Risk-Based Sampling of Beef Manufacturing Trimmings for Escherichia coli (E. coli) O157:H7, 23761-23765 [2015-09957]
Download as PDF
23761
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 80, No. 82
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS–2012–0020]
Risk-Based Sampling of Beef
Manufacturing Trimmings for
Escherichia coli (E. coli) O157:H7
Food Safety and Inspection
Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice: Response to comments.
AGENCY:
The Food Safety and
Inspection Service (FSIS) is responding
to comments on the September 19, 2012,
Federal Register notice, ‘‘Risk-Based
Sampling of Beef Manufacturing
Trimmings for Escherichia coli O157:H7
and Plans for Beef Baseline’’ and
providing updates on how it is
scheduling sampling for beef
manufacturing trimmings. Additionally,
the Agency is announcing that it is
changing its existing algorithms for
sampling of bench trim and raw ground
beef components other than trim to
make them more risk-based. Finally, the
Agency is making available the
following report: ‘‘Effective
Implementation of Beef Manufacturing
Trimmings Sampling Redesign (MT60).’’
DATES: On July 28, 2015, FSIS will
implement design changes in bench
trim and other ground beef components
besides trimmings.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Engeljohn, Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy and
Program Development, Food Safety and
Inspection Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, (202) 205–0495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Background
On September 19, 2012, FSIS
published a Federal Register notice (77
FR 58091) announcing its intention to
redesign its E. coli O157:H7 verification
testing program for trimmings to make
the program more risk-based and to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Apr 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
enable the Agency to calculate on-going
statistical prevalence estimates for E.
coli O157:H7 in raw trimmings (https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/
15e75329-978f-43f0-b8fe-101845d898f0/
Redesign_Beef_Trim_Sampling_
Methodology.pdf?MOD=AJPERES). FSIS
also announced additional changes to
the trimmings sampling program to
increase collection rates and the
likelihood of finding positive E. coli
O157:H7 sample results. FSIS discussed
its plans to conduct a beef carcass
baseline. Finally, FSIS explained it was
planning to conduct a survey, using its
employees that are assigned to beef
slaughter and processing
establishments, to gather information on
establishment controls for Shiga toxinproducing Escherichia coli (STECs) in
beef. Results of the survey are available
at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/
connect/fe95af5f-3271-41af-b92b68490fa87cab/beef-operationssummary-results.pdf?MOD=AJPERES,
which FSIS previously announced in
the Federal Register notice announcing
the availability of its analysis of the
costs and benefits associated with
FSIS’s non-O157 STEC testing on
November 19, 2014 (79 FR 68843) at
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/
connect/ce564342-fa9c-44f4-a98aa4a6b6797646/2010-0023.pdf?MOD=
AJPERES.
In June 2012, FSIS implemented the
risk-based design and other changes
discussed in the 2012 Federal Register
notice. FSIS conducted analyses of the
trimmings sampling program twelve
months after implementation of the new
risk-based design. Analyses show that
the new design was successful at
increasing the number of E. coli
O157:H7 positives detected and also
significantly increased the collection
rate. In the first twelve months of
implementation, FSIS analysis of
routine sampling of trimmings detected
1.8 times more E. coli O157:H7 positives
than FSIS had previously detected in
this product. In the Federal Register
notice FSIS estimated that the
probability of obtaining E. coli O157:H7
results in trimmings during FSIS
verification testing would increase by a
factor of about 2.5. Possibilities for why
FSIS did not detect an approximate 2.5
times as many E. coli O157:H7 positives
are numerous and include changes to
the data systems and the frame available
during analysis and modeling, changes
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to the laboratory tests implemented at
about the same time as the new
statistical design, and positives being
collected under follow-up sampling
rather than routine sampling. The new
statistical design and overscheduling to
adjust for nonresponse solved the
historically low response rates
associated with trimmings. The report is
posted at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/
wcm/connect/31575c98-2c22-4e9ca19d-b3511d106082/Analysis-BeefTrim-Redesign.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
Therefore, FSIS has concluded that its
change in sampling was effective.
However, FSIS has not been able to
estimate STEC prevalence in trimmings
because it has not obtained a sufficient
number of sample results. To address
this issue, FSIS has increased the
number of trim samples scheduled to be
collected by inspectors for each month
to that of the number of samples it had
previously scheduled to be collected
during months in the high prevalence
season, effective November 2014. FSIS
made this change to obtain the number
of samples needed to allow on-going
prevalence determinations to be made
from the data collected.
FSIS started conducting the Beef-Veal
carcass baseline on August 1, 2014, and
will complete the survey July 31, 2015.
As stated in the previous Federal
Register notice discussed above, FSIS
plans to use the results of the Beef-Veal
carcass baseline and the results of the
Pathogen Controls in Beef Operations
survey data to conduct risk analyses to
determine the relative impact of various
establishment factors on the probability
of E. coli O157:H7 contamination and
subsequent illnesses, hospitalizations,
and deaths. FSIS will post the survey
results. In addition, now that FSIS also
is analyzing beef samples for both STEC
and Salmonella (79 FR 32436), FSIS is
able to make statistically-based
determinations about the on-going
prevalence of these pathogens in beef
samples at least on an annual basis.
FSIS conducted a statistical analysis
of the results from its sampling of bench
trim program and its sampling of other
ground beef components besides
trimmings to identify factors that would
lead to a higher probability of detecting
E. coli O157:H7. FSIS did not find a
higher probability of finding E. coli
O157:H7 in particular establishments
when it looked at the factors considered
for these products. Because
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
23762
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Notices
establishments make different volumes
of product, FSIS is changing its existing
sampling algorithms for bench trim and
other ground beef components besides
trim to sample establishments
proportional to production volume.
Additionally, FSIS intends to
overschedule to adjust for nonresponse
under the redesigned programs, similar
to how FSIS implemented changes to
the trimmings program.
Comments and Responses
FSIS received comments from seven
industry and consumer organizations in
response to the September 2012 notice.
Both industry and consumer
organizations supported the Agency’s
use of statistically significant data to
make scientifically supported decisions
regarding its sampling programs.
Following is a discussion of these
comments and FSIS’s responses.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Sampling Programs
Comment: Two consumer
organizations requested that more
funding be provided to maintain FSIS’s
sampling in the low prevalence season
of the year in addition to maintaining
the increased sampling during the high
prevalence season.
Response: As is stated above, the
Agency has increased the number of
trim samples. FSIS is now maintaining
the high prevalence level of sampling
throughout the entire year.
Comment: One consumer group
questioned the statistical validity of
using an N–60 collection method for
trimmings that the Agency has reported
on its Web site and cited the findings of
the 2012 OIG audit report.
Response: FSIS’s sampling and testing
for E. coli O157:H7 is just one of the
activities that FSIS conducts to verify
that an establishment’s food safety
systems effectively address STEC. FSIS
sampling of beef trim works along with
other inspection and verification
activities, including FSIS sampling of
ground beef and other ground beef
components and its review of
establishment testing results, to detect
and reduce E. coli O157:H7 in beef
products.
As FSIS explained in response to the
Office of the Inspector General’s report
on the Agency’s sampling protocol for
testing beef trim for E. coli O157:H7,1
FSIS does not view a single N–60
sampling result apart from other
verification activities. Note that along
with sampling and carcass-by-carcass
inspection, FSIS inspection personnel
1 OIG Audit Report 24601–9–KC ‘‘FSIS Sampling
Protocol for Testing Beef Trim for E. coli O157:H7’’
p. 31
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Apr 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
performed more than 839,000
inspection procedures in CY-2014 at
roughly 635 slaughter establishments
that would also be subject to trim
sampling. These inspection procedures,
performed daily at slaughter
establishments, play an important role
in ensuring that establishments are
producing safe and wholesome
products.
While a single N–60 sample result
may not indicate definitively the
success or failure of an establishment’s
process controls for beef trim, it can be
an important part of the establishment’s
verification program, especially if the
establishment or FSIS takes multiple N–
60 samples over time.
FSIS’ mission is not to screen the food
supply through testing but to ensure the
production of safe and wholesome food
through inspection.
Comment: One industry organization
suggested that the Agency consider
market class of animal, size of the
establishment, and the historical rate of
E. coli O157:H7 detection at the
establishment in Agency testing when
making risk-based sampling program
decisions.
Response: When considering the
redesign of its trimmings sampling
program, the Agency did consider
establishment size in average pounds
produced per day and historical positive
sampling results over time. The Agency
chose to consider the volume of product
that an establishment produced to focus
the Agency’s resources on actual
product produced.
As explained in the 2012 Federal
Register notice (77 FR 58091), FSIS
redesigned the sampling algorithm to
collect more samples from
establishments in establishment size
categories with the highest probability
of producing trimmings contaminated
with E. coli O157:H7. As a result, the
Agency is focusing on small
establishments that produce between
1001 and 50,000 pounds per day.
At this time, FSIS does not have the
means to collect different types of
market class information other than to
differentiate between beef and veal.
FSIS will continue to report veal results
separately from other beef results https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/
topics/data-collection-and-reports/
microbiology/ec/positive-resultscurrent-cy/positive-results-current-cy. In
addition, FSIS will consider assessing
the differences between veal and beef
results and issuing necessary guidance
and instructions to the field based on
these results when appropriate. For
example, based on its analysis of results,
FSIS issued instructions, in 2011–2012,
for inspectors to verify that
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
establishments applied antimicrobial
interventions to veal carcasses correctly,
and that they maintained procedures to
minimize cross-contamination among
veal carcasses.
Comment: One industry organization
encouraged FSIS to conduct risk-based
sampling for ground beef as well.
Response: An FSIS risk assessment,
presented in a public meeting on
October 28, 1998, and updated
thereafter, found that volume of
production is a better determinant of
risk for E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef
than size of the establishment.
Beginning on January 1, 2008, FSIS
initiated an enhanced risk-based
sampling and testing program for E. coli
O157:H7 in raw ground beef. The riskbased sampling program took into
account establishment volume, and
whether the establishment had any FSIS
or Agriculture Marketing Service
positive results within the past 120
days. The current sampling is
proportional to ground beef production
volume. Consequently, the program
supports on-going prevalence estimates
from the data.
Comment: One industry organization
commented that the Agency concluded
that the rate of sanitary dressing
procedure noncompliance reports could
not be used to identify establishments
that have a higher probability of E. coli
O157:H7 positive tests result. The
industry organization requested that
FSIS determine whether the revised
cattle sanitary dressing directive
improved sanitary dressing procedures,
and whether there is a correlation
between sanitary dressing procedures
and positive E. coli O157:H7 test results.
The commenter stated that
establishment size and animal market
class should also be addressed in this
review of sanitary dressing procedures.
Response: When FSIS did the analysis
for the statistical redesign, it found that
there is no predictive relationship
between higher sanitary dressing
noncompliances and the probability of
E. coli O157:H7 positive sample results.
Under the Public Health Inspection
System (PHIS), the Agency tracks the
inspection activities inspection
personnel use to verify whether an
establishment’s food safety system
meets regulatory requirements. The
inspection activities tracked include the
procedures used to verify whether
establishments maintain effective
sanitary dressing procedures. The
Agency analyzes the PHIS data on
inspection activities on a biannual basis.
FSIS reviewed the data for the
relevant inspection tasks performed and
FSIS positive results at establishments
sampled under the trimmings (MT50)
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Notices
sampling program. FSIS did not find a
correlation between sanitary dressing or
sanitation NRs and MT50 percent
positive in trimmings.
Comment: One consumer organization
recommended that FSIS take additional
steps to improve the representativeness
of the samples collected by eliminating
FSIS’s procedure of pre-notification of
testing. The commenter stated that this
notification allows establishments to
adjust their operations before the
sample is taken. The consumer group
also recognized that FSIS mailed test
kits to establishments before field
personnel collected samples for chain of
evidence reasons. The commenter stated
that the arrival of a sample box would
signal that a test is imminent and serves
as a pre-notification. The consumer
organization suggested that sample
boxes be kept stocked by in-plant
personnel.
Response: FSIS requires
establishments to hold product tested
for an adulterant such as E. coli
O157:H7 pending the results of FSIS
testing. Establishment management
needs sufficient pre-notification of
sampling in order to hold production
lots in a manner such that they are
microbiologically independent.
Otherwise, FSIS would be collecting
samples from production lots that may
already be distributed in commerce,
resulting in preventable product recalls.
FSIS has issued instructions to field
personnel to notify establishment that
FSIS will be collecting a sample, but
that the notification should only
provide enough time for the
establishment to be able to hold all
affected product.
The Agency has a finite number of
resources which makes stocking
multiple sample boxes at establishments
cost prohibitive. Additionally, some
USDA offices in establishments are
small and do not allow for storage of
multiple sample boxes. If
establishments change their food safety
system on the days that FSIS collects
samples in a manner to influence the
sample result, FSIS has instructed
inspection program personnel to notify
their supervisory chain so that a
determination can be made as to how to
address this concern. In such
circumstances, FSIS may decide to
conduct additional sampling at the
establishment or to conduct a Food
Safety Assessment (which includes indepth verification that the establishment
meets regulatory requirements related to
food safety).
Comment: One consumer organization
questioned whether the results for
FSIS’s sampling programs can be used
to develop reliable prevalence estimates.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Apr 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
Response: As noted above, FSIS has
increased the number of trimming
samples collected to achieve the number
of samples needed to allow STEC ongoing prevalence determinations to be
made from the data collected. FSIS will
make E. coli O157:H7 prevalence
estimates for ground beef available in
the near future. FSIS will make STEC
prevalence (E. coli O157:H7 and other
STEC) estimates for trim available in the
first quarter of FY 2016.
Industry Survey
Comment: One industry organization
had several suggestions regarding the
beef survey that FSIS announced in the
2012 Federal Register notice (77 FR
58091). The commenter stated that the
survey should: (1) have clear goals and
deliverables, (2) not put an economic
burden on industry, (3) have questions
based on data that pertain to the
problem of E. coli O157:H7
contamination, (4) collect data on the
volume of source material produced by
establishments that test for E. coli
O157:H7, and (5) present results as
volume-based to address the results
from the survey.
Response: Through the survey
described above, inspectors provided
information on processing practices that
establishments employ to reduce the
likelihood of contamination of intact
and non-intact raw beef products with
STEC. FSIS did have clear goals when
it put forth the survey. This survey was
designed to gather information not
collected in the Public Health
Information System. FSIS is using the
survey results to update the economic
analysis to support the full
implementation of its non-O157 STEC
policy. Data from the 2013 Pathogen
Controls in Beef Operations Survey
(conducted in May–July 2013) allowed
FSIS to estimate the number of nonO157 STEC tests conducted by the
industry for a 12-month period. FSIS is
also analyzing the survey results to
develop targeted approaches for its riskbased verification testing program and
to assist it in prioritizing the scheduling
of Food Safety Assessments (FSA) by
Enforcement, Investigations, and
Analysis Officers (EIAO). FSIS did not
collect production volume information
in the survey and is not presenting the
results as volume based. Establishment
profiles contain production volume
information in the Public Health
Information System.
FSIS has used the numbers obtained
in the survey to estimate sampling
numbers for industry testing as part of
the economic analysis for STEC
sampling in all of the Agency’s raw beef
microbiological sampling programs. The
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23763
economic analysis is available at
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/
connect/52afacbc-4780-4fba-a7abcde987ea1d45/STEC-cost-benefitanalysis.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
Additionally, FSIS plans to conduct risk
analyses, as appropriate, to determine
the relative impact of various
establishment factors on the probability
of E. coli O157:H7 contamination and
subsequent illnesses, hospitalizations,
and deaths. FSIS intends to use the data
generated by the actions listed above to
assess and evaluate its trimmings
sampling program and to make riskbased changes as appropriate.
FSIS implemented the survey in such
a way as to not cause an undue
economic burden on industry.
Comment: One consumer group
commented that FSIS should make
plans to routinely repeat the survey to
inform sampling decisions made by the
Agency.
Response: Conducting the survey is
very time intensive for field personnel.
FSIS must weigh the time spent
completing a survey against the time
spent conducting regular inspection
duties. FSIS will conduct future surveys
as necessary.
Carcass Baseline
Comment: An industry organization
commented that the beef carcass
baseline should include the whole beef
trimmings production process, and that
it should also include veal.
Response: The Beef-Veal carcass
baseline began August 1, 2014. FSIS is
including steers, heifers, cows, bulls,
stag, dairy cows, and veal carcasses in
the Beef-Veal carcass baseline. FSIS is
collecting samples at two points in the
process, immediately after hide removal
(pre-evisceration) and at pre-chill (after
all antimicrobial interventions).
Comment: An industry organization
suggested that because FSIS is only
testing for pathogenic organisms that are
adulterants, the Agency should consider
alternative baseline testing locations
within the production supply chain.
The commenter suggested that FSIS
collect a post-hide removal sample to
address the hide removal process, where
cross-contamination is more likely to
occur; a second sample site after
antimicrobial interventions; and trim
testing for E. coli O157:H7 for products
that will be used in ground beef or veal
production.
Response: The Agency is obtaining
samples at two points in the slaughter
process for the baseline study:
immediately after hide removal but
before evisceration, and at pre-chill
before the carcasses enter the chillers
and after all antimicrobial applications.
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
23764
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Notices
This study addresses three distinct
objectives: to estimate the prevalence
and quantitative levels of selected
foodborne microorganisms, to obtain
data for use in the development of
Agency programs, and to obtain data for
informing industry guidance related to
process control. The sample design and
the resulting sample size are limited for
this survey by practical constraints such
as finite personnel and financial
resources, and the problems with
implementing scientific studies in realworld production settings. Considering
these constraints, FSIS expects that the
Beef-Veal carcass baseline study will
achieve the stated objectives because
FSIS will collect and analyze as many
samples as possible to ensure an
appropriate level of statistical
confidence.
With the two points that the Agency
chose to use for sampling for the
baseline carcass study, FSIS requires the
establishment to hold or control the
movement of sampled carcasses at prechill until the establishment is notified
of STEC results. FSIS verifies that the
establishment does not treat the
sampled carcasses any differently than
any of the other carcasses it is
processing. In the event that a sampled
carcass is treated differently, FSIS will
randomly select another carcass during
the same processing time and collect
samples from that carcass.
The results from samples collected
during the baseline carcass study
become available after all analyses for
STEC and Salmonella are complete.
Baseline sample results usually are
reported in two to six days but may take
longer depending on individual
circumstances. Post-hide/preevisceration and pre-chill sample results
are reported through Laboratory
Information Management System (LIMS)
Direct.
FSIS is not issuing noncompliance
records (NRs) for STEC positive results
during the baseline. In response to a
positive result from the pre-chill sample
only, field personnel perform a directed
Slaughter HACCP Verification task to
verify that the establishment has
adequate slaughter controls (including
antimicrobial intervention
implementation) for the specific
production lot represented by the
positive STEC carcass result. Field
personnel also verify that the
establishment implements corrective
actions that meet the applicable
requirements in 9 CFR 417.3. Field
personnel do not verify corrective
actions in response to a positive STEC
result from the post-hide/preevisceration sample. Rather, FSIS
verifies that establishments ensure that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Apr 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
carcasses found positive for STECs
during the pre-chill sampling and
testing are not processed into raw nonintact product. The presence of STEC on
a pre-chill carcass intended for use as
raw non-intact product would
adulterate the carcass. The presence of
STEC on a carcass intended for use as
raw intact product would not adulterate
the carcass if the entire carcass is going
for intact product. In the event that a
carcass tests positive for STEC,
establishments may take action to
ensure that all products from the carcass
go for cooking, or they may take action
to recondition the carcass and ensure
that the carcass goes for intact use only.
In the event of a STEC positive on a
post-hide removal/pre-evisceration
sample without a corresponding prechill sample on a carcass intended for
raw non-intact use, the carcass would
not be considered adulterated. The
carcass presumably will undergo further
interventions after post-hide removal/
pre-evisceration. In the event of a STEC
positive from a pre-chill test result on a
carcass intended for raw non-intact use,
the carcass is considered adulterated.
The establishment is required to take
corrective action.
Comment: One industry organization
recommended that FSIS conduct a
‘‘shakedown’’ period at establishments
representative of the industry in order to
assess the logistics of sampling. The
commenter stated that this shakedown
should be done to provide a safe
sampling environment for inspection
personnel and to ensure that sampling
will not interfere with the routine
slaughter process.
Response: FSIS agrees with the
comment. The Agency did conduct a
shakedown training period before the
actual baseline and confirmed that
baseline sampling will not interfere
with the routine slaughter process.
Comment: One industry organization
commented that while the Agency is
developing the baseline, the timeframe
for the publication of study results
should be outlined.
Response: FSIS posted the study
design and sampling plan on the FSIS
Web site at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
wps/wcm/connect/5057f4ef-f924-422cbafe-771b1ead78e4/Beef-Veal-CarcassBaseline-Study-Design.pdf?MOD=
AJPERES. FSIS will publish a final
report with the national prevalence
calculations after the completion of the
survey.
Comment: One industry organization
commented that sampling immediately
after de-hiding may not provide the
most meaningful information as to the
presence of the various organisms in the
slaughter process. The commenter
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
stated that although the sample may be
taken before any on-line interventions,
the condition of the carcass, in terms of
potential microbial load, is not
comparable across establishments. The
commenter explained that some
establishments have interventions and
other practices that occur before dehiding, such as bacteriophage sprays or
hide washes. Likewise, the commenter
stated that the effectiveness of hide
removal in minimizing contamination of
the carcass varies among
establishments. If FSIS is seeking to use
this baseline to assist establishments in
assessing ‘‘incoming’’ contamination
levels before on-line interventions, the
commenter stated that not taking into
account the steps that come before this
sampling point at each establishment
would likely limit the usability of the
results.
Response: FSIS agrees that the
incoming microbial load may vary from
establishment to establishment
depending on whether establishments
use bacteriophage sprays or hide
washes, and that the effectiveness of
establishments in preventing crosscontamination in hide removal may also
vary. Nevertheless, FSIS expects that the
Beef-Veal carcass baseline study will
achieve the stated objectives by
collecting and analyzing as many
samples as possible to ensure an
appropriate level of statistical
confidence.
Comment: Two commenters stated
that carcass sampling immediately after
de-hiding could pose a safety risk to
inspection program personnel, as well
as to establishment employees.
According to the commenters, this
location is in the middle of the harvest
line, so taking a sample at this juncture
will require inspection program
personnel to enter an area of the process
where hazards, such as dangerous
equipment, are present and space is
limited. Taking samples at this point
could, in turn, also put establishment
employees at risk.
Response: FSIS discussed with
establishment management before
collecting samples for the shakedown
the following: (1) Where supervisory
personnel could safely collect post-hide
removal/pre-evisceration and pre-chill
samples, (2) establishment safety
requirements and protocols that
supervisory field personnel must follow
during sample collection, and (3) the
potential need for line stoppages for
supervisory field personnel to safely
and properly collect the samples. FSIS
also issued instructions to inspection
program personnel for conducting
sampling from a safe vantage point,
especially when collecting the posterior
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Notices
samples from the post-hide/preevisceration and pre-chill locations;
following the same safety procedures
provided for employees at that
establishment which may require the
use of a harness; slowing or stopping
production lines; and acquiring needed
tools to safely collect samples.
Information on the Beef-Veal carcass
baseline can be found at the following
link https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/
connect/5d3552e7-9b81-4b2c-aa20cfaeef77f251/36-14.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
Comment: One industry organization
asked what type of carcass sampling the
Agency will use for the carcass baseline
study.
Response: As was done during the
shakedown, FSIS is obtaining samples
following the procedures described in
the United States Department of
Agriculture Agricultural Research
Service Meat Animal Research Center
Carcass Sampling Protocol 2 available at
the following link: https://www.ars.usda.
gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/54380530/
protocols/USMARC%20Carcass%20
Sampling%20Protocol.pdf.
Comment: One consumer organization
stated that FSIS should conduct a
baseline study to estimate the
prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in beef
manufacturing trimmings and ground
beef in order to improve the confidence
in FSIS’s efforts to detect contaminated
product and effectively verify process
controls.
Response: FSIS decided to focus on
sampling carcasses for this baseline and
not trimmings and ground beef because
of resource limitations. The Beef–Veal
carcass baseline survey will provide
FSIS the necessary data on percent
positives and quantitative levels of
select foodborne bacterial pathogens
(e.g., Salmonella, STEC, and certain
indicator organisms). FSIS will use the
data from the Beef–Veal carcass baseline
survey to estimate the national
prevalence of select microorganisms in
carcasses, not trimmings and ground
beef; to develop industry performance
guidelines; to assess process control
across the industry; and to inform
additional policy considerations.
Results of this study will be used to
estimate volume-weighted prevalence
and bacterial loads immediately after
hide removal and at pre-chill. Moreover,
FSIS has made changes to both the
trimmings and ground beef verification
testing programs to be able to obtain ongoing prevalence of both E. coli
O157:H7 and Salmonella (79 FR 32437).
2 U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (MARC)
Carcass Sampling Protocol.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Apr 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
Other Topics
The following comment topics that
were received are outside the scope of
this notice: disappearing schedule dates
from PHIS, returned FedEx sample
boxes, FSIS training materials, and
purge studies.
USDA Non-Discrimination Statement
No agency, officer, or employee of the
USDA shall, on the grounds of race,
color, national origin, religion, sex,
gender identity, sexual orientation,
disability, age, marital status, family/
parental status, income derived from a
public assistance program, or political
beliefs, exclude from participation in,
deny the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination any person in the United
States under any program or activity
conducted by the USDA.
How To File a Complaint of
Discrimination
To file a complaint of discrimination,
complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, which
may be accessed online at https://www.
ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/
2012/Complain_combined_6_8_12.pdf,
or write a letter signed by you or your
authorized representative.
Send your completed complaint form
or letter to USDA by mail, fax, or email:
Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–9410, Fax: (202)
690–7442, Email: program.intake@
usda.gov.
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication
(Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.),
should contact USDA’s TARGET Center
at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD).
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of
rulemaking and policy development is
important. Consequently, FSIS will
announce this Federal Register
publication on-line through the FSIS
Web page located at: https://www.fsis.
usda.gov/federal-register.
FSIS also will make copies of this
publication available through the FSIS
Constituent Update, which is used to
provide information regarding FSIS
policies, procedures, regulations,
Federal Register notices, FSIS public
meetings, and other types of information
that could affect or would be of interest
to our constituents and stakeholders.
The Update is available on the FSIS
Web page. Through the Web page, FSIS
is able to provide information to a much
broader, more diverse audience. In
addition, FSIS offers an email
subscription service which provides
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23765
automatic and customized access to
selected food safety news and
information. This service is available at:
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe.
Options range from recalls to export
information, regulations, directives, and
notices. Customers can add or delete
subscriptions themselves, and have the
option to password protect their
accounts.
Done, at Washington, DC.
Dated: April 23, 2015.
Alfred V. Almanza,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015–09957 Filed 4–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request—Special Milk
Program for Children
Food and Nutrition Service
(FNS), USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice invites the general public and
other public agencies to comment on
this information collection. This
collection is a revision of a currently
approved collection which FNS
employs to determine public
participation in Special Milk Program
for Children.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 29, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions that
were used; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Comments may be sent to: Lynn
Rodgers-Kuperman, Branch Chief,
Program Monitoring, Child Nutrition
Programs, Food and Nutrition Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101
Park Center Drive, Room 636,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 82 (Wednesday, April 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23761-23765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09957]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 /
Notices
[[Page 23761]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS-2012-0020]
Risk-Based Sampling of Beef Manufacturing Trimmings for
Escherichia coli (E. coli) O157:H7
AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice: Response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is responding to
comments on the September 19, 2012, Federal Register notice, ``Risk-
Based Sampling of Beef Manufacturing Trimmings for Escherichia coli
O157:H7 and Plans for Beef Baseline'' and providing updates on how it
is scheduling sampling for beef manufacturing trimmings. Additionally,
the Agency is announcing that it is changing its existing algorithms
for sampling of bench trim and raw ground beef components other than
trim to make them more risk-based. Finally, the Agency is making
available the following report: ``Effective Implementation of Beef
Manufacturing Trimmings Sampling Redesign (MT60).''
DATES: On July 28, 2015, FSIS will implement design changes in bench
trim and other ground beef components besides trimmings.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Engeljohn, Assistant
Administrator, Office of Policy and Program Development, Food Safety
and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, (202) 205-0495.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 19, 2012, FSIS published a Federal Register notice (77
FR 58091) announcing its intention to redesign its E. coli O157:H7
verification testing program for trimmings to make the program more
risk-based and to enable the Agency to calculate on-going statistical
prevalence estimates for E. coli O157:H7 in raw trimmings (https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/15e75329-978f-43f0-b8fe-101845d898f0/Redesign_Beef_Trim_Sampling_Methodology.pdf?MOD=AJPERES). FSIS also
announced additional changes to the trimmings sampling program to
increase collection rates and the likelihood of finding positive E.
coli O157:H7 sample results. FSIS discussed its plans to conduct a beef
carcass baseline. Finally, FSIS explained it was planning to conduct a
survey, using its employees that are assigned to beef slaughter and
processing establishments, to gather information on establishment
controls for Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STECs) in beef.
Results of the survey are available at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/fe95af5f-3271-41af-b92b-68490fa87cab/beef-operations-summary-results.pdf?MOD=AJPERES, which FSIS previously announced in the
Federal Register notice announcing the availability of its analysis of
the costs and benefits associated with FSIS's non-O157 STEC testing on
November 19, 2014 (79 FR 68843) at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/ce564342-fa9c-44f4-a98a-a4a6b6797646/2010-0023.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
In June 2012, FSIS implemented the risk-based design and other
changes discussed in the 2012 Federal Register notice. FSIS conducted
analyses of the trimmings sampling program twelve months after
implementation of the new risk-based design. Analyses show that the new
design was successful at increasing the number of E. coli O157:H7
positives detected and also significantly increased the collection
rate. In the first twelve months of implementation, FSIS analysis of
routine sampling of trimmings detected 1.8 times more E. coli O157:H7
positives than FSIS had previously detected in this product. In the
Federal Register notice FSIS estimated that the probability of
obtaining E. coli O157:H7 results in trimmings during FSIS verification
testing would increase by a factor of about 2.5. Possibilities for why
FSIS did not detect an approximate 2.5 times as many E. coli O157:H7
positives are numerous and include changes to the data systems and the
frame available during analysis and modeling, changes to the laboratory
tests implemented at about the same time as the new statistical design,
and positives being collected under follow-up sampling rather than
routine sampling. The new statistical design and overscheduling to
adjust for nonresponse solved the historically low response rates
associated with trimmings. The report is posted at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/31575c98-2c22-4e9c-a19d-b3511d106082/Analysis-Beef-Trim-Redesign.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
Therefore, FSIS has concluded that its change in sampling was
effective. However, FSIS has not been able to estimate STEC prevalence
in trimmings because it has not obtained a sufficient number of sample
results. To address this issue, FSIS has increased the number of trim
samples scheduled to be collected by inspectors for each month to that
of the number of samples it had previously scheduled to be collected
during months in the high prevalence season, effective November 2014.
FSIS made this change to obtain the number of samples needed to allow
on-going prevalence determinations to be made from the data collected.
FSIS started conducting the Beef-Veal carcass baseline on August 1,
2014, and will complete the survey July 31, 2015. As stated in the
previous Federal Register notice discussed above, FSIS plans to use the
results of the Beef-Veal carcass baseline and the results of the
Pathogen Controls in Beef Operations survey data to conduct risk
analyses to determine the relative impact of various establishment
factors on the probability of E. coli O157:H7 contamination and
subsequent illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths. FSIS will post the
survey results. In addition, now that FSIS also is analyzing beef
samples for both STEC and Salmonella (79 FR 32436), FSIS is able to
make statistically-based determinations about the on-going prevalence
of these pathogens in beef samples at least on an annual basis.
FSIS conducted a statistical analysis of the results from its
sampling of bench trim program and its sampling of other ground beef
components besides trimmings to identify factors that would lead to a
higher probability of detecting E. coli O157:H7. FSIS did not find a
higher probability of finding E. coli O157:H7 in particular
establishments when it looked at the factors considered for these
products. Because
[[Page 23762]]
establishments make different volumes of product, FSIS is changing its
existing sampling algorithms for bench trim and other ground beef
components besides trim to sample establishments proportional to
production volume. Additionally, FSIS intends to overschedule to adjust
for nonresponse under the redesigned programs, similar to how FSIS
implemented changes to the trimmings program.
Comments and Responses
FSIS received comments from seven industry and consumer
organizations in response to the September 2012 notice. Both industry
and consumer organizations supported the Agency's use of statistically
significant data to make scientifically supported decisions regarding
its sampling programs. Following is a discussion of these comments and
FSIS's responses.
Sampling Programs
Comment: Two consumer organizations requested that more funding be
provided to maintain FSIS's sampling in the low prevalence season of
the year in addition to maintaining the increased sampling during the
high prevalence season.
Response: As is stated above, the Agency has increased the number
of trim samples. FSIS is now maintaining the high prevalence level of
sampling throughout the entire year.
Comment: One consumer group questioned the statistical validity of
using an N-60 collection method for trimmings that the Agency has
reported on its Web site and cited the findings of the 2012 OIG audit
report.
Response: FSIS's sampling and testing for E. coli O157:H7 is just
one of the activities that FSIS conducts to verify that an
establishment's food safety systems effectively address STEC. FSIS
sampling of beef trim works along with other inspection and
verification activities, including FSIS sampling of ground beef and
other ground beef components and its review of establishment testing
results, to detect and reduce E. coli O157:H7 in beef products.
As FSIS explained in response to the Office of the Inspector
General's report on the Agency's sampling protocol for testing beef
trim for E. coli O157:H7,\1\ FSIS does not view a single N-60 sampling
result apart from other verification activities. Note that along with
sampling and carcass-by-carcass inspection, FSIS inspection personnel
performed more than 839,000 inspection procedures in CY-2014 at roughly
635 slaughter establishments that would also be subject to trim
sampling. These inspection procedures, performed daily at slaughter
establishments, play an important role in ensuring that establishments
are producing safe and wholesome products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ OIG Audit Report 24601-9-KC ``FSIS Sampling Protocol for
Testing Beef Trim for E. coli O157:H7'' p. 31
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While a single N-60 sample result may not indicate definitively the
success or failure of an establishment's process controls for beef
trim, it can be an important part of the establishment's verification
program, especially if the establishment or FSIS takes multiple N-60
samples over time.
FSIS' mission is not to screen the food supply through testing but
to ensure the production of safe and wholesome food through inspection.
Comment: One industry organization suggested that the Agency
consider market class of animal, size of the establishment, and the
historical rate of E. coli O157:H7 detection at the establishment in
Agency testing when making risk-based sampling program decisions.
Response: When considering the redesign of its trimmings sampling
program, the Agency did consider establishment size in average pounds
produced per day and historical positive sampling results over time.
The Agency chose to consider the volume of product that an
establishment produced to focus the Agency's resources on actual
product produced.
As explained in the 2012 Federal Register notice (77 FR 58091),
FSIS redesigned the sampling algorithm to collect more samples from
establishments in establishment size categories with the highest
probability of producing trimmings contaminated with E. coli O157:H7.
As a result, the Agency is focusing on small establishments that
produce between 1001 and 50,000 pounds per day.
At this time, FSIS does not have the means to collect different
types of market class information other than to differentiate between
beef and veal. FSIS will continue to report veal results separately
from other beef results https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/data-collection-and-reports/microbiology/ec/positive-results-current-cy/positive-results-current-cy. In addition, FSIS will consider
assessing the differences between veal and beef results and issuing
necessary guidance and instructions to the field based on these results
when appropriate. For example, based on its analysis of results, FSIS
issued instructions, in 2011-2012, for inspectors to verify that
establishments applied antimicrobial interventions to veal carcasses
correctly, and that they maintained procedures to minimize cross-
contamination among veal carcasses.
Comment: One industry organization encouraged FSIS to conduct risk-
based sampling for ground beef as well.
Response: An FSIS risk assessment, presented in a public meeting on
October 28, 1998, and updated thereafter, found that volume of
production is a better determinant of risk for E. coli O157:H7 in
ground beef than size of the establishment. Beginning on January 1,
2008, FSIS initiated an enhanced risk-based sampling and testing
program for E. coli O157:H7 in raw ground beef. The risk-based sampling
program took into account establishment volume, and whether the
establishment had any FSIS or Agriculture Marketing Service positive
results within the past 120 days. The current sampling is proportional
to ground beef production volume. Consequently, the program supports
on-going prevalence estimates from the data.
Comment: One industry organization commented that the Agency
concluded that the rate of sanitary dressing procedure noncompliance
reports could not be used to identify establishments that have a higher
probability of E. coli O157:H7 positive tests result. The industry
organization requested that FSIS determine whether the revised cattle
sanitary dressing directive improved sanitary dressing procedures, and
whether there is a correlation between sanitary dressing procedures and
positive E. coli O157:H7 test results. The commenter stated that
establishment size and animal market class should also be addressed in
this review of sanitary dressing procedures.
Response: When FSIS did the analysis for the statistical redesign,
it found that there is no predictive relationship between higher
sanitary dressing noncompliances and the probability of E. coli O157:H7
positive sample results. Under the Public Health Inspection System
(PHIS), the Agency tracks the inspection activities inspection
personnel use to verify whether an establishment's food safety system
meets regulatory requirements. The inspection activities tracked
include the procedures used to verify whether establishments maintain
effective sanitary dressing procedures. The Agency analyzes the PHIS
data on inspection activities on a biannual basis.
FSIS reviewed the data for the relevant inspection tasks performed
and FSIS positive results at establishments sampled under the trimmings
(MT50)
[[Page 23763]]
sampling program. FSIS did not find a correlation between sanitary
dressing or sanitation NRs and MT50 percent positive in trimmings.
Comment: One consumer organization recommended that FSIS take
additional steps to improve the representativeness of the samples
collected by eliminating FSIS's procedure of pre-notification of
testing. The commenter stated that this notification allows
establishments to adjust their operations before the sample is taken.
The consumer group also recognized that FSIS mailed test kits to
establishments before field personnel collected samples for chain of
evidence reasons. The commenter stated that the arrival of a sample box
would signal that a test is imminent and serves as a pre-notification.
The consumer organization suggested that sample boxes be kept stocked
by in-plant personnel.
Response: FSIS requires establishments to hold product tested for
an adulterant such as E. coli O157:H7 pending the results of FSIS
testing. Establishment management needs sufficient pre-notification of
sampling in order to hold production lots in a manner such that they
are microbiologically independent. Otherwise, FSIS would be collecting
samples from production lots that may already be distributed in
commerce, resulting in preventable product recalls. FSIS has issued
instructions to field personnel to notify establishment that FSIS will
be collecting a sample, but that the notification should only provide
enough time for the establishment to be able to hold all affected
product.
The Agency has a finite number of resources which makes stocking
multiple sample boxes at establishments cost prohibitive. Additionally,
some USDA offices in establishments are small and do not allow for
storage of multiple sample boxes. If establishments change their food
safety system on the days that FSIS collects samples in a manner to
influence the sample result, FSIS has instructed inspection program
personnel to notify their supervisory chain so that a determination can
be made as to how to address this concern. In such circumstances, FSIS
may decide to conduct additional sampling at the establishment or to
conduct a Food Safety Assessment (which includes in-depth verification
that the establishment meets regulatory requirements related to food
safety).
Comment: One consumer organization questioned whether the results
for FSIS's sampling programs can be used to develop reliable prevalence
estimates.
Response: As noted above, FSIS has increased the number of trimming
samples collected to achieve the number of samples needed to allow STEC
on-going prevalence determinations to be made from the data collected.
FSIS will make E. coli O157:H7 prevalence estimates for ground beef
available in the near future. FSIS will make STEC prevalence (E. coli
O157:H7 and other STEC) estimates for trim available in the first
quarter of FY 2016.
Industry Survey
Comment: One industry organization had several suggestions
regarding the beef survey that FSIS announced in the 2012 Federal
Register notice (77 FR 58091). The commenter stated that the survey
should: (1) have clear goals and deliverables, (2) not put an economic
burden on industry, (3) have questions based on data that pertain to
the problem of E. coli O157:H7 contamination, (4) collect data on the
volume of source material produced by establishments that test for E.
coli O157:H7, and (5) present results as volume-based to address the
results from the survey.
Response: Through the survey described above, inspectors provided
information on processing practices that establishments employ to
reduce the likelihood of contamination of intact and non-intact raw
beef products with STEC. FSIS did have clear goals when it put forth
the survey. This survey was designed to gather information not
collected in the Public Health Information System. FSIS is using the
survey results to update the economic analysis to support the full
implementation of its non-O157 STEC policy. Data from the 2013 Pathogen
Controls in Beef Operations Survey (conducted in May-July 2013) allowed
FSIS to estimate the number of non-O157 STEC tests conducted by the
industry for a 12-month period. FSIS is also analyzing the survey
results to develop targeted approaches for its risk-based verification
testing program and to assist it in prioritizing the scheduling of Food
Safety Assessments (FSA) by Enforcement, Investigations, and Analysis
Officers (EIAO). FSIS did not collect production volume information in
the survey and is not presenting the results as volume based.
Establishment profiles contain production volume information in the
Public Health Information System.
FSIS has used the numbers obtained in the survey to estimate
sampling numbers for industry testing as part of the economic analysis
for STEC sampling in all of the Agency's raw beef microbiological
sampling programs. The economic analysis is available at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/52afacbc-4780-4fba-a7ab-cde987ea1d45/STEC-cost-benefit-analysis.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. Additionally, FSIS plans to
conduct risk analyses, as appropriate, to determine the relative impact
of various establishment factors on the probability of E. coli O157:H7
contamination and subsequent illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths.
FSIS intends to use the data generated by the actions listed above to
assess and evaluate its trimmings sampling program and to make risk-
based changes as appropriate.
FSIS implemented the survey in such a way as to not cause an undue
economic burden on industry.
Comment: One consumer group commented that FSIS should make plans
to routinely repeat the survey to inform sampling decisions made by the
Agency.
Response: Conducting the survey is very time intensive for field
personnel. FSIS must weigh the time spent completing a survey against
the time spent conducting regular inspection duties. FSIS will conduct
future surveys as necessary.
Carcass Baseline
Comment: An industry organization commented that the beef carcass
baseline should include the whole beef trimmings production process,
and that it should also include veal.
Response: The Beef-Veal carcass baseline began August 1, 2014. FSIS
is including steers, heifers, cows, bulls, stag, dairy cows, and veal
carcasses in the Beef-Veal carcass baseline. FSIS is collecting samples
at two points in the process, immediately after hide removal (pre-
evisceration) and at pre-chill (after all antimicrobial interventions).
Comment: An industry organization suggested that because FSIS is
only testing for pathogenic organisms that are adulterants, the Agency
should consider alternative baseline testing locations within the
production supply chain. The commenter suggested that FSIS collect a
post-hide removal sample to address the hide removal process, where
cross-contamination is more likely to occur; a second sample site after
antimicrobial interventions; and trim testing for E. coli O157:H7 for
products that will be used in ground beef or veal production.
Response: The Agency is obtaining samples at two points in the
slaughter process for the baseline study: immediately after hide
removal but before evisceration, and at pre-chill before the carcasses
enter the chillers and after all antimicrobial applications.
[[Page 23764]]
This study addresses three distinct objectives: to estimate the
prevalence and quantitative levels of selected foodborne
microorganisms, to obtain data for use in the development of Agency
programs, and to obtain data for informing industry guidance related to
process control. The sample design and the resulting sample size are
limited for this survey by practical constraints such as finite
personnel and financial resources, and the problems with implementing
scientific studies in real-world production settings. Considering these
constraints, FSIS expects that the Beef-Veal carcass baseline study
will achieve the stated objectives because FSIS will collect and
analyze as many samples as possible to ensure an appropriate level of
statistical confidence.
With the two points that the Agency chose to use for sampling for
the baseline carcass study, FSIS requires the establishment to hold or
control the movement of sampled carcasses at pre-chill until the
establishment is notified of STEC results. FSIS verifies that the
establishment does not treat the sampled carcasses any differently than
any of the other carcasses it is processing. In the event that a
sampled carcass is treated differently, FSIS will randomly select
another carcass during the same processing time and collect samples
from that carcass.
The results from samples collected during the baseline carcass
study become available after all analyses for STEC and Salmonella are
complete. Baseline sample results usually are reported in two to six
days but may take longer depending on individual circumstances. Post-
hide/pre-evisceration and pre-chill sample results are reported through
Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) Direct.
FSIS is not issuing noncompliance records (NRs) for STEC positive
results during the baseline. In response to a positive result from the
pre-chill sample only, field personnel perform a directed Slaughter
HACCP Verification task to verify that the establishment has adequate
slaughter controls (including antimicrobial intervention
implementation) for the specific production lot represented by the
positive STEC carcass result. Field personnel also verify that the
establishment implements corrective actions that meet the applicable
requirements in 9 CFR 417.3. Field personnel do not verify corrective
actions in response to a positive STEC result from the post-hide/pre-
evisceration sample. Rather, FSIS verifies that establishments ensure
that carcasses found positive for STECs during the pre-chill sampling
and testing are not processed into raw non-intact product. The presence
of STEC on a pre-chill carcass intended for use as raw non-intact
product would adulterate the carcass. The presence of STEC on a carcass
intended for use as raw intact product would not adulterate the carcass
if the entire carcass is going for intact product. In the event that a
carcass tests positive for STEC, establishments may take action to
ensure that all products from the carcass go for cooking, or they may
take action to recondition the carcass and ensure that the carcass goes
for intact use only.
In the event of a STEC positive on a post-hide removal/pre-
evisceration sample without a corresponding pre-chill sample on a
carcass intended for raw non-intact use, the carcass would not be
considered adulterated. The carcass presumably will undergo further
interventions after post-hide removal/pre-evisceration. In the event of
a STEC positive from a pre-chill test result on a carcass intended for
raw non-intact use, the carcass is considered adulterated. The
establishment is required to take corrective action.
Comment: One industry organization recommended that FSIS conduct a
``shakedown'' period at establishments representative of the industry
in order to assess the logistics of sampling. The commenter stated that
this shakedown should be done to provide a safe sampling environment
for inspection personnel and to ensure that sampling will not interfere
with the routine slaughter process.
Response: FSIS agrees with the comment. The Agency did conduct a
shakedown training period before the actual baseline and confirmed that
baseline sampling will not interfere with the routine slaughter
process.
Comment: One industry organization commented that while the Agency
is developing the baseline, the timeframe for the publication of study
results should be outlined.
Response: FSIS posted the study design and sampling plan on the
FSIS Web site at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/5057f4ef-f924-422c-bafe-771b1ead78e4/Beef-Veal-Carcass-Baseline-Study-Design.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. FSIS will publish a final report with the
national prevalence calculations after the completion of the survey.
Comment: One industry organization commented that sampling
immediately after de-hiding may not provide the most meaningful
information as to the presence of the various organisms in the
slaughter process. The commenter stated that although the sample may be
taken before any on-line interventions, the condition of the carcass,
in terms of potential microbial load, is not comparable across
establishments. The commenter explained that some establishments have
interventions and other practices that occur before de-hiding, such as
bacteriophage sprays or hide washes. Likewise, the commenter stated
that the effectiveness of hide removal in minimizing contamination of
the carcass varies among establishments. If FSIS is seeking to use this
baseline to assist establishments in assessing ``incoming''
contamination levels before on-line interventions, the commenter stated
that not taking into account the steps that come before this sampling
point at each establishment would likely limit the usability of the
results.
Response: FSIS agrees that the incoming microbial load may vary
from establishment to establishment depending on whether establishments
use bacteriophage sprays or hide washes, and that the effectiveness of
establishments in preventing cross-contamination in hide removal may
also vary. Nevertheless, FSIS expects that the Beef-Veal carcass
baseline study will achieve the stated objectives by collecting and
analyzing as many samples as possible to ensure an appropriate level of
statistical confidence.
Comment: Two commenters stated that carcass sampling immediately
after de-hiding could pose a safety risk to inspection program
personnel, as well as to establishment employees. According to the
commenters, this location is in the middle of the harvest line, so
taking a sample at this juncture will require inspection program
personnel to enter an area of the process where hazards, such as
dangerous equipment, are present and space is limited. Taking samples
at this point could, in turn, also put establishment employees at risk.
Response: FSIS discussed with establishment management before
collecting samples for the shakedown the following: (1) Where
supervisory personnel could safely collect post-hide removal/pre-
evisceration and pre-chill samples, (2) establishment safety
requirements and protocols that supervisory field personnel must follow
during sample collection, and (3) the potential need for line stoppages
for supervisory field personnel to safely and properly collect the
samples. FSIS also issued instructions to inspection program personnel
for conducting sampling from a safe vantage point, especially when
collecting the posterior
[[Page 23765]]
samples from the post-hide/pre-evisceration and pre-chill locations;
following the same safety procedures provided for employees at that
establishment which may require the use of a harness; slowing or
stopping production lines; and acquiring needed tools to safely collect
samples. Information on the Beef-Veal carcass baseline can be found at
the following link https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/5d3552e7-9b81-4b2c-aa20-cfaeef77f251/36-14.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
Comment: One industry organization asked what type of carcass
sampling the Agency will use for the carcass baseline study.
Response: As was done during the shakedown, FSIS is obtaining
samples following the procedures described in the United States
Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service Meat Animal
Research Center Carcass Sampling Protocol \2\ available at the
following link: https://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/54380530/protocols/USMARC%20Carcass%20Sampling%20Protocol.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) Carcass Sampling
Protocol.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: One consumer organization stated that FSIS should conduct
a baseline study to estimate the prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in beef
manufacturing trimmings and ground beef in order to improve the
confidence in FSIS's efforts to detect contaminated product and
effectively verify process controls.
Response: FSIS decided to focus on sampling carcasses for this
baseline and not trimmings and ground beef because of resource
limitations. The Beef-Veal carcass baseline survey will provide FSIS
the necessary data on percent positives and quantitative levels of
select foodborne bacterial pathogens (e.g., Salmonella, STEC, and
certain indicator organisms). FSIS will use the data from the Beef-Veal
carcass baseline survey to estimate the national prevalence of select
microorganisms in carcasses, not trimmings and ground beef; to develop
industry performance guidelines; to assess process control across the
industry; and to inform additional policy considerations. Results of
this study will be used to estimate volume-weighted prevalence and
bacterial loads immediately after hide removal and at pre-chill.
Moreover, FSIS has made changes to both the trimmings and ground beef
verification testing programs to be able to obtain on-going prevalence
of both E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella (79 FR 32437).
Other Topics
The following comment topics that were received are outside the
scope of this notice: disappearing schedule dates from PHIS, returned
FedEx sample boxes, FSIS training materials, and purge studies.
USDA Non-Discrimination Statement
No agency, officer, or employee of the USDA shall, on the grounds
of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual
orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status,
income derived from a public assistance program, or political beliefs,
exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to
discrimination any person in the United States under any program or
activity conducted by the USDA.
How To File a Complaint of Discrimination
To file a complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, which may be accessed online at https://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you or your
authorized representative.
Send your completed complaint form or letter to USDA by mail, fax,
or email:
Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of
Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410,
Fax: (202) 690-7442, Email: program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for
communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), should contact
USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy
development is important. Consequently, FSIS will announce this Federal
Register publication on-line through the FSIS Web page located at:
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/federal-register.
FSIS also will make copies of this publication available through
the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information
regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal Register
notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information that
could affect or would be of interest to our constituents and
stakeholders. The Update is available on the FSIS Web page. Through the
Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader, more
diverse audience. In addition, FSIS offers an email subscription
service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food
safety news and information. This service is available at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe. Options range from recalls to export
information, regulations, directives, and notices. Customers can add or
delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password
protect their accounts.
Done, at Washington, DC.
Dated: April 23, 2015.
Alfred V. Almanza,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-09957 Filed 4-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P