Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 130 (Friday, July 6, 2012)

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 130 (Friday, July 6, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39895-39899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16571]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

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.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 130 / Friday, July 6, 2012 / Rules
and Regulations

[[Page 39895]]

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 417

[Docket No. FSIS-2012-0012]

New Analytic Methods and Sampling Procedures for the United
States National Residue Program for Meat, Poultry, and Egg Products

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing
that it is restructuring the United States National Residue Program
(NRP) with respect to how sampling of chemical compounds and animal
production and egg product classes is scheduled. To complement this new
approach to sampling and scheduling, the Agency is implementing several
multi-residue methods for analyzing samples of meat, poultry, and egg
products for animal drug residues, pesticides, and environmental
contaminants in its inspector-generated testing program. These modern,
high-efficiency methods will conserve resources and provide useful and
reliable results while enabling FSIS to analyze each sample for more
chemical compounds than was previously possible.

DATES: New methods and procedures will be effective 30 days from
publication of this notice.

ADDRESSES: FSIS invites interested persons to submit comments on this
document. Comments may be submitted by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: This Web site provides the ability to
type short comments directly into the comment field on this Web page or
attach a file for lengthier comments. Go to Regulations.Gov at http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions at that site
for submitting comments.
Mail, including floppy disks or CD-ROMs, and hand-or courier-
delivered items: Send to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), FSIS,
Docket Clerk, Patriots Plaza 3, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 8-
163A, Mailstop 3782, Washington, DC 20250-3700.
Instructions: All items submitted by mail or electronic mail must
include the Agency name and docket number FSIS-2011-0012. Comments
received in response to this docket will be made available for public
inspection and posted without change, including any personal
information, to http://www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to background documents or to comments received,
go to the FSIS Docket Room at the address listed above between 8:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information: Contact Rachel
Edelstein, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Policy and Program
Development, at (202) 720-0399, or by fax at (202) 720-2025.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

FSIS administers a regulatory program under the Federal Meat
Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry Products
Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 453 et seq.), and the Egg Products
Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.) to protect the health and
welfare of consumers by regulating the meat, poultry, and egg products
produced in federally inspected establishments. Through its
inspections, the Agency endeavors to prevent the distribution in
commerce of any such products that are adulterated or misbranded,
thereby reducing the risk of foodborne illness from FSIS-regulated
products. One way in which the Agency effects its regulatory program is
through the United States National Residue Program (NRP). The NRP is
designed to protect the public from exposure to harmful levels of
chemical residues in meat, poultry, and egg products produced or
imported into the United States. The NRP requires the cooperation and
collaboration of several agencies for successful design and
implementation. FSIS, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the Department of Health and
Human Services are the Federal agencies primarily involved in managing
this program. EPA and FDA have statutory authority to establish residue
tolerances through regulations that limit the quantity of a chemical
for the protection of public health. FDA, under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act, establishes tolerances or action levels for
veterinary drugs, food additives, and environmental contaminants. EPA,
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (as
modified by the Food Quality Protection Act), establishes tolerance
levels for registered pesticides. Title 21 CFR sets out tolerance
levels established by FDA; Title 40 CFR sets out tolerance levels
established by EPA.
The NRP is designed to provide a structured process for identifying
and evaluating chemical compounds of concern in food animals;
collecting, analyzing and reporting results; and identifying the need
for regulatory follow-up when violative levels of chemical residues are
found. The NRP tests for the presence of chemical compounds, including
approved (legal) and unapproved (illegal) veterinary drugs, pesticides,
hormones, and environmental contaminants that may appear in meat,
poultry, and egg products.
A scheduled residue sampling program is developed annually by
representatives from FSIS, FDA, EPA, and other Federal agencies,
including the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC). These agencies meet at least once a year as part of
the Surveillance Advisory Team (SAT). The SAT creates the annual
sampling plan (per calendar year) using sample results from the NRP,
information that the agencies have accumulated during investigations,
and information from veterinary drug inventories that FDA has compiled
during on-farm visits. The agencies create a list of chemical compounds
for testing and rank them using mathematical equations that include
variables for public health risk and regulatory concern. In addition to
establishing a relative ranking for the chemicals, the SAT determines
the compound/production class pairs of public health concern and
evaluates FSIS laboratory capacity and analytical

[[Page 39896]]

methods to devise a final sampling plan. FSIS publishes the final
sampling plan in the National Residue Program Sampling Plan, which is
traditionally referred to as the Blue Book.
Since 1967, FSIS has administered the NRP by collecting samples
from meat, poultry, and egg products and analyzing the samples at one
of three FSIS laboratories. A basis for concern appears when an FSIS
laboratory detects a chemical compound level in excess of an
established tolerance or action level in a sample. FSIS shares
laboratory findings that exceed established tolerances and action
levels with FDA and EPA. If the findings are for imported product, FSIS
shares them with the competent authority in the foreign country from
where the product originated. FDA has jurisdiction on-farm, and FSIS
assists FDA in obtaining the names of producers and other parties
involved in offering the animals for sale. FSIS informs producers
through certified letters when an animal from their business has a
violative level of a residue. FDA and cooperating State agencies
investigate producers linked to residue violations. If a problem is not
corrected, subsequent FDA visits could result in an enforcement action,
including prosecution.
At the request of industry, FSIS posts a weekly list of repeat
residue violators. The Residue Repeat Violators List includes producers
associated with more than one violation on a rolling 12-month basis.
Because FSIS updates this list weekly, FDA may not have investigated
each violation. The list provides helpful information to processors and
producers who are working to avoid illegal levels of residues, serves
to deter violators, and enables FSIS and FDA to make better use of
their resources.
Recognizing that a scientifically sound chemical residue prevention
program is essential to encourage the prudent use of pesticides and
veterinary drugs in food animals, in the late 1990s FSIS implemented
the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) inspection
system in all federally inspected meat and poultry establishments to
verify that, among other things, the establishments have effective
residue controls in their food production systems. In pertinent part,
the HACCP regulations (9 CFR Part 417) require that FSIS-inspected
slaughter establishments identify all food safety hazards, including
drug residues, pesticide residues, and chemical contaminants, that are
reasonably likely to occur before, during, and after entry into the
establishment and establish preventive measures to control these
hazards. FSIS will take regulatory action against an establishment that
does not have an adequate chemical residue control program in place.

NRP Operating Structure

In practice, the NRP consists of three separate but interrelated
chemical residue testing programs: Scheduled sampling, inspector-
generated sampling, and import sampling. This basic structure has been
in existence since 1967, though modified over the years to adjust to
emerging and reemerging chemical residue concerns and to improvements
in testing methodologies.
Under the current scheduled sampling program, FSIS calculates the
number of samples needed for the scheduled sampling as part of a
``paired sampling'' protocol. Since the 2006 residue program, FSIS has
sampled 230 or 300 animals for each chemical compound/production class
pair. For instance, if FSIS scheduled heifers to be tested for four
different chemical compound classes (for example, antibiotics,
chlorinated hydrocarbons, [beta]-agonists, and sulfonamides), FSIS
inspectors would collect approximately three hundred samples for each
of the chemical compound classes. Therefore, FSIS inspectors would
collect samples from approximately 1,200 heifers (300 samples by four
chemical compound classes = 1,200 samples collected). Applying sampling
rates of 230 or 300 in food animals and egg products assures FSIS a 90
percent and 95 percent probability, respectively, of detecting chemical
residue violations if the violation rate is equal to or greater than
one percent. For the Calendar Year (CY) 2011 domestic scheduled
sampling program, FSIS laboratories completed 21,555 analyses across
multiple production classes and chemicals. Several of the analytical
methods tested for multiple compounds.

New NRP Structure

During CY 2012, in contrast, FSIS is significantly modifying the
scheduled sampling approach by eliminating the ``paired sampling''
protocol. FSIS will be analyzing fewer samples but by using multi-
residue methods will actually be assessing more compounds per sample.
As part of this new approach, FSIS is establishing three tiers of
sampling for the NRP.
Tier 1--New Scheduled Sampling Program
The new Tier 1 resembles the current scheduled sampling program and
should be understood as an exposure assessment. Where the current
scheduled sampling program has collected samples from each production
class, the new FSIS program will rotate production classes through Tier
1. Where FSIS has allocated a maximum of 300 samples per chemical
compound class in the traditional program, the new structure will
allocate approximately 800 samples per chemical compound class for each
of the production classes tested in Tier 1.
Under Tier 1 during CY 2012 domestic scheduled sampling program,
FSIS will run 6,400 samples through 12 multi-residue methods across
nine production classes of meat and poultry, which represent 95 percent
of the meat and poultry consumed domestically. Eliminating the ``paired
sampling'' protocol will result in more samples run per production
class and more analytes targeted. Samples from Tier 1 will be analyzed
at either the FSIS Eastern or Western laboratories.
New Scheduled Sampling Program Tier 2
The new Tier 2 will resemble the traditional inspector-generated
sampling program at the establishment level. The inspector-generated
program is a targeted testing program in which field public health
veterinarians make the determination to perform in-plant screens on
carcasses because they suspect that animals or carcasses contain higher
than allowable levels of chemical residues. Samples from carcasses
having positive in-plant screens are sent to the FSIS Midwestern
Laboratory for confirmation, and the carcass is held pending results.
In 2010, field personnel completed more than 200,000 in-plant screens
resulting in almost 7,000 positive samples submitted to the FSIS
Midwestern Laboratory for confirmation. FSIS implemented the newest in-
plant screen (Kidney Inhibition Swab (KIS^TM) test) in 2009,
and since then, the Midwestern Laboratory has instituted a policy of
repeating the KIS^TM test on positive in-plant
KIS^TM screens received from the field. In 2012, FSIS will
begin using a multi-analytic screening method discussed below on
inspector-generated in-plant screen positives submitted to the
Midwestern Laboratory.
Simultaneously, FSIS will discontinue the use of the 7-plate
bioassay in the Midwestern Laboratory as a primary screen for field
positive samples. Inspector-generated samples will be tested using the
updated multi-residue analytic screening method on in-plant samples
described below in the section on New Methodology. Because the multi-
analytic method is significantly superior to the KIS^TM test,
it will be unnecessary to repeat the

[[Page 39897]]

KIS^TM test on field-screen positive samples submitted to the
Midwestern Laboratory. Hence, the turnaround time for availability of
regulatory results will be reduced.
FSIS will continue, however, to use the bioassay for quantification
of those veterinary drugs having tolerances associated with the
bioassay as required by FDA New Animal Drug Applications (NADA).
The new Tier 2 also will absorb the traditional exploratory
assessment program at the production class and compound class level.
Exploratory assessments are targeted sampling plans designed, for
example, in response to information gained from previous exposure
assessments and intelligence from other agencies. Consequently, FSIS
may use the data results from Tier 1 sampling to inform the type of
sampling that will occur in Tier 2.
New Scheduled Sampling Program Tier 3
FSIS is further planning a Tier 3 level, which the Agency
anticipates will be similar in structure to the exploratory assessment
program in Tier 2, with the exception that Tier 3 will encompass
targeted testing at the herd or flock level. FSIS anticipates that
certain chemical exposures may occur that involve more than one animal
or bird. For instance, producers may administer some veterinary drugs
to a herd or a flock (for example, growth promotants or antibiotics
given in the feed) in a way that involves misuse. In addition,
livestock and birds may be exposed unintentially to an environmental
contaminant. Therefore, a targeted testing program designed for
livestock or flocks originating from the same farm or region may be
necessary on occasion to determine the level of a chemical or chemicals
to which the livestock or the birds in the flock have been exposed.
Tier 3 will provide a vehicle for developing information that will
support future policy development within the NRP. FSIS is evaluating
implementation issues and requirements for Tier 3 activities.
Import Sampling
The import-sampling program will be structured using the Tier 1 and
2 frameworks. In CY 2012, FSIS intends to collect approximately 1300
import samples--500 samples under Tier 1 and 800 samples under Tier 2.
It also intends to screen a subset of these samples for unknown
compounds in the FSIS Food Emergency Response Network (FERN)
laboratory.

New Methodology and Sampling Procedures

The analytical methods that have been used for many years in the
NRP to measure veterinary drug residues in meat, poultry, and egg
products are laborious, expensive, and time consuming and, as a result,
sometimes prevent the timely testing of food products before they are
released into the marketplace. More modern, performance-based
analytical methods can reduce cost, increase the number of analytes
that can be measured, and improve precision and accuracy while also
shortening turn-around time. Modern methods use multi-residue
techniques to quantify a larger number of analytes with greater
precision (repeatability) and accuracy (degree of closeness to actual
value). Such methods can often be performed with faster throughput and
at lower cost than conventional single residue methods. In the food
regulation arena, improved analytical methods are necessary if
regulatory agencies are to effectively monitor for the increasing
number of chemical residues and to protect public health.
This notice announces the adoption by FSIS of a new screening
method for antibiotics and environmental contaminants. The current
official FSIS screening methodology for antibiotics is a 7-plate
bioassay. The 7-plate bioassay screen has several drawbacks: (1) It
only works for microbial growth-inhibiting residues (certain
antibiotics within and among classes); (2) it is not sensitive enough
for sulfonamides and fluoroquinolones in relation to their tolerances,
but it is much too sensitive as a screen for tetracyclines and certain
aminoglycosides with high tolerances; (3) it does not distinguish one
drug from another in the same class; (4) the results can be difficult
to interpret, especially when multiple drugs are present; (5) it is
prone to unknown microbial inhibition responses; (6) it takes a team of
personnel to set up the assay and more than 16 hours to obtain the
results; and (7) the measurement uncertainty associated with the 7-
plate bioassay is large compared with other methods.
The new multi-residue method (MRM) being implemented by FSIS
provides significant improvements: (1) It can screen for a variety of
analytes, not just antibiotics; (2) the method can be validated at
levels appropriate in relation to tolerances; (3) because of the power
of mass spectrometry, it can clearly distinguish individual analytes,
even if multiple drugs are present in the same sample; (4) unknown
microbial inhibition responses would be mitigated; and (5) the time and
personnel needed to obtain results is reduced.
The 52 analytes shown in the following table are appropriate for
inclusion in the new MRM at and above the level specified. Analytes
that were not analyzed during the 2011 NRP sampling plan and had not
been included for testing in previous years are in italics.

Analytes and Applicability Level
[([mu] g/g) for MRM]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-plate
Analyte Bovine kidney Porcine kidney bioassay
(ppm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ampicillin...................................................... 0.02 0.02 0.05
Beta-dexamethasone.............................................. 0.05 0.05 ..............
Cefazolin....................................................... 0.2 0.2 ..............
Chloramphenicol................................................. 0.006 0.006 20
Chlortetracycline............................................... 1 1 0.05
Cimaterol....................................................... 0.012 0.003 ..............
Ciprofloxacin................................................... 0.025 0.025 ..............
Clindamycin..................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Cloxacillin..................................................... 0.02 0.02 1.6
Danofloxacin.................................................... 0.025 0.025 ..............
DCCD (marker for Ceftiofur)..................................... 0.2 0.2 ..............
Desthylene Ciprofloxacin........................................ 0.025 0.025 ..............
Dicloxacillin................................................... 0.2 0.2 ..............

[[Page 39898]]

Difloxacin...................................................... 0.025 0.025 ..............
Enrofloxacin.................................................... 0.025 0.025 ..............
Erythromycin A.................................................. 0.05 0.05 0.25
Florfenicol..................................................... 0.1 0.1 ..............
Florfenicol Amine *............................................. .............. 0.15 ..............
Flunixin........................................................ 0.0125 0.0125 ..............
Gamithromycin................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Lincomycin...................................................... 0.05 0.05 1.5
Nafcillin....................................................... 0.2 0.2 ..............
Norfloxacin..................................................... 0.025 0.025 ..............
Oxacillin....................................................... 0.2 0.2 ..............
Oxyphenylbutazone *............................................. 0.05 .............. ..............
Oxytetracycline................................................. 0.5 0.5 0.4
Penicillin G.................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.05
Phenylbutazone *................................................ .............. 0.05 ..............
Pirlimycin...................................................... 0.25 0.25 ..............
Prednisone...................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Ractopamine..................................................... 0.003 0.003 ..............
Salbutamol...................................................... 0.006 0.003 ..............
Sarafloxacin.................................................... 0.025 0.025 ..............
Sulfachloropyridizine........................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfadiazine.................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfadimethoxine................................................ 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfadoxine..................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfaethoxypyridazine........................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfamerazine................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulamethazine................................................... 0.05 0.05 150
Sulfamethizole.................................................. 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfamethoxazole................................................ 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfamethoxypyridazine.......................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfanilamide *................................................. 0.1 .............. ..............
Sulfanitran..................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfapyridine................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfaquinoxaline................................................ 0.05 0.05 ..............
Sulfathiazole................................................... 0.05 0.05 ..............
Tetracycline.................................................... 0.5 0.5 0.4
Tilmicosin...................................................... 0.12 0.24 0.5
Tylosin......................................................... 0.1 0.2 1
Zearalanol *.................................................... .............. 0.012 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This analyte is not applicable for bovine kidney in the MRM.

With the new sampling and analytic methods, approximately 6,400
samples of two pounds of muscle and one pound each of kidney and liver
will be collected, in contrast to approximately 20,000 samples
collected per year under the current system in which the Agency
collects one pound each of muscle, kidney, and liver. Although FSIS
inspectors will be collecting more muscle with every sample, they will
be collecting far fewer samples.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

The new methodologies will result in additional costs for the
Agency only for the purchase and maintenance of new equipment that will
enable the FSIS laboratories to use the new multi-residue method.
Equipment for the Midwestern Laboratory was replaced and charged under
the old program. The additional purchase of the same equipment for the
Eastern and Western Laboratories is anticipated to cost $250,000 per
instrument, resulting in a total cost in the second year of
implementation of $550,000 for two instruments and service maintenance.
(Maintenance of the 2 instruments is at the rate of 10 percent of the
cost of each instrument.) FSIS is exploring the possibility of leasing
this equipment, which would significantly reduce the startup cost and
eliminate the maintenance cost. The annualized cost of the instruments
plus maintenance over 6 years at 7 percent equals approximately
$112,000 and, if discounted at 3 percent, equals about $108,000. The
Agency does not expect a significant impact on other laboratory
resources because of the instrument purchases. In sum, FSIS sees only a
small cost to the taxpayer in implementing the new methodology.
As stated above, under the new system approximately 6,400 samples
of two pounds of muscle and one pound each of kidney and liver will be
collected, in contrast to approximately 20,000 samples collected per
year under the current system in which the Agency collects one pound
each of muscle, kidney, and liver. The muscle samples will be larger,
but the total number of samples collected will be much smaller. The
smaller number of samples required will result in cost savings to FSIS
that will be realized through reductions in special delivery shipments
and in inspector time spent collecting samples. At approximately $20 a
shipment, a reduction of approximately 13,600 samples that will not
need to be collected will equal approximately $272,000 saved annually.
At approximately 30 minutes allowed for an inspector to collect and
package a

[[Page 39899]]

sample, the savings for 13,600 samples will equal approximately
$218,280.
Thus, given annualized costs of approximately $112,000 (7 percent)
or $108,000 (3 percent) and annual recurring benefits of $490,280, net
annual benefits exceed the costs by approximately $378,280.
Benefits to the public health are likely to occur because the
Agency will be able to test for more residues with the additional new
methods, but those benefits cannot be quantified at this time.

Impact on Small Entities

The new sampling program will operate according to a scheduling
algorithm that will ensure that establishments are sampled in
proportion to their production volume, and the Agency expects no
negative impact on small businesses. Because of the design of the
algorithm used for the new sampling program, small businesses may be
sampled less frequently than is the case under the current system. This
differential in frequency of sampling is likely to offset any economic
losses conceivably resulting from the increased size of an individual
sample.

Expected Changes in Violation Rates

The nine classes to be sampled for CY 2012 under the new program
are specified as Bob Veal, Beef Cows, Dairy Cows, Steers, Heifers,
Market Swine, Sows, Young Chicken, and Young Turkey. The number of
samples taken for nine species classes for CY 2012 will be 800 per
class except for steers and heifers, which have 400 each. The total
allocation per species class and the number of samples allocated per
species class may change, as will the species classes sampled in
successive years. Assuming a constant rate of violations estimated from
those in CY 2011, the number of expected violations will tend to
increase in some but not all cases even though the total number of
samples will decrease. This is because the number of analyses run per
sample will be increased in CY 2012 compared to CY 2011. Specifically,
based on historical data on chemical residue violations, the Agency
expects that Bob Veal, Beef Cows, and Sows may show some increase in
violations, while Dairy Cows, Steers, Heifers, Market Swine, Young
Chicken, and Young Turkey may show no change in violations. The total
net increase in violations expected is unlikely to have a significant
impact because the residue violative rate is very low.

Impact on Foreign and State Stakeholders

The proposed plan remains statistically structured relative to
sample collection of imported products. FSIS and other federal agencies
will continue to select chemicals tested within the U.S. program using
a risk-based approach. FSIS expects countries exporting meat, poultry,
and egg products to the United States to control chemical residues in
the products that they export. FSIS will continue to require foreign
countries to maintain equivalent residue control programs (9 CFR
327.2(a)(2)(iv)(C)). Therefore, FSIS does not anticipate any trade
issues or international consequences.
States that administer ``at least equal to'' cooperative State meat
or poultry inspection (MPI) programs need to complete and sign an
``Annual Statement of Defensible Laboratory Results'' as part of their
annual ``at least equal to'' self-assessment. States under the
Cooperative Interstate Shipment Program must demonstrate that their
laboratory services used to analyze regulatory samples are capable of
producing results that are the ``same as'' those obtained by FSIS
laboratories. Requirements for demonstrating ``same as'' status can be
found at http://askfsis.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1622/related/1. State laboratories operating under the Cooperative
Interstate Shipment Program need to use the protocols for analytical
tests required for FSIS regulatory activities on meat and poultry and
egg products described in the FSIS Chemistry, Microbiological, and
Pathology Laboratory Guidebooks. The authorities of affected States
should take note of the methodological developments described in this
notice.

Additional Public Notification

FSIS will announce this document online through the FSIS Web page
located at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/Federal_Register_Notices/index.asp. FSIS will also make copies of this Federal
Register publication available through the FSIS Constituent Update,
which is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies,
procedures, regulations, Federal Register notices, FSIS public
meetings, and other types of information that could affect or would be
of interest to constituents and stakeholders. The Update is
communicated via Listserv, a free electronic mail subscription service
for industry, trade groups, consumer interest groups, health
professionals, and other individuals who have asked to be included. The
Update is also available on the FSIS Web page. In addition, FSIS offers
an electronic mail subscription service which provides automatic and
customized access to selected food safety news and information. This
service is available at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Email_Subscription/. Options range from recalls to export information
to regulations, directives and notices. Customers can add or delete
subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password protect their
accounts.

Done at Washington, DC, on June 29, 2012.
Alfred V. Almanza,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-16571 Filed 7-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P