Comprehensive
Aquaculture Health Program Standards (CAHPS)
Premises
WorkBook
2022
CAHPS General Premises Information |
|||
Premises Name |
|
||
APHIS/CAHPS/RAEF ID |
|
||
CAHPS Participation |
Farm ☐ |
National (count) ☐ |
Global ☐ |
AAHT Point of Contact |
|
|
|
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cell/Phone |
|
|
|
Decision
Tree Evaluations
Population Description (Figure 1) |
||||
Population Description |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Is the premises layout well-described? |
|
|
||
Are population groupings well-defined? |
|
|
||
Are animal flow patterns and critical control (potential pathogen entry) points identified? |
|
|
||
Should the entire population on the premises be treated as a single epidemiologic unit? |
|
|
||
Decision Outcome (Circle outcome) |
Single Population |
Multiple Populations |
|
|
CAHPS Pillars (Figure 2) |
|||
Pillar |
CAHPS Element |
Yes |
No |
1 |
Aquatic Animal Health Team |
|
|
2 |
Risk Evaluation and Mitigation |
|
|
3 |
EDS and Surveillance |
|
|
4 |
Disease Investigation and Reporting |
|
|
5 |
Response and Recovery |
|
|
Decision Outcome |
Are all CAHPS Pillars Implemented? |
|
|
Risk Evaluation (Figure 3) |
||||
Risk Evaluation |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Has the AAHT identified pathogens of concern?
|
|
|
||
Is the premises' proximity to other related aquatic animal populations known and described?
|
|
|
||
Are the premises' business (or other) connections to other aquatic animal operations known and described?
|
|
|
||
Has a written risk evaluation of pathways for pathogen introduction been completed?
|
|
|
||
Is the assessment current?
|
|
|
||
Is the risk evaluation used as a basis for design of biosecurity and surveillance strategies?
|
|
|
||
Decision Outcome (Circle outcome) |
Complete |
Incomplete |
|
|
Representative Sampling (Figure 4) |
|||
Representative Sampling |
|
Yes |
No |
Are surveillance sampling strategies defined and appropriate at the population-level? |
|
|
|
Are surveillance sampling strategies defined and appropriate at the animal-level? |
|
|
|
Are sampling decisions documented and available for review? |
|
|
|
Decision Outcome |
Sampling represents the larger population and is reliable for official assessment purposes.
|
|
|
Early Detection System/Observational (Figure 5) |
||||
Early Detection System/Observational |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Are clinical conditions likely to be seen and recognized as abnormalities on the premises? |
|
|
||
Are observations representative of the larger population? |
|
|
||
Are health issues communicated and effectively investigated? |
|
|
||
Are detections likely to be timely? |
|
|
||
Decision Outcome (Circle One) |
Sufficient* |
Insufficient |
|
|
*If determined to be sufficient – can use next table to determine CAHPS EDS credit
CAHPS EDS Obs Credit (Figure 10) |
||||
Early Detection System/Observational Credit Scoring |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Has the EDS/observational criteria been met for each pathogen of concern? |
|
|
||
Are susceptible species or sentinels/proxies represented in the sample collection? |
|
|
||
Would the pathogen CLEARLY raise suspicion if introduced by one or both of the following - |
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
Decision Outcome (Circle One) |
If yes to all, CREDIT 0.33 pts |
NO CREDIT |
|
|
Early Detection System/Screening (Figure 6) |
||||
Early Detection System/Screening |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Are routine morbidities or mortalities screened for additional assurance of normal health status?
|
|
|
||
Do positive results trigger appropriate responses (whether further testing, investigation, or corrective actions)?
|
|
|
||
Are screenings frequent and substantial?
|
|
|
||
Are detections likely to be timely?
|
|
|
||
Decision Outcome (Circle One) |
Sufficient |
Insufficient |
|
|
CAHPS EDS Screening Credit (Figure 11) |
||||
Early Detection System/Screening Credit Scoring |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Has the EDS/screening criteria been met for each pathogen of concern? |
|
|
||
Are susceptible species or sentinels/proxies represented in the sample collection? |
|
|
||
Do the screened animals count as unique samples? Yes if the following is true - |
|
|
||
The tests were conducted on animals that are not already (or to be) counted under Official Surveillance. In other words, this credit only applies if the Screening EDS and OS tests capture different animals. If multiple tests are run on a single animal, use only those run through OS, or use the most sensitive (if none are OS) for EDS credit purposes, or consult a statistician or epidemiologist for direction. |
|
|
||
Decision Outcome (Circle One) |
If yes to all, CREDIT 0.33 pts |
NO CREDIT |
|
|
Official Health Surveillance (Figure 7) |
|||
Established Design Health Target: 5%/95% (National; confidence based) ☐ 5%/95% (National; count based) ☐ Other: _________________________ ☐ |
|||
Official Health Surveillance |
|
Yes |
No |
Are laboratory, assay, species, and tissue selections appropriate for the pathogens of concern? |
|
|
|
Are samplings conducted by an APHIS-recognized health professional? |
|
|
|
Are samplings representative of the larger population? |
|
|
|
Are sample sizes and frequencies appropriate following one of these options - |
|
|
|
|
Sampling meets the 95%/2% target. OR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sampling meets trade partner targets. |
|
|
|
Strategy and results are documented and available for review at 6 month intervals. |
|
|
Decision Outcome
|
Sampling meets official health surveillance requirements. |
|
|
CAHPS
Risk Introduction Pathways Assessments
Water Sources
Animal Sources
Feed and supplements
Non-human Vectors
Fomites and Humans
Water Source* Biosecurity (Figure 8A) |
|||||
Water Source Biosecurity |
|
Yes |
No |
||
Influent waters meet one or more of the following criteria: |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
AND, |
|||||
|
|
|
|||
Other mitigations required** |
|
|
|||
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
SECURE |
MANAGED |
INSUFFICENT |
|
|
|
3 risk mitigation points |
|
|
|
|
*Complete this table for each influent water source. For example, freshwater well, saltwater well, surface water etc.
** If yes, provide description of all mitigations in place.
Animal Source Biosecurity (Figure 8B) |
|||||
Animal Biosecurity |
Are the following statements true for the premises? |
|
|
||
|
Yes |
No |
|||
Animals are either sourced internally (from cohorts with verified equal or higher health status), or from premises or regions with APHIS-recognized disease freedom for all pathogens of concern, AND |
|
|
|||
Exposure to pathogens or carryover from previous life stages or cohorts is eliminated by |
|
|
|||
Hard breaks, e.g., all-in all-out, with cleaning, disinfection and fallowing, as appropriate for pathogens of concern, AND, |
|
|
|||
For semi-open or fully open systems, there is an absence of susceptible wild species in the region, AND, |
|
|
|||
Processes are documented and monitored |
|
|
|||
Other mitigations required** |
|
|
|||
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
SECURE |
MANAGED |
INSUFFICENT |
|
|
|
3 risk mitigation points |
|
|
|
|
** If yes, provide description of all mitigations in place.
* If yes, provide description of all mitigations in place.
Feed and Supplement Biosecurity (Figure 8C) |
|||||
Feed and Supplement Biosecurity |
All feed and supplement sources meet one or more of the following criteria: |
|
|
||
|
Yes |
No |
|||
All live feed is internally sourced (and culture water meets the secure definition), and/or |
|
|
|||
Feed and supplements derive from an APHIS-recognized disease freedom source, and/or |
|
|
|||
Feed and supplements are implausible pathways (per OIE or APHIS guidance) for the pathogens in question. |
|
|
|||
Processes are documented and monitored |
|
|
|||
Other mitigations required** |
|
|
|||
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
SECURE |
MANAGED |
INSUFFICENT |
|
|
|
3 risk mitigation points |
|
|
|
|
Non-human Vector Biosecurity (Figure 8D) |
|||||
Non-human Vector Biosecurity |
Are the following statements true for the premises? |
|
|
||
|
Yes |
No |
|||
Regarding biological vectors, either - (a) biological vectors are an implausible route (the pathogen is not transmitted by biological vectors), OR |
|
|
|||
(b) there is a regional absence of biological vectors (primary and/or intermediate hosts), AND |
|
|
|||
Regarding all types of vectors (biological and mechanical), either (a) facility design and pest management effectively exclude vectors (aquatic, avian and terrestrial wildlife, livestock, pets, parasites, pests), OR |
|
|
|||
(b) there is an APHIS-recognized disease freedom status for regions within the home and migratory range of plausible vectors, AND, |
|
|
|||
Processes are documented and monitored. |
|
|
|||
Other mitigations required** |
|
|
|||
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
SECURE |
MANAGED |
INSUFFICENT |
|
|
|
1 risk mitigation points |
|
|
|
|
Fomites and Humans Biosecurity (Figure 8E) |
|||||
Fomites and Humans Biosecurity |
Are the following statements true for the premises? |
|
|
||
|
Yes |
No |
|||
Access to the premises is restricted, and includes a visitor/provider log, c/d protocols at entry, and a temporal lag between site visits. |
|
|
|||
Vehicles, shipping containers, shipping water, packaging (including water), and material deliveries are site-specific or first/single use, and mitigations preclude contamination during transit. AND, |
|
|
|||
Either of the following is true - |
|
|
|||
(a) equipment and gear are site-specific, OR |
|
|
|||
(b) the premises is in a region with APHIS-recognized disease freedom status, and any shared equipment or gear with potential prior contact with aquatic animals (or their water, wastes or products) receives c/d appropriate to pathogens of concern prior to entry |
|
|
|||
Processes are documented and monitored. |
|
|
|||
Other mitigations required**
|
|
|
|||
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
SECURE |
MANAGED |
INSUFFICENT |
|
|
|
1 risk mitigation points |
|
|
|
|
Pathogen-based Sampling
Reductions (Figure 12) |
||
Pathogen-based sampling reduction |
|
|
Was EDS Observation credit awarded for this pathogen? |
0.33 x pathogen |
|
Was the EDS Screening credit awarded for this pathogen? |
0.33 x pathogen |
|
Official Surveillance (OS) has been determined to be baseline sample size or Pool-adjusted Target and complete these steps - |
|
|
(1) Sum the Observational EDS credit and the Screening EDS credit (use percent/100, e.g., 0.33 rather than 33%). |
Total EDS credit |
|
(2) Subtract the Total EDS Credit from 1. |
1 – EDS Credit (Result is the sample proportion remaining for Official Surveillance to meet) |
|
|
(3) Multiply this remaining proportion by the sample size (number of animals) previously set for Official Surveillance. |
This is the Official Surveillance Test Balance (animal sample size), that incorporates all pathogen-based reductions. |
Risk Mitigation Score
(Figure 13) |
|||||
Risk Mitigation Score |
|
|
|
||
|
Yes |
No |
|||
Completed Pathways Assessment |
|
|
|||
Were any pathways RED (insufficient)? |
|
|
|||
|
|
||||
If no, complete these 4 steps - |
Score Tally |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
Risk Mitigation Score TALLY |
|
|
|
|
Premises Freedom Eligibility (Figure 14) |
|||
Premises Freedom Eligibility |
|
Yes |
No |
Can the premises demonstrate 2+ years history of compliance with CAHPS Pillars? |
|
|
|
Has the Premises accrued 2+ years history of official surveillance (OS) negative for the named pathogens? |
|
|
|
Are test results reviewed and maintained by the AAHT? |
|
|
|
Are pathogen detections and suspect results reported in a timely fashion? |
|
|
|
Are all 5 introduction pathways rated managed or secure for the named pathogens (Figures 8A-8E)? |
|
|
|
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
If all yes, premises may claim freedom for named pathogens. |
|
Risk-based Sampling Eligibility (Figure 15) |
|||
Risk-based Sampling Eligibility |
|
Yes |
No |
Has the premises achieved CAHPS Global with (named pathogen) Premises Freedom status? |
|
|
|
Is the Risk Mitigation Score ≥ 2 |
|
|
|
Decision Outcome (Circle one) |
If all yes, premises is eligible for risk-based reductions in Official Surveillance sampling for the named pathogen(s). |
|
|
CAHPS Pathogens of Concern List - Worksheet
Pathogen Name |
Abbreviation or Common Name |
2% APPL |
5% APPL |
10% |
CAHPS Official Surveillance Test Balance Score |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fish WOAH Listed Pathogens |
|||||
Aphanomyces invadens |
Epizootic ulcerative syndrome (EUS) |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Epizootic hematopoietic necrosis virus |
EHN |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Gyrodactylus salaris |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Infectious salmon anemia virus HPR-deleted |
ISA pathogenic |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Infectious salmon anemia virus HPR0 |
ISA non-pathogenic |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus |
IHN |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Koi herpesvirus |
KHV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Red sea bream iridovirus |
RSIV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Salmonid alphavirus |
SAV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Spring viremia of carp virus |
SVCV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Tilapia lake virus |
TILV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Viral hemorrhagic virus |
VHS |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fish Pathogens of Concern (not WOAH Listed) |
|||||
Aeromonas salmoncida |
furunculosis |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Ceratomyxa shasta |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Channel catfish virus |
CNN |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Heterosporosis |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Infectious pancreatic virus |
IPN |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Lactococcus garvieae |
|
|
|
|
|
Largemouth bass virus |
LMBV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Myxobolus cerebralis |
MXY Whirling disease |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Oncorhynchus masou virus |
OMS |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Piscine myocarditis virus |
PMV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Piscirickettsia salmonis |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Renibacterium salmonarum |
Bacterial kidney disease |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Salmon Gill Poxvirus |
SGPV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Schyzocotyle acheilognathi |
Asian tapeworm |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Viral nervous necrosis/Viral encephalopathy retinopathy |
VNN/VER |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Yersinia ruckeri |
Enteric redmouth disease |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mollusk WOAH Listed Pathogens |
|||||
Abalone herpesvirus |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Bonamia ostreae |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Bonamia exitiosa |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Marteilia refringens |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Perkinsus marinus |
Dermo |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Perkinsus olseni |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Xenohaliotis californiensis |
Withering syndrome of abalone |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mollusk Pathogens of Concern (not WOAH Listed) |
|||||
Haplosporidium nelsoni |
MSX |
|
|
|
|
Hemocytic neoplasia of oysters |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Clam neoplasia |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Marteiliodes chungmuensis |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Mikrocytos mackini |
Denman Island Disease |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Ostreid herpesvirus -1 |
OSHV1 |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crustacean WOAH Listed Pathogens |
|||||
Acute hepatopancreatic necrosis disease |
AHPND |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Aphanomyces astaci |
Crayfish plague |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Decapod iridescent virus 1 |
DIV1 |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Hepatobacter penaei |
Necrotizing hepatopancreatitis |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Infectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virus |
IHHNV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Infectious myonecrosis virus |
IMV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Macrobrachium rosenbergii nodavirus |
Whitetail disease |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Taura Syndrome virus |
TS |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
White spot syndrome virus |
WSSV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Yellow head virus -1 |
YH1 |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crustacean Pathogens of Concern (not WOAH Listed) |
|||||
Baculovirus penaei virus |
BP |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Covert Mortality Nodavirus |
CMV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Enterocytozoon hepatopenaei |
EHP |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Hepatopancreatic parvovirus |
HPV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Laem-Singh Virus |
LSV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Monodon Baculovirus |
MBV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Mourilyan Virus |
MV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Necrotizing hepatopancreatitis bacterium |
NHB |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
Penaeus vannamei nodavirus |
PvNV |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Pathogens of Concern |
|||||
|
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
|
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
CAHPS-Global Premises Freedom Security Worksheet
|
Secure |
Managed |
Insufficient |
|||
|
Negligible risk of pathogen introduction via pathway |
Minimized risk of pathogen introduction via pathway |
Pathway is UNCERTAIN (or not minimized) |
|||
Water |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AT LEAST ONE
OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
|||
> Natural absence of aquatic animals in source waters, or |
☐ |
> Mitigations
to remove or inactivate pathogens in source water, or |
☐ |
> UNCERTAIN
(or not minimized) due to none of the above, AND/OR |
☐ |
|
> Natural absence of conducive conditions for pathogens of concern, or, |
☐ |
> Locally recognized health status of source region |
☐ |
> NOT documented & monitored |
☐ |
|
> APHIS-recognized health status of source region (or country) |
☐ |
AND |
☐ |
|
|
|
AND |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
Examples |
>
Groundwater (well, spring) without surface access |
> UV
treatment of source water appropriate for pathogen inactivation
(do we need a reference table?) |
|
|||
Animals |
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: |
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
|||
> Internally sourced animals are derived from lots with verified equal or higher health status, and, |
☐ |
> Mitigations and/or testing demonstrate that incoming animals have a health status equal to or greater than the resident population, and |
☐ |
> UNCERTAIN (or not minimized) due to none of the above, and/or |
☐ |
|
> Externally sourced animals are derived from a CAHPS Global Premises or from populations with APHIS-recognized disease freedom status, and |
☐ |
> If no to all-in all-out and hard breaks, then exposure to previous life stages is only permitted if the previous life stage is verified equal or higher health status, and |
☐ |
|
☐ |
|
> All-in all-out and hard breaks prevent exposure from previous life stages, and |
☐ |
> Documented and monitored |
☐ |
|
|
|
> Documented and monitored |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
Examples |
> Hard
break examples could include (1) All-in, all-out with c/d and
synchronized (bay management) fallow between YC (this assumes no
susceptible wild species in the region), or (2) All-in, all-out
with c/d of tanks and fallow between YC |
> Lot
based testing from a source with greater than 2-year health
history of the premises verified by appropriate
authority/oversight for animal health; |
|
|||
Feed and Supplements |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
|||
>Implausible route, or, |
☐ |
|||||
> Internally sourced live feed (and culture water meets secure definition), or |
☐ |
> Mitigations are in place to inactivate pathogens of concern, AND |
☐ |
> UNCERTAIN (or not minimized) due to none of the above, AND/OR |
☐ |
|
> Ingredients are treated in accordance with international standards for feed safety and security, or |
☐ |
|||||
> APHIS-recognized disease freedom source |
☐ |
> Documented and monitored |
☐ |
> NOT documented & monitored |
☐ |
|
AND |
☐ |
|||||
Examples |
>
Implausible would include feed ingredients of non-susceptible
species appropriately sourced and handled to prevent
contamination |
>
Reputable source, plus test and ship, confirm safety of source or
product |
>
Supplements, probiotics, and other animal-derived products that do
not have a certificate of analysis for quality control and
pathogen inactivation |
|||
Vectors and non-human Biosecurity |
AT LEAST ONE
OF THE FOLLOWING: |
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
|||
> Implausible route (not transmitted by biological vectors), or |
☐ |
> Terrestrial livestock and pets are also deterred or are restricted to premises of equal or higher health status for the same pathogens, and |
☐ |
|||
> Regional absence of vectors (primary and/or intermediate hosts) |
☐ |
> Integrated pest management strategies deter parasite vectors and/or their intermediate hosts, and |
☐ |
> UNCERTAIN (or not minimized) due to none of the above, AND/OR |
☐ |
|
AND |
> Mitigations (and integrated pest management strategies) deter plausible vectors including aquatic, avian and terrestrial wildlife, and |
☐ |
||||
AT LEAST ONE
OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AND |
☐ |
> NOT documented & monitored |
☐ |
||
> APHIS-recognized disease freedom status for regions within home or migratory range of plausible vectors, or |
☐ |
|
|
|||
> Facility design (and integrated pest management) effectively excludes vectors (aquatic, avian and terrestrial wildlife, and livestock, pets, parasites, and pests) |
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
AND |
|
|
|
|||
Examples |
Documentation includes SOPs, and records or other evidence of implementation, available for review during inspection. |
> Integrated
pest management |
|
|||
Fomites & Humans |
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: |
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: |
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
|||
> Human access to premises is restricted, including visitor/provider log, c/d protocols at entry, and temporal lag between site visits, and |
☐ |
|||||
> Vehicles, containers, and material deliveries are site-specific, or first/single use |
☐ |
> Human access to premises is restricted, including visitor/provider log, c/d protocols at entry, and temporal lag between site visits, and |
☐ |
> INCONSISTENT mitigations, and/or |
☐ |
|
AND |
||||||
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: |
> Any shared vehicles, containers, materials, gear, or equipment with potential prior contact with aquatic animals (or their water, wastes or products) receives c/d prior to entry |
☐ |
> NOT documented and monitored |
☐ |
||
(1) Site-specific equipment and gear, or |
☐ |
|||||
(2) APHIS-recognized disease freedom status for the region, and any shared equipment or gear with potential prior contact with aquatic animals (or their water, wastes or products) receives c/d prior to entry |
☐ |
AND |
☐ |
|
|
|
AND |
☐ |
|||||
Examples |
> Documentation includes SOPs, and records or other evidence of implementation, available for review during inspection |
|
|
File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
File Title | Comprehensive Aquaculture Health Program Standards (CAHPS) |
Subject | Premises WorkBook |
Author | Hartman, Kathleen H - APHIS |
File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
File Created | 2024-07-29 |