[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 207 (Monday, October 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55569-55570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28366]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. 97-057N]


Notice of Change in Inspection Procedures; Adoption of a Hands-
off Inspection Procedure for Lambs

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In response to a request from the American Sheep Industry 
Association, the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is changing 
its inspection procedures for lambs. Currently, inspectors palpate the 
carcasses of lambs for the purpose of detecting and removing carcasses 
with diseases such as Caseous lymphadenitis. Under the new procedure, 
there will be hands-off inspection of lambs in order to reduce the risk 
and hands-on inspection methods may spread or add microbial 
contamination to carcasses.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Alice Thaler, Chief, Concepts & Design Branch, Inspection Methods 
Development Division, Office of Policy, Program Development, and 
Evaluation, Food Safety and Inspection Service, Department of 
Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250-3700; telephone, (202) 205-0005.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Traditionally, meat inspectors have palpated the carcasses of lambs 
as part of their post-mortem evaluation of these animals. The American 
Sheep Industry Association recommended that we end this practice for 
food safety reasons. The primary justification for this long-standing 
hands-on inspection procedure was to detect and remove carcasses with 
diseases such as Caseous lymphadenitis.
    In determining the desirability of such a procedure for lambs, FSIS 
considered two questions: (1) Will diseased carcasses of parts be more 
likely to reach consumers in a hands-off system?; and (2) Are current 
hands-on inspection methods likely to be spreading or adding 
contamination to carcasses?

Comparing Hands-on and Hands-off Procedures

    The first issue deals with the benefits of a hands-on system. What 
is the risk that a diseased carcass or diseased parts would be passed 
for food and reach the consumer if FSIS instituted a hands-off 
inspection procedure?
    The second issue was to determine whether current inspection 
techniques used on lambs cause inspectors to spread or add 
contamination to carcasses. Although there is no data on this specific 
question, we believe that data from other food handling and health care 
industries indicate that the hands-on procedures could contaminate lamb 
carcasses or spread such contamination.
    Caseous lymphadenitis is the primary disease detected by carcass 
palpation, and it is not a public health concern. In the United States, 
there are six plants that slaughter 80 percent of the lambs. From 
Fiscal Years 1987 to 1996, these six plants slaughtered 26,347,480 
lambs and yearlings. (Present data do not distinguish between lambs and 
yearlings.) The plants condemned 1,203 animals in the same 10-year 
period for Caseous lymphadenitis, a 0.0046 percent condemnation rate. 
It is unknown how many carcasses were detected on post-mortem and 
trimmed, and then passed for food.
    Seven of the diseases routinely present in lambs are of public 
health concern: Actinobacillosis, Campylobacteriosis, Contagious 
ecthyma, Echinococcosis, Leptospirosis, Salmonella dysentery, and 
Toxoplasmosis. However, none of them require carcass palpation for 
diagnosis.
    The American Sheep Industry Association believes that hands-on 
inspection methods spread or add contamination to carcasses, including 
pathogenci microorganisms such as Escherichia coli 0157:H7 and 
Salmonella. The Agenc7y evaluated existing information to determine its 
adequacy and reviewed literature regarding the documented spread of 
contamination by hands in other industries. (See References at end of 
document.) Evidence from other food handling and health care industries 
supports these concerns. (Gould and Ream 1996; Wenzel and Pulverer 
1995). FSIS accepts the documentation in allied fields, which argues 
that the palpation of lamb carcasses is inconsistent with our food 
safety philosophy that FSIS must return carcasses presented for 
inspection with unchanged or lower food safety risk factors.

Conclusion

    The primary reason for carcass palpation in lambs is to detect 
Caseous lymphadenitis. This disease is not in public health concern and 
has an extremely low condemnation rate. Although it has not been proven 
directly that palpation by inspectors causes microbial contamination or 
actually spreads such contamination, compelling evidence from allied 
industries indicates that hands do spread or add microorganisms. The 
risk of contamination using a hands-on procedure exceeds the risk of 
diseased carcasses being missed using a hands-off procedure for lambs.
    Therefore, FSIS is proceeding to adopt a hands-off inspection 
method for lambs. This process involves a number of steps, including 
consultation with employee organizations. FSIS intends to complete the 
process within the next 12 months.
    FSIS will monitor condemnation rates in the six plants to identify 
the impact, if any, of the change. Further, the Agency intends to look 
at the implications of hands-of inspection procedures with regard to 
the production of all meat and poultry products.

    Done at Washington, DC, on October 17, 1997.
Thomas J. Billy,
Administrator.

References

    1. Snider, O.P., Jr., HACCP--An Industry Food Safety Self-
Control Program--Part VI, Dairy Food & Environ. Sanitation, June 
1992; 12(6):362-365.
    2. Almeida, R.C., Kuaye, A.Y., Serrano, A.M., de Almeida, P.F., 
Evaluation and Control of the Microbiological Quality of Hands in 
Food Handlers, Revista de Saude Publica (Brazil), Aug. 1995; 
29(4):290-4.
    3. Bell, R.G., Hathaway, S.C., The Hygienic Efficiency of 
Conventional and Inverted Lamb Dressing Systems. Journal of Applied 
Bacteriology (New Zealand). Sep. 1996; 81(3):225-34AB.
    4. Gould, D., Ream, E., Nurses' Infection-control Practice: Hand 
Decontamination, the Use of Gloves and Sharp Instruments. 
International Journal of Nursing Studies (U.K.). Apr. 1996; 
33(2):143-60AB.

[[Page 55570]]

    5. Wenzel, R., Pulverer, G., Methicillin-resistant 
Staphylococcus homiletics on the Hands of Health Care Workers: A 
Route of Transmission or a Source? Journal of Hospital Infection 
(Germany). Nov. 1995; 31(3):195-120AB.
    6. Kaltenthaler, E.C., Elsworth, A.M., Schweiger, M.S. Mara, 
D.D., Brfaunholttz, D.A., Faecal Contamination on Children's Hands 
and Environmental Surfaces in Primary Schools in Leeds. Epidemiology 
and Infection (U.K.). Dec. 1995; 115(3):527-34.
    7. Sengupta, P.G., Sicar, B.K., Mandal, S.K. Mukhopadhyay, A.K., 
Nair, G.B., et al., Epidemiology of Vibro cholerae 0139 with Special 
References to Intrafamilial Transmission in Calcutta. Journal of 
Infection (India). Jul. 1995; 31(1):45-7.
    8. Gerding, D.N., Johnson, S., Peterson, L.R., Mulligan, M.E., 
Silva, J.A., Jr., Clostridium difficile-Associated Diarrhea and 
Colitis. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, Aug. 1995; 457-
77AB.
    9. Urano, T., Noguchi, K., Jiang, G., Tsukumi, K., Survey of 
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Contamination in Human Beings and Laboratory 
Animals. Experimental Animals (Japan). Jul. 1995; 44(3):233-9.

[FR Doc. 97-28366 Filed 10-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-M