Source: Rita Jane Gabbett, MEATINGPLACE, 9/9/16

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is working on a number of policy proposals, including animal handling and labeling as well as a planned focus on a specific salmonella serotype, according to FSIS Assistant Administrator Dan Engeljohn.

Animal welfare and transport
Speaking at the North American Meat Institute’s (NAMI) Pathogen Control conference here, Engeljohn said those who transport live animals to federal establishments should look for regulatory proposals in the coming months that would hold them accountable for animal welfare issues related to loading and unloading.

“If you are a transporter of livestock to a federal establishment you could be held accountable…at the point of time the animal comes on [or off the truck], if it is noted that the transporter, who may or may not be an employee of the facility or a contractor, is abusing those animals in some way the policy would put enforcement on that transporter,” he said. “It may or may not mean enforcement onto the establishment. The intent was to apply the enforcement against the individual as part of animal welfare expectations that are in place.”

Engeljohn said the policy is in the final stages of approval at the agency and should be published in the Federal Register in the next few weeks.

Pathogen performance standards
As reported by Meatingplace, Engeljohn went into detail about updates to performance standards for beef carcasses, boneless manufacturing trim and ground beef expected to be proposed by the end of the year with a focus on salmonella.

“I’m not sure whether the agency will have a routine pathogen testing program for carcasses but we would publish a performance standard that we would expect to have the industry be aware of and using in a functional way to assess whether your slaughter dressing processes are working,” he said. “Our intent is also to include indicator organism information to give you good guidance as to what we found in our national baseline study in terms of indicators in the slaughter process.”

Currently, while certain E. coli serotypes are considered adulterants on beef meant for grinding, salmonella is not considered an adulterant. Engeljohn did not indicate any change in the status of salmonella in that regard.

Focus on Salmonella Dublin
Engeljohn told the group of industry food safety executives that FSIS plans to focus specifically on Salmonella Dublin, which is often found in dairy and veal cattle and affects both human and animal health.

“Out of concern for its multi-drug resistance, you should expect the agency to look at those operations that are bringing Salmonella Dublin into their facilities and passing it through to other products that are causing exposure in the human population,” he warned. “We have not identified what types of approaches we would be putting in place for this, but you should expect that the agency is concerned overall with salmonella and [Salmonella Dublin] is of particular concern.”

Foreign contaminants and consumer complaints
Engeljohn said FSIS has asked the industry to put together a best practices document for foreign contaminants and consumer complaints, which the agency will review. FSIS has also conduct a survey of its establishment personnel in plants with particular interest in what procedures establishments have in place for how decisions are made around reporting those complaints.
“We are pleased with the industry response regarding the best practices and we will see how we can move forward to make that more of a voluntary action by the industry as opposed to a mandatory rule,” Engeljohn said.

Generic labeling
Due to extreme efforts invested by marketing firms in selling products, there is increased concern that labels are becoming less compliant, adding unapproved claims and features that make product more appealing, Engeljohn said. The industry should expect some action by USDA in the coming fiscal year, which begins in October.

Noting that generic labeling rules have been in place for about two years, Engeljohn said, “We are concerned that industry might be generically approving labels that should not be generically approved.”

USDA started a pilot project two weeks ago that will run for the next couple of weeks to evaluate whether pilot establishments are using inappropriate generic labels. The pilot program results will determine whether or not USDA moves forward with a national review of generic labeling.

“You should expect USDA to move forward next fiscal year with a very definite approach at looking nationally at whether there are inappropriate generic labels,” he said.

He also acknowledged many FSIS inspectors have not had training regarding labeling and the agency is working on a training packet for them.

Nutrient content labeling
FSIS is also looking at labeling discrepancies on product nutrient content.

“Ground beef is where we found the greatest discrepancy with regards to fat content,” Engeljohn noted. Nutrient content claims allow a 20 percent variance. Looking at samples already collected for pathogen screening, FSIS has found fat content as high as 35 percent more variant and sodium content around 2 percent more variant. There has also been variance in protein content claims.

FSIS expects to expand the nutrient content sampling project to poultry in the fiscal year that begins in October.

Third-party verified label claims
FSIS is also looking a label claims verified by third parties, such as antibiotic and hormone “never fed” and allergen declarations.

He said antibiotic claims will be the first priority and over the coming weeks FSIS will complete its plan for collecting samples for antibiotic claims to determine if the third-party approval process is adequate.
Engeljohn said hormone claims are also becoming a bigger issue as more countries disallow synthetic hormones. He said there is a concern that muscle testing might not be catching hormone residues in organ meats, such as kidney and liver.

Veal
Engeljohn expects FSIS this calendar year to publish a proposal to define veal, stimulated in part by a need the Agriculture Marketing Service has for standards for what constitutes veal and in terms of foreign countries wanting to ship veal to the United States. Veal is defined differently in other countries and USDA needs a single definition to use.

Natural
FSIS plans to propose this calendar year a new definition of “natural.”

“There is an enormous amount of disagreement among stakeholders as to what “natural” means on a label,” said Engeljohn, noting a number of expectations consumers have around that term. For example, some people believe a natural designation should include information about how the animal was raised.

“We find there is a need to have a regulatory definition, so you should expect a proposal on the definition of 'natural,’” he said.

Nutrient fact panel
FSIS expects to publish this calendar year its proposed changes to the nutrient fact panel to make it consistent with FDA’s nutrient fact panel for other products. 

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