Source: Lisa M. Keefe, MEATINGPLACE, 11/6/15

Processors were updated on a host of programs and proposals under consideration by various sub-agencies of the USDA during a  90-minute-long regulatory panel discussion at the North American Meat Institute’s Annual Meeting and Outlook Conference here this week.

Food Safety and Inspection Service
Whole genome sequencing — The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is building up capacity to use this technology to track the spread of pathogens, as the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control also are doing, said Philip Derfler, deputy administrator of FSIS.

“Periodically we have a series of illnesses that we say are linked and the question is, is it an outbreak or is it not an outbreak?” he said. “If you go by [pulsed-field gel electrophoresis results], it looks like the [pathogens causing the] illnesses are related. However, with [whole genome sequencing] it may be that they’re actually different.”

Retail ground meats — FSIS has a proposed a rule that would require retailers that grind meat in-house to keep records on the source of those meats. “We think it’s in the public interest that we be able to trace [the meat] back to the originating plant,” Derfler said.

Humane handling — Derfler noted that several consumer groups have asked FSIS to amend its regulations so that non-ambulatory, disabled pigs destined for slaughter would be euthanized instead. FSIS is not expected to act quickly on the petition, but as part of addressing the issue, he noted that there seems to be “renewed interest” by humane handling group in sending people undercover into plants.

Also under review is the fact that drivers transporting live animals are subject to FSIS jurisdiction when delivering animals to a packing plant, Derfler said. This, although the drivers may not be employed by the processor.

“We’ve never taken action [against drivers] but we could if there’s egregious mishandling,” he said. “At some point we’ll have to evaluate our position in what we’re going to do with respect to our jurisdiction” over animal transport. “So that’s something under review,” Derfler said.

Labeling — FSIS will, in the near future, be proposing and amendment to its nutritional labeling regulations. The FDA has already proposed and reproposed changes to its labeling regulations, and FSIS is looking to do the same in order to keep the regulations consistent across agencies.

Meat processors who may be concerned about what they’ve read in the FDA’s proposals should “comment like crazy,” Derfler said, to FDA if the feedback is more general but to USDA if the comments are specifically related to how the proposed changes would affect processors.

Definition of “natural” — Despite pressure from some consumer groups to drop use of the term “natural” on meat altogether, Derfler said that FSIS personnel believe they should try to define the term to improve its applicability. “I’m not promising anything but don’t be surprised if you see more on that,” he said.

American Marketing Service
Vendors — At the recent American Marketing Service (AMS) vendor conference, the agency told suppliers to its commodity purchase programs that the agency is looking at letting the vendors use more commercial processes for producing commodities, with the goal of simplification and better overall oversight of the program rather than issuing “spec after spec after spec,” said Bucky Gwartney.

So, for example, rather than requiring a 1-inch incision or a manual dislocation of a chicken thigh bone during processing to make sure that the end cooked product does not contain red-colored meat around the bone, the specification would be revised to require simply that the end cooked product does not contain red-colored.

Process verified programs — AMS is working with the industry to develop new programs, such as one for grass-fed beef. “We’re seeing quite a few farmers sign up for that,” Gwartney said.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
HPAI — Representing the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Administrator Kevin Shea updated the gathering on the status of high-pathogen avian influenza, noting that the federal government has spent $1 billion on this outbreak, compared to the entire APHIS budget for all other activities of about $840 million a year.

“We’ve learned how vulnerable we can be to things we have no control over … . How do you stop wild birds from dropping disease out of the sky?” Shea asked, rhetorically.

One lesson has been that prior to the outbreak, the industry has “insufficient” biosecurity, “insufficient not because it’s deficient or poor,” Shea said. “It’s pretty solid biosecurity for ordinary times but not good enough for an outbreak like this. So going forward we know there has to be better biosecurity.”

Looking ahead, by Dec. 22 “or so” poultry processors should finish disinfecting all of the facilities that have been identified as involved in the outbreak, and “we can tell the world governing bodies that we have been free of the disease for 60 to 90 days,” Shea said.

Altogether, Shea said the HPAI outbreak will cost the U.S. industry about $3 billion.

FMD — Although food & mouth disease is not a problem in the United States currently, APHIS is on guard against its reintroduction, Shea said, adding that, “if we did get a larger scale outbreak we’d have to look at vaccination.” Building an FMD vaccine bank large enough to protect the beef herd across the continent would require the combined resources of the public and private sector, he said, as the cost of creating and maintaining it could be about $150 million annually.

For more stories, go to www.meatingplace.com.