[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 111 (Tuesday, June 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31562-31566]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15124]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. 97-037N]


Interstate Distribution of State-Inspected Meat and Poultry 
Products

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of public meetings; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is soliciting 
comments on ways it can improve Federal and State cooperation in the 
implementation of the Federal meat and poultry inspection laws, and on 
whether, and if so how, those laws should be amended to permit meat and 
poultry products inspected by State inspection programs to be 
distributed in interstate commerce. State inspection programs are 
authorized under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Poultry 
Products Inspection Act (PPIA) to inspect meat and poultry 
establishments that prepare products intended for use as human food 
solely for distribution within the State under requirements ``at least 
equal to'' those imposed under Federal inspection.

DATES: The meetings will be held on June 16 and 17, 1997, in Sioux 
Falls, SD, and on July 22, 1997, in Washington, DC. Written information 
and comments will be accepted and made a part of the record of these 
proceedings through August 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: The first meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 
on June 16 and from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on June 17, 1997, at the 
Radisson Encore Inn, 4300 Empire Place, Sioux Falls, SD 57106-6525; 
telephone (605) 361-6684. The second meeting will be held from 9:00 
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on July 22, 1997, in the Ticonderoga Room of the 
Hyatt Regency Washington on Capitol Hill, 400 New Jersey Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20001. Persons sending written comments should send an 
original and two copies to the FSIS Docket Clerk, Docket No. 97-037N, 
Room 102 Annex Building, 300 12th Street, SW, Food Safety and 
Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 
20250-3700.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Persons wishing to participate in 
either of the two meetings are requested to register by contacting Ms. 
Traci Phebus by telephone at (202) 501-7138, by FAX at (202) 501-7642, 
or by E-mail at [email protected]. Participants may reserve a 5-
minute comment period when they register. More time may be available, 
depending on the number of people wishing to make a presentation and 
the time needed for questions, following the presentations. 
Reservations will be confirmed on a first-come, first-served basis. 
Written comments may also be submitted for the record at the meetings. 
For questions about the meetings contact Mr. Ralph Stafko at (202) 720-
7774, or FAX at (202) 720-2345. Participants who require a sign 
language interpreter or other special accommodations should contact Ms. 
Jennifer Callahan at (202) 501-7138.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A number of State Departments of Agriculture 
operating their own meat and poultry inspection programs have expressed 
various concerns about the relationship between the State programs and 
the Federal meat and poultry inspection program, and, in addition, have 
advocated amendments in Federal laws to permit State-inspected meat and 
poultry products to be distributed in interstate commerce. FSIS will 
conduct public hearings to explore these concerns and any recommended 
alternative policies and procedures, including proposals to amend 
Federal laws to improve the cooperative relationship between Federal 
and State meat and poultry inspection programs. The following 
information is provided in order to encourage the discussion of these 
issues and the submission of relevant information and comment.

Background

    FSIS must provide Federal inspection at any meat and poultry 
establishment that produces meat and poultry products for interstate or 
foreign commerce, or that produces such products for intrastate 
commerce if the State in which it is located does not operate its own 
program. Those approximately 6,500 establishments, encompassing very 
large to very small establishments, produce the vast majority of the 
nation's inspected meat and poultry products slaughtered and processed 
in the United States.
    Twenty-six states operate their own inspection programs, which 
collectively inspect approximately 2,800 mostly small and mid-size meat 
and poultry plants (Table 1). Estimates of the proportion of the 
nation's meat and poultry products that are State-inspected have ranged 
as high as 7 percent. FSIS data, limited to slaughter operations and 
not accounting for processed products, show that State-inspected 
establishments slaughter commercially a little more than 1 percent of 
the nation's livestock and a small fraction of 1 percent of the 
nation's poultry by weight.
    To ensure that States are enforcing requirements ``at least equal 
to'' the Federal requirements, FSIS inspection program personnel work 
directly with State inspection officials providing advice and guidance 
on Federal inspection requirements on a continuing basis and also 
conduct periodic reviews of the State inspection programs. FSIS reviews 
each State program's State Performance Plan (SPP) annually. The SPP is 
a compilation of applicable State laws and regulations, program 
resources, and current operations and enforcement activities (FSIS 
Directive 5720.2, Cooperative Inspection Programs). In addition, teams 
of FSIS experts periodically conduct comprehensive on-site reviews, 
including random sampling of records and inspection of conditions in 
State-inspected plants. State programs are rated as: 1, Acceptable; 2, 
Acceptable with Minor Variations; 3, Acceptable with Significant 
Variations; and 4,

[[Page 31563]]

Unacceptable. A ``1'' is reviewed at least every 5 years; a ``2'' at 
least every 4 years; a ``3'' at least every 3 years; and a ``4'' as 
frequently as necessary, depending on the nature of the findings. 
Presently, 6 States are rated ``1'', 14 States are rated ``2'', and 6 
States are rated ``3''.
    If a State does not have an ``at least equal to'' State inspection 
program, the State is designated by FSIS as one in which Federal 
inspection must be provided for all meat and poultry establishments 
requiring inspection under Federal law, regardless of whether the 
establishments' products are distributed solely within the State. 
Currently, 24 States have no meat and poultry inspection programs. 
(Table 2).
    In addition to the State administered meat and poultry inspection 
programs, State agencies also enforce adulteration and mislabeling 
requirements of State and local laws governing meat and poultry 
products in commercial channels outside inspected establishments. 
Although the products are concurrently subject to FMIA and PPIA 
adulteration and mislabeling provisions, FSIS relies heavily on State 
and local agencies to ensure inspected products are kept safe, 
wholesome, and properly labeled as they are handled during 
distribution, and prepared and held for sale to consumers at retail 
stores and restaurants.

Federal Support of State and Local Programs

    State meat and poultry inspection programs are an integral part of 
the Federal regulatory system for ensuring the safety of the nation's 
meat and poultry products. Accordingly, the FMIA and PPIA provide for 
FSIS cooperation with State agencies in carrying out the provisions of 
the Federal inspection laws and specify that FSIS may furnish State 
agencies advisory assistance, technical and laboratory assistance and 
training, and financial and other aid for administration of the State 
programs--up to 50 percent of the cost of any State's program. 
Currently, FSIS provides about $40.5 million to 26 States for 
administering the State inspection programs. In addition, FSIS 
allocates funds specifically for training assistance to State programs.
    Some States have found that despite Federal support, they cannot 
maintain a State inspection program, and have deferred to FSIS to 
conduct all meat and poultry inspection within their States. Even in 
States maintaining inspection programs, State legislatures sometimes 
appropriate less than 50 percent of the (USDA) estimated cost, thereby 
reducing proportionately the amount of Federal money contributed to the 
State program. In those cases, non-monetary Federal assistance in areas 
such as training is especially important to the State programs.
    In addition to 50 percent Federal funding of, and non-monetary 
assistance to, State inspection programs, FSIS from time to time enters 
into cooperative agreements with State agencies and provides funding 
for those agencies to conduct Federal inspection, or other enforcement 
activities under FMIA and PPIA within those States. This authority is 
provided under the Talmadge-Aiken Act, which gives the Secretary 
authority to enter into such agreements ``[i]n order to avoid 
duplication of functions, facilities and personnel, and to attain 
closer coordination and greater effectiveness and economy in 
administration of Federal and State laws * * * within his area of 
responsibility * * *'' (7 U.S.C. 450). Currently, FSIS has agreements 
under its Federal-State Cooperative Inspection Program with 9 States, 
under which employees of State inspection agencies carry out Federal 
inspection in 255 establishments under USDA supervision (Table 3). FSIS 
provides 50 percent funding for that work.
    The President's Food Safety Initiative directs USDA and other 
Federal food safety and public health agencies to improve coordination 
and cooperation among themselves and with State and local governments 
on food safety matters. The Initiative recognizes the importance of 
State and local food safety agencies and provides for additional 
Federal support of those State and local activities. For example, the 
Initiative would improve training of State inspectors in Federal food 
safety standards and provide to States equipment and technology for 
rapid sharing of inspection results to develop a national database for 
monitoring all food inspections.
    FSIS is working closely with FDA, State and local governments, and 
organizations representing industry, consumers, and public health 
professionals to promote more effective food safety programs. FSIS also 
is developing, in cooperation with the Association of Food and Drug 
Officials, training and training materials on potentially high-risk 
meat and poultry processing activities for State and local food 
inspection agencies that oversee meat and poultry processing at retail 
and food service operations. Although retail and food service 
facilities generally are exempt from federally mandated inspection, 
they are engaged in processing activities similar to those in inspected 
establishments. In recognition of the need for more Federal support for 
State agencies primarily responsible for regulating retail and food 
service establishments, the Administration's 1998 FSIS budget requests 
$565,000 for training State and local food inspectors on meat and 
poultry processing and related food safety matters. In addition, FSIS 
participates in the Partnership for Food Safety Education, a broad 
alliance of industry, government, and other organizations, which is 
developing a comprehensive plan for food safety education of consumers 
and others who handle food.
    FSIS believes it is essential to maintain and strengthen the State 
administered meat and poultry inspection programs. FSIS officials 
understand the concern of State officials of inspection programs that 
the statutory requirement that State-inspected plants have Federal 
inspection in order to ship interstate can result in a decrease in the 
number of State-inspected plants and potentially threaten the viability 
of the affected State program. Accordingly, FSIS solicits the views and 
specific recommendations of all interested parties regarding how the 
Agency can enhance its support of, and assist in improving, State 
inspection programs under its current authorities.

Amending FMIA and PPIA

    FSIS also is seeking comment on whether, and if so how, the FMIA 
and PPIA should be amended to permit distribution of State-inspected 
meat and poultry products in interstate commerce.
    Some State Departments of Agriculture, mostly through the National 
Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA), contend that 
because a State inspection program must be ``at least equal to'' 
Federal inspection, sales of State-inspected meat and poultry products 
should not be limited to commercial distribution only in that State, 
thereby denying State-inspected establishments access to markets that 
could help them survive and prosper in an increasingly competitive 
marketplace. Proponents of this view often cite the case where a State-
inspected plant located right next to the State line is cut off from 
what would otherwise be a natural market because it is restricted to 
intrastate sales. Many State program officials also point out that 
while State-inspected products are restricted to intrastate sale, 
imported products can be sold freely in any State.
    Efforts to obtain statutory amendments that would permit

[[Page 31564]]

interstate distribution of State-inspected products led to a 1996 
request for USDA to report to Congress on the issue. The Federal 
Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, also known as the 1996 
Farm Bill, directed the Secretary of Agriculture to submit to Congress 
a report concerning steps necessary to achieve interstate shipment of 
products inspected under State programs that are ``at least equal to'' 
the Federal inspection program.
    The Department submitted this report to Congress in July, 1996. The 
report recommended that before State-inspected establishments are 
authorized to ship products in interstate commerce, certain conditions 
should be met: These conditions are: (1) States should implement FSIS's 
Pathogen Reduction/Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point systems; (2) 
FSIS resources would need to be adequate to accommodate any additional 
oversight required to substantiate ``at least equal to'' status; (3) 
such legislation should clarify that the Secretary retains ultimate 
authority over products prepared for interstate commerce; and (4) 
additional issues, mostly dealing with potential conflicts between 
Federal and State laws, would have to be resolved.
    Recently, two bills (H.R. 801 and H.R. 1137) have been introduced 
in Congress to amend the FMIA and PPIA to permit the interstate 
distribution of State-inspected meat and poultry. The Department has 
determined that the changes proposed by these bills raise a number of 
important food safety issues that require plenary discussion and 
careful consideration. Some of the issues that need to be considered 
are as follows:
     Whether legislative changes to the FMIA and PPIA to 
provide for interstate distribution of State-inspected products should 
be enacted or made effective prior to implementation of HACCP?
     Whether and, if so how, Federal oversight of State 
programs should be strengthened in the event State-inspected products 
are authorized to be shipped interstate?
     Whether allowing the interstate distribution of State-
inspected products would lead to ``competing'' inspector programs among 
the States and between the States and the Federal program, and also to 
``forum shopping?''
     Whether and how other pending or proposed regulatory 
actions should be taken into account before any of the proposed 
legislative changes are made effective? Further, there are a number of 
jurisdictional issues central to the discussion:
     Whether there would be concurrent State and Federal 
jurisdiction regarding the denial/withdrawal/withholding of grants of 
inspection?
     Who would have jurisdiction over misbranding/adulteration 
violations?
     Whether States will have separate authority to detain/
seize/condemn/recall products in commercial channels outside plants?
    The foregoing list of issues is not intended to be exhaustive. FSIS 
welcomes discussion and comments on all issues related to the 
interstate shipment of meat and poultry from State-inspected 
establishments.

    Done in Washington, DC, on: June 4, 1997.
Thomas J. Billy,
Administrator.
    Table 1 summarizes the number of States at the end of fiscal year 
1996 with intrastate inspection programs for meat (26) and poultry 
(24); the number of State full-time equivalent staff years during 
fiscal year 1996; and Federal funding assistance expended by States 
during fiscal year 1996. ``M'' after the name of the State indicates 
that the State conducted a meat inspection program; ``M&P'' indicates 
that the State conducted meat and poultry inspection programs. In order 
to continue operating intrastate inspection programs and to continue 
receiving Federal funding assistance, States must maintain inspection 
requirements at least equal to those of the Federal program.

                                                           Table 1.--State Inspection Programs                                                          
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Regular plants                            Custom exempt plants                                      
                                            ------------------------------          ----------------------------------------  Full time       FY 1996   
                                                                 Meat and    Total                       Meat and             equivalent      federal   
                                               Meat     Poultry   poultry              Meat     Poultry   Poultry    Total   staff years    assistance  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA M&P................................        70         5         3        78        20         0         0        20         15.5       1,274,376
ALASKA M&P.................................         7         0         8        15         1         0         0         1          5.0         341,155
ARIZONA M&P................................        63         2         0        65        27         0         0        27         24.8         584,388
DELAWARE M&P...............................         1         0         2         3         3         1         3         7         10.5         212,604
FLORDIA \1\ M&P............................         0       105        27       132        26  ........  ........        26         79.0       1,966,547
GEORGIA M \2\..............................        86         0         0        86        21         0         0        21        101.0       2,403,110
HAWAII \3\ M&P.............................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...........         293,200
ILLINOIS M&P...............................       208        21       101       330        15         4         2        21        122.0       4,359,261
INDIANA M&P................................        48         7        74       129        20         6         1        27         85.0       1,652,715
IOWA M&P...................................       136         6         0       142       105         5         6       116         34.0       1,010,902
KANSAS M&P.................................       141         5         5       151        12         1         0        13         51.0       1,282,247
LOUSIANA M&P...............................        84         5         1        90        42         0         0        42         68.0       1,754,579
MISSISSIPPI M&P............................        36         0        15        51        18         4         0        22         44.0       1,098,002
MONTANA M&P................................        22         0        15        37        87        31        20       138         15.0         341,039
NEW MEXICO M&P.............................        38         0         0        38        13         0         0        13         15.0         418,650
NORTH CAROLINA M&P.........................       156        10         0       166        41         0         0        41        125.0       2,847,709
OHIO M&P...................................       151        17        91       259        58        14         1        73        133.0       4,616,502
OKLAHOMA M&P...............................        63         3        22        88        60         0         0        60         68.0       1,616,065
SOUTH CAROLINA M&P.........................        43         9        56       108         0         0         0         0         49.0       1,131,972
SOUTH DAKOTA M \2\.........................        53         0         0        53        51         0         0        51         21.0         479,771
TEXAS M&P..................................       256        12        78       346       131         4        11       146        213.0       4,622,924
UTAH M&P...................................        29         0         8        37        48         2         0        50         29.3         770,926
VERMONT M&P................................        16         1         1        18        12         2         0        14         14.2         283,578
VIRGINIA M&P...............................        24         3         4        31       136         0         2       138         42.0       1,292,494
WEST VIRGINIA M&P..........................        30         0         0        30        42         0         0        42         26.0         597,101
WISCONSIN M&P..............................       155        10       113       278        56         3        13        72         85.0       2,983,403

[[Page 31565]]

                                                                                                                                                        
WYOMING M&P................................        31         0         0        31        29         0         0        29          7.5         283,805
TOTAL......................................     1,947       221       624     2,792     1,074        77        59     1,210      1,482.8      40,519,025
CALIFORNIA \1\.............................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........       306  ...........         147,697
MINNESOTA \4\..............................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........       298  ...........         110,348
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FY 1995 figures. FY 1996 figures not available at this time.                                                                                        
\2\ Poultry Program is under Federal jurisdiction.                                                                                                      
\3\ The Hawaii Program was designated November 1, 1995 so other statistics are not available.                                                           
\4\ Official plants are under Federal jurisdiction. Custom exempt facilities are reviewed under State contract.                                         
*All Federal assistance amounts are estimates.                                                                                                          

    Table 2 lists the dates the Department assumed inspection of meat 
and poultry products for intrastate sale in designated States as of 
September 28, 1996. All plants in designated States come under Federal 
inspection and their products can be sold in interstate commerce.

           Table 2.--Dates USDA Assumed Intrastate Inspection           
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      State                          Meat       Poultry 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas........................................    06/01/81    01/02/71
California......................................    04/01/76    04/01/76
Colorado........................................    07/01/75    01/02/71
Connecticut.....................................    10/01/75    10/01/75
Georgia.........................................       (\1\)    01/02/71
Hawaii..........................................    11/01/95    11/01/95
Idaho...........................................    07/01/81    01/02/71
Kentucky........................................    01/14/72    07/28/71
Maine...........................................    05/12/80    01/02/71
Maryland........................................    04/01/91    04/01/91
Massachusetts...................................    01/12/76    01/12/76
Michigan........................................    10/03/81    01/02/71
Minnesota.......................................    05/16/71    01/02/71
Missouri........................................    08/18/72    08/18/72
Nebraska........................................    10/01/71    07/28/71
Nevada..........................................    07/01/73    07/01/73
New Hampshire...................................    08/07/78    08/07/78
New Jersey......................................    07/01/75    07/01/75
New York........................................    07/16/75    04/11/77
North Dakota....................................    06/22/70    01/02/71
Oregon..........................................    07/01/72    01/02/71
Pennsylvania....................................    07/17/72    10/31/71
Rhode Island....................................    10/01/81    10/01/81
South Dakota....................................       (\1\)    01/02/71
Tennessee.......................................    10/01/75    10/01/75
Washington......................................   06/01 /73   06/01/73 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(\1\) Indicates USDA has not assumed meat inspection in the State shown.

    Table 3 lists the number of meat, poultry, and other plants 
inspected under Federal-State Cooperative Inspection Program (FSCIP) 
agreements as of September 28, 1996. FSCIP agreements permit State 
employees to carry out inspection in federally inspected plants.

                 Table 3.--Federal-State Cooperative Inspection Plants (Formerly Talmadge-Aiken)                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Meat and                              
                        State                           Meat     Poultry   poultry     Sub      Other     Grand 
                                                       plants    plants    plants     total    plants     total 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.............................................        20         0         0        20         0        20
Georgia.............................................        11         0        41        52         0        52
Illinois............................................        18         2        10        30         0        30
Mississippi.........................................         5         0        14        19         0        19
North Carolina......................................        51         3         0        54         0        54
Oklahoma............................................        13         0         1        14         0        14
Texas...............................................         7         1        14        22         0        22
Utah................................................         8         0         5        13         0        13
Virginia............................................         9         1        21        31         0        31
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................................       142         7       106       255         0       255
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 31566]]

[FR Doc. 97-15124 Filed 6-5-97; 1:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P