FOOD
SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE
Submitted for the Record
Statement of Dr. Garry L. McKee,
Administrator,
Before the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration and
Related Agencies
Mr.
Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am
pleased to have the opportunity to provide a
statement on the current status of Food Safety
and Inspection Service (FSIS) programs and on
the fiscal year (FY) 2004 budget request for
food safety within the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA).
Before
I move into the details of my statement, I’d
like to take this opportunity to introduce
myself, since this is my first time before the
Subcommittee. I’ve been with FSIS for a little
over six months now. Although I came to FSIS
from the Wyoming Department of Health, I am a
proud Oklahoman at heart. I graduated from
Southwestern Oklahoma State University and the
University of Oklahoma, concentrating on
microbiology and public health. Having been in
the public health field for more than 30
years, I am very comfortable with the work and
responsibilities of FSIS.
Today I would like share with you the steps
FSIS is taking to become a world-class public
health agency. These will include:
-
FSIS’
Year in Review;
-
Three
Functions of a Successful Public Health Model;
-
FSIS
Accomplishments Towards Becoming a World-Class
Public Health Agency;
-
FSIS
Partnerships; and
-
the
Proposed FY 2004 FSIS Budget.
FSIS’ Year in Review
If you
would allow me a moment, I would like to share
some of FSIS’ accomplishments over the past
year so you can gain a better understanding of
the way our budget is structured. As you know,
under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the
Poultry Products Inspection Act, and the Egg
Products Inspection Act, FSIS inspects meat,
poultry, and egg products sold in interstate
commerce and reinspects imported products, to
ensure that they meet U.S. food safety
standards.
It is
FSIS’ mission to ensure that all meat,
poultry, and egg products for use as human
food are safe, secure, wholesome, and
accurately labeled. More than 7,600 inspection
personnel verify that regulations regarding
food safety, and other consumer protection
concerns, such as labeling, are met in over
6,300 Federal meat, poultry, and egg
processing plants, each and every day they are
in operation. FSIS has jurisdiction over
products that generate more than $120 billion
in sales, which represents one-third of
consumer spending on food. In addition, since
September 11th, our workforce has
been on heightened alert and is diligently
monitoring all of these plants to ensure that
there is no intentional biosecurity breach
that could harm our nation’s food supply.
Throughout 2002, FSIS was hard at work,
protecting the safety of meat, poultry, and
egg products. In FY 2002, FSIS inspectors
monitored the slaughter of 92.6 billion pounds
of meat and poultry and inspected 3.7 billion
pounds of liquid egg products. Inspectors at
our 110 import inspection stations monitored
the importation of 3.9 billion pounds of meat
and poultry products from 27 of 33 foreign
countries meeting U.S. equivalency
requirements and choosing to import to the
U.S. last year. FSIS also facilitated the
exportation of over 11 billion pounds of meat
and poultry products worth $7.5 billion to
over 100 countries. In addition, FSIS spread
the food safety message to approximately 90
million people through the media, the FSIS web
site, and the USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline.
FSIS also diligently continued its duty of
protecting the public health, by overseeing
the voluntary recall of any meat, poultry, and
egg products that may have been potentially
contaminated. As you can see, we have had
quite a busy year. Improving
Public Health
I have spent my entire career
in this field and am devoted to administering
under its protocols and scientific
foundations. Public health is my number one
priority. Thus, we are building FSIS into a
recognized, credible, world-class public
health agency that is a model for all other
public health institutions.
What does a “world-class” public health agency
mean? Frankly, it means that we need to be the
experts in improving the safety of meat,
poultry, and egg products for the American
people. We must also ensure that our food
supply is safe and secure from bioterrorist
attacks, intentional tampering, or other forms
of adulteration. While I believe that FSIS has
made considerable progress towards these
goals, more can be done to make this agency
the top-notch public health regulatory agency
we envision it can be. All of the nearly
10,000 employees at FSIS are dedicated to
achieving this vision. Three
Functions of a Successful Public Health Model
In order to make FSIS a
world-class public health agency, there are
three parts of a successful public health
model that FSIS must implement. First, FSIS
must assess public health problems using
science, such as surveillance, data
collection, monitoring, risk assessment, and
forecasting trends. Dr. Murano, Dr. Pierson,
and I believe that science is the absolute
best and most reliable tool we have to address
the public health issue of food safety. In
order to accomplish our goals, we must
continue to make significant, science-based
policy improvements that can measurably
improve public health. By relying on science
in our decision-making, we take the guesswork
out of our policy-making process. Science is
the weapon that will lead our workforce to
victory in our declared war on pathogens.
Our assessment activities will help FSIS carry
out the second part of a successful public
health model, which is policy development.
FSIS must continue to develop and implement
policies to reduce the risk of foodborne
illnesses using science-based knowledge. Once
we identify a problem or hazard, we need to
craft an effective solution. As a public
health agency, we are equipped for this
problem-solving role with our technical
knowledge and expertise. Policy development
activities include planning and
priority-setting, the development of
regulations, directives, and other policy
vehicles, mobilizing resources, training,
constituency building, distribution of public
information, and encouragement of public and
private sector cooperation.
Finally, FSIS must assure the American public
that we are carrying out our jobs effectively,
through enforcement of established statutory
and regulatory responsibilities. We will hold
industry, as well as ourselves, responsible
for ensuring that meat, poultry, and egg
products are safe, wholesome, and accurately
labeled. By successfully carrying out our food
safety mission, we are assuring the public
that the USDA mark of inspection found on
meat, poultry, and egg products means what it
says. By carrying out these
functions, FSIS is protecting the public from
foodborne illnesses. But, protecting public
health also means ensuring the security of our
food, which is a vital component of Homeland
Security – a growing source of concern. The
tragic events of September 11th
have made Americans more aware that the
unthinkable could become a reality.
Biological, chemical, and radiological threats
to our Nation’s food supply are plausible from
those intent on harming our nation through any
possible means. Since the terrorist attacks on
America, food security has been the highest
priority at FSIS and we continue to take steps
to ensure that we are prepared to prevent and
respond to any potential or actual threats to
our Nation. Now I’d like to
share with you some specific examples of how
FSIS is ensuring the safety of our meat,
poultry, and egg products.
Better Addressing Pathogens
E. coli
O157:H7
The issue of E. coli O157:H7 in ground
beef emerged in the 1990s and FSIS’
microbiological testing program to detect
E. coli O157:H7 in raw ground beef began
in October 1994. Since then, over 55,000 raw
ground beef samples have been analyzed. Each
month, a random sample from the approximately
1,700 establishments that produce ground beef
under FSIS inspection and the 100,000 retail
stores that grind beef on a regular basis, are
selected for sample collection. In 2002, over
7,000 samples were analyzed for E. coli
O157:H7. Since FSIS’ E. coli O157:H7
testing program began, it has been
continuously amended to incorporate the most
up-to-date data and technologies.
Data from the
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC), as well as FSIS’ draft risk
assessment of E. coli O157:H7, indicate
that E. coli O157:H7 is more prevalent
than previously believed. The data led FSIS
to further strengthen its E. coli
O157:H7 policies and implement additional
safeguards to increase food safety. In an
October 2002 Federal Register Notice,
FSIS published a series of new measures
designed to reduce the incidence of E. coli
O157:H7 contamination in raw ground beef. For
instance, all facilities handling raw ground
beef must reassess their Hazard Analysis and
Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans and
decide whether E. coli O157:H7 is a
pathogen reasonably likely to occur in their
products. In addition, establishments that
receive product for grinding may determine
that no additional steps are necessary at
grinding facilities to address E. coli
O157:H7, but only if appropriate purchase
specifications are built into their food
safety system. However, these specifications
require that all suppliers must have one or
more validated critical control points to
eliminate or reduce E. coli O157:H7
below detectable levels and some means to
ensure that these specifications are met.
FSIS has set
deadlines for completion of the reassessments,
in order to ensure that all plants have
reassessed their HACCP plans to account for
E. coli O157:H7. Large plants, those with
500 or more employees, were required to comply
by December 6, 2002, and small plants, or
those with less than 500, by February 4,
2003. Very small plants, those having fewer
than 10 employees or annual sales of less than
$2.5 million, are required to comply by April
7, 2003. FSIS Consumer Safety Officers (CSO)
are completing extensive scientific reviews of
plant HACCP plans to ensure the reassessments
are successfully addressing E. coli
concerns, as well as all other aspects of
HACCP regulations.
FSIS is also
modifying its current E. coli O157:H7
sampling and testing program to include all
plants. In the past, FSIS did not typically
collect raw ground beef samples at
establishments that conduct their own E.
coli O157:H7 testing. However, FSIS has
recently found that, in spite of this
private-sector testing, some of these
establishments have had problems with E.
coli O157:H7 contamination. In response,
FSIS is revising its current directive to
discontinue all exemptions from FSIS sampling
and testing for E. coli O157:H7.
FSIS is also
developing a risk-based verification program
that takes into account factors such as volume
of production and effectiveness of
interventions in determining testing
frequencies. In addition to continuing to
test for E. coli O157:H7 in
ground beef, FSIS is considering testing for
E. coli O157:H7 in trimmings and
other intact materials used in non-intact
product and beef carcasses and parts that will
be processed into non-intact product. We
believe that controls to reduce the risk of
E. coli O157:H7 on intact product may be
among the most effective ways to control the
hazard overall and that these changes are
critical to protecting public health.
Listeria monocytogenes
Following a
recent voluntary recall of ready-to-eat meat
products due to potential contamination with
Listeria monocytogenes, FSIS
implemented a new policy to improve testing
programs for Listeria in the
environment of plants producing ready-to-eat
products, such as deli meats and hot dogs. In
November 2002, the agency released a directive
announcing that plants producing high- and
medium-risk, ready-to-eat products that do not
have a scientifically-based, validated program
in place for the control of Listeria
monocytogenes, will be subject to an
intensified FSIS testing program. In December
2002, the agency completed a survey to
identify plants that will be considered for
intensified testing.
This new
risk-based policy will allow FSIS to confirm
an establishment’s commitment to zero
tolerance for Listeria monocytogenes on
product and product contact surfaces.
On February
14, 2003, FSIS released its draft risk
assessment that provides a vital tool to
estimate the public health impacts of various
control measures for reducing the risk of
Listeria monocytogenes. This draft risk
assessment suggests that a combination of
testing, sanitation, and other interventions
exhibited greater benefits than when each step
was used alone. It also suggests that product
contact testing, used in conjunction with
enhanced sanitation procedures, can lead to a
reduction in Listeria-related illness.
In addition, the risk assessment demonstrated
that the use of intervention steps, such as
post-packaging pasteurization or the
introduction of growth inhibitors, showed
dramatic public health benefits. We plan to
use information gained from this risk
assessment to examine different combinations
of testing and other interventions that may
direct policymaking in the future.
FSIS intends
to utilize information gained from the risk
assessment to proceed on an effective
regulatory approach to reduce Listeria
monocytogenes in processing plants
producing ready-to-eat meat and poultry
products. FSIS is committed to publishing a
final rule for Listeria monocytogenes
in ready-to-eat products as soon as possible.
We continue to gather comprehensive and
critical data to support such a rule. We
believe that the scientific data obtained from
this risk assessment enables the agency to
make a sensible, responsible, and
well-supported final rule based on solid and
comprehensive science and not guess work. The
final rule, based on the risk assessment, will
also bolster our mission of reducing foodborne
illnesses and actually saving lives.
Scientific Symposia
We have also
greatly increased our efforts to incorporate a
broad range of scientific thinking on food
safety issues in order to effectively combat
harmful pathogens. In 2002, FSIS initiated a
series of nine scientific symposia aimed at
generating dialogue on important issues among
public health experts, industry, advocacy
groups, academia, and the public. These
meetings allowed the agency to gather input on
what scientific solutions would best address
public health concerns. For example, FSIS
held a scientific symposium on pathogen
reduction in May 2002, to discuss the
appropriate role of microbial testing in food
safety and other food safety concerns. In
November 2002, the agency held a Listeria
summit to discuss the public health impact of
Listeria monocytogenes. Last month,
the agency held a meeting to discuss the
results of the draft risk assessment on
Listeria monocytogenes. We believe the
symposia allowed us to be as inclusive as
possible, as well as gain valuable information
and insight. Therefore, the agency has
planned additional symposia in FY 2003 on such
topics as applied epidemiology, the National
Academy of Sciences report on performance
standards, and international food safety.
Public Health Management
A world-class public health
agency must run like clockwork in order to
quickly and successfully prevent or respond to
food safety emergencies. This requires a
common dedication and focus at all levels,
from headquarters management to the frontline
employees in plants in the most rural parts of
America. Therefore, FSIS has implemented an
array of measures over the past year to
enhance accountability, build professionalism,
and ensure a coordinated public health
approach to food safety. FSIS
Reorganization
On our way to becoming a
world-class public health agency, it became
apparent that the structure of FSIS needed to
be reorganized to efficiently and effectively
meet our goals, carry out our critical
functions, and protect public health. I have
made it a top priority to restructure the
agency in a way that prepares FSIS to meet its
public health and food safety goals in a
modern and streamlined fashion. This
reorganization will increase accountability
for all FSIS employees and refocus the duties
of many employees. The
reorganization will ensure that the principles
of public health and food safety cut across
the entire spectrum of FSIS’ critical public
health mission. We have added four assistant
administrators in key areas—for Food Security;
Program Evaluation, Enforcement, and Review;
Communications, Outreach and External Affairs;
and International Coordination. These
additions will strengthen the bonds between
our various offices and make our operational
model more coherent and responsive. For
example, the assistant administrator of Food
Security will tie together all Homeland
Security activities within the agency, so that
our policy makers, our scientists, our field
staff, and our management are all working
together to ensure that we are prepared to
prevent and respond to any bioterrorist
attack.
Program Evaluation,
Enforcement and Review
In FY 2002, as part of our
reorganization, FSIS created the Program
Evaluation, Enforcement and Review (PEER)
office to serve as the agency’s quality
control team. This office’s mission is to
ensure that effectiveness, efficiency,
consistency, and accountability become the
rule at FSIS. This new office will ensure that
FSIS functions such as reviews of plants for
compliance and food safety investigations are
carried out in a way most conducive to
protecting the public health. This office also
conducts program audits, reviews, assessments,
and evaluations in an effort to ensure that
they are performing as needed or uncover
difficulties early on, before they reach the
problem stage. Lastly, this office also helps
ensure that the agency has an effective,
efficient, timely, and aggressive program for
dealing with those who violate the meat and
poultry laws. Improved
Communications
Our food safety message is
most effective when every person along the
farm-to-table continuum is aware of its
importance and, just as importantly,
understands it. As part of the FSIS
reorganization, we created the Office of
Communication, Outreach, and External Affairs.
This office is tasked with spreading the food
safety message to our many constituents
whether in Congress, industry, advocacy
groups, the public, or the media. We devote a
great deal of energy and resources into
translating highly technical food safety
information and making it accessible and
understandable at many different levels. But
communication is a two-way street and we make
every effort to receive and process input from
our constituents so that we are aware of, and
sensitive to, their range of viewpoints. We
are always looking to improve our public
health mission and communication is one of our
most critical tools. Automated
Import Inspection System
FSIS is also improving its
management effectiveness on the international
level. All imported meat and poultry is
inspected in its country of origin, as well as
visually reinspected by FSIS before being
released in the U.S. Additionally, FSIS tests
imported products for residues, microbiology,
and food chemistry. In FY 2002, FSIS
introduced the new Automated Import
Information System (AIIS). This system focuses
on a foreign country’s inspection system as a
whole, rather than on individual plants, to
statistically choose imports for reinspection
based on the annual volume of shipments from
the exporting country. Previously, for all
countries except Canada, reinspection was
randomly assigned based on an establishment’s
compliance history. The new system is
user-friendly and allows inspectors at all
ports-of-entry to share data. It also allows
managers to have easier access to inspection
reports. The new AIIS system also provides
better tracking of shipments once they enter
the U.S. The next step is for FSIS to
integrate our system with USDA’s Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and
the U.S. Customs systems to further strengthen
the food safety system against intentional
attacks. Workforce and
Training Initiatives
Our workforce is the backbone
of FSIS. We rely on our field employees to be
in every meat, poultry, and egg products
plant, ensuring that the plants are producing
products that are safe, wholesome, and
accurately labeled. Our frontline employees
are the ones we rely on to make the critical
determination that products are not
adulterated and are safe to eat. They are also
responsible for identifying and preventing
intentional threats to the food supply. For
this reason, I have made this issue one of my
top priorities as FSIS Administrator. I am
personally overseeing the changes the agency
is implementing in our training programs and
believe it is absolutely necessary that we
have a scientifically- and technically-trained
workforce that is dedicated to ensuring a safe
supply of meat, poultry, and egg products. A
well-trained and competent workforce is a key
element to making any institution successful.
I am committed to achieving the aggressive
public health goals we have set at FSIS
through improving our employees’ skill level,
which will in turn, raise their performance.
Consumer Safety Officers
Let me give you an example. To
achieve our public health goals, FSIS
recognized the need for frontline employees to
have a scientific background. Therefore, the
agency created the Consumer Safety Officer
(CSO) series to reflect our increasing
reliance on science and technology. CSOs
require a scientific background and receive
additional agency training that enables them
to assess and verify the design of food safety
systems. FSIS trained 104 employees as CSOs in
FY 2002, and plans to train an additional 105
in FY 2003. The agency is extending CSO
training to its District Veterinary Medical
Specialists (DVMS) and other Veterinary
Medical Officers (VMOs) to raise scientific
knowledge within the agency.
Humane Handling and Slaughter Initiatives
USDA considers humane methods
of handling animals and humane slaughter
operations a top priority. FSIS used funding
allocated in the FY 2001 Supplemental bill to
hire 17 veterinarians to serve as District
Veterinary Medical Specialists (DVMS) in each
of the agency’s 17 districts. The DVMS
reported for duty on December 30, 2001. The
DVMS have been trained in all aspects related
to humane handling and slaughter, including
antemortem inspection, humane handling
regulations, the Humane Methods of Slaughter
Act (HMSA), stunning methodologies, assessing
consciousness, enforcement procedures related
to humane handling, and workplace violence.
They also serve as the program coordinator for
all humane handling issues within their
districts and are providing training to newly
hired in-plant VMOs on the agency’s humane
handling and slaughter responsibilities.
The FY 2003 Omnibus
Appropriations bill includes $5 million for
FSIS to hire at least 50 fulltime employees to
enforce the HMSA. FSIS is determining how to
best utilize the resources of the 50 fulltime
employees enforcing the HMSA. The agency is
also ensuring that our 17 DVMS are fully
devoted to humane handling and slaughter
activities. Chief Veterinarian
In FY 2002, FSIS established a
Chief Veterinarian position to promote the
education, training, and professional
development of the agency’s approximately
1,100 veterinarians. In addition, FSIS
veterinarians have completed a survey to
determine what skills they possess and to help
the agency assess how it can harness their
skills to help meet its ever-evolving goals.
The results will be analyzed in FY 2003.
Inspection Coordinator Training
Becoming a world-class public
health agency requires that FSIS increase
technical training and the scientific
expertise of our workforce. Inspection
Coordinators (ICs) in each District were
trained to increase their HACCP expertise,
particularly with respect to HACCP plan design
and scientific support for HACCP plans. The
ICs often participate in, or even lead,
in-depth verification reviews (IDVs) to assess
whether an establishment is carrying out
activities that meet requirements of the FSIS
Pathogen Reduction (PR)/HACCP rule. This
training will enhance their ability to do a
more effective job and will also provide
Districts with an additional resource capable
of conducting comprehensive food safety
assessments. In response to a Government
Accounting Office recommendation that FSIS
strengthen basic training for its inspectors,
the agency plans to reinforce HACCP,
Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures
(SSOPs), and Sanitation Performance Standards
knowledge, through training of its entire
in-plant workforce beginning in FY 2003. I
will discuss in greater detail this key aspect
of our FY 2004 budget request in a moment. Compliance Officer Training
In FY 2002, FSIS conducted a Compliance
Officers (COs) training program at the Federal
Law Enforcement Training Center in New Mexico.
Nineteen Federal and three State COs completed
the three-week course on basic safety
training. In addition, sixty-one COs and three
CSOs completed three specialized one-week
safety courses, especially designed for FSIS.
Also, twelve COs completed a one-week
Instructor Verbal Judo Course designed to
instruct them how to teach other employees how
to better handle stressful situations they may
encounter as part of their jobs. All of these
training programs are the building blocks to
the model public health agency I envision for
FSIS. In-Plant Performance System
In October 2002, FSIS implemented the In-Plant
Performance System (IPPS), which puts in place
a formal process so frontline supervisors can
be sure that inspection personnel carry out
their assigned job responsibilities. All field
supervisors have been trained to use this
system. Performance reviews have recently
resulted in several letters of caution and
instruction to employees who were not
performing at the expected level. More
importantly, the reviews have highlighted what
we are doing right, as well as steps we can
take to make even more improvements. HIMP
As you know, in 1997, FSIS initiated the
HACCP-based Inspection Models Project (HIMP)
pilot program, which was designed to address
the fact that FSIS inspectors carry out
certain process control activities that are
not inspection activities. I see HIMP as the
way of the future for a model public health
agency. Ultimately under HIMP, we will focus
better on public health concerns from farm to
table. There are additional activities in
slaughter plants, consistent with the mission
to protect public health, which FSIS believes
deserve more attention. These include
verification of the zero tolerance standard
for fecal contamination, microbial sampling,
and verification of the HACCP system. In June 2002, FSIS made data available
comparing HIMP and traditional inspection,
which showed improvements in detecting and
controlling quality concerns and food safety
measures in HIMP pilot plants. The data showed
no change in the incidence of dressing
defects, such as feathers, or in the
prevalence of Salmonella. In September
2002, an independent review of the HIMP data
concluded “the HIMP system compared favorably
to the traditional system of inspection.” HIMP
is just another example of our commitment to
modernizing FSIS’ inspection programs in order
to better meet USDA’s public health
responsibilities. Homeland
Security Training
FSIS has also initiated a
comprehensive two-year training and education
effort designed to ensure that every FSIS
employee fully understands his or her role and
responsibility in preventing or responding to
an attack on the food supply. To date, FSIS
has developed a videotape covering food
security initiatives, emergency response
procedures, and guidelines for food processors
for use in training all frontline supervisors.
This has been shared with our State and local
partners, as well as industry, to address
their biosecurity awareness and training
needs. Homeland Security
Efforts
The events of September 11th
revealed the need for a more integrated and
coordinated plan to protect meat, poultry, and
egg products from being used as vehicles to
spread dangerous biological, chemical, or
radionuclear material throughout the food
supply. Immediately following September 11th,
FSIS established the Food Biosecurity Action
Team (F-BAT), charged with coordinating all
activities pertaining to biosecurity,
countering terrorism, and emergency
preparedness within the agency. These
activities are coordinated with USDA’s
Homeland Security Council, other government
agencies and industry.
F-BAT
F-BAT has been instrumental in
several initiatives to improve the safety and
security of the food supply, including:
assessing potential vulnerabilities along the
farm-to-table continuum, including imported
products; developing guidelines for industry
on food security and increased plant security;
strengthening FSIS coordination and
cooperation with law enforcement agencies;
enhancing security features at all FSIS
laboratories; increasing the capacity of the
agency’s laboratories to test for additional
food safety hazards and biological agents; and
developing a multi-year food security plan.
Office of Food Security and Emergency
Preparedness
FSIS’ reorganization also
includes the creation of the Office of Food
Security and Emergency Preparedness. This will
provide one centralized office within the
agency that will serve as an interface with
USDA’s Homeland Security Office and will
represent the agency on all food security
matters throughout the Federal government as
well as State and local activities. The
Office’s mission is to prepare for, prevent,
and coordinate a response to intentional acts
and other major events threatening the U.S.
food supply. It is comprised of two staffs, an
External Relations and Emergency Preparedness
Staff, in addition to a Scientific and
Technical Support Staff. The External
Relations staff’s primary responsibility is to
develop and maintain the extensive network of
Federal and State relationships necessary to
mobilize for a food-related emergency. The
Scientific staff provides science-based
support for emergency response and prepares
contingency plans for minimizing risk to the
safety and security of the food supply, as
well as to first responders.
Tabletop Exercises
In addition to reorganizing
the agency to meet Homeland Security needs,
FSIS is participating in a number of tabletop
exercises at the Federal, State, and local
levels. These exercises give agency employees
the opportunity to simulate their actions in
response to a threat on the food supply. One
recent exercise, “Crimson Winter,” proved very
successful because it allowed the agency to
recognize and correct vulnerabilities in its
Homeland Security response plans.
Bioterrorism Risk Assessment for Domestic and
Imported Products
FSIS has conducted a food
security risk assessment to be used for
determining the most vulnerable products,
likely agents, and potential sites for
deliberate adulteration of domestically
produced meat, poultry, and egg products. The
assessment was conducted using a farm-to-table
approach based on current knowledge of the
industrial processes used in the production of
these products and the potential biological
and chemical agents that could be introduced.
The assessment was concluded in June 2002, and
the information obtained is being used to
develop risk management strategies, including
ensuring that our laboratories are equipped
with methods and personnel for detecting
agents of concern. A threat
assessment of the import system is also being
developed to identify points in the production
of imported products where biological,
chemical, and radiological contaminants could
be intentionally added to foods being brought
into the United States. FSIS used the risk
analysis framework to conduct a relative risk
ranking to be used to allocate resources to
monitor U.S. ports of entry for those food
commodities that pose the greatest risk,
examine different intervention strategies for
preventing or reducing risks, develop
biohazard identification protocols, and target
training of personnel and develop educational
campaigns to increase awareness. This
assessment is expected to be completed in
September 2003. Import
Surveillance Liaison Inspector
Soon after the terrorist
attacks on the United States, FSIS inspectors
nationwide were placed on heightened alert, a
condition that remains in effect today. Using
funds provided by the Homeland Security
Supplemental, FSIS created a new position,
that of the import surveillance liaison
inspectors. As of March 1, the 20 new import
inspectors are on duty at ports of entry to
augment the efforts of traditional FSIS import
inspectors assigned to the 146 import
establishments in the country. Where
traditional USDA import inspectors examine
each shipment and conduct reinspection
activities, these new import surveillance
liaison inspectors will conduct a broader
range of surveillance activities at each
import facility, as well as extensive records
review. These inspectors will not only improve
the agency’s ability to ensure the safety of
imported meat, poultry, and egg products, but
as liaisons, they will also be able to improve
coordination with other agencies (e.g., U.S.
Customs, APHIS) concerned with the safety of
imported food products. We are looking at
ways, in the future, to both increase the
number of liaison officers and to expand and
enhance their roles.
FSIS Food Security Initiatives
I also
wanted to submit for the record a report
titled, Protecting America’s Meat, Poultry
and Egg Products, that FSIS released
in early February 2003. The report,
prepared by the Office of Food Security and
Emergency Preparedness, outlines FSIS’ food
security initiatives. Some of the initiatives
included in the report are assessing potential
vulnerabilities along the farm-to-table
continuum, enhancing security features at all
FSIS laboratories, and strengthening FSIS
coordination and cooperation with law
enforcement agencies.
FSIS Partnerships
FSIS plays an essential role
in ensuring that the meat, poultry, and egg
products that we eat are safe. While we mainly
focus on the processing of these products, we
have a responsibility to the American people
to make sure that the entire food chain is
strong. Food safety is a team effort and we
are always working to improve our role in the
process. However, it requires that everyone
involved in the process, from the farmer to
the consumer, carries out his or her
responsibility in ensuring that the food we
eat is safe and safely prepared. FSIS works
with industry, consumers, and our sister
agencies on a daily basis in the war on
pathogens. Industry Outreach
FSIS strives to maintain a
healthy and direct relationship with the meat,
poultry, and egg products industries. We rely
on industry to prevent harmful pathogens from
entering the food supply. However, FSIS does
not just hand out policies or regulations and
declare: “You are on your own. Figure it out.
Good luck.” This is particularly true of
HACCP. FSIS was there to help when the program
was first implemented, and we continue to help
plants correctly implement the program through
our veterinarians, on-line inspectors, and
consumer safety officers. But now that HACCP
has been introduced and implemented, we are in
the next phase, which is enforcement. We will
hold industry, and ourselves, responsible for
successfully operating under the PR/HACCP
model. I have personally given industry a due
notice about our intentions. My message is a
clear one—that industry know the HACCP rule
and have it fully incorporated and implemented
into their HACCP plans or we will take
enforcement action. A cut-and-paste, or even
minimalist, approach to HACCP will not
suffice. To ignore HACCP is to put the
public’s health at risk and that is, simply,
unacceptable. In FY 2002, FSIS
made significant achievements in its Small and
Very Small Plant Outreach Program. This
program, introduced in 1998, was designed to
develop and provide technical guidance and
assistance to meet the specific needs of small
plants, with ten or more employees, but fewer
than 500, and very small plants with fewer
than 10 employees, or annual sales of less
than $2.5 million. FSIS held more than 30
courses targeting these segments of the
industry across the country. The courses
focused on HACCP food safety systems and were
provided through cooperative agreements with
nine universities. Part of the
agency’s outreach effort also includes keeping
the meat, poultry, and egg products industry
informed of changes and innovations in food
safety, as well as the standards and
requirements they must meet to operate a safe
food production facility. In FY 2002, FSIS
made improvements to the agency’s labeling and
standards policy web site, which was
introduced in 2002 as a new, business-friendly
web site providing essential information to
small and very small plants. The site is
geared towards helping small businesses
understand the fundamentals of labeling and
standards and to provide a key contact on our
staff to answer related questions. FSIS also
provides a staff liaison charged with
facilitating resolution of small business
issues on a one-on-one basis. The Labeling
Policy Staff receive over 400 inquiries a
month for labeling guidance. In
May 2002, FSIS published voluntary security
guidelines to assist Federal- and
State-inspected meat, poultry, and egg
products plants in identifying ways to
strengthen their security plans to protect
against acts of bioterrorism. FSIS provided
these guidelines to field employees who will
assist plants that seek further clarification
or advice. They were designed for plants that
may not have access to specialized security
planning advice. These voluntary guidelines
are available in English, Spanish, Vietnamese,
Korean, and Mandarin Chinese, both in print
and on the FSIS web site. Food
Safety Education
While a meat processing plant
might produce a perfectly safe hamburger,
innocent mistakes made by a food preparer
could taint a product with harmful bacteria
and create a potentially unsafe meal. Food can
become contaminated at any step in the food
chain. Thus, FSIS is committed to spreading
the food safety message in order to further
reduce the incidence of foodborne illness.
Food safety education is certainly not a
substitute for, but rather a complement to,
science-based food safety policies. I would
like nothing better than to tell people that
they do not need to worry about how they
handle and prepare their food because the
government has taken care of the problem. But,
as I said before, food safety is a team effort
and must be carried out at all stages of the
food production and preparation chain.
We will continue to strive for greater
reductions in harmful pathogens within meat,
poultry, and egg products production
facilities. But regardless of what we can
accomplish, food preparers always will have an
important role in keeping food safe.
Because of this, FSIS food safety education
programs are designed to increase consumer
knowledge in order to prevent foodborne
illness. The agency constructs educational
materials based on up-to-date scientific and
consumer research. Our programs target the
general public, as well as those groups who
face increased risks from foodborne illness –
the very young, the elderly, pregnant women,
people with chronic diseases, and people with
compromised immune systems.
FSIS spreads the food safety
message through the development and
distribution of brochures, technical papers,
and booklets via the media, educators, the
FSIS web site, and our Meat and Poultry
Hotline. The agency continues to look for
opportunities to leverage our resources to get
these important food safety messages out to
the public from coast to coast.
During its 18th
year in existence, the USDA Meat and Poultry
Hotline handled nearly 86,000 calls concerning
safe food handling practices in the home. Last
year, the Hotline expanded its service to
include recorded messages and live assistance
in Spanish. In addition, the agency’s two main
e-mail addresses received over 5,200 inquiries
and comments about food safety.
FSIS also carried out a number of food safety
education campaigns in FY 2002. In September,
the agency held the “Thinking Globally –
Working Locally: A Conference on Food Safety
Education.” The conference included
breakout sessions, workshops, and tours
focusing on the food safety education
implications of the global food supply. Over
600 participants from the U.S. and abroad
attended. Coordination on
International Activities
As one of several key U. S.
agencies responsible for food safety, FSIS
actively participates in developing
international food safety standards through
the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The U.S.
Codex Office is located within FSIS, and the
agency served as the head of U.S. Delegations
to the Executive Committee of the Codex
Alimentarius Commission meeting and to the
Codex Committee on General Principles. In
2002, FSIS announced 17 public meetings on
Codex standard setting activities and hosted
foreign government officials at various
workshops about important Codex issues.
Our leadership at Codex is
instrumental in realizing global food safety
standards are reasonable, equitable, and
achievable. America is the gold standard for
food safety programs. Successful participation
in the Codex leadership is a vital national
interest and will raise food safety standards
around the world. FSIS remains committed to
working through Codex to continue to stress
the role of science in international standard
setting. Other Public Health
Agencies
Because food safety plays such
a vast role along the entire farm-to-table
continuum, FSIS works with other government
agencies to make sure the U.S. produces safe
meat, poultry, and egg products. We have
partnerships with other Federal public health
agencies, regulatory agencies, State
governments, and research institutions, in
order to share ideas and concerns, and
maintain an open dialogue concerning food
safety. By doing so, we are helping each
agency achieve its respective vision, which
ultimately helps us paint the big picture –
improving public health.
Ensuring public health depends on sound
scientific research. Food safety research
carried out by ARS plays a critical role in
assisting FSIS to evolve into a model public
health agency. This is especially true because
our environment is certainly not static. We
constantly need to study the factors that
change the prevalence rate of pathogens. These
factors could be on the farm, around the farm,
in transportation, at the plant, or en route
to the consumer. ARS and FSIS have worked
cooperatively to ensure that food safety
research is appropriately addressed in USDA’s
research agenda. An integral
element in the fight against foodborne illness
is early detection. In FY 2002, FSIS completed
its seventh full year of a partnership with
CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
that conducts active surveillance for
foodborne diseases in five States and parts of
four more. This effort, called FoodNet, serves
as an early warning system for foodborne
illnesses. FoodNet, for the first time,
identified a downward trend in the incidence
of foodborne disease from 1996-2001. CDC
reported in April 2002, that this reduction
could be attributed to multiple control
measures, including implementation of FSIS’
PR/HACCP regulations. In FY
2002, FSIS initiated eight cooperative
agreements with States to raise awareness and
understanding of the risks of handling meat,
poultry, and egg products by retail stores and
food service establishments. These agreements
benefit those State and local agencies
responsible for inspecting these
establishments, as well as managers and
owners. Additionally, FSIS field
epidemiologists assisted local and State
health departments with over 30 outbreak or
emergency-related investigations due to such
causes as E. coli, Listeria, and
Salmonella. Many of these
investigations involved multiple States and
localities. In addition, as of
July 31, 2002, FSIS can now share product
distribution lists of establishments
conducting recalls with State and Federal
agencies with which the agency has negotiated
memoranda of understanding. Previously, we
were not allowed to share this information due
to Freedom of Information Act regulations.
This new policy will allow FSIS to better work
with its partners throughout the nation to
more quickly and effectively carry out recalls
of potentially contaminated product.
FY 2004 Budget Request
Now that I have provided a
synopsis of FSIS’ progress, I would like to
present an overview of the FY 2004 budget
request for FSIS. The budget request for FY
2004 would fund those programs previously
discussed and will help FSIS reach the goal of
becoming a world-class public health agency.
By incorporating the principles of public
health into all of our operations, we will be
modernizing our inspection system to meet the
goals and challenges of food safety in the 21st
century. Implementation of these budget
initiatives is imperative to helping us attain
the public health vision we have set for FSIS.
In FY 2004, FSIS is requesting a program level
of $899 million, a net increase of about $42
million over the enacted level for FY 2003.
Under current law, we are requesting an
appropriation of $797 million and $102 million
in existing user fees.
Supporting FSIS’ Basic Mission
The FSIS budget request for FY
2004 supports the agency’s basic mission of
providing continuous food safety inspection in
each meat, poultry, and egg products
establishment in the U.S. The FY 2004 budget
includes $23.6 million in increases to cover
pay and employee benefit costs, inflation, and
the agency’s support of State-inspection
programs. The budget reflects the proposed FY
2004 pay raise of 2.0 percent for Federal and
State program personnel and the annualized
cost of the 4.1 percent pay increase for 2003.
These costs also include a total net increase
of approximately $853,000 for state food
safety and inspection. This includes Federal
control of the Commonwealth of Virginia’s
inspection program beginning in July 2003, as
well as the initiation of Maine’s State
inspection program. New
Initiatives
The FY 2004 request includes a
$19.3 million increase for new initiatives
that support the Department’s goals for FSIS.
While the implementation of the HACCP system
has provided a solid base for FSIS to carry
out its goal of protecting the nation’s food
supply, more can be done to strengthen this
foundation. Thus, the FY 2004 budget requests
an increase of $5.7 million to enhance the
agency’s workforce training capability, which
I mentioned earlier is one of my top
priorities. This will allow FSIS to re-tool
and expand its existing training programs by
incorporating a public health focus and
integrating scientific and technical
principles, including HACCP validation, with
training on technical and regulatory
approaches to inspection. In addition to
increasing the technical skills of our
employees, the agency intends to use training
opportunities to strengthen the management
capabilities of our workforce as well.
Additionally, the agency plans to enhance
training by taking the training opportunities
we offer into the field. Employees will now
have a variety of training options, including
the ability to take courses taught by
university professors near their work sites.
The FY 2004 budget includes an
increase of $4.3 million to cover costs
associated with funding 7,680 in-plant
personnel in meat, poultry, and egg products
plants. This is an increase of 80 slaughter
inspectors and is necessary due to industry
growth. The increase will allow the agency to
ensure that there is an inspector in every
meat, poultry, and egg products establishment
each and every day that it is in operation.
With the additional inspectors we will ensure
that every carcass is inspected.
To achieve the agency’s goal of applying
science to all policy decisions, the FY 2004
budget includes a new $1.7 million initiative
to establish a continuous baseline program for
risk assessments and performance measurement.
While the agency has previously conducted
baseline studies using its internal laboratory
resources, this new initiative would include
laboratory analyses using outside
laboratories, would repeat each baseline study
every three years to provide longitudinal data
to track performance, and would provide
scientific data needed for ongoing risk
assessments. Using nationwide microbiological
baseline studies would improve data quality
and incorporate risk management into all
regulatory and policy actions.
When a foodborne outbreak occurs, it is
essential to identify the source of the
outbreak so that the agency can take swift
action to prevent further illnesses and warn
the public of the adulterated product.
Therefore, the FY 2004 budget request includes
$4.5 million to provide additional
microbiologists, chemists, laboratory
technicians, and other personnel to increase
the agency’s ability to identify adulterants
in meat, poultry, and egg products. This
funding will help the agency develop
analytical methods to test food products for
chemical, biological, and radiological
contamination. This initiative would also
increase sampling of ready-to-eat products for
the presence of bacteria such as Listeria
monocytogenes and Salmonella. FSIS
would increase sampling of these products from
10,000 to 15,000 annually and would add the
capability to conduct 5,000 Listeria
monocytogenes environmental samples
annually. The agency also plans to increase
sampling of raw ground beef and raw ground
beef ingredients for E. coli O157:H7
from 7,000 to 15,000 samples annually.
Education and outreach have always been
important aspects of FSIS’ mission and this is
again reflected in the FY 2004 budget request.
The agency is requesting a $1.5 million
increase to design a mass media campaign aimed
at improving safe food handling habits of
consumers at home. Emphasis will be placed on
a program that communicates with under-served
groups. Performance measures will be
incorporated to evaluate the effectiveness of
the campaign at spreading the food safety
message. It is important that
foreign products meet U.S. standards.
Therefore, the FY 2004 budget request includes
$1.8 million to increase FSIS equivalence
reviews in exporting countries. In recent
years, FSIS has experienced a rise in
applications from foreign countries to export
meat and poultry products to the U.S. This
funding is necessary for the agency to hire
additional foreign auditors to meet the
demands of increased foreign inspection system
audits. This will help ensure that foreign
meat, poultry, and egg products establishments
are shipping product to the U.S. that meets
the same standard of safety required in U.S.
establishments.
User Fee Proposal
FSIS’ FY 2004 budget also
includes a legislative proposal to recover the
costs of providing inspection services beyond
an approved eight-hour primary shift. FSIS
collects $102 million in user fees annually to
recover the costs of overtime, holiday, and
voluntary inspection. If enacted, the level of
appropriated funds needed would be reduced
from $797 million to $675 million to reflect
an increase in user fee funding of $122
million. This will result in savings for the
American taxpayer.
Closing
Let me restate that we all
have a role to play in improving public
health. We will continue to hold ourselves and
industry to a higher standard. This is not a
pain-free process, but there will be tangible,
and measurable, benefits for the American
people. Our workforce has been reinvigorated
by this challenge and we will deliver.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared
statement. Thank you for the opportunity to
submit testimony to the Subcommittee on how
FSIS is working with Congress and other
partners to become a first class public health
agency. It is my hope that with Congress’
assistance, food safety in the United States
will reach unsurpassed heights. I look forward
to working with you to ensure that the vision
of FSIS as a world-class public health agency
is realized. |
