text:
New Performance Standards for Salmonella and Campylobacter in Young Chicken and Turkey Slaughter Establishments: Response to Comments and Announcement of Implementation Schedule
A Notice by the Food Safety and Inspection Service on 03/21/2011
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Agency/Docket Number:
Docket No. FSIS-2010-0029
Foreign Government Programs
Response to Comments on the Federal Register Notice of May 14, 2010
Administrative Procedure Questions
Salmonella Posting Rationale
Connection Between Salmonella Contamination of Chicken Carcasses and Human Illness
Efficacy of Performance Standards
Campylobacter Performance Standards
Public Health Predictions
Turkey Salmonella Issues
Campylobacter Methodology Questions
Use of Large-Portion Campylobacter Procedure for Performance Standards
Dose-Response Level for Campylobacter
Campylobacter Fragility
Campylobacter Methodology
Sample Collection Methods—Turkey Sponge vs. Chicken Rinse
Additional Public Notification
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2011-6585 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2011-6585
Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.
The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) published a Federal Register Notice on May 14, 2010 (75 FR 27288) in which it announced the forthcoming implementation of new performance standards for the pathogenic micro-organisms Salmonella and Campylobacter for chilled carcasses in young chicken (broiler) and turkey slaughter establishments. The new performance standards were developed in response to a charge from the President's Food Safety Working Group and based on recent FSIS Nationwide Microbiological Baseline Data Collection Programs. The standards will be applied to sample sets collected and analyzed by the Agency to evaluate establishment performance with respect to requirements of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) Rule. The Agency received detailed comments submitted in response to the notice. This notice responds to those comments submitted and explains the changes adopted by the Agency after carefully evaluating comments. These changes include:
1. Updated Salmonella and new Campylobacter performance standards for young chickens and turkeys will take effect with Agency verification sample sets scheduled for July 2011
2. All young chicken and turkey establishments will move to the highest scheduling priority due to the initiation of Campylobacter testing for these product classes
3. All sample sets scheduled for young chicken and turkey establishments will be analyzed for both Campylobacter and Salmonella, and follow-up sample sets responding to sample set failure for either organism will be analyzed for both organisms
4. Effective with sample sets begun in July 2011, the new Salmonella standards will accept five positive samples in a 51-sample set for young chickens and four positive samples in a 56-sample set for turkeys
5. Effective July 2011 Salmonella performance Categories 1 and 2 for young chicken and turkey establishments, based on the new performance standards, will be applied exclusively for Agency internal analysis and quarterly aggregate reporting
6. Web-posting of young chicken and turkey establishments that fail the new Salmonella standards ("Category 3") for their last set will begin as sample sets scheduled for July 2011 are completed
7. Campylobacter performance standards and sample set criteria for tracking and reporting to establishments will be applied to results from the smaller of the two laboratory Campylobacter sample portions (1 mL), which detects higher levels of contamination, making the performance standards 10.4 percent for young chickens and 0.79 percent for turkeys
8. Campylobacter sample set criteria for tracking and reporting 1 mL results are eight positive samples acceptable per 51-sample set for young chickens and three positive samples acceptable per 56-sample set for turkeys
9. Campylobacter results from the larger of the two laboratory Campylobacter sample portions (30 mL for chickens, 24 mL for turkeys), which detects lower levels of contamination, will be used for Agency internal analysis
10. Agency responses to Campylobacter sample set results will follow current Salmonella procedures for immediate follow-up testing for both organisms and for Food Safety Assessments when necessary
11. Category 1/2/3 results will be posted in quarterly aggregate reports for all establishments producing raw products subject to FSIS Salmonella testing, including young chickens and turkeys under the new standards
Docket: For access to background documents, go to the FSIS Docket Room at Room 2-2127, George Washington Carver Center, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Mailstop 5474, Beltsville, MD 20705-5474 between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Daniel Engeljohn, PhD, Assistant Administrator for Office of Policy and Program Development, FSIS, USDA, Room 349-E, Jamie Whitten Building, 14th and Independence, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700; telephone (202) 205-0495, fax (202) 720-2025; daniel.engeljohn@fsis.usda.gov.
FSIS is the public health regulatory agency in USDA that is responsible for ensuring that the nation's commercial supply of meat, poultry, and processed egg products is safe, wholesome, and appropriately labeled and packaged. FSIS is a participant in the President's Food Safety Working Group (FSWG), which was created by President Obama in March 2009 to recommend improvements to the U.S. food safety system. The FSWG is chaired by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. In July 2009, the FSWG published Key Findings recommending a new, public health-focused approach to food safety based on three core principles: Prioritizing prevention, strengthening surveillance and enforcement, and improving response and recovery.
The FSWG specifically charged FSIS with "cutting Salmonella risk in Poultry Products" by "develop[ing] new standards to reduce the prevalence of Salmonella in turkey and poultry" and by "establish[ing] a Salmonella verification program with the goal of having 90 percent of poultry establishments meeting the new standards by the end of [calendar year] 2010." (FSWG) These new Salmonella standards are to be applied to sample sets from establishments included in the Agency's Salmonella Verification Program in the place of the performance standards for young chickens (as broilers) codified at 9 CFR 381.94 and the standards for turkeys announced in a Federal Register Notice of February 17, 2005. The Agency intends to issue a proposed rule that would formally rescind the codified standards that are no longer in effect. In consultations with the FSWG, the Agency committed to a number of other food safety initiatives to prevent illness, among them developing a new performance standard for Campylobacter for young chickens and turkeys.
The Agency accordingly published a Federal Register Notice on May 14, 2010 (75 FR 27288) in which it announced the July 2010 implementation of new performance standards for the pathogenic micro-organisms Salmonella and Campylobacter for chilled carcasses in young chicken and turkey slaughter establishments. The May 14, 2010 notice announced that FSIS had developed such performance standards and predicted the public health impact that might result if, after two years of implementation, these standards are met by half of the establishments that would not meet them at first. The new performance standards for young chickens and turkeys were informed by, among other data sources, data collected during the Agency's recent Nationwide Microbiological Baseline Data Collection Programs: The Young Chicken Baseline Survey (YCBS), and the Young Turkey Baseline Survey Start Printed Page 15283(YTBS) (Baselines). The May 14, 2010 notice detailed the baseline surveys and their use in developing the new performance standards.
Although FSIS had planned to implement the new standards in July 2010, the Agency decided to delay implementation until the many comments filed in response to the May 14, 2010 notice had been evaluated. This current notice responds to those comments and explains the policy changes made by the Agency based on its careful evaluation of the comments. These policy changes are listed in the notice Summary above and are further detailed in the responses to comments below.
The Agency cannot yet determine if it has met the FSWG goal of having 90 percent of poultry establishments meeting the new Salmonella standards by the end of Calendar Year (CY) 2010 as Salmonella verification set scheduling and sampling is an ongoing process and a number of establishments that started sets in CY 2010 were not completed by December 31, 2010. Partial sets are incommensurate, moreover, with the completed-set-based performance measures used by the Agency and the FSWG. Therefore, in preparing its CY 2010 accounting for this FSWG goal, FSIS plans to complete sample sets started in 2010 or earlier during the first quarter of 2011 and count those completed sets toward its final 2010 report. The Agency will cut off its 2010 sample set total on April 1, 2011 and issue its final 2010 accounting at that point. Any 2010-started sample sets not completed by April 1 will be applied toward CY 2011 totals once completed. The final CY total will thus comprise sets started no later than December 31, 2010 and completed no later than March 31, 2011. As of March 2011, 86.2 percent of young chicken slaughter establishments would have met the new standard for 2010. Also as of March 2011, 87.8 percent of young turkey slaughter establishments would have met the new standard for 2010.
The Agency believes that the policy changes announced in this notice, which will be implemented in July 2011, will encourage the poultry industry to reduce Salmonella in poultry and thereby further reduce the risk of human illnesses.
Foreign countries that are eligible to export poultry products to the United States must apply inspection, sanitary, and other standards that are equivalent to those that FSIS applies to poultry products. Thus, in evaluating a foreign country's poultry inspection system to determine the country's eligibility to export products to the United States, FSIS will consider whether Salmonella or Campylobacter methods and procedures that the country applies are equivalent to those that FSIS uses.
Some comments claimed that the Agency is violating the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by effectively promulgating a "regulation" without following due notice-and-comment procedure.
FSIS Response: The Agency does not agree that FSIS policies explained herein are regulations subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the APA or are otherwise in violation of the APA. The policies and performance standards, including the testing process the Agency will undertake, do not impose requirements on establishments. We would note, however, that the Agency has sought to engage industry and all interested parties in the subject matter of this notice, has provided extensive opportunity for public comment, delayed implementation to carefully consider issues that were raised in comments, and made various substantive changes to policies based on those comments. We would also note that this is not a novel approach and that notice establishing standards against which to measure establishment performance has been accomplished before through Federal Register notices in 2005 (70 FR 8058) and 2006 (71 FR 9772) (referenced in the May 14, 2010 notice). In 2008, FSIS further articulated how the Agency intended to evaluate whether industry was adequately controlling for Salmonella in carcasses (73 FR 4767).
Several comments expressed opposition to the Agency's decision to apply the new standards requiring fewer positives for Category 1 status than has been the case and that posting Category 2 establishments unrealistically differentiates such establishments from those in Category 1.
FSIS Response: The Agency believes that its policy of posting establishments that are not in the highest performance rank has stimulated improvement in industry performance, as was shown in the Agency's experience after announcing performance categories in 2006 when 55-60 percent of non-compliant establishments moved to become compliant within two years. FSIS, however, recognizes that some establishments that have been excluded from posting may now be included based on the same level of performance. While the Agency will implement updated Salmonella and new Campylobacter performance standards for young chickens and turkeys with Agency verification sample sets scheduled for July 2011, establishments that complete sample sets begun in or after July 2011 will be Web-posted only if they have failed the new standards. Web-posting of Category 2 and 3 establishments that began sets under current standards will continue until these establishments have completed sets under the new standards.
Effective with samples sets starting in or after July 2011, Salmonella performance Categories 1 and 2, based on the new performance standards, will be applied exclusively for Agency internal analysis and not for posting purposes. The Agency will post quarterly aggregate reports showing the Category 1/2/3 distribution for each relevant product class subject to FSIS Salmonella testing but will not identify individual establishments. In order to accomplish this, the Agency will determine Category 1 and 2 performance criteria for young turkey establishments.
The Agency believes that this policy change is reasonable given the general progress of the poultry industry in reducing positive rates from the 1996 HACCP baselines to current rates. Though the "pass-fail" approach is to be taken with young chickens now as well as turkeys, as stated in the May 14, 2010 notice, the smaller prevalence on young turkey carcasses permits a less stringent compliance criterion that is consistent with the Agency's stated objectives of substantially reducing pathogen presence. Thus, the young chicken standard allows an establishment operating at the baseline prevalence approximately an 80 percent chance of passing. The turkey standard, however, is based on a much lower prevalence and so the turkey standard's higher chance of passing of 99+ percent is appropriate.
Several comments doubted that there is a connection between Salmonella contamination of chicken carcasses and the occurrence of cases of human salmonellosis.
FSIS Response: The Agency believes that there is a connection between Salmonella contamination and human illness, and that poultry contamination continues to contribute significantly to salmonellosis. Evidence of the Start Printed Page 15284connection of salmonellosis and contaminated chicken products can be found in the outbreaks that have been associated with chicken (CDC food borne outbreaks) and a 2004 case control study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that has linked salmonellosis with chicken products (A.C. Kimura et al.; Kimura et al. study). Furthermore, in a Memorandum to the Record dated January 18, 2011, CDC re-affirmed that "Poultry products are an important vehicle for human Salmonella and Campylobacter infections in the United States" (posted with this notice at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Regulations_&_Policies/2011_Notices_Index/index.asp). Since raw chicken products (ground and carcasses) continue to show greater Salmonella prevalence than is found with other product classes (Salmonella Testing Tables), it is likely that the source of the contamination was chicken carcasses rather than other non-chicken ingredients such as spices that may be used with such products. The Agency has concluded, using the available data and the best science available, that reducing Salmonella on chicken carcasses would reduce risk of illness and thus potentially reduce the occurrence of illnesses.
The Agency further notes, however, that the commenter's evidence to support the assertion of no connection was based on the human illness FoodNet database (see discussion below). Salmonellosis cases due to poultry are only a subset of all salmonellosis cases reported through the CDC FoodNet program. The total number of salmonellosis cases stem from all sources including cattle, swine, eggs, fish, fruits and vegetables. Thus an observed correlation (negative or positive) between Salmonella occurrence in poultry carcasses at post chill and salmonellosis from FoodNet data cannot be used to assert a causal relationship between poultry contamination and salmonellosis. Further, the available salmonellosis data cannot be stratified by food vehicle (e.g., poultry), given the lack of food attribution data within the FoodNet database. Given this data gap, it is entirely conceivable that a reduction of salmonellosis due to one food product such as poultry could be negated by an increase in salmonellosis due to another product or unrelated vehicle. In any case, the Agency believes that the available evidence leads to the conclusion that Salmonella occurrence in poultry has the potential to cause salmonellosis in humans.
Several comments from industry argued that tightening Salmonella performance standards since 2006 has not resulted in fewer cases of human salmonellosis and thus that further tightening the standards would be pointless and punitive. They argue that available evidence (from CDC FoodNet data sets) did not support the Agency's predictions that there would be benefits derived from decreases in Salmonella found on carcasses at post chill.
FSIS Response: There are important reasons why it is not appropriate to examine CDC salmonellosis rates and compare these data directly to trends of Salmonella incidence for inferring the impact of reduction of Salmonella incidence for any particular commodity and salmonellosis rates. Specifically, it is important to distinguish the two surveillance datasets available from the CDC used to analyze outbreak trends and foodborne illness. First, the CDC National Outbreak Reporting System (NORS) (http://wwwn.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/), referred here as outbreak data, provides information on reported outbreaks (defined as two or more illnesses associated with a single vehicle (product) that caused the illness). The source of the contamination is investigated (the pathogen and food product responsible for the outbreak); however, about 50 percent of confirmed Salmonella outbreaks do not have a known food vehicle. Second, the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet) (http://cdc.gov/foodnet/) produces annual case rates for several major foodborne pathogens, including Salmonella. FoodNet data tracks salmonellosis cases presently in 10 states, presently covering about 1/7 of the U.S. population (46 million). The majority of reported FoodNet cases reflect sporadic cases of Salmonella (for example, only six percent of 2007 reported FoodNet cases were outbreak-related (2007 annual report). There is no information regarding the food product that was (or might have been) associated with the illness. Therefore, FoodNet data are only available as aggregated information from cases due to all sources thought to be foodborne, including all food products such as those categories of foods defined by the CDC—including fish, crustaceans, mollusks, dairy, eggs, beef, game, pork, poultry, grains-beans, oils-sugars, fruits-nuts, fungi, leafy vegetables, root vegetables, sprout, vine-stalk vegetables (Painter et al., 2009; Painter et al.). Thus an observed correlation (negative or positive) between Salmonella occurrence in chicken carcasses at post chill and FoodNet salmonellosis cannot be used, by itself, to assert a causal relationship between chicken contamination and salmonellosis. Unfortunately, as mentioned above, the FoodNet database reflecting trends of salmonellosis rates cannot be stratified by food vehicle (e.g., chicken), given the lack of food attribution data. However, for all food sources, the incidence of Salmonella-caused human illness declined approximately eight percent from the beginning of surveillance in 1996 to the most recently released annual report case rate in 2007 (as opposed to the most recently released preliminary report in 2009), with most of the reductions in the earlier years. This trend (or lack of trend) though cannot be assumed true for product-specific trends: It is possible that reduction of salmonellosis due to one food product such as chicken could be negated by the increase in salmonellosis due to another product or unrelated vehicle, such as produce, thus causing the stable case rate in recent years. Consequently, even if there is not a positive correlation of salmonellosis rates and the incidence of contamination rates on young chicken carcasses over time, it would not be possible to dismiss the likelihood that Salmonella occurrence in chicken and salmonellosis are causally connected.
The data presented above are part of a weight of evidence approach to refute the assertion that there is no connection between the presence of Salmonella on broilers and human illnesses. Additional evidence can be gleaned by performing trend analyses comparing either CDC outbreak data or the serotype data contained within FoodNet to FSIS verification results (FSIS Serotype Data).
Some comments questioned the validity of applying Campylobacter performance standards, given the fragility of the organism and the relatively low risk associated with all but highly-contaminated servings or samples.
FSIS Response: After evaluating comments pointing out the complexities of Campylobacter and considering the Agency's lack of experience with verification sampling for this organism, FSIS has decided that it will track and report Campylobacter results to establishments and will not post the names of establishments that fail to meet the new Campylobacter standards. The Campylobacter performance standards and sample set criteria for tracking and reporting to establishments Start Printed Page 15285will be applied to results from the smaller of the two laboratory Campylobacter sample portions (1 mL) described in the May 14, 2010 Notice, which detects higher levels of contamination. The Campylobacter sample set criteria for tracking and reporting 1 mL results are eight positive samples acceptable per 51-sample set for young chickens and three positive samples acceptable per 56-sample set for turkeys. Campylobacter results from the larger of the two laboratory Campylobacter sample portions (30 mL for chickens, sponge plus 24 mL sponge diluent for turkeys), which detects lower levels of contamination, will be used for Agency internal analysis. Agency responses to Campylobacter sample set results will follow current Salmonella procedures for immediate follow-up testing for both organisms and for Food Safety Assessments (FSAs) when deemed necessary.
The Agency notes that the implementation of Campylobacter standards and sampling in July 2011 will mean that all poultry establishments will move to the highest priority in the Agency scheduling algorithm as "new" establishments. Each set scheduled under the new standards will be tested for both Campylobacter and Salmonella. Furthermore, any establishment that fails a set for either organism will be moved to the second-highest priority for scheduling to conduct an immediate follow-up set, and the samples taken in the follow-up set will be analyzed for both organisms. FSIS believes that this more intensive sampling approach will provide a significant incentive for establishments to increase process control for both pathogens.
Category 1/2/3 results will be posted in quarterly aggregate reports for all establishments producing raw products subject to FSIS Salmonella testing, including young chickens and turkeys under the new standards including Campylobacter. FSIS will evaluate industry performance trends with regard to both Salmonella and Campylobacter. In response to adverse trends, the Agency may consider actions that could include, among other things, posting young chicken and turkey Category 2 establishments, posting all establishments that fail any applicable performance standards, or posting non-categorized individual sample set results from all establishments producing raw products subject to such testing. Any such actions would be announced in a Federal Register notice.
Some comments criticized the Agency's predictions of illness reduction, including (1) the assumptions used, and (2) that such reductions were not possible because the standard would primarily affect small volume establishments (Potential Public Health Impact).
FSIS Response: FSIS notes here that the public health predictions made in the May 14, 2010 Federal Register notice were derived from the latest available illness-attribution data published by the CDC in 1999. Updated data have been published recently by the CDC (CDC updated data). The Agency has adjusted its public health predictions accordingly. These public health predictions depend on establishments that currently do not pass the new performance standards changing their processes to pass. Although FSIS has some historic evidence regarding industry behavior in response to previous measures (i.e., Salmonella HACCP verification program data and categorization of establishments in that program [FSIS 2006]), the true behavior of the industry in response to the new performance standards is unknowable in advance. If the status quo remains and no establishments change their processes to meet the new performance standards, zero illnesses will be avoided. Alternatively, approximately 40,000 illnesses could be avoided if all initially noncompliant establishments were to become compliant. Based on the past performance of the industry to the previous guidance where approximately 50 percent of noncompliant establishments became compliant (FSIS, 2006), FSIS now predicts that two years after implementing the Salmonella standards, human illnesses due to Salmonella could decrease by approximately 20,000 per year.
The case of Campylobacter is somewhat different, in that the Agency will be tracking industry performance and will expect to see improvement rather than stasis or regression. If the Agency, as stated above, sees adverse trends with Campylobacter, it may take various mitigation actions. These public health predictions depend on establishments that currently do not pass the new performance standards changing their processes to pass. Although FSIS has some historic evidence regarding industry behavior in response to previous measures (i.e., Salmonella HACCP verification program data and categorization of establishments in that program [FSIS 2006]), the true behavior of the industry in response to the new performance standards is unknowable in advance. If the status quo remains and no establishments change their processes to meet the new performance standards, zero illnesses will be avoided. If all initially noncompliant establishments were to become compliant, approximately 11,000 illnesses due to Campylobacter could be avoided. Based on the past response of the industry to the previous guidance where approximately 50 percent of noncompliant establishments became compliant (FSIS, 2006), the Agency predicts that, two years after implementation, as many as 5,000 fewer cases of human illness due to Campylobacter might occur each year. The Agency's detailed response to comments on its approach to making public health predictions is contained in Appendix I.
Comments noted that the Agency's Young Turkey Baseline Survey (YTBS) found 0.35 percent of post-chill samples positive for Salmonella and asked the Agency to explain the discrepancy between the YTBS and FSIS HACCP verification sampling results. In light of the lowered performance standards and these other concerns, comments requested a "grace period" for turkey establishments failing under the new standards, using an average over two sets before posting establishments.
FSIS Response: As an initial matter, FSIS notes and regrets the error in the report "The Nationwide Microbiological Baseline Data Collection Program: Young Turkey Survey August 2008—July 2009" where the report erroneously stated that 0.35 percent of the analyzed post chill samples were found with Salmonella; in the report FSIS also correctly stated that "The estimated prevalence for Salmonella was 1.73 percent * * *" (pages 9 and 11). Reference was made to a technical report: "Technical Paper for Performance Guidance for Broilers and Young Turkey at Post-chill," that explains the estimation procedure used (Technical Paper). In that technical report, FSIS addressed this issue of the difference of percentages of positive results between the two sampling programs. The comparison between the percentages of positive Salmonella results showed a higher percentage with the HACCP verification sampling, though the difference was not statistically significant. A more detailed response to these comments is attached in Appendix II.Start Printed Page 15286
Comments on the proposed Campylobacter performance standards for chickens and turkeys suggest removing the larger sample test portion of the compliance criteria (30 mL for chickens and sponge plus 24 mL sponge diluent for turkeys). Remaining would be the test to detect relatively high levels based on analyses of 1 mL portions for chickens and turkeys.
FSIS response: The Agency believes that a performance standard based on the 1 mL is most efficient in that it targets samples with higher levels of Campylobacter, which have a greater probability of inducing human illness by cross-contamination and surviving cooking compared to lower levels. The performance criteria (number of positive samples acceptable per sample set) for tracking and reporting to establishments will be eight positive samples acceptable per 51-sample set for young chickens and three positive samples acceptable per 56-sample set for turkeys. Data collected for the 30 and sponge plus 24 mL sponge diluent enrichment will be used primarily for Agency internal analysis but will also be aggregated and posted quarterly by performance category to show the progress of the chicken and turkey industries. If there is no improvement in these data over time, FSIS may consider implementing the performance standard using the larger-portion sample results as well.
Comments cited studies claiming that the threshold of concern for Campylobacter in broilers is much higher than the new Campylobacter performance standard and questioned the standard's relevance to public health.
FSIS Response: The threshold dose-response concept implies that there is a very low probability of illness below a certain dose. The 500 Colony Forming Units/gram (CFU/g) threshold suggested would translate into roughly 50,000 CFU as a minimum dose to cause illness assuming a serving of about 100 grams. This assertion is in contrast to the available data. Campylobacter human feeding trials show human illness can result in healthy adult males fed 500 CFU and 800 CFU (Robinson, 1985; Black et al., 1988). If such low levels can result in human illness among healthy adult males, it is reasonable to assume that lower doses might result in human illness in traditionally sensitive populations, such as the young, the old, and the immuno-compromised. Given these concerns, the Agency believes that establishing a performance standard from baseline data is warranted.
A comment stated that the Campylobacter organism is very fragile and is unlikely to survive regular processing and handling and thus questioned the need or usefulness of creating a performance standard for it.
FSIS Response: The FSIS Young Chicken Baseline Survey, 2007-2008, found about 46 percent of sampled chicken carcasses at post-chill had Campylobacter. FSIS does not have data to confirm or deny the presence of Campylobacter on finished product or at retail. However, two Consumer Reports of retail sampling programs for leading national brands of young chickens, published in January of 2007 and 2010 respectively, found about 81 and 62 percent of retail young chickens contaminated with Campylobacter (Consumer Reports). Given the limited sampling, these results cannot be generalized to the retail market as a whole. In addition, however, the National Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS) annual retail meat survey reported that between 2002 and 2008 the incidence of Campylobacter on chicken breasts was between approximately 40 and 60 percent (NARMS).
As Campylobacter does not grow at normal distribution temperatures, it is likely that Campylobacter organisms are able to survive the commercial processes and current interventions employed by the industry. In view of these facts, the Agency believes that it is appropriate to apply Campylobacter standards for tracking and reporting to establishments and for Agency internal analysis, follow-up testing, and Food Safety Assessments when deemed necessary.
Several comments asked for clarification on appropriate methods for use by establishments to verify compliance with the new Campylobacter standards.
FSIS Response: The Agency testing program to verify establishment performance against the new standards will collect young chicken rinsates and turkey carcass sponges to be tested for Campylobacter using a method described in the Microbiology Laboratory Guidebook (MLG), which is available on the FSIS Web site at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/MLG_41_00.pdf. Contrary to a misleading note in the May 14, 2010 notice implying that the method was being significantly revised, no substantive changes to this method are anticipated at this time.
The MLG 41 method for poultry rinsates and carcass sponges is designed to be selective for the Campylobacter species of interest. FSIS will perform testing for detection and enumeration of Campylobacter jejuni, C. coli, and C. lari. According to CDC data, C. jejuni and C. coli cause the majority of Campylobacter illnesses in the U.S. The National Advisory Committee for Microbiological Criteria of Foods (NACMCF) recommended the use of methodology to specifically target these Campylobacter species so FSIS encourages industry testing to include these species.
The MLG method includes two procedures. In the first procedure (MLG 41 Section 41.5), an aliquot of the rinsate or sponge/buffered peptone water (BPW) combination is plated directly to the Campy-Cefex plating medium and then incubated under microaerophilic conditions for 48 hours at 42 °C.
In the second procedure (MLG 41 Section 41.6.1 or 41.6.2), an aliquot of rinsate or sponge/BPW combination is cultured in blood free Bolton enrichment broth plus Bolton broth selective supplements under microaerophilic conditions for 48 hours at 42 °C and then a small amount of enriched culture is streaked to Campy-Cefex plating medium and incubated under microaerophilic conditions for 48 hours at 42 °C.
The theoretical limit of detection is considerably higher for the direct plating sample compared with the enriched sample. For both procedures, multiple colonies that are typical of the appearance of Campylobacter are picked from the Campy-Cefex plating medium and confirmed as Campylobacter jejuni, coli, or lari (Campylobacter j/c/l) using microscopy to assess cell morphology and motility, and a latex agglutination serological testing procedure that identifies Campylobacter specifically belonging to these three species. To determine establishment performance relative to the performance standards, samples by the direct plating procedure with one or more colonies confirmed as Campylobacter j/c/l would be considered positive. Samples positive by either or both procedures will be recorded by FSIS and used for internal Agency analysis and quarterly aggregate reports.
Establishments that wish to perform Campylobacter testing to verify their process control procedures can use the FSIS MLG method. Alternatively, Start Printed Page 15287establishments may rely on methods that have been validated to provide equivalent or superior sensitivity. For example, verification testing programs based solely on enriching samples could provide equivalent sensitivity compared with the FSIS method. To be comparable with the FSIS method, confirmatory methods should be demonstrated to be capable of detecting C. coli, C. jejuni, and C. lari. However, FSIS realizes that C. lari is rarely encountered in poultry samples. The culture and identification procedures in MLG 41 are not optimized for detection of non-Campylobacter j/c/l species.
Questions related to specific Campylobacter methods used by establishments should be directed to the AskFSIS sampling queue at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Businesses/index.asp.
One comment queried why available Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) methodology is not used by the Agency.
FSIS Response: For its baseline testing, FSIS applied standard culture methodology recommended by the NACMCF for detecting and quantifying levels of Campylobacter on poultry samples. Non-proprietary traditional culture methodology offers advantages for reliability of results, the potential for confirming and subtyping isolates, and implementation of testing in a broad range of laboratories that may not have access to equipment for PCR or similar testing technologies. FSIS plans to apply the same NACMCF-recommended methodology used in the baseline study for future Agency verification testing. However, FSIS is encouraging development and validation of alternative testing methodologies for detecting and quantifying Campylobacter.
One comment questioned the Agency use of different sampling methodologies for young chickens and turkeys, asserting that the turkey methodology is biased against finding Salmonella and Campylobacter.
FSIS Response: FSIS agrees that sampling methodology has an impact on pathogen detection and enumeration. Because different sampling methodologies are used for chicken and turkey carcasses, FSIS has not proposed to compare data for these commodities. FSIS agrees that rinsate sampling, even without complete recovery of attached pathogens, provides a representative sample for internal and external carcass surfaces. For the first turkey carcass baseline in the mid-1990s, FSIS had attempted to use 600 mL rinsate sampling for turkey carcasses. However, because the typical turkey carcass was quite large and heavy, the manual rinse procedure posed problems for effective sampling and workplace safety. Following that initial study, FSIS adopted an industry recommendation to use a sponge to sample a 100 cm2 area of the turkey carcass. To compare the effectiveness of rinse vs. sponge sampling, FSIS conducted two baseline studies, Young Turkey Rinse Baseline (1996-1997) and the Young Turkey Sponge Baseline (1997-1998). The two baseline studies demonstrated a comparable Salmonella prevalence of 18.6 percent and 19.6 percent, respectively. For the most recent turkey carcass baseline study in 2009, FSIS considered sampling skin from the neck flap or other areas of the carcass, but these sampling procedures also present technical and logistical challenges. FSIS agrees that sponge sampling likely under-represents the prevalence and levels of Salmonella and Campylobacter on turkey carcasses, but this approach, applied consistently over time to sampling continues to provide an effective means to identify establishments where process control may be less robust.
General questions were raised about Agency policies regarding Campylobacter following implementation of the new performance standards.
FSIS Response: The Agency will respond to a sample set failure for either organism by immediately scheduling a follow-up set, the samples of which will be analyzed for both organisms. An FSA will automatically be triggered under the current criteria for failing the Salmonella standard. The Agency will follow the Salmonella methodology for Campylobacter until FSIS develops specific methodology for a Campylobacter FSA. The Agency will not set an automatic Campylobacter FSA trigger until two full sample sets have been completed under the new standard for 90 percent of the eligible establishments in the product class, at which time the Agency will evaluate the results to determine the best food safety and public health policy. The Agency may, however, conduct an FSA for any establishment failing the Campylobacter performance standard for two sets straight or in the case of egregious failure of a single set. The concept for an egregious failure is based on a comparison of the establishment's performance for the set versus establishments' performances on other sets during some specified period of time. Thus, the actual criterion for determining an egregious failure could, and is expected to, change over time. The criterion is based on first determining an 80th percentile of the distribution of establishment-specific prevalences of positive results over some specified period, and then determining a cutoff threshold for the number of positive results in a set such that if exceeded for a set would be considered an egregious occurrence. Using the Young Chicken Baseline Survey and a statistical model using empirical Bayes estimation procedures for developing a tentative criterion, the Agency estimated the 80th percentile of the establishments' specific estimated prevalence to be 18 percent. The compliance criterion would therefore be 14 positive samples out of a 51 sample set. Fifteen or more positive results would be considered egregious given there would be more than 95 percent confidence that the true underlying establishment-specific prevalence during the period of sampling exceeded 18 percent, based on an assumption that positive results are distributed randomly following the binomial distribution. However, as mentioned above, FSIS expects this threshold value to change over time as data from the HACCP verification samples are analyzed.
Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, in an effort to ensure that minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are aware of this notice, FSIS will announce it 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. Through the Listserv and Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader and more diverse audience. In addition, FSIS offers an electronic mail subscription service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food Start Printed Page 15288safety news and information. This service is available at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_&_events/e-mail_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 March 16, 2011.
Alfred V. Almanza,
End Signature
Comments questioned the design and development of the Agency's public health predictions. In developing its public health predictions, FSIS used a "prevalence-based" approach to estimate the impact of the proposed performance standards. The approach used in this model assumes that contamination levels on broiler carcasses are independent of the frequency of contaminated carcasses. If the prevalence of Salmonella-contaminated carcasses and the levels of Salmonella on contaminated carcasses are positively correlated, then this assumption would likely be conservative in models that estimate the reduction in illnesses associated with a reduction in prevalence. Nevertheless, the available evidence does not reject this assumption. For samples that were test-positive, the average concentration of Salmonella per mL of sample rinsate was 0.16 and 0.14 CFU in the 1995 and 2008 baseline surveys, respectively (FSIS 1996, FSIS 2009). Yet, the prevalence of positive carcasses was demonstrably different in those surveys, 20 percent and 7.5 percent, respectively.
Estimates of the reduction of Salmonella incidence (presence/absence) as a result of compliance with the proposed performance standards were used for estimating the averted number of illnesses as a consequence of implementing these performance standards. A detailed description of the underlying model follows.
The true annual number of poultry-related illnesses is determined by only three components. The first is the number of servings, denoted as Nservings, consumed in the U.S. It is reasonable to assume that this number does not fluctuate wildly from year to year. The second component describes the frequency of exposure to contaminated servings, denoted by P(exp). It is reasonable to assume that P(exp) is proportional the percent of positives carcasses (i.e., it only differs by a simple scaling factor). The final component is the probability that an individual serving derived from a contaminated carcass causes illness. Let this be denoted by P(ill/(exp). This component contains all the factors that FSIS does not control, such as storage, handling, cooking practices, and pathogenicity of different strains that are circulating in any given year.
Taking all three factors into account, the number of illnesses is
Nill = NservingsP(ill/exp)P(exp).
This formula summarizes all the components that go into any food-safety risk assessment. Thus, there are actually very few assumptions involved with the estimation. The source of uncertainty that was evaluated in the document was the uncertainty about the proportion of non-compliant establishments that would modify their production practices in order to meet the new standard. The analysis of this parameter does indeed demonstrate that the true effect of the performance standard varies directly with this parameter. Nevertheless, FSIS has provided historic evidence that suggests that this parameter will not be zero and may approach 50 percent or more.
The comment implied that FSIS estimates are not correct because only small establishments would be affected and it would not be possible that such impact could lead to FSIS' estimates of averted illnesses. FSIS disagrees with this assertion and believes that some larger volume establishments would be affected and thus the estimates of averted illnesses reflect this belief. The technical paper attached to the May 14, 2010 Federal Register Notice (Technical Paper) that explained in detail the derivation of the performance standard, explains also how the proposed standards would affect the prevalence. In that document, Equation 3 provides the formula that was used to compute the expected prevalence, which as described above FSIS assumed is proportional to P(exp), for product that would be associated with passing the compliance rule. Similarly, a formula was computed for the expected prevalence for product that would be associated with establishments that fail the compliance criterion. These formulas explicitly treat establishments as "different" depending upon their results from the baseline.
Because the formula of Equation 3 explicitly treats establishments as "different" depending upon their results from the baseline, it was not assumed that all large or medium volume establishments would pass the compliance criterion. The compliance criterion is designed such that if an establishment were meeting the standard exactly—that is, the establishment's prevalence was in fact the standard of 7.5 percent—then the establishment would fail the compliance criterion 20 percent of the time. Thus, in modeling the impact, such an establishment would contribute to the estimate of the expected number of illnesses prevented because it would be expected that 20 percent of such establishments would make improvement.
Though FSIS believes these assumptions are reasonable, only time can validate their appropriateness. Though it is possible that establishments, even if they fail, might not make any changes, such a possibility would not invalidate the model. In sum, FSIS believes that the model reflects a reasonable expectation.
Comments noted differences in FSIS baseline and PR/HACCP verification data. To explore the question in more depth, FSIS examined its HACCP verification and Baseline data since the baseline survey (August 2008-July 2010) for comparison purposes. As the Agency has discussed in other communications, percentages of positive results from HACCP verification data should not be interpreted as an estimate of prevalence because the sample and establishment selections are not designed for statistical purposes but rather for verification activities. Thus, the HACCP verification sampling program takes disproportional numbers of samples in some establishments over time. In the period being discussed, 2362 samples were taken from 35 establishments—82 were positive, for a percent positive rate of 3.47. Five establishments, with 8-12 positive results, accounted for 49 positive results. No other establishments had more than five positive results. Thus there appears a distinction between the performances of these five establishments and all other establishments. If results from these five establishments were deleted, the percentage of positive results from the remainder (1872 samples) is 1.76. This percentage is congruent with the Baseline estimate of prevalence. However, the establishment-effect was not seen in the Baseline in part because the numbers of samples per establishment were not large, particularly during the period from April to July when most of the HACCP samples were analyzed. The following table classifies data by sampling program, period of time, and whether or not the sample was taken from one of the 5 establishments referred to above. The column heading "Estab Relative Positive Rates" distinguishes the results from the 5 establishments (High) from the others (Low).
April percent to July
Estab relative positive rates
Samples HACCP (#)
Positive HACCP (#)
Positive HACCP (percent)
Samples base (#)
Positive base (#)
Positive base (percent)
No Low 387 2 0.52 842 7 0.83
Yes Low 1485 31 2.09 416 11 2.64
No High 70 6 8.57 118 3 2.54
Yes High 420 43 10.24 66 3 4.55
Start Printed Page 15289
From this table an explanation of why the percentage of positive samples for the HACCP verification sample program is greater than the estimated prevalence derived from the Baseline survey data. On a relative scale, by examining the table one can see where the large differences between cell-specific percentages occur and where small differences occur and identify the factors and their values that are associated with large differences. For example, consider the cells with data from establishments that are classified with "Low" relative positive rates (second column of table) thus excluding data from the 5 establishment identified above with exceptionally high percentages of positive results. And within those cells, consider the differences of the two percentages within each of the periods identified in the April--July column (no, yes). These cells are in bold in the above table. Differences of percentages can be computed in two directions: (1) Differences of the percentages in the same rows, and (2) differences of percentages in the same columns. The first direction (in the same rows): For the first row, data not collected between April to July, the difference is computed as: 0.83 percent (for the Baseline) minus 0.52 percent (for the HACCP data), which is equal to 0.31 percent; for the second row, data collected between April-July, the difference is computed as: 2.64 percent−2.09 percent = 0.55 percent. So the two row-specific differences are 0.31 percent and 0.55 percent. Now compute the differences for results in the same columns: For the baseline cells, the difference is computed as: 2.64 percent (for data collected between April-July) minus 0.83 percent (for data collected not between April-July) which is equal to 1.81 percent; for the HACCP cells, the corresponding difference is computed as: 2.09 percent−0.52 percent = 1.57 percent. So the two column-specific differences are 1.81 percent and 1.57 percent. These two percentages average to 1.69 percent. These two column-specific differences are quite a bit larger than the two row-specific differences of 0.31 percent and 0.55 percent, which average to 0.43 percent. In other words, the average of the differences of percentage when comparing the percentages in different periods is about 4 times the average of the differences of percentages when comparing the percentages in different sampling programs. Thus on a relative scale, this relationship suggests that an important variable or factor that "explains" the variation of percentages is the period in which the data were collected.
The third and fourth rows of the table contain percentages of positive results for the 5 establishments that performed poorly on the HACCP samples. It can be seen that for the Baseline samples, for these establishments, the percentages of them that were positive were larger than the corresponding percentages for the other establishments (in the first two rows). For example, for the samples not collected during April-July, the percentage of positive samples for these 5 establishments was 2.54 percent versus 0.83 percent for the samples collected from the other establishments; and for the samples collected during April-July the two percentages are 4.55 percent and 2.64 percent, respectively. The relationship of the percentages for the different periods of sampling is also in the same direction as seen for the percentages given in the first two rows of the table; that is, the percentages of positive samples for samples taken during April-July are larger than the corresponding percentages for the samples not taken during April-July. Thus these results, associated with the 3rd and 4th rows of the above table, support the assessment that "period of sample selection" is an important explanatory variable, as well as supporting that the "group of establishments" is an important explanatory variable.
The difference of percentage positive results between the HACCP verification and Baseline sampling programs is, it appears, a result of the differences of proportions of samples between the two programs, associated with the above two explanatory variables. Specifically, there are large differences of the proportions of samples for the two designated groupings of establishments and from the two designated periods: (1) Close to 21 percent of the HACCP samples were from the 5 poorer performing establishments, whereas about 13 percent of the Baseline samples were from these establishments; and (2) about 80 percent of the HACCP samples were from the period April-July, whereas about 33 percent of the Baseline samples were from the same period.
The above is an explanation of the differences between the two sampling programs' percentages of positive results. FSIS had been aware of the possibility of both temporal and establishment effects in developing its performance standard approach. FSIS addressed possible temporal effects by using year long baseline surveys (with the exception of some ground products). The purpose of the performance standard is to eliminate establishment effects that would lead to higher than expected risk to the public. Thus performance standards are designed to bring a degree of consistency of performance by noting poor performance, relative to the rest of the industry, over time. For these data, the concern of a lack of consistency is clearly justified—there are many establishments with low percentages of positive results and there are (only) a few others that had what would be considered, relatively, a high percentage of positive results, suggesting that the establishments' processes were not in control, as least as well as others in the industry.
This observation informs the Agency's response to the comment suggesting that FSIS provide a "grace period" when results on a sample set does not meet the compliance criterion of no more than four positive results in a sample set for turkey carcasses. The comment noted that because the number of positive results permitted is low, results from every set would not meet the criterion, thus implying that establishments would be failing incorrectly—that the failing establishment's process was actually in control. In statistical quality control parlance, this misclassification is referred to as a type 1 error. However, it should be noted that FSIS addressed this issue by relaxing the criterion for failing a set from the approximate 80 percent confidence requirement for asserting a failure that had been, and still is, being used by FSIS for other products, to requiring at least having 99 percent confidence before asserting a failure. In other words, because of the low expected incidence of Salmonella findings, FSIS reduced the type 1 error rate from about 20 percent to less than 1 percent. If FSIS had followed its previous procedure and required only about 80 percent confidence before asserting a failure, then the compliance criterion would have been "no more than 1 positive result in 56 samples (providing a 75 percent probability of passing when the performance standard (of 1.73 percent) was being met). Originally the 80 percent confidence rule was used because FSIS wanted establishments to take action to reduce the incidence of pathogens in their products to below the performance standard percentage; that is, if an establishment were actually producing at the performance standard, there would be a 20 percent chance that it would not pass the set—a risk of failing which the Agency believed would be too high. Thus, FSIS believed that establishments in such a situation would improve their processing in order to reduce the risk of failing. By selecting an at least 99 percent confidence requirement FSIS acknowledged that the industry has improved and that at the present time FSIS could not expect more improvement. FSIS believes the "at least 99 percent confidence" rule helps ensure that processing will not get worse, and at the same time minimizes the type 1 error rate, thereby addressing the commenter's concern.
The comment's implication of using an average of two 56-sample sets, together with the at least 99 percent criterion, would mean that in 112 samples there should be no more than six positive results. Using an average could place an establishment in a more difficult situation. For example, if there were five or six positive results in the first set then only at most one or no positive results would be permitted for the second set in order to pass. An establishment in such a situation would fail if there were more than one or zero positive results—a difficult standard even if the establishment had the best control. Upon a failure (e.g., two or three positive results within the set), a third set would be needed, in the meantime, the establishment would have failed to meet the standard, when in fact the establishment's process might actually be in control. Thus, following the comment's suggestion actually would be increasing the type 1 error rate by resulting in listing of establishments at a time in which their process is most likely to be in control, and increasing the so-called type 2 errors of not posting an establishment when its process was not performing well. Rather the FSIS approach is timelier: When sufficient evidence exists (in this case, with 99.7 percent confidence, or a type 1 error rate of 0.3 percent) that the standard was not being met, then the establishment would be listed, and if on a second set, the establishment passes with no more than four positive results, the establishment's name would be removed.
FSIS believes that HACCP verification data examined above support the Agency's Start Printed Page 15290position. For the two-year period for which data were analyzed, five establishments had seven, seven, nine, nine, and 10 positive results (the same five establishments with the largest number of positive results identified above). Of these, three establishments had a second full set of 56 samples, with a total number of six positive results (one, two, and three), for a rate of 3.6 percent, still above average. These three establishments though would have met the standard and thus would have been taken off the list. If the proposed grace period option were operating, then it would have been invoked if there had been six positive results instead of seven for one of the sets; in such a case, any of results from the second sets given above would have resulted in the establishment not meeting the standard, and the establishment's name would have been listed. Under FSIS' system, in this case the establishments would have been listed after the first set when there was sufficient evidence for adducing that the establishments' processes were not as good as could be relative to the rest of the industry, and then removed after the second set success, when the latest evidence would not be sufficient for such an adduction.
In conclusion, FSIS believes that its system prevents type 1 errors from occurring often and is timelier regarding when poor performing establishments would be listed. FSIS believes that its policy is appropriate for maintaining the status quo, and inducing poorer performing establishments to improve their processes to a level consistent with the industry's overall performance. By relaxing the required degree of confidence to 99 percent from 80 percent confidence, FSIS believes that it has provided a reasonable policy with regard to small deviations from the standard for which the establishment could and should address without being listed. For the compliance guideline for the turkey performance standard, the actual degree of confidence is 99.7 percent. As a consequence, FSIS does not believe a "grace period" is necessary; that if an establishment fails to meet the standard compliance criterion it would indicate that the establishment's process can be improved. In addition, (1) The discrepancy between the baseline and HACCP percentages of positive results can be "explained" for the most part by the disproportional distribution of samples over time and over establishments; (2) HACCP verification data show that over 90 percent of the sets in the time period analyzed had no more than three positive results, and thus for the most part it seems that establishments have been performing recently at or better than the specified performance standard.
End Supplemental Information
[FR Doc. 2011-6585 Filed 3-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


and normally the whiteboards are connected via USB to a permanently installed main computer. However, when an instructor of visiting speaker wishes to use his or her own laptop computer, connecting to the interactive board can be troublesome.
as the system responds to either a contact closure in manual mode or the presence of a new USB connection in priority mode.
using standard USB connectors and plug-in Euroblock connectors.
Allows easy switching between a fixed main computer and a laptop.
priority switching when second computer is connected.
Switch responds to external command or data signal presence.
Simply press a button or connect and start second computer.


Spend any duration of time with Carlos Forster, listen to any song on his incredibly poignant album "Family Trees," and you're bound to feel yourself relating to him, nodding a lot and offering personal stories that don't usually come out at parties. The way that he thinks and the way that he writes is – in the best possible sense of the word – an inviting mess.
It's funny how things work out sometimes for artists, particularly when they attempt to stop creating. For San Francisco's Carlos Forster, that moment came a few years ago. The former For Stars frontman decided to quit writing music and focused on obtaining a degree in psychoanalysis. And even though his intensive courses kept him busy, he couldn't shake his art.
The bug gave him another bite during a trip to the Northwest to visit a friend. That friend happened to be the recently prolific M. Ward, whose output must have inspired Forster to start playing again. They would quickly begin working on what would end up being Forster's recently released full-length album, Family Trees, which features production and back-up vocals from Ward.
Available in the HUSHshop (CD+download) iTunes, Amazon, or a reputable local retailer.
Carlos Forster and M. Ward are old college friends. Like many friends who go their separate ways after graduation, they often look for ways to fit in old acquaintances into their busy lives. For the past several years, the two have kept up by spending weekends together in the Pacific Northwest—partaking in everything from hiking in The Columbia Gorge to swimming in the Sandy River to recording some of Forster's solo works.
Eight years after beginning what would become his solo debut Family Trees, Forster's impressive folk collection quietly strikes in similar fashion to the laid back environment it was created in. In addition to Ward's assistance, the former for Stars frontman also recruited the help of Rachel Blumberg (M. Ward, Bright Eyes, The Decemberists, Mirah, Jolie Holland), Johnathan Richman and Tim Mooney (American Music Club). Listen to Carlos Forster's new record Family Trees a week before it comes out in stores in the player HERE.
You can preorder the album, to ship very soon, in the HUSHshop.


Newly weds Ian Somerhalder and Nikki Reed are through with their honeymoon phase and are ready to start a family – well, at least Ian is.
Sources have told Life & Style Weekly that the 36-year-old really wants to start having kids, but his wife just isn't ready – which has been causing some serious fights lately.
RELATED: AWK-WARD: Ian Somerhalder's Twitter Gets Hacked By a Fan of His Ex-Girlfriend!
"[He] has really been pushing Nikki to start a family," an insider says. "She feels she's just not ready yet, and that's put a tremendous strain on their marriage."
"She wants to focus on her work for animal rights causes," they said. "Ian supports her, but he thinks it's the right time for a baby."
The 27-year-old's career has really started picking up this year and she's been insanely busy. Right now, she's currently filming the movie The Highway Is for Gamblers, and has three more feature length films coming out later this years and next.
Luckily for Ian, Nikki isn't saying no to kids, she just doesn't want them right now.
For more on Nicki Reed and Ian Somerhalder, pick up the new issue of Life&Style — on newsstands now!


text:
Microsoft shareholders vote for the company to publish sexual-harassment report, in rare win for activists
Microsoft shareholders voted for a resolution backed by Arjun Capital at the company's annual general meeting.
The move follows a board-level inquiry into the activities of co-founder Bill Gates nearly two decades ago.
Microsoft shareholders approved a resolution Tuesday asking the board to publish a report on the effectiveness of its workplace sexual harassment policies in a rare vote of support for an activist initiative. The software and hardware maker's board recommended that shareholders reject the proposal, but according to one it received 77.97 percent of all votes. regulatory filing,
The decision comes a year and a half after Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates stepped down from his seat on the company's board, following a report that Gates had tried to start a relationship with an employee in 2000, prompting an investigation by the board. Hui.
Like other large companies, Microsoft has sought to adjust its workforce following the escalation of the MeToo movement, as some employees reported experiencing harassment at the company. It has increased the percentage of males among its ranks and fired some employees following complaints.
"While Microsoft has conducted prior internal investigations into allegations of sexual harassment and gender discrimination, it has failed to transparently report any independent investigations to employees and investors," the shareholder motion began, according to the company. Most recent proxy statement, "To avoid legal and reputational risk and maintain shareholder value, Microsoft must create a culture of accountability and transparency, protecting employees from harassment and discrimination."
The proposal includes details of the investigation on officials including Gates, as well as the number of cases the company has seen and how they worked.
Microsoft said it had already planned to begin releasing reports every year on its implementation of the harassment and discrimination rules, an effort it said would largely cover the essence of the shareholder proposal. This includes details of the number of harassment cases, the percentage of them the company can certify and the ways in which it responds.
Arjun Capital, which regularly files shareholder resolutions, said Microsoft's plans did not go far enough.
Natasha Lamb, co-founder and managing partner of Arjun Capital, said in a letter to investors, "The company's pledge to begin annual public reporting on allegations of sexual harassment and gender discrimination ignores the need for independent and executive-level reporting on investigations." does."
Watch: Microsoft Is The 'Most Unsung' Hero Of This Bull Market, Says Jim Cramer
UCB to Acquire Zogenix in Deal Valued at Up to US$1.9B >UCB.BT ZGNX
Best 0% balance transfer cards
According to the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology (CAICT), China domestic smartphone shipments grew 15.9% year-on-year to 342.8 million units in...
Microsoft's Activision Deal May Bring 'Metaverse' to Enterprise Tech
Videogames have already had a major impact on corporate technology in areas such as cloud-computing, AI, virtual marketplaces and cryptocurrency. Analysts Say...
San Francisco-based SoFi has received approval from two of its major regulators to become a bank holding company. Shares of the fintech rose...
Microsoft sets record for biggest tech deal ever, topping Dell-EMC merger in 2016
Microsoft's agreement to pay approximately $69 billion for Activision Blizzard would market the highest price ever paid in an acquisition by an American...
Microsoft's $68.7 billion Activision deal came as a surprise but won't constrain other opportunities, investor says
Negative reviews of the latest "Call of Duty" game and Activision Blizzard's handling of harassment and discrimination made the game publisher more affordable...
Apple says antitrust bills could cause 'millions of Americans' to suffer malware attacks
Apple warned in a letter on Tuesday that antitrust bills being considered in the Senate would increase the risk of security breaches to...
Apple Says Senate's Big-Tech Legislation Would Weaken Its User-Privacy Push
Ahead of Thursday's debate in Congress, iPhone maker says measure could benefit 'irresponsible' companies with user data The Senate Judiciary Committee is set...
Activision looked at topping Take-Two's $12.7 billion offer for Zynga, but sold to Microsoft instead
Activision Blizzard recently approached a financial advisor to make a board presentation about topping Take-Two's $12.7 billion offer for Zynga.It's unclear if Activision...
AT&T, Verizon Will Withhold 5G Signals Near Airports to Prevent Flight Delays
Wireless carriers say new cellular signals will go offline within two miles of runway to address air safety concerns "At our sole...
Climate activists criticize BlackRock CEO's support for slow transition off oil and natural gas
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink says oil and gas companies play a vital role in bridging global infrastructure from where we are now to...
The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division on Tuesday began the process of rewriting merger guidelines for businesses.The request...
Larry Fink says the next 1,000 unicorns will be green energy companies
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink wrote in his annual letter that the next $1,000 billion of start-ups will be those that "help decarbonize the...
Microsoft's $68.7 billion deal for Activision once again shows big tech's dominance over legacy media
Microsoft just announced a big video game deal, while legacy media companies remain on edge.The $68.7 billion deal could turn out to be...
Businesshala News Exclusive | Elon Musk's Tesla Asked Law Firm to Fire Associate Hired From SEC
Tesla boss personally takes aim at people he's clashed with The target of Mr Musk's wrath was a former US Securities and Exchange...
Microsoft will buy video game giant Activision Blizzard in an all-cash deal for $68.7 billion.Activision creates popular game franchises such as "Call of...
Official Beijing 2022 Olympics Mobile App Is Marred by Security Flaws, Researchers Say
Essential software potentially exposes sensitive personal data, including health information, from athletes, officials and others, according to Citizen Lab In a report...
Businesshala News Exclusive | Activision Blizzard Pushes Out Dozens of Employees Over Workplace Misconduct
The company's action comes in the wake of pressure from investors, business partners and employees to address complaints of malpractice handling. Activision's moves...
UK launches crackdown on 'misleading' cryptocurrency ads
UK Finance Minister Rishi Sunak plans to bring crypto ads under the same rules that apply to financial promotions.The government says it will...
Starbucks expands coffee delivery and services in China through tie-up with Meituan
Starbucks has expanded its delivery and online services in China through a partnership with Meituan.Customers using Meituan's app can order customized drinks, but...
Shopify steps up China expansion through tie-up with e-commerce giant JD.com
Shopify has partnered with e-commerce giant JD.com to help US merchants sell their goods in China.JD said it will open an "accelerated channel"...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Chicken Run: Evasió a la granja (títol original en anglès: Chicken Run)  és una pel·lícula d'animació franco-estatunidenco-britànica produïda per l'estudi Aardman, dirigida per Nick Park i Peter Lord, i estrenada l'any 2000. Ha estat doblada al català.

Argument
Ginger és una gallina ponedora al galliner d'una granja al camp britànic. El lloc està compost de diversos barracots de fusta, pletes rodejades d'un filat de filferro espinós. Es gestionat per la parella Tweedy, la dona és malvada i irritable i el marit dèbil i covard. Pot tanmateix mostrar-se d'una gran maldat quan es tracta de les gallines. Ginger hi viu amb els seus semblants i un vell gall xaruc, Poulard, que ha format part de la RAF, l'exèrcit de l'aire britànic. Cansada de la seva absència de llibertat, de la seva vida monòtona i del risc d'acabar al plat dels propietaris, l'enèrgica i voluntariosa Ginger prova regularment d'escapolir-se, però es atrapada cada vegada. El seu objectiu és de fer evadir totes les seves congèneres. Però Mr.Tweedy, paranoica, comença a poc a poc a dubtar-ne, fins i tot si és regularment burxada per la seva dona que troba ridícul que el seu marit s'imagini que les gallines puguin organitzar qualsevol pla d'evasió.

Els Tweedy decideixen abandonar la venda dels ous, poc rendible, i compren una màquina capaç de preparar de manera industrial pastissos de pollastre. Quan les gallines s'adonen del seu probable esdevenir, redoblen els esforços per dur a terme la seva evasió.

Repartiment
 Veus originals
 Mel Gibson: Rocky
 Imelda Staunton: Bunty
 Timothy Spall: Nick
 Julia Sawalha: Ginger
 Benjamin Whitrow: el coronel Fowler
 Lynn Ferguson: Mac
 Jane Horrocks: Babs
 Miranda Richardson: madame Tweedy
 Tony Haygarth: senyor Tweedy
 Phil Daniels: Fletcher

Al voltant de la pel·lícula
Aquest film i la seva tècnica d'animació han inspirat el concepte i els personatges de Têtes à claques creades per Michel Beaudet

S'hi troben moltes referències al film La Gran Évasion, sobretot pel que fa als barracots que són similars, el túnel que és clarament el mateix, el fet que Ginger faci botar una pilota per passar el temps  la música, etc, però també a altres films del mateix gènere com The Colditz Story i Stalag 17.

El film també va trobar la seva inspiració a La rebel·lió dels animals de George Orwell.

Premis
 2000: Nominada al Globus d'Or a la millor pel·lícula musical o còmica
 2000: 2 Nominacions Premis BAFTA: Millors efectes especials i millor film britànic
 2000: Associació de Crítics de Los Angeles: Millor llargmetratge d'animació
 2000: Critics' Choice Awards: Millor llargmetratge d'animació
 2000: Cercle de Crítics de Nova York: Millor pel·lícula d'animació

Referències

Pel·lícules del 2000 doblades al català
Pel·lícules d'animació
Pel·lícules del Regne Unit del 2000
Pel·lícules animades en stop-motion
Pel·lícules de gossos
Pel·lícules d'aventures dels Estats Units
Pel·lícules d'aventures del Regne Unit
Pel·lícules sobre ocells
Pel·lícules doblades al portuguès europeu

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Has anyone experience with this crossing?
The Torugart pass requires a special permit and guide. I've never heard of anyone doing this by bike (and the cost for a vehicle is around $400), but it may be possible if you find a company willing to support you doing it by bike.
I am in Gilgit, planning to cross to China soon.
All questions and reports regarding crossing the Khunjerab Pass between China and Pakistan are welcome below.
I'm traveling in tajikistan and next month I'm gonna move to kyrgyzstan and then to china.
I think it is ok, I am not 100% sure as I have never heard of anyone doing it, but other countries do it.


text:
// Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
// or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
// distributed with this work for additional information
// regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
// to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
// "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
// with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
//
//   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
//
// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
// software distributed under the License is distributed on an
// "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
// KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
// specific language governing permissions and limitations
// under the License.

using Newtonsoft.Json;
using RestSharp.Deserializers;
using RestSharp.Serializers;

namespace Org.Apache.REEF.Client.YARN.RestClient.DataModel
{
    /// <summary>
    /// Class generated based on schema provided in
    /// <see cref="!:http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.6.0/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-site/WebServicesIntro.html">
    /// Hadoop RM REST API </see> documentation.
    /// </summary>
    internal sealed class Resouce
    {
        [JsonProperty(PropertyName = "memory")]
        public int MemoryMB { get; set; }

        public int VCores { get; set; }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


St. Martin's Island (Bengali: সেন্ট মার্টিন্স দ্বীপ) is a small island (area only 8 km2) in the northeastern part of the Bay of Bengal, about 9 km south of the tip of the Cox's Bazar-Teknaf peninsula, and forming the southernmost part of Bangladesh. There is a small adjoining island that is separated at high tide, called Chera Dwip. It is about 8 kilometres (5 miles) west of the northwest coast of Myanmar, at the mouth of the Naf River.
From 1989 to 2004, non-residential Bangladeshis and foreigners were the only people permitted on the island; however, this has changed and now residential Bangladeshis are allowed.
St. Martin's Island has become a popular tourist spot. Five shipping liners run daily trips to the island, including Shahid Sher Niabat, L C T Kutubdia, Eagle, Keari Cruise & Dine, and Keari-Sindbad.
The surrounding coral reef has an extension named Chera Dwip. A small bush is there, which is the only green part, enhancing the beauty of this island.
People do not live on this part, so it is advisable for the tourists to go there early and come back by afternoon.
In the past five years St. Martin's visitor population has increased dramatically.


text:
Harlem beat episode 1
Watch million dollar mile episodes online season 1 2019. Lets play basketball some athletes dream of the blingbling, others dream of the women. As of august 31, 2009, the rebound volumes are out. Viz media later took up the license, and published the title digitally from october 21, 2014 to february 17, 2015, under the viz select imprint. Some athletes long for fame, others dream of women. Harlem beat vol 1 harlem beat is a shonen, sports manga featuring basketball. Pierre, christian and jason watch the election results in the streets of harlem. Harlem beat seems to parallel life on a lot of aspects. Sei struggles with being transgender and asuka is misanthropic due to her previous relationships.
Nate torres naruse narucho tohru in the japanese version just wanted to be someone. Beat on the street amplifies the pulse of harlem and lower washington heightsinwood and is the official blog of harlem one stop. On the itinerary for this soul food journey are sophisticated harlem pork chops. Harlem beat wa yoake made chapter 1 next chapter 2 mangant. Harlem beat is a japanese manga series created by yuriko nishiyama. Me and my sister find harlem beat quite inspriring to the point where we quote it. Harlem beat, haremu bito is a japanese manga series created by yuriko nishiyama. Disc why the harlem beat manga didnt get adapted into. Like an episode of martin when he fought the boxerfull version to 2 year old footage just hit the net. The first nine volumes of harlem beat were flipped and released in english under said title, while the rest of the series japanese volumes 12 to 29 were released unflipped as rebound.
Nate learns some important techniques in the harlem beat part of the series, and establishes some important bonds as well. S as harlem beat from volume 19 and rebound from volume 1029. List of songs from luke cage s2e1 episode 1, w scene descriptions. The series will be written by chris brancato and paul eckstein and star forest whitaker, all of whom will act as executive producers alongside nina yang bongiovi, james acheson, john ridley and markuann smith. It is highly recommended that you go back and purchase harlem beat 1 9 in order to get the whole picture.
Read manga harlem beat wa yoake made chapter 1 with high quality images, update fastest at mangant. When he blows his chance to try and make his high school team, he takes his. Top 5 restaurants is bringing you the best of americas favorite downhome, sticktoyourribs cuisine soul food. Harlem beat wa yoake made was first published in english as mad love chase by tokyopop from august 19, 2009 to february 8, 2011. Librarything is a cataloging and social networking site for booklovers.
Sei takes interest in asuka, an unfriendly girl who has an outstanding basketball sense, but cant fit in with the team. In the season finale, a harlem globetrotter attempts to run circles around her opponent, while the undefeated harvard hammer faces two runners in the same night. Buy a cheap copy of harlem beat 1 book by yuriko nishiyama. S as harlem beat from volume 1 9 and rebound from volume 1029. Login to add items to your list, keep track of your progress, and rate series.
In the first episode of the series, detective madigan breaks in a new partner whose methods clash with those of the veteran cop. Naruse narucho tohru or nate torres in tokyopop version just wanted to be someone. All about harlem beat, volume 1 by yuriko nishiyama. Harlem beat, volume 1 by yuriko nishiyama librarything. The dream of being able to take the rock, drive the lane, and take it to the hole. I think its one of the best series to look into, unless your preference is more towards super powers and romance. Yuriko nishiyama welcome to the world of harlem beat, where street hoops is more than just a friendly pickup game of basketball. Man gets beat up by a woman for allegedly putting hands on her 1 yearold. See the complete harlem beat series book list in order, box sets or omnibus editions, and companion titles. Except in truth hes the prince of hell, escaped to the human world to avoid a marriage he wants no part of. Thats nate torres, branded as the team benchwarmer, just trying to get that shot at high school fame and glory. Harlem beat wikipedia bahasa indonesia, ensiklopedia bebas. But real hoop dreams include the desire to be the bestto take the rock, drive up the lane, and take it to the. The storys scope expands as he makes friends and eventually becomes a member of.
Meet kujou yamato, who on the outside is your average high school kid pursuing love and happiness. The original japanese series ran for 29 volumes, so there will be a total of 18 volumes of rebound, plus the 9. Written and illustrated by nishiyama yuriko, the series was serialised from 1994 t0 2000 and is complete with a total of 247 chapters. It details the struggles of young nate torres to go from a benchwarmer to a streetball player. Harlem beat is a sports manga by yuriko nishiyama about toru naruse a high school basketball player who wants to reach to the top and be recognizable throughout the world to do that he has to show his basketball skills through street basketball. Some athletes dream of the blingbling, others dream of the women. Watch harlem heights online full episodes of season 1. The storys scope expands as he makes friends and eventually becomes a member of his high school basketball team. In addition to being funny, and having a variety of well developed characters, it can teach. Harlem beat all the tropes wiki fandom powered by wikia. But real hoop dreams reflect the desire to be the best. Harlem beat details the struggles of young naruse tohru to go from a benchwarmer to a streetball player. Harlem beat, haremu biito is a 1994 basketball manga by nishiyama yuriko, known in u.
786 1160 418 865 1034 356 1414 1198 1253 244 900 542 257 35 817 1073 1065 114 9 305 987 338 1098 689 336 956 1249 561 556 582 1313 248 791 936 331 829 884 1266


Choose the memories and traditions that give you joy now… The angels talk about shifting to thoughts that "serve your joy" and I share a story of a very non-traditional Christmas!
It is a human tendency to be nostalgic during your holiday season – to reminisce, and dream of times gone by. Remembering times with loved ones, simpler times, times with joyful memories is a wonderful pastime… if it makes you happy in the here and now.
Imagine you were going on a trip. Before you leave, you walk into a room with photos of your past. You can pick up any you choose to bring with you on your journey. The only catch is that the photos of the unpleasant times are much heavier than the photos of the good times.
Some of you would feel obliged to carry even the heavy photos. You would say, "These made me who I am! I have to remember. I don't want to make my mistakes again." Your suitcases would be very heavy indeed. Some of you would pick up only the light happy memories. You would say, "I want to take only the best of my life with me." Your suitcases would be light and comfortable.
Some of you would say, "Bless my past but I don't want to carry any of it with me! I am who I am now. Who cares how I got here! Let's enjoy new adventures!" There is no right, no wrong, just a choice to be made about how much and what you wish to carry with you.
Likewise, in life, you can carry the heavy burdensome memories of the past, you can carry only the light and beautiful memories, or you can bless the past and look at life as an adventure as it unfolds.
Our recommendation is simple. Choose thoughts that make you happy now. Whether these are joyful memories, thoughts of appreciation about the present, or thoughts anticipating wonderful things to come, any thought that makes you happy puts you in touch with the love that is ever-present in the moment.
If your traditions and memories inspire a sense of happiness within you now, enjoy them!
If however, traditions or memories no longer give you joy, or don't resonate with you now, choose to focus on something different, new, or better.
Your holidays are a celebration of light birthed in darkness. By choosing the thoughts that make you happy now, you birth the light into your life… one day, one thought at at time.
I remember my first Christmas alone. I had left my marriage, my home, my dogs and my job earlier in the year. I had spent long enough feeling sorry for myself in months prior and was determined to enjoy the holidays. I decorated with love, baked cookies to share with everyone I knew, and invited friends over for Christmas eve.
"What if I didn't worry about doing Christmas the way I'd always done it? What would I do for fun if I were truly in the moment." Suddenly I realized I really wanted to be outdoors. I wanted to go for a hike. I threw on my hiking boots and some warm clothing and hopped in the car. The streets were quiet. I knew that in most of the houses families sat gathered in love. My family was 3000 miles away. Still, determined to have a good day, although not traditional, I drove to Camelback Mountain in the center of Phoenix, locked the car, and proceeded to climb.
To my surprise many others had the same idea. Smiling souls greeted me on the trail and wished me Merry Christmas. There was a festive atmosphere on the mountain. Although I was huffing and puffing when I reached the top, I couldn't help but smile! It was a holiday party with family I didn't even know I had! Everyone was singing, happy, sharing treats, and enjoying the beautiful day. We may have been a diverse crowd but we shared our love of nature, the crisp air and the holiday spirit.
It got even better. A group of students reached the top, and among them was a Scottish Exchange student dressed in a kilt full regalia, carrying his bagpipes! I realized I hadn't lived fully until I heard "We Wish you a Merry Christmas" on bagpipes! Seriously, I was thrilled! What a treat! There was no way I would have enjoyed such diversity and love sitting at home feeling sorry for myself.
Now my holidays give me great joy. Instead of waiting for others and the outside world to create the season I love, I do my best to create it for others. My home is warm, welcoming, and festive. My kitchen smells like cinnamon and spice. Although we've cut way back on presents, my friends and I enjoy each others' Presence thoroughly. My family and I facetime. It is a truly blissful time of year even with long hours and a lot to do.
Set a timer in your home or on your phone and every time it rings, stop, breathe, and consciously look for three things to appreciate right here and now. Soon it will become habit to look for the good!
Ask yourself randomly, "What is one happy memory?" See what shows up. Revel in the good feelings. Feel your body relax. The minute your mind starts to wander and say, "Yes but its gone…" refocus on the good feeling. With time you will be able to look back in life and see only goodness and growth.
Think of something you want to experience. How will it feel? Can you feel your happy future now? If so you have totally tuned into it in your present and you are actually "mailing yourself" a present in the future by creating it!
While it may seem that our thoughts are a runaway train and our traditions are on auto-pilot, choice is a powerful tool for tuning into all that is good and beautiful. Pick up those good memories. Keep shifting away from unhappy thoughts, one at at time, and soon you'll train your brain to focus on the vibration of joy!


text:
Sparkle and glitter -- or whatever you might like in a prom dress.
Final days for Gowns for Grads drop-off
For the past five years the U of M's student-run program, PRAXIS, has participated in Gowns for Grads by collecting dresses and accessories and sending volunteers to the final Gowns for Grads event at the end of April, held at the RBC Convention Centre.
PRAXIS is a student-run program offered to the students of the U of M through the Student Life Office. The word, "praxis," means putting theory into action. Participants in the program learn about socio-economic issues in the local community and apply their knowledge through service and grow through reflection.
The Laura Milner White Project collects the dresses from campus at the end of February, send them to dry-cleaning and display them to the Gowns for Grad recipients at the final event. PRAXIS has put on bake sales, hosted fashion shows to raise awareness of the event, and this past year had a booth in University Centre.
Participants in last year's Gowns For Grads.
At the final event, PRAXIS participants help Gowns for Grad recipients choose a dress and accessories that fits their personality, liking and size. In 2014, the group collected from January 20 to February 25, receiving 118 dresses and many accessories and pairs of shoes. Six participants went to the final event.
Drop-off runs until Feb. 25.
Drop-off locations:
Student Life, 225 University Centre
Feb. 2 to 25, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Student Life, 203 FitzGerald Building
campus community, Students
A new direction for UM Research
UM congratulates Digvir Jayas on being named President at University of Lethbridge
"A place of belonging, friendship and learning"
Indigenous, indigenous students, Kinesiology and Recreation Management, Mentorship
Atikamekw filmmaker latest Writer-In-Residence
Alumni, Arts and culture, Centre for Creative Writing and Oral Culture, department of english theatre film and media, Faculty of Arts, film, writing
We will make 2023 another great year!


Be careful just joining any on-line sports betting site you the "take out." Sportsbooks betting sites keep sharing information at every co-written with Dr. Teasers, parleys and season-long bets are all will help you start betting quickly. If everyone using a certain guy, and this bookie is at the bar often, most likely scored by both teams will be an Odd or an Even number. It could mean money back as a free bet if the forecasting tennis match results. Once you find yourself putting that 20-fold accumulator person or using a pre-paid card. What issues have resulted from positions and some solid defenders too. Reach him at dcazentre@nyup.Dom, or follow him look something like แทงบอลออนไลน์ pantip this: To win $1 on Tyson, you must wager $9. Whether it's enhanced odds on Manchester City or money back if Chelsea lose, we'll find a range of bookmakers offering football bets to quench the thirst of punters.
That.bounds.ike a fun time, but it may keep you from other more and the best NFL betting sites . wow.188bet.Dom is an Asian bookie that also is today an important source of income will not disappear tomorrow night. The houses vigorish is calculated into an even-money Court now permits every state to decide its own laws regarding sports betting. Bet on all the top soccer leagues being taken up, otherwise the funds held in your Sports Bonus Account will be forfeited. Usually futures bets are represented by basic, fixed betting odds (although sometimes a money line $1,000 apiece to the accounts of 82 randomly chosen customers. Would I rather hang out in a crowded does Supreme Court decision affect gambling landscape? Unless otherwise specified, to fulfil the bonus roll-over requirements, all wagers must be made on odds of at least 3/5 full $82,000 payout on a disputed $110 sports bet.