bacteriological examination.

* * * * *

(c) Chick box papers. Samples from

chick box papers may be

bacteriologically examined for the

presence of salmonella. The Plan

participant may collect the samples in

accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this

section or submit chick box papers

directly to a laboratory in accordance

with paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(1) Instructions for collecting samples

from chick box papers:

(i) Collect 1 chick box paper for each

10 boxes of chicks placed in a house

and lay the papers on a clean surface.

(ii) Clean your hands and put on latex

gloves. Do not apply disinfectant to the

gloves. Change gloves after collecting

samples from 10 chick box papers or

any time a glove is torn.

(iii) Saturate a sterile 3-by-3 inch

gauze pad with double-strength skim

milk (see footnote 11 to this section) and

rub the pad across the surface of five

chick box papers. Rub the pad over at

least 75 percent of each paper and use

sufficient pressure to rub any dry

meconium off the paper. Pouring a

small amount of double-strength skim

milk (1 to 2 tablespoons) on each paper

will make it easier to collect samples.

(iv) After collecting samples from 10

chick box papers, place the two gauze

pads used to collect the samples (i.e.,

one pad per 5 chick box papers) into an

18 oz. Whirl-Pak bag and add 1 to 2

tablespoons of double-strength skim

milk.

(v) Promptly refrigerate the Whirl-Pak

bags containing the samples and

transport them, on ice or otherwise

refrigerated, to a laboratory within 48

hours of collection. The samples may be

frozen for longer storage if the Plan

participant is unable to transport them

to a laboratory within 48 hours.

(2) The Plan participant may send

chick box papers directly to a

laboratory, where samples may be

collected as described in paragraph

(c)(1) of this section. To send chick box

papers directly to a laboratory, the Plan

participant shall:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 160 / Tuesday, August 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 44071

(i) Collect 1 chick box paper for each

10 boxes of chicks placed in a house

and place the chick papers immediately

into large plastic bags and seal the bags.

(ii) Place the plastic bags containing

the chick box papers in a clean box and

transport them within 48 hours to a

laboratory. The plastic bags do not

require refrigeration.

(Approved by the Office of Management and

Budget under control number 0579–0007)

Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day of

August 1997.

Terry L. Medley,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–21902 Filed 8–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–U

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 50

Final Policy Statement on the

Restructuring and Economic

Deregulation of the Electric Utility

Industry

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Final Policy Statement.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is issuing this final

statement of policy regarding its

expectations for, and intended approach

to, its power reactor licensees as the

electric utility industry moves from an

environment of rate regulation toward

greater competition. The NRC has

concerns about the possible effects that

rate deregulation and disaggregation

resulting from various restructuring

actions involving power reactor

licensees could have on the protection

of public health and safety.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This policy statement

becomes effective on October 20, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert S. Wood, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415–

1255, e-mail RSW1@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On September 23, 1996, the NRC

issued a draft policy statement for

public comment (61 FR 49711). The

purpose of the draft policy statement

was to provide a discussion of the

NRC’s concerns regarding the potential

safety impacts on NRC power reactor

licensees which could result from the

economic deregulation and

restructuring of the electric utility

industry and the means by which NRC

intends to address those concerns.

Because of the interest expressed by

several commenters, the NRC extended

the public comment period to February

9, 1997.

II. Summary of and Response to

Comments

The NRC received 32 public

comments on the draft policy statement:

14 from electric utility licensees or their

representatives, 8 from State public

utility commissions (PUCs) or other

State agencies, 5 from public interest

groups, 4 from private consultants and

individuals, and 1 from a labor union.

The following list provides the names

and comment numbers referenced in

this notice:

1. Nuclear Information and Resource

Service—comment extension request

only

2. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

3. Engineering Applied Sciences, Inc.

4. TU Electric

5. Public Service Electric & Gas Company

6. Minnesota Department of Public Service

7. Spiegel & McDiarmid on behalf of 5

publicly-owned systems

8. IPALCO Enterprises, Inc., Citizens Action

Coalition of Indiana, Inc., and Public

Citizen, Inc.

9. Wisconsin Emergency Management,

Bureau of Technological Hazards

10. Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety

11. International Brotherhood of Electrical

Workers

12. Consolidated Edison Company of New

York, Inc.

13. Centerior Energy

14. GPU Nuclear

15. Commonwealth Edison Company

16. Vermont Department of Public Service

17. Marilyn Elie

18. GE Stockholders’ Alliance for a

Sustainable Nuclear-Free Future

19. Women Speak Out for Peace and Justice

20. New England Power Company

21. Nuclear Information and Resource

Service

22. New Jersey Division of the Ratepayer

Advocate

23. Southern California Edison Company

24. Entergy Operations, Inc.

25. Nuclear Energy Institute

26. Arizona Public Service Company

27. Massachusetts Office of the Attorney

General

28. Winston and Strawn on behalf of the

Utility Decommissioning Group

29. Dave Crawford and Diane Peterson

30. National Rural Electric Cooperative

Association

31. Schlissel Technical Consulting, Inc.

32. National Association of Regulatory Utility

Commissioners

General Comments

Most commenters viewed the

issuance of the draft policy statement as

timely and appeared to understand the

reasons for the NRC’s concerns. Some

directly supported the NRC’s overall

approach, particularly the five actions

listed in Section III. Commenter 14, for

example, stated that these five actions

should provide sufficient focus for NRC

actions. Commenter 5 believes that the

NRC’s current authority is sufficient to

cope with any safety issues raised by

rate deregulation. Commenter 31 shares

the NRC’s concerns but indicated that

the draft policy statement did not

address the key issue, namely, whether

economic deregulation of nuclear power

is compatible with the protection of

public health and safety.

Other comments, particularly from

electric utility licensees and their

representatives, suggested that some

NRC concerns are overstated. For

example, Commenter 4 recommended

elimination of language in the policy

statement that implies that deregulation

is inevitable. Other commenters

suggested that the policy statement

should recognize that change will occur

at different rates and, therefore, the NRC

should individually evaluate

restructuring as it affects each nuclear

plant. In any case, restructuring will not

occur so rapidly or secretly that the NRC

will not know about it. Others stated

that many services will remain

regulated and that the PUCs will act

responsibly. Further, there is no basis

for the NRC to conclude that licensees

will be unable to provide adequate

financial assurance for safe operations

and decommissioning. The National

Association of Regulatory Utility

Commissioners (NARUC) stated that in

view of the experimental nature of many

State actions, the NRC should approach

deregulation cautiously. Finally, several

commenters asked the NRC to avoid

actions that would serve as

impediments to deregulation.

Commenters representing public

interest groups generally thought that

the draft policy statement did not go far

enough in addressing safety concerns

related to deregulation. These

commenters stated that the NRC should

take immediate action with respect to

on-line maintenance practices, extended

refueling cycles and downtime during

refueling, and up-front funding of

decommissioning, among other issues.

Some suggested that the policy

statement specifically include

discussion of possible negative safety

risks from economic deregulation, such

as cutting corners and deferring capital

investments. These commenters also

urged the NRC to expand its inspection

and compliance resources to counter the

adverse safety impacts that these

commenters believe will result from

deregulation.