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

61025 

Vol. 70, No. 202 

Thursday, October 20, 2005 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

9 CFR Part 77 

[Docket No. 02–111–2] 

Tuberculosis; Amend the Definition of 

Affected Herd 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are amending the 

regulations by removing the two 

different definitions of affected herd 

and replacing them with a single, 

updated definition. This action is 

necessary to provide more clarity in the 

regulations and because the current 

definitions are out-of-date and 

inconsistent. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 21, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

M.J. Gilsdorf, Director, Ruminant Health 

Programs, National Center for Animal 

Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River 

Road Unit 43, Riverdale, MD 20737– 

1231; (301) 734–6954. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The regulations in 9 CFR part 77, 

‘‘Tuberculosis’’ (referred to below as the 

regulations), and the ‘‘Uniform Methods 

and Rules—Bovine Tuberculosis 

Eradication’’ (UMR), January 22, 1999, 

edition, which is incorporated by 

reference into the regulations, restrict 

the interstate movement of cattle, bison, 

and captive cervids to prevent the 

spread of bovine tuberculosis. Subpart 

A of part 77 (§§ 77.1–77.4) contains 

general provisions of the tuberculosis 

regulations such as definitions; subpart 

B (§§ 77.5–77.19) contains specific 

provisions regarding cattle and bison; 

and subpart C (§§ 77.20–77.41) contains 

specific provisions regarding captive 

cervids. 

There have been two definitions of 

affected herd in part 77. In § 77.5, 

affected herd has been defined as ‘‘a 

herd in which tuberculosis has been 

disclosed in any cattle or bison by an 

official tuberculin test or by post 

mortem examination.’’ In § 77.20, 

affected herd has been defined as ‘‘a 

herd of captive cervids that contains or 

that has contained one or more captive 

cervids infected with Mycobacterium 

bovis (determined by bacterial isolation 

of M. bovis) and that has not tested 

negative to the three whole herd tests as 

prescribed in § 77.39(d) of this part.’’ 

On July 2, 2004, we published in the 

Federal Register (69 FR 40329–40330, 

Docket No. 02–111–1) a proposal to 

amend the regulations by removing the 

two inconsistent definitions of affected 

herd from §§ 77.5 and 77.20 and 

replacing them with a new definition of 

the term that would apply to cattle, 

bison, and captive cervids. Our 

proposed new definition read as 

follows: ‘‘A herd of livestock in which 

there is strong and substantial evidence 

that Mycobacterium bovis exists. This 

evidence should include, but is not 

limited to, any of the following: 

Epidemiologic evidence, 

histopathology, polymerase chain 

reaction (PCR) assay, bacterial isolation 

or detection, testing data, or association 

with known sources of infection.’’ 

We solicited comments concerning 

our proposal for 60 days ending August 

31, 2004. We received three comments 

by that date. They were from a State 

government official and two private 

citizens. The comments are discussed 

below. 

One commenter stated that the 

‘‘strong and substantial evidence’’ 

standard in the proposed definition was 

too high and that potentially infected 

animals could remain unidentified as a 

result. We disagree and believe that the 

new definition will actually increase the 

likelihood that the disease will be 

detected. For example, under the new 

definition, cervid herds can be classified 

as affected without first having a 

diagnosis of tuberculosis confirmed 

through a culture—a procedure that can 

be difficult and usually requires at least 

8 to 12 weeks to complete. With respect 

to cattle, the new definition provides 

that a herd can be classified as affected 

based on broader criteria than under the 

definition in § 77.5, which provided that 

a diagnosis could only be made when an 

official test or a post mortem 

examination was conducted. Therefore, 

we expect that the new definition will 

eliminate time constraints, confusion, 

and differing standards between cattle, 

bison, and cervids. The new definition 

also will expand the types of evidence 

or information that can be considered by 

a professional veterinary diagnostician 

when examining herds. Moreover, a 

designated tuberculosis epidemiologist 

(DTE), which is already defined in 

§ 77.2, is designated by the 

Administrator of the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service to use and 

interpret diagnostic tests for 

tuberculosis and the management of 

tuberculosis affected herds. Thus, a DTE 

has the expertise necessary to 

appropriately apply the new definition. 

A second commenter suggested that 

the words ‘‘in domestic livestock’’ 

should be added to the definition after 

the words ‘‘association with known 

sources of infection.’’ We disagree and 

believe that this language would hinder 

the diagnosis of tuberculosis as it would 

eliminate consideration of contacts with 

infected animals outside of domestic 

livestock, such as wild animals. For 

example, in Michigan, wild deer have 

passed tuberculosis to domestic 

livestock. Under such circumstances, 

the suggested limiting language might 

prevent the introduction of evidence 

indicating tuberculosis in wildlife 

populations and possibly slow or deter 

the detection of the disease in regulated 

animals. 

Another commenter pointed out that 

the definition in the proposed rule 

differed slightly from the definition of 

affected herd set forth in a draft update 

of the UMR, that is currently under 

consideration. The commenter 

suggested that we revise the definition 

in the regulations to match the 

definition of affected herd in the draft 

UMR update. We agree that the 

definitions in the regulations and the 

draft UMR update should be the same. 

In this final rule, we have slightly 

modified the definition so that it refers 

to ‘‘epidemiologic evidence such as 

contact with known sources of 

infection’’ rather than naming 

‘‘epidemiologic evidence’’ and 

‘‘association with known sources of 

infection’’ as separate considerations. 

The definition as presented in this final 

61026 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

rule will be added to the draft UMR 

update. 

Therefore, for the reasons given in the 

proposed rule and in this document, we 

are adopting the proposed rule as a final 

rule, with the changes discussed in this 

document. 

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. 

We are amending the tuberculosis 

regulations by removing the two 

different definitions of affected herd 

and replacing them with a single, 

updated definition. This action is 

necessary because the definitions that 

have appeared in the regulations are 

out-of-date and inconsistent. This action 

will provide more clarity to the 

regulations. 

No economic benefits or costs are 

associated with this action, which 

would simply update and clarify our 

definition of affected herd. This action 

would have no effect on small entities, 

other Federal agencies, State 

governments, or local governments. 

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 final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts 

all State and local laws and regulations 

that are in conflict with this rule; (2) has 

no retroactive effect; and (3) does not 

require administrative proceedings 

before parties may file suit in court 

challenging this rule. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This final rule contains no 

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 Part 77 

Animal diseases, Bison, Cattle, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Transportation, 

Tuberculosis. 

■ Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR 

part 77 as follows: 

PART 77—TUBERCULOSIS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 77 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2.80, and 371.4. 

■ 2. Section 77.2 is amended by adding, 

in alphabetical order, a definition of 

affected herd to read as follows: 

§ 77.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Affected herd. A herd of livestock in 

which there is strong and substantial 

evidence that Mycobacterium bovis 

exists. This evidence should include, 

but is not limited to, any of the 

following: Histopathology, polymerase 

chain reaction (PCR) assay, bacterial 

isolation or detection, testing data, or 

epidemiologic evidence such as contact 

with known sources of infection. 

* * * * * 

§§ 77.5 and 77.20 [Amended] 

■ 3. Sections 77.5 and 77.20 are 

amended by removing the definitions of 

affected herd. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 14th day of 

October 2005. 

Elizabeth E. Gaston, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–20974 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–21529; Airspace 

Docket No. 05–AAL–19] 

Revision of Class E Airspace; Yakutat, 

AK 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action revises Class E 

airspace at Yakutat, AK to provide 

adequate controlled airspace to contain 

aircraft executing three new Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs), seven existing SIAPs and one 

revised Departure Procedure. This rule 

results in new Class E airspace upward 

from 1,200 feet (ft.) above the surface at 

Yakutat, AK. The existing airspace 

upward from 700 ft. above the surface 

is not changed. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, December 

22, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 

Rolf, AAL–538G, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, 

Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513–7587; 

telephone number (907) 271–5898; fax: 

(907) 271–2850; e-mail: 

gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov. Internet address: 

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On Friday, June 24, 2005, the FAA 

proposed to amend part 71 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

part 71) to amend the Class E airspace 

upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above 

the surface at Yakutat, AK (70 FR 

36542). The action was proposed in 

order to create Class E airspace 

sufficient in size to contain aircraft 

while executing three new SIAPs, seven 

revised SIAPs and one revised departure 

procedure for the Yakutat Airport. The 

new approaches are (1) Area Navigation 

(Global Positioning System) (RNAV 

(GPS)) Runway (RWY) 02, original; (2) 

RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, orig.; and (3) 

RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, orig. The seven 

revised SIAPs are (1) Direction Finder 

(DF) RWY 11, amendment (AMDT) 3, 

(2) Instrument Landing System (ILS) or 

Localizer (LOC)-Distance Measuring 

Equipment (DME) RWY 11, orig., (3) 

LOC–DME-Back Course RWY 29, AMDT 

3, (4) Non-directional Radio Beacon 

RWY 11, AMDT 3, (5) Very High 

Frequency Omnidirectional Range 

(VOR)–DME RWY 02, AMDT 2, (6) 

VOR–DME RWY 11, AMDT. 1, and (7) 

VOR–DME RWY 29, AMDT 1. The 

Departure Procedure is the FAKES–

TWO, AMDT 1. Revised Class E 

controlled airspace extending upward 

from 700 ft. above the surface in the 

Yakutat Airport area is revised by this 

action. Interested parties were invited to 

participate in this rulemaking 

proceeding by submitting written 

comments on the proposal to the FAA. 

No public comments have been 

received; thus the rule is adopted as 

proposed. 

The area will be depicted on 

aeronautical charts for pilot reference. 

The coordinates for this airspace docket 

are based on North American Datum 83. 

The Class E airspace areas designated as 

700/1,200 ft. transition areas are 

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA 

Order 7400.9N, Airspace Designations 

and Reporting Points, dated September 

1, 2005, and effective September 15, 

2005, which is incorporated by 

reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E