Nutrition Labeling of Single-Ingredient Products and Ground or Chopped Meat and Poultry Products, 82148-82167 [2010-32485]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Food Safety and Inspection Service

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 82148-82167]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32485]



[[Page 82147]]

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

Part II





Department of Agriculture





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



Food Safety and Inspection Service



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



9 CFR Parts 317 and 381



Nutrition Labeling of Single-Ingredient Products and Ground or Chopped 
Meat and Poultry Products; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 82148]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 317 and 381

[Docket No. FSIS-2005-0018]
RIN 0583-AC60


Nutrition Labeling of Single-Ingredient Products and Ground or 
Chopped Meat and Poultry Products

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is amending the 
Federal meat and poultry products inspection regulations to require 
nutrition labeling of the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and 
poultry products on labels or at point-of-purchase, unless an exemption 
applies. FSIS is also amending its regulations to require nutrition 
labels on all ground or chopped meat and poultry products, with or 
without added seasonings, unless an exemption applies. In addition, the 
rule provides that, when a ground or chopped product does not meet the 
regulatory criteria to be labeled ``low fat,'' a lean percentage 
statement may be included on the label or in labeling as long as a 
statement of the fat percentage that meets the specified criteria also 
is displayed on the label or in labeling.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on January 1, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosalyn Murphy-Jenkins, Director, 
Labeling and Program Delivery Division, Office of Policy and Program 
Development, Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Beltsville, MD 20705; (301) 504-0878.

Section I.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) of 1990 required 
nutrition labeling of most foods regulated by the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA). Because FSIS is committed to providing consumers 
with the most informative labeling system possible, FSIS published 
regulations establishing comparable nutrition labeling requirements for 
meat and poultry products. FSIS published an advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking on nutrition labeling of meat and poultry products on April 
2, 1991 (56 FR 13564), a proposed rule on November 27, 1991 (56 FR 
60302), a final rule on January 6, 1993 (58 FR 632), and subsequently 
other amendments to the rule.
    The Agency's regulations currently require nutrition labels on the 
packages of all multi-ingredient and heat processed meat and poultry 
products, unless an exemption applied. The required nutrition labeling 
provisions are referred to as ``the mandatory nutrition labeling 
program.'' The Agency's 1993 regulations also established guidelines 
for voluntary nutrition labeling of single-ingredient, raw meat and 
poultry products, including single-ingredient, raw ground or chopped 
products.
    On January 18, 2001, FSIS published a proposed rule in the Federal 
Register entitled, ``Nutrition Labeling of Ground or Chopped Meat and 
Poultry Products and Single-Ingredient Products'' (66 FR 4969). Because 
of the length of time since the publication of the proposed rule, FSIS 
published a supplemental proposed rule on December 18, 2009, to provide 
the public an additional opportunity to comment (74 FR 67736). This 
final rule is consistent with the provisions in the supplemental 
proposed rule.
    Nutrition labeling continues to be an integral part of USDA's 
efforts to educate consumers concerning nutrition and diets. Since 1980 
USDA and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have jointly 
published the Dietary Guidelines for Americans every five years. The 
Dietary Guidelines provide advice concerning food choices that promote 
health and prevent disease. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2005, 
advises consumers to aim for a total fat intake between 20 to 35 
percent of calories (page viii). In addition, the Dietary Guidelines 
for Americans, 2005, includes a chart showing the recommended upper 
limits for grams of saturated fat per day for a range of total calories 
per day (page 31). The nutrition information that FSIS is requiring in 
this final rule on the labels of ground or chopped products and on 
either labels or point-of-purchase materials for the major cuts of 
single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products would include the 
number of calories and the grams of total fat and saturated fat the 
product contains. The information FSIS is requiring would, therefore, 
assist consumers in following the advice in the Dietary Guidelines for 
Americans, 2005.
    Major cuts: This final rule requires nutrition labeling of the 
major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products 
identified in Sec. Sec.  317.344 and 381.444 that are not ground or 
chopped, except for certain exemptions. For these products, the final 
rule requires that nutrition information be provided on the label or at 
point-of-purchase, unless an exemption applies.
    In its two most recent surveys of the voluntary nutrition labeling 
of single-ingredient, raw products, FSIS found that significant 
participation in the voluntary nutrition labeling program did not exist 
(66 FR 4972, January 18, 2001). Under 9 CFR 317.343 and 9 CFR 381.443, 
if FSIS finds that there is not significant participation by retail 
stores in the voluntary nutrition labeling program to provide nutrition 
labeling for the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry 
products, FSIS is obligated to institute rulemaking to require that 
such labeling be provided. FSIS regulations provide that a food 
retailer participates at a significant level (1) if the retailer 
provides nutrition labeling information for at least 90 percent of the 
major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products it 
sells; and (2) if the nutrition label on these products is consistent 
in content and format with the mandatory program, or if nutrition 
information is displayed at point-of-purchase in an appropriate manner. 
Significant participation by food retailers exists if at least 60 
percent of all companies that were evaluated were participating in 
accordance with the guidelines. Based on the survey data from the two 
most recent surveys from 1996 and 1999, less than 60 percent of stores 
evaluated were participating in accordance with the guidelines. 
Therefore, significant participation in the voluntary nutrition 
labeling program did not exist, and FSIS proceeded with rulemaking.
    Under Sec.  317.4, FSIS's Labeling and Program Delivery Division 
(LPDD) reviews labels on meat and poultry products that have been 
submitted for approval. Based on its label review, FSIS has not seen an 
increase in nutrition labeling of the major cuts of single-ingredient 
raw, meat and poultry products since the surveys were conducted. 
Compliance investigators in FSIS's Office of Program Evaluation, 
Enforcement & Review (OPEER) also have not seen an increase in the 
number of packages of the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and 
poultry products that have nutrition facts panels on their labels at 
retail or an increase in the availability of point-of-purchase 
materials that provide nutrition information for such products at 
retail since the last compliance surveys were conducted. For these 
reasons and because no other evidence has been submitted to FSIS that 
significant participation in the voluntary program

[[Page 82149]]

now exists, FSIS has concluded that this final rule is necessary.
    FSIS has determined that major cuts of single-ingredient raw, meat 
and poultry products that do not bear nutrition information on their 
labels or on point-of-purchase materials will be misbranded, under 
section 1(n) of the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 
601(n)(1)) and section 4(h)(1) of the Poultry Products Inspection Act 
(PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 453(h)(1)). Without nutrition information on their 
labeling, FSIS has concluded that the labeling of these products will 
be false or misleading because it will not provide consumers with 
sufficient information to assess the nutrient content of the major cuts 
and will not enable consumers to select major cuts that fit into a 
healthy diet that meets their individual needs.
    Consumers are given a rough indication of the fat content of major 
cuts of poultry based on whether the product has skin and based on the 
levels of attached fat in the product. Similarly, consumers are given a 
rough indication of the fat content of major cuts of meat products 
based on internal marbling and attached fat. However, without nutrition 
labeling for the major cuts, consumers cannot assess precise levels of 
fat (e.g., 10 grams vs. 20 grams of fat per serving) and cannot know 
the levels of specific nutrients, such as saturated fat, in these 
products. Therefore, without nutrition labeling of these products, 
consumers cannot make educated choices about consuming the major cuts.
    To provide flexibility, the rule allows nutrition information to be 
provided on the labels of individual packages of the major cuts of 
single-ingredient, raw products and, to be provided on point-of-
purchase materials. Further, FSIS has determined that point-of-purchase 
labeling is appropriate because consumers can generally estimate the 
fat content in these products, and because the nutrient content of any 
given major cut is relatively uniform across the market.
    Ground or Chopped Products: This final rule requires that nutrition 
labels be provided for all ground or chopped products (livestock 
species) and hamburger, with or without added seasonings, unless an 
exemption applies. Similarly, this final rule requires that nutrition 
labels be provided for all ground or chopped poultry (kind), with or 
without added seasonings, unless an exemption applies. Under this final 
rule, products that would be required to bear nutrition labels include 
single-ingredient, raw hamburger, ground beef, ground beef patties, 
ground chicken, ground turkey, ground chicken patties, ground pork, and 
ground lamb.
    Unlike other single-ingredient, raw products, producers are able to 
formulate precisely the fat content of ground or chopped products. 
Therefore, in this respect, these products are similar to products in 
the existing mandatory program that are required to bear nutrition 
labels. Other single-ingredient, raw products cannot be formulated in 
the same manner or to the same degree as ground products.
    In ground or chopped products, the fat is uniformly distributed 
throughout the product and is not clearly distinguishable on the 
surface of the product. The Agency has concluded that consumers cannot 
estimate the level of fat in these products and cannot compare the 
levels of fat in these products to those in other products. 
Additionally, producers sometimes use meat from advanced meat recovery 
(AMR) systems and low temperature rendering (LTR) in ground or chopped 
beef or pork products, which can affect their nutrient content. For 
these reasons, FSIS has concluded that ground or chopped meat and 
poultry products that do not bear nutrition information will be 
misbranded under section 1(n)(1) of the FMIA and section 4(h)(1) of the 
PPIA.
    FSIS is requiring that nutrition information for ground or chopped 
products appear on the label of these products (unless an exemption 
applies), as is required for multi-ingredient and heat processed 
products, rather than on point-of-purchase materials. Because there are 
numerous formulations of ground or chopped products, it would be 
difficult for producers or retailers to develop point-of-purchase 
materials that would address all the different formulations that exist 
for these products. Furthermore, it would be difficult for consumers to 
find the correct information for a specific ground or chopped product 
on point-of-purchase materials that include information concerning 
numerous formulations of these products.
    Non-major Cuts of Single-Ingredient, Raw Meat and Poultry Products 
that are not Ground or Chopped: FSIS is not requiring nutrition 
information for single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products that 
are not major cuts and that are not ground or chopped. But, if 
nutrition information is provided for these products, it must be 
provided in accordance with the nutrition labeling requirements for the 
major cuts. Therefore, under the final rule, if establishments or 
retail facilities choose to provide nutrition information for these 
products, they will either provide it at point-of-purchase, in 
accordance with Sec.  317.345 or Sec.  381.445, or on their label, in 
accordance with Sec.  317.309 or Sec.  381.409. Thus, the nutrition 
labeling provisions for these products will be consistent with those 
for the voluntary nutrition labeling program.
    Permitting Percent Lean Statements on labels or in labeling of 
ground or chopped products: The final rule permits a statement of lean 
percentage on the label or in labeling of ground or chopped meat and 
poultry products that do not meet the regulatory criteria for ``low 
fat,'' provided that a statement of the fat percentage is also 
displayed on the label or in labeling. The required statement of fat 
percentage must be contiguous to, in lettering of the same color, size, 
and type as, and on the same color background as, the statement of lean 
percentage. Many consumers have become accustomed to this labeling on 
ground beef products, and FSIS has concluded that this labeling 
provides a quick, simple, and accurate means of comparing ground or 
chopped meat and poultry products.
    Exemptions: Under this final rule, the following exemptions from 
nutrition labeling requirements will apply to the major cuts of single-
ingredient, raw meat and poultry products and ground or chopped meat 
and poultry products:
     Products intended for further processing, provided that 
the labels for these products bear no nutrition claim or nutrition 
information,
     Products that are not for sale to consumers, provided that 
the labels for these products bear no nutrition claims or nutrition 
information,
     Products in small packages that are individually wrapped 
packages of less than \1/2\; ounce net weight, provided that the labels 
for these products bear no nutrition claims or nutrition information,
     Products that are custom slaughtered or prepared, and
     Products intended for export.
    This final rule also provides the following additional exemptions 
for ground or chopped products:
     Ground or chopped products that qualify for the small 
business exemption in Sec. Sec.  317.400(a)(1) and 381.500(a)(1),
     Products that are ground or chopped at an individual 
customer's request and that are prepared and served at retail, provided 
that the labels or labeling of these products bears no nutrition claims 
or nutrition information,
     Ground or chopped products in packages that have a total 
surface area for labeling of less than 12 square inches, provided that 
the product's labeling includes no nutrition claims or

[[Page 82150]]

nutrition information and provided that an address or telephone number 
that a consumer can use to obtain the required information is included 
on the label, and
     Ground products produced by small businesses that use 
statements of percent fat and percent lean on the label or in labeling 
of ground products, provided they include no other nutrition claims or 
nutrition information on the product labels or labeling.
    FSIS believes an exemption for ground or chopped products produced 
by small businesses is necessary because the burden of mandatory 
nutrition labeling may force some small firms to stop producing the 
product because of the cost of nutrition labeling and eventually force 
some small firms out of business. FSIS believes it would not be 
feasible for some small businesses to incur the additional costs of 
nutrition labeling because of their low volume of sales or low volume 
of ground product. FSIS believes it is feasible for larger businesses 
to incur the additional costs of nutrition labeling because of their 
higher volume of sales or larger levels of production of ground 
product. This final rule, with an exemption for ground or chopped 
products that qualify for the small business exemption in Sec. Sec.  
317.400(a)(1) and 381.500(a)(1), provides nutrition labeling on the 
maximum volume of ground or chopped product while assuring that small 
businesses producing low volumes of product are not at risk of going 
out of business or materially reducing the variety of products they 
deliver to their customers. Further, FSIS believes that the relatively 
small additional benefits of requiring small businesses to put 
nutrition labels on all ground or chopped products are outweighed by 
the larger additional costs. FSIS estimates that without the exemption 
there would be a $3 million reduction in annual average net benefit. 
Without the exemption, the projected compliance average total cost 
increase annually of $54 million would not be the only type of cost 
that would be incurred. FSIS believes that without the exemption many 
small businesses would have to close or substantially reduce the 
variety of products they now offer. Reductions in purchase options 
would be a cost to consumers that could not be quantified for FSIS's 
analysis.
    Under this final rule, there is not a small business exemption for 
the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products 
because nutrition information for these products may be provided on 
labels or, alternatively, at their point-of-purchase. Additionally, 
FSIS will make point-of-purchase materials available over the Internet 
free of charge. Therefore, the nutrition labeling requirement for major 
cuts of single-ingredient, raw products should not impose an economic 
hardship for small businesses, including those that are retail stores.
    Under the proposed rule, if small businesses produced ground or 
chopped product and included a statement of lean percentage and fat 
percentage on the product's label, the small business would have been 
required to include nutrition information on the product label. These 
small businesses would not have qualified for the small business 
exemption because the labels for these products included nutrition 
claims. Based on the National Cattleman's Beef Association (NCBA) 
National Meat Case Study in 2004, 93 percent of ground beef packages 
had statements of lean or fat percentages (74 FR 67741). Sixty-eight 
percent of packages with such statements had nutrition facts panels and 
25 percent did not (74 FR 67741). Because about 95 percent of grinders 
are small businesses, FSIS concluded that many of the 25 percent of 
packages that included lean or fat percentage statements without 
nutrition facts panels were produced by small businesses. Therefore, 
FSIS believes many small businesses include statements of lean or fat 
percentage on the label of their ground products but not the nutrition 
facts panel. Also, because of the longstanding use of the statements of 
percent fat and percent lean on the label or in labeling of ground beef 
and hamburger products, FSIS believes that such statements on the label 
or in labeling of ground products produced by small businesses will not 
mislead consumers, even if the small businesses do not include 
nutrition information on the products' labels (74 FR 67741). Many 
consumers have become accustomed to this labeling on ground beef 
products, and FSIS believes that this labeling provides a quick, 
simple, and accurate means of comparing ground or chopped meat and 
poultry products. Therefore under the final rule, small businesses that 
use statements of percent fat and percent lean on the label of ground 
products, provided they include no other nutrition claims or nutrition 
information on the product labels or labeling, are exempted from the 
nutrition labeling requirements.
    Additionally, under this final rule, any ground or chopped product 
or major cut of single-ingredient, raw product represented or purported 
to be specifically for infants and children less than 4 years of age 
will not be allowed to include certain nutrient content declarations 
because infants and children less than 4 years of age have different 
nutrition needs than adults and children older than 4 years of age.
    Finally, this final rule makes clear that the current regulatory 
exemptions for ready-to-eat (RTE) product packaged or portioned at 
retail and multi-ingredient product processed at retail do not apply to 
RTE ground or chopped products packaged or portioned at retail or 
multi-ingredient ground or chopped products that are processed at 
retail because there may be a significant amount of multi-ingredient 
ground beef retail processed products or RTE retail packaged products 
(66 FR 4979, January 18, 2001). For further explanation of the reasons 
for the foregoing exemptions, see 58 FR 638-639; 66 FR 4978-4979; and 
75 FR 67740-67741.
    Enforcement and Compliance: After the final rule is implemented, 
FSIS will collect samples of ground product at retail for nutrient 
analysis. In addition, FSIS will assess whether nutrition information 
is available for the major cuts, either on package labels or at the 
point-of-purchase.
    Under this final rule, the procedures set forth for FSIS product 
sampling and nutrient analysis in Sec. Sec.  317.309(h)(1)-(8) and 
381.409(h)(1)-(8) will be applicable to ground or chopped meat and to 
ground or chopped poultry products, respectively. FSIS will sample and 
conduct nutrient analysis of ground or chopped products to verify 
compliance with nutrition labeling requirements, even if nutrition 
labeling on these products is based on the most current representative 
database values contained in USDA's National Nutrient Data Bank or the 
USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference and there are no 
claims on the labeling. Therefore, FSIS will treat these products as it 
treats other products required to bear nutrition labels.
    FSIS will treat ground or chopped products in this way because the 
fat content of these products can vary significantly. FSIS employees 
cannot visually assess whether nutrition information on the label of 
ground or chopped products accurately reflects the labeled products' 
contents because, in most cases, it is not possible to visually assess 
the level of fat in a ground or chopped product.
    If nutrition labeling of the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw 
products (other than ground beef or ground pork) is based on USDA's 
National Nutrient Data Bank or the USDA's National Nutrient Database 
for Standard Reference, and there are no nutrition claims on the 
labeling, FSIS will not sample and

[[Page 82151]]

conduct a nutrient analysis of the products because FSIS personnel can 
visually identify the particular cut. If the nutrition information for 
these products is based on USDA's National Nutrient Data Bank or the 
USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, and there are 
no nutrition claims on the labeling, it is not necessary for FSIS to 
verify the accuracy of the data because they are USDA data. USDA has 
already evaluated these data and determined that they are valid (66 FR 
4980, January 18, 2001).
    Outreach: FSIS personnel will conduct meetings and Webinars on the 
final rule and will provide additional information and guidance as 
needed. If retailers cannot obtain point-of-purchase materials over the 
Internet, FSIS personnel will have copies of the information to provide 
to retailers.
    Six months prior to the effective date, FSIS intends to make 
available nutrition labeling materials that can be used at the point-
of-purchase of the major cuts at the following Internet address: https://www.fsis.usda.gov. Also, the Food Marketing Institute (FMI) has made 
available materials that can be used at the point-of-purchase at the 
following Internet address: https://www.fmi.org/consumer/nutrifacts/.
    In addition, the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard 
Reference is developed and maintained by the Agricultural Research 
Service (ARS) and can be found on the Internet at the following 
address: https://www.ars.usda.gov\nutrientdata. Information is available 
at this site for ground beef products containing 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 
25%, and 30% fat. In addition, ARS has included a calculator on the 
Internet, with the Database. Parties can enter the amount of fat (5% to 
30% percent fat) or lean (70% to 95% lean) in a particular raw ground 
beef product, and the calculator will calculate the nutrient values for 
the product based on the fat value entered.
    The USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference also 
includes a set of tables with nutrient values for ground pork with fat 
levels from 4% to 28%, in one percent increments. The USDA Nutrient 
Database also includes nutrient values for raw and cooked ground 
chicken but does not include nutrient values for such product at 
varying fat levels. ARS also has published nutrient values for ground 
turkey with fat levels of 0%, 7%, and 15%. In the supplemental proposed 
rule, FSIS provided examples of nutrition labels for ground or chopped 
products that would meet the requirements of the final rule (74 FR 
67742). Six months prior to the effective date, FSIS will make 
additional examples of acceptable labels for such products available on 
the Agency's Web site.
    Effective Dates: The requirements for ground or chopped products 
will become effective on January 1, 2012. FSIS issued a final rule to 
establish this date as the uniform compliance date for new food 
labeling regulations that are issued between January 1, 2009, and 
December 31, 2010 (73 FR 75564; December 12, 2008). FSIS established 
the uniform compliance date to minimize costs associated with on-
package labels. Because this final rule allows for the presentation of 
nutrition information for the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat 
and poultry products at their point-of-purchase, no change in on-
package labels will be necessary to effect this aspect of this final 
rule. Thus, in the supplemental proposed rule, FSIS proposed that the 
labeling requirements for the major cuts would be effective one year 
from the date of publication of the final rule. Because one year from 
the date of publication will only be a few days before the effective 
date for ground and chopped products, January 1, 2012, FSIS is also 
establishing January 1, 2012 as the effective date for the labeling 
requirements for the major cuts.

Summary of and Response to Comments

    FSIS received 33 comments on the supplemental proposed rule from 
individuals, a consumer organization, members of the regulated 
industry, trade and professional associations, and a city health 
department.
    A summary of issues raised by commenters and the Agency responses 
follows.

Nutrition Labeling for the Major Cuts of Single-Ingredient, Raw Meat 
and Poultry Products

    Comment: Many individuals, several trade associations, a city 
health department, a perishable items tracking company, and an industry 
commenter all generally supported required nutrition information for 
the major cuts, either on their label or at their point-of-purchase. 
Several individuals and the city health department stated that 
providing this nutrition information will help consumers make 
healthier, informed food choices and will allow them to monitor the 
amount of fat, cholesterol, and sodium that they consume. According to 
the city health department, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and 
cancer are the leading causes of death, disability, and compromised 
quality of life in the United States. This commenter also argued that 
these illnesses are connected with nutrition, and improved access to 
nutrition information through nutrition labeling can help people reduce 
their risk of developing these illnesses. A trade association stated 
that nutrition labeling allows consumers to quickly differentiate 
between meat products and identify leaner choices. One individual 
stated that many people need to check the specific nutritional content 
of foods for medical reasons.
    One individual stated that most retailers do not participate in the 
voluntary nutrition labeling program at a significant level because the 
program is voluntary.
    A consumer organization, a city health department, and an 
individual supported the proposed rule but argued that the final rule 
should mandate that nutrition information for major cuts of meat be 
provided through on-package labels rather than point-of-purchase 
materials. These commenters stated that on-package labeling helps 
people make more informed decisions. The consumer organization noted 
that a recent telephone survey showed an overwhelming percentage (86%) 
of the respondents preferred nutrition facts labels on meat packages 
rather than nutrition information on wall posters or signs. The city 
health department and the consumer organization argued that point-of-
purchase materials are not an effective means of communication because 
their success depends on external factors, such as the retailer's 
placement of the point-of-purchase materials and layout limitations in 
small stores. The consumer organization and one individual stated that 
some of the disadvantages to using point-of-purchase materials are that 
they are hard to find, inconvenient to use, and difficult to read and 
comprehend. One individual also believed it was time-consuming and 
embarrassing for shoppers to read posters regarding nutrition 
information. Another individual stated that on-package labeling allows 
consumers to quickly compare products and provides the nutrition 
information to other consumers at home.
    The consumer organization stated that point-of-purchase materials 
are not subject to any formal requirements under the supplemental rule. 
The consumer organization stated that FSIS should specify format and 
placement requirements for point-of-purchase materials. This 
organization stated that the USDA should work with the FDA to update 
format and readability requirements for posters. This organization 
believed that posters are

[[Page 82152]]

likely to omit many cuts or give them a different name than what 
appears on the package. The organization also stated that USDA should 
conduct a survey to determine whether consumers are better served by 
on-package nutrition labels than point-of-purchase materials. According 
to this consumer organization, many companies and grocery chains 
already use on-package nutrition labeling. Additionally, the consumer 
organization stated that if similar nutrition labels and labeling 
equipment are required for ground products, then retailers would not 
incur substantial additional costs by adding nutrition labels to major 
cuts.
    The consumer organization disagreed with FSIS's position that 
consumers can visually determine the difference in fat content between 
various cuts. This organization noted that a recent telephone survey 
showed an overwhelming percentage (80%) of respondents could not 
determine which cuts of meat had the least amount of fat. The consumer 
organization suggested that the USDA does not have any data to support 
its assumption that consumers can visually determine the difference in 
fat content between various cuts.
    Several trade associations, an industry commenter, and the food 
marketing organization supported the option of providing nutrition 
information for the major cuts through point-of-purchase materials. 
According to one trade association, their retailer customers believe 
nutrition labeling for meat is more efficiently displayed via point-of-
purchase materials than on the product.
    Response: As FSIS proposed, this final rule will require that 
nutrition information be provided for the major cuts of single-
ingredient, raw meat and poultry products, either on the label or at 
the point-of-purchase. FSIS agrees that the final rule will produce 
health benefits, including projected reductions in the incidence of 
coronary heart disease and three types of cancer that may accrue as 
consumers improve their diet quality through increased use of nutrition 
information generated by the final rule.
    FSIS agrees with the individual that stated that most retailers do 
not participate at a significant level when labeling is voluntary. In 
the two most recent surveys from 1996 and 1999, FSIS found that 
significant participation in the voluntary nutrition labeling program 
did not exist (see 66 FR 4973, January 18, 2001; 74 FR 67736-67737, 
December 18, 2009). In addition, since the surveys were conducted, 
FSIS's LPDD has not seen an increase in the number of labels that 
include nutrition information for the major cuts of single-ingredient, 
raw meat and poultry products. Further, FSIS's OPEER also has not seen 
an increase in the number of packages of the major cuts of single-
ingredient, raw meat and poultry products that have nutrition facts 
panels on their labels at retail or an increase in the availability of 
point-of-purchase materials that provide nutrition information for such 
products at retail since the last compliance surveys were conducted. 
These observations do not constitute survey data but provide additional 
meaningful information based on the experience of FSIS's LPDD and 
OPEER. No evidence has been submitted to FSIS that significant 
participation in the voluntary program now exists.
    FSIS agrees that many consumers cannot accurately assess the 
nutritional content of the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw 
products; however, we continue to believe that point-of-purchase 
nutritional information is appropriate for these products.
    While consumers cannot accurately assess the nutritional content of 
the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw products, their ability to do 
so is greater than in the case of ground products. Ground products are 
processed in such a way that fat content is very difficult to visually 
ascertain. Internal marbling, attached fat, and whether the product has 
skin gives consumers some rough indication of the fat content of the 
major cuts of single-ingredient, raw products, which leads FSIS to 
believe that the benefits of on-package labeling may be slightly less 
than with ground product. FSIS notes, however, that consumers still 
need nutrition information on point-of-purchase materials for the major 
cuts because consumers cannot assess precise levels of fat (e.g., 10 
grams vs. 20 grams of fat per serving) and cannot know the levels of 
calories or other specific nutrients, such as saturated fat, in these 
products.
    Based on comments received and the Supplemental Proposed Rule 
Regulatory Impact Analysis, FSIS believes that requiring on-package 
labeling for the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw products is also 
likely to be significantly more costly than for ground products because 
it would require on-package labeling on a larger volume of product. In 
the Supplemental Proposed Rule Regulatory Impact Analysis, FSIS 
estimated that the annualized average present value of the costs of 
requiring nutrition labels on the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw 
meat and poultry products would be $16.48 million more than the 
annualized average present value of the costs of requiring nutrition 
labels on all ground or chopped products, without taking into account 
the current level of voluntary compliance (74 FR 67789).
    As discussed in the proposed rule and in the supplemental proposed 
rule, FSIS believes it will be relatively easy to prepare point-of-
purchase materials for the major cuts because the nutrient content of a 
given major cut is relatively uniform across the market, and these 
products are not formulated in the manner of ground or chopped products 
(66 FR 4974, January 18, 2001) (74 FR 67737, December 18, 2009). To 
ensure that this is the case, FSIS is making available nutrition 
labeling materials that can be used at point-of-purchase over the 
Internet free of charge.
    FSIS acknowledges the concern expressed by an individual and by the 
consumer organization about the location of point-of-purchase 
materials, but believes that it is currently addressed in the 
regulations (9 CFR 317.345(a)(3) and 381.445(a)(3)) which require that 
point-of-purchase materials be made available in close proximity to the 
food. In addition, FSIS personnel will also visit stores to verify that 
they are following this and the other requirements.
    In response to the comment that noted that an advantage of 
including nutrition information on the label is that consumers can 
review the nutrient content of the product once the product is taken 
home, and that others besides the primary food purchaser would have 
better access to this information, surveys, including the Diet and 
Health Knowledge Survey (DHKS), show that a majority of individuals 
report using labels while buying foods. Although the DHKS shows that 
adults who are not main household shoppers use labels, the survey shows 
that the main shoppers use labels at a higher rate than those who are 
not main household shoppers. If individuals in a household have certain 
nutrition practices and needs, the person who purchases food for the 
household would likely take other household members' needs and 
preferences into account. In this case, the entire household would 
ultimately receive the benefits of the nutrition information. Further, 
other household members besides the primary food purchaser will be able 
to obtain nutrition information for the major cuts on the Internet on 
FSIS's Web site, ARS's Web site, and FMI's Web site.
    FSIS agrees that consumers cannot accurately judge the nutritional 
content of the major cuts of single-ingredient, raw products, and that 
the mandatory provision of this information to consumers is warranted 
and

[[Page 82153]]

appropriate. However, for the reasons described above, we believe that 
point-of-purchase information is appropriate for these products.
    Comment: Several individuals and trade associations, one food 
marketing organization, and an industry commenter opposed the proposed 
rule to require nutrition information for the major cuts, either on 
their label or at their point-of-purchase. These trade associations and 
the food marketing organization stated that FSIS should maintain its 
existing voluntary program. One trade association and the food 
marketing organization advocated that the USDA should conduct a new 
compliance survey because it is likely that the level of participation 
in the voluntary nutrition labeling program has increased beyond the 
``significant participation'' threshold because of changes in the 
composition of the retail sector over the past decade, and because of 
efforts by FMI to encourage the widespread use and dissemination of 
Nutri-Facts materials. These organizations stated that the last USDA 
survey for compliance is outdated because it was conducted in 1999, and 
should not be the basis for promulgating the rule. The food marketing 
organization noted that the regulations that require FSIS to evaluate 
the level of participation in the voluntary nutrition labeling program 
every two years remain in effect. One trade association stated that 
maintaining the voluntary program will be less costly and will help the 
industry. According to this trade association, FSIS could increase 
voluntary compliance by making the same updated nutrition information 
available free of charge to retailers as it planned to make available 
under the proposed rule. Several trade associations stated that if 
individual consumers wanted more specific nutrition information about a 
particular product, they could access it through other sources like the 
Internet. An industry commenter noted that if there was sufficient 
consumer demand for more nutrition information, then retailers would 
have an economic incentive to voluntarily supply it.
    One trade association did not agree with FSIS's position that major 
cuts of single-ingredient raw, meat and poultry products that do not 
bear nutrition information on their labels or on point-of-purchase 
materials are misbranded. Another trade association believed that there 
were few significant differences in the nutritional values among the 
various brands of young chicken, and that nutrition information for 
single-ingredient chicken is not that useful because most people add 
ingredients to it during cooking that alter the calories, fat, and 
protein. For those reasons, the poultry trade association stated that 
there is no need to mandate nutrition labeling for the major cuts, and 
FSIS should maintain its existing voluntary nutrition labeling program 
for the major cuts. Several individuals stated that consumers already 
have a general idea of the average nutritional value of major cuts of 
meat and poultry products.
    Response: FSIS encouraged participation in the voluntary nutrition 
labeling program through meetings with industry. Additionally, 
nutrition labeling materials for the major cuts have been available on 
FMI's Web site for several years (https://www.fmi.org). Despite this, 
and FSIS's encouragement of the use of such materials, the 1999 
voluntary nutrition labeling survey found a lower rate of participation 
than the 1996 survey found. Thus, the fact that nutrition information 
was available was insufficient to ensure that consumers received this 
necessary nutrition information. By making the guidelines for the 
voluntary nutrition labeling program mandatory, FSIS will ensure that 
consumers are provided with sufficient information to assess the 
nutrient content of the major cuts and enable them to select foods that 
fit into a healthy diet that meets their individual needs.
    FSIS's regulations provide that the Agency would evaluate 
significant participation every 2 years (Sec. Sec.  317.343(e) and 
381.443(e)). Although FSIS did not conduct the surveys precisely 2 
years apart, the Agency did conduct the surveys approximately every two 
years until 1999 (74 FR 67748, December 18, 2009), and the surveys 
failed to show significant participation. Because significant 
participation did not exist, FSIS proceeded with rulemaking.
    Under Sec.  317.4, FSIS's LPDD reviews labels on meat and poultry 
products that have been submitted for approval. Based on its label 
review, FSIS has not seen an increase in nutrition labeling of the 
major cuts of single-ingredient raw, meat and poultry products since 
the surveys were conducted. Compliance investigators in FSIS's OPEER 
also have not seen an increase in the number of packages of the major 
cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products that have 
nutrition facts panels on their labels at retail or an increase in the 
availability of point-of-purchase materials that provide nutrition 
information for such products at retail since the last compliance 
surveys were conducted. Because (i) the most recent surveys showed that 
significant participation in the voluntary nutrition labeling program 
did not exist, (ii) FSIS's LPDD has not seen an increase in nutrition 
labeling of the major cuts of single-ingredient raw, meat and poultry 
products and ground or chopped meat and poultry products since the 
surveys were conducted, (iii) FSIS's OPPER has not seen an increase in 
nutrition labeling of the major cuts of single-ingredient raw, meat and 
poultry products at retail or an increase in the availability of point-
of-purchase materials that provide nutrition information for the major 
cuts at retail since the last compliance surveys were conducted, and 
(iv) no other evidence has been submitted to FSIS that significant 
participation in the voluntary program now exists, FSIS has concluded 
that this final rule is necessary.
    In response to the comment that maintaining the voluntary program 
will be less costly and will help the industry, this final rule makes 
the guidelines for the voluntary nutrition labeling program mandatory, 
so the costs for the industry should not increase for stores that are 
following the guidelines.
    In response to the statement that if there was sufficient consumer 
demand for more nutrition information, then retailers would have an 
economic incentive to voluntarily supply it, market forces have not 
been great enough to ensure significant participation in the voluntary 
nutrition labeling program. This fact could be evidence that consumers 
are not willing to pay for this information. However, as is explained 
above, FSIS believes that consumers can generally estimate the fat 
content of the major cuts of meat and poultry products, but 
nonetheless, they need more precise information about the nutrient 
content of the major cuts in order to make a fully informed comparative 
judgment about the various cuts.
    FSIS has concluded that without nutrition information for the major 
cuts of single-ingredient, raw meat and poultry products, these 
products will be misbranded under the FMIA and the PPIA (21 U.S.C. 
601(n)(1) and 453 (h)(1)). Without nutrition information on their 
labeling, FSIS has concluded that the labeling of these products will 
be false or misleading because it will not provide consumers with 
sufficient information to assess the nutrient content of the major cuts 
and will not enable consumers to select major cuts that fit into a 
healthy diet that meets their individual needs.
    In response to the comment that nutrition information for single-
ingredient chicken is not that useful because most people add 
ingredients to

[[Page 82154]]

it during cooking that alter the calories, fat, and protein, the final 
rule allows nutrition information to be declared on either an ``as 
packaged'' basis or an ``as consumed'' basis. The point-of-purchase 
materials and the labels clearly inform consumers whether the nutrition 
information provided is ``as packaged'' or ``as consumed.'' Consistent 
with the provisions in the voluntary nutrition labeling program, when 
nutrition information is presented on an ``as consumed'' basis, 
retailers or manufacturers will be required to specify a method of 
cooking that will not add nutrients from other ingredients such as 
flour, breading, and salt (Sec. Sec.  317.345(d) and 381.445(d)).
    Comment: Several trade associations asserted that the list of major 
cuts needs to be updated. One trade association stated that, according 
to The National Pork Board meat scanner data, pork whole loin, pork 
shoulder picnic, pork shoulder Boston butt, pork sirloin chop, pork 
center chop, and pork rib roast should be added to the list of major 
cuts. One trade association stated that FSIS should review the list of 
major cuts based on market share and availability because there are 
still cuts on the list of major cuts for which data reflective of trim 
levels sold at retail is not currently available. One trade association 
was concerned that if the USDA does not update the list, but rather 
makes a change to the list later, then retailers will incur the $5.67 
million cost to purchase and install posters again.
    Response: Because FSIS did not propose to amend the codified list 
of major cuts in the regulations and did not provide an opportunity for 
the public to comment on proposed changes to the list, FSIS is not 
amending the list of major cuts in the regulations at this time. FSIS 
acknowledges that the codified list of major cuts may need to be 
updated. FSIS intends to assess the need to update the list and to 
update it as necessary when resources permit. Establishments or retail 
facilities may choose to provide nutrition information for the non-
major cuts, either at point-of-purchase, in accordance with Sec.  
317.345 or Sec.  381.445, or on their label, in accordance with Sec.  
317.309 or Sec.  381.409.
    Comment: The consumer organization argued that the number of 
servings should be required on all major cuts. This organization stated 
that many retailers now have the ability to calculate the number of 
servings in a package. As an example, this organization suggested that 
companies could determine the number of servings for the major cuts 
based on the number of pieces of meat in the package and their average 
weights. According to this organization, the number of servings reminds 
consumers that a package has multiple servings, and that if someone 
eats more than one serving, the nutrients consumed will increase. This 
commenter stated that most consumers eat more than the USDA standard 
serving size of 4 oz. of meat or poultry, and single-serving packages 
of meat or poultry contain more than 4 oz. This commenter also stated 
that nutrition facts should be provided for the entire package if the 
single serving package exceeds 4 oz. Alternatively, the commenter 
stated that the package should be required to include a disclaimer such 
as: ``Nutrition Facts are based on a 4 oz. serving. This package may 
contain a serving larger than 4 oz.'' Finally, the commenter stated 
that the USDA also needs to update its standard serving size upward to 
reflect actual consumption.
    Response: The number of servings per container is not necessary 
information on the nutrition labels or point-of-purchase materials of 
the major cuts or non-major cuts of single-ingredient, raw products 
because these products are typically random weight products. For multi-
ingredient and heat-processed products that must bear nutrition labels, 
the number of servings is not required on random weight products 
because the weight statement is applied at retail. The weight of such 
products varies from package to package (Sec. Sec.  
317.309(b)(10)(iii), 381.409(b)(10)(iii), 317.2(h)(9) and 
381.121(c)(9)) (74 FR 67747, December 18, 2009).
    The request to change and update USDA's standard serving size is 
outside the scope of this regulation.
    Comment: One individual and a trade association were concerned that 
consumers would not understand that the nutrition information for the 
major cuts will be based on averages of nutrient content data for that 
cut of meat or poultry. The trade association questioned whether there 
should be an explanation on the package regarding the potential 
variation from the average, so consumers will not be misled. The 
individual suggested that there should be a disclaimer on the label 
regarding the potential variation from the average.
    Response: FSIS does not believe an explanation regarding potential 
variability of nutrition information is necessary for single-ingredient 
cuts. All nutrition information is based on average values. Compliance 
requirements in 9 CFR 317.309 and 381.409 allow for a twenty percent 
variation before regulatory action is taken against products.
    Comment: The consumer organization stated that nutrition facts 
should be provided on an ``as packaged'' basis rather than on an ``as 
consumed basis'' because consumers may alter the product in ways that 
could affect the nutrient content before eating.
    Response: As proposed, for the major cuts and non-major cuts of 
single-ingredient, raw products, this final rule will allow nutrition 
information on the label or on point-of-purchase materials to be 
declared on either an ``as packaged'' basis or an ``as consumed'' basis 
because most of these products will not be subject to FSIS nutrient 
analysis. If nutrition information for these products is based on 
USDA's National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, and there are 
no claims on the labeling, FSIS will not conduct a nutrient analysis of 
these raw products and, therefore, will not evaluate ``as packaged'' 
nutrition labeling information for these products. Consistent with the 
provisions in the voluntary nutrition labeling program, when nutrition 
information is presented on an ``as consumed'' basis, retailers or 
manufacturers will be required to specify a method of cooking that will 
not add nutrients from other ingredients such as flour, breading, and 
salt (Sec. Sec.  317.345(d) and 381.445(d)) (74 FR 67747, December 18, 
2009).

Mandatory Nutrition Labeling for Ground or Chopped Products

    Comment: Many individuals, several trade associations, a city 
health department, an industry commenter, and a perishable items 
tracking company supported mandatory on-package nutrition labeling for 
ground or chopped products. Several of those trade associations and the 
city health department specifically supported FSIS's proposal to 
require on-package labeling as opposed to allowing for nutrition 
information at point-of-purchase. One of these trade associations 
stated that on-package labeling is needed because fat content is 
difficult to see in ground products. Two of the trade associations 
noted that plants produce ground meats at specific lean/fat ratios, and 
that the amount of fat is easy to control. One trade association stated 
that plants provide nutritional data to retailers, and that data can 
easily be added to a nutrition facts panel.
    Two trade associations and the city health department believed that 
on-package labeling is the most beneficial for consumers. One of the 
trade associations questioned whether consumers actually use point-of-
purchase materials for ground or

[[Page 82155]]

chopped products and questioned the feasibility of developing point-of-
purchase materials for such products. The city health department argued 
that point-of-purchase materials for ground or chopped products are not 
an effective means of communication because their success depends on 
external factors such as the retailer's placement of the point-of-
purchase materials and layout limitations in small stores. One trade 
association stated that point-of-purchase materials increase redundancy 
and cost because most retailers have nutrition data that can be easily 
distributed among retailers and added to a nutrition facts panel.
    Several trade associations and the food marketing organization 
supported the option to provide nutrition information for ground and 
chopped products at point-of-purchase. One of the trade associations 
believed that point-of-purchase materials allow consumers to make more 
informed choices concerning the purchase of ground or chopped products 
because they are consistently displayed and more efficient than on-
package labeling. This commenter stated that retailers are limited 
because of the small number of meat case staff and the available space 
on ground or chopped product packages. According to the food marketing 
organization, point-of-purchase materials allow consumers to easily 
compare products. The organization also was concerned that consumers 
would not be able to visually inspect the product because of the large 
label required to be able to list the nutrition information, food 
safety information, and cooking instructions. This organization also 
suggested that important food safety information would not be as 
prominent once nutrition information is added to the label.
    One trade association and the food marketing organization asserted 
that allowing the use of point-of-purchase materials will reduce the 
financial burden on retailers and benefit consumers. These commenters 
stated that FSIS underestimated the cost of providing nutrition labels 
on ground and chopped products. According to these commenters, FSIS did 
not account for the number of retailers that would have to buy new 
printer or scale systems at the store level. Additionally, one trade 
association stated that retailers that provide on-site custom services 
would have to increase prices or only sell case-ready meat because of 
the increased costs. The food marketing organization was concerned that 
retailers may be forced to eliminate some of their product choices 
because of the cost of testing and verifying the nutrient values for 
each nutrition label.
    The food marketing organization claimed that effective point-of-
purchase materials for ground and chopped products could be developed. 
One trade association suggested that there could be standardized 
posters for other ground or chopped products, similar to the ones 
currently used for ground beef. An industry commenter noted that 
producers supply retailers with ground products based on established 
finished lean/fat ratios, which do not differ among retailers. The 
industry commenter suggested that nutrition information for these lean/
fat ratios could be used on point-of-purchase materials, and consumers 
could match the lean/fat ratio on their ground product with the 
nutrition information for that lean/fat ratio on the point-of-purchase 
materials. The commenter also stated that if a retailer uses a 
different lean/fat ratio than is provided on the point-of-purchase 
materials, it would have to put the nutrition information on the 
individual package.
    A trade association, an industry commenter, and the food marketing 
organization stated that FSIS should maintain its existing voluntary 
program for nutrition labeling of ground or chopped products. The food 
marketing organization believed that there was no need to require 
mandatory on-package labeling for ground and chopped products.
    Response: FSIS will require on-package nutrition information for 
these products rather than allowing nutrition information to be 
provided at their point-of-purchase for the reasons stated above. 
Because there are numerous formulations of ground or chopped products, 
as a practical matter, it would be difficult for producers or retailers 
to develop point-of-purchase materials that would address all the 
different formulations that exist for these products. Furthermore, it 
would be difficult for consumers to find the correct information for a 
specific ground or chopped product on point-of-purchase materials that 
include information concerning numerous formulations of these products 
(66 FR 4977, January 18, 2001). If a statement of the fat percentage 
and lean percentage is not included on a package of ground product, 
consumers would not know which nutrient data concerning ground product 
on point-of-purchase materials would apply to that particular ground 
product. Establishments and retailers are not required to provide such 
a statement and will not be required to provide such a statement when 
this rule becomes effective (74 FR 67750, December 18, 2009).
    Information concerning the nutritional qualities of ground or 
chopped meat and poultry products is particularly important because 
these products, especially ground beef, are widely consumed. Based on a 
Beef Sales Survey at retail markets in the United States over 52 weeks 
ending March 23, 2010, ground beef sales were about $5.6 billion for 
about 2.1 billion pounds, excluding the ``other'' category of ground 
beef for chili, meatloaf, meat balls, and trim (source: FreshLook 
Marketing, available at https://beefretail.org/GroundBeefCategoryBreakdown.aspx). According to the summary of results 
on the National Cattleman's Beef Association Web site, ground beef 
accounts for about 66 percent of all fresh beef eatings (servings) in-
home (source: NPD National Eating Trends (NET) Research, Two Years 
Rolling August 2009, available at https://beefretail.org/individualpenetrationbybeefcut.aspx). Additional information about the 
nutrient values of ground or chopped meat and poultry products will 
enable consumers to make informed decisions about including these 
products in their diets and will, therefore, help consumers to 
construct healthy diets (74 FR 67750, December 18, 2009).
    Thus, this final rule will require nutrition labels on all ground 
or chopped meat and poultry products, with or without added seasonings, 
unless an exemption applies. These products are similar to multi-
ingredient products in the mandatory nutrition labeling program (which 
requires nutrition information to be on the label of individual 
packages). Just as producers can control the incoming ingredients and 
levels of such ingredients in multi-ingredient products, producers can 
precisely control the fat content of ground or chopped products to 
obtain the desired product. In addition, just as consumers cannot often 
see all the ingredients in multi-ingredient products, consumers cannot 
easily see the fat in ground or chopped products. The fat is uniformly 
distributed throughout the product and is not clearly distinguishable 
on the surface of the product. Therefore, consumers cannot estimate the 
fat levels in these products and cannot compare the fat levels in these 
products to those in other products. Thus, it is difficult for 
consumers to have a reasonable understanding of the nutritional quality 
of these products (74 FR 67750, December 18, 2009).
    Many grocers and manufacturers provide nutrition facts panels on 
ground

[[Page 82156]]

beef products. Therefore, FSIS questions why certain commenters stated 
that there is not sufficient room on the label of these products for 
nutrition information (74 FR 67750, December 18, 2009). FSIS disagrees 
with the comment that consumers will not be able to visually inspect 
the product because of the large label required to list the nutrition 
information, food safety information, and cooking instructions. As with 
the Safe Handling Instructions (SHI) and cooking instructions, 
nutrition labeling information can appear off the principal display 
panel (PDP). Many retailers place SHI on the bottom or side panels of 
packages to allow consumers to visually inspect the largest amount of 
product. There should be sufficient space available on these panels for 
nutrition facts information to appear off the PDP.
    Additionally, the nutrition labeling requirements for ground or 
chopped products should not be particularly difficult for small 
operations, since ground or chopped product produced by retail 
establishments and Federal establishments that meet specific small 
business criteria will be exempt from nutrition labeling requirements 
(Sec. Sec.  317.400(a)(1) and 381.500(a)(1)) (74 FR 67750, December 18, 
2009).
    Moreover, an exemption from the nutrition labeling requirements, 
which is provided in this final rule, should alleviate any concerns 
that nutrition labeling requirements will discourage retailers from 
grinding product based on customers' requests. This final rule provides 
an exemption from nutrition labeling requirements for ground or chopped 
products that are ground or chopped at an individual customer's request 
and that are prepared and served or sold at retail, provided that the 
labels or labeling of these products bear no nutrition claims or 
nutrition information (74 FR 67750, December 18, 2009).
    If a customer selects an intact product for purchase and requests 
that the product be ground at the retail facility, FSIS has determined 
that nutrition information on the package of the ground product would 
not be necessary. In this instance, the customer has made the decision 
to purchase the product before it was ground. The customer is not 
selecting the product from among various, formulated, ground or chopped 
product, and thus the reasons for requiring a nutrition label on such a 
product would not be applicable here (74 FR 67750, December 18, 2009). 
Moreover, the product selected may already be the subject of nutrition 
labeling as a raw, single ingredient product.
    Many of the suppliers of coarse ground products that are then 
ground and packaged at retail have supplied, or can supply, the 
nutrition facts panels for the retailers. Most retailers offer a 
limited selection of ground beef products. Thus, dozens of different 
nutrition labels for each retailer will not be necessary. In addition, 
information for ground beef and other products is avail