[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 2, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15932-15936]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-7847]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 94

[Docket No. 99-032-2]


Importation of Cooked Meat and Meat Products

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations governing the importation of 
certain animals, meat, and other animal products to allow meat cooked 
in plastic in processing establishments located in regions where 
rinderpest or foot-and-mouth disease exists to be further processed 
after cooking and before importation. Additionally, we are allowing the 
pink juice test to be used in determining whether ground meat cooked in 
such establishments has been adequately cooked. These amendments will 
provide foreign meat processing establishments with additional 
processing options while continuing to protect against the introduction 
of rinderpest and foot-and-mouth disease into the United States.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Masoud Malik, Senior Staff 
Veterinarian, Products Program, National Center for Import and Export, 
VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 40, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 
734-3277.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the 
regulations) govern the importation of specified animals and animal 
products to prevent the introduction into the United States of various 
animal diseases, including rinderpest, foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), 
bovine spongiform encephalopathy, swine vesicular disease, hog cholera, 
and African swine fever. These are dangerous and destructive 
communicable diseases of ruminants and swine.
    Under Sec.  94.4 of the regulations, the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service (APHIS) prohibits the importation of cured and 
cooked meat from regions where rinderpest or FMD exists unless the 
cured or cooked meat fulfills the conditions prescribed in that 
section.

Meat Cut Into Cubes

    Section 94.4(b)(8) requires that cooked ruminant or swine meat 
imported into the United States from regions where rinderpest or FMD 
exists be inspected at the port of arrival by an inspector of the Food 
Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture (Department) and be found to be thoroughly cooked. For meat 
that is cooked in plastic, thoroughness of cooking must be determined 
either by a temperature indicator device (TID) or by the pink juice 
test performed on a piece of meat known as an indicator piece. It is 
important for the FSIS inspector to be able to associate a TID or 
indicator piece with the plastic tube of cooked meat that it came from. 
Until now, that has meant that meat from various cooking tubes could 
not be combined after cooking for further processing at a foreign meat 
processing establishment before being exported to the United States.
    On May 22, 2002, we published a proposed rule in the Federal 
Register (67 FR 35936-35939, Docket No. 99-032-1) in which we proposed 
to allow meat cooked in different plastic tubes in a single cycle of 
cooking to be combined after that cooking for further processing. 
Additionally, we proposed to allow the pink juice test to be used in 
determining whether ground meat cooked in foreign meat processing 
establishments has been adequately cooked.
    We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending 
July 22, 2002. We received 16 comments by that date. They were from 
livestock associations, food processing associations, a State 
department of agriculture, foreign and domestic meat processors, 
importers, manufacturers of packaged food products, and a meat science 
association. Three of the commenters opposed the proposed provisions, 
two supported the proposal as written, and the rest of the commenters 
recommended changes to the proposed rule. We discuss the issues raised 
by the commenters below.

Comments Received

    In our proposed rule, we referred to meat that is cooked in the 
same cooking cycle as being part of the same ``shift.'' A number of 
commenters stated that the word ``shift'' connotes the time worked by 
personnel, rather than a cooking

[[Page 15933]]

cycle, and recommended that we replace the word ``shift'' with 
``batch.'' In this final rule, we are changing our terminology to use 
``batch,'' as recommended by the commenters. In our discussion of the 
proposed rule in this background information, when we refer to text in 
the proposed rule that used the term ``shift,'' we will use the term 
``batch'' instead and follow it with the term ``shift'' in parentheses.
    The regulations in part 94 require that meat cooked in plastic for 
exportation to the United States from regions where FMD or rinderpest 
exists be cooked in boiling water or a steam-fed oven. Several 
commenters stated that technology exists that makes it possible to 
carry out the required cooking by steam or boiling water in a 
continuous cooker, rather than in a single batch cooker. The commenters 
requested that the regulations specifically acknowledge that adequate 
cooking by steam or boiling water can be done in a continuous cooker 
and that, if such a continuous cooker is used, a batch be considered a 
designated period of time in the cooker. One commenter recommended that 
such a batch be limited to one metric ton of meat.
    We agree that a steam-fed or boiling water continuous cooker can be 
used to cook meat to a temperature that will destroy the FMD and 
rinderpest agents, and consider a batch to be a unit of meat kept in 
the cooker for a minimum of 1.75 hours. We are adding language to Sec.  
94.4 to clarify that such a continuous cooker may be used. However, we 
do not consider it necessary to limit the amount of meat that may be 
cooked in a batch, provided all of the meat is cooked for the minimum 
required time.
    Several commenters requested that APHIS eliminate the requirement 
in the regulations for any specific cooking method and either allow 
manufacturers to use alternative heat processing technologies that 
achieve the necessary time and temperature results, or provide that 
alternative cooking methods may be approved on a case-by-case basis.
    We are making no changes based on this comment. The methods of 
cooking allowed by the regulations were approved after we determined 
them to be effective in destroying the FMD and rinderpest agents. Part 
of the process of determining the efficacy of those cooking methods was 
to allow members of the public to submit information regarding the 
effectiveness of the cooking methods. We will consider any requests to 
allow alternative cooking methods that are submitted to us along with 
supporting documentation regarding their effectiveness. If it appears 
the methods can be used to destroy the FMD and rinderpest agents, we 
will propose to add them to the cooking methods allowed under the 
regulations and will invite the general public to comment on the 
proposal. Based on all information we receive, we will determine 
whether to add such cooking methods to those allowed under the 
regulations.
    Among the requirements we proposed regarding the further processing 
of meat after cooking was that one tube of cooked meat from each batch 
(shift) per cooker be randomly selected and that an indicator piece be 
cut from the cold spot of the tube to serve as the indicator piece for 
the entire batch (shift).
    A number of commenters stated that all of the meat cooked in a 
particular batch per cooker cannot always be shipped together. The 
commenters recommended that the regulations allow indicator pieces or 
TID's to be taken from more than one cooking tube per batch of a 
cooker, in case the batch is split into more than one shipment. The 
commenters recommended that the regulations require that unused 
indicator pieces or TID'S taken from the batch be destroyed once the 
batch is loaded into a container.
    With regard to the use of TID's, we did not specifically refer to 
them in our proposed provisions because current standard industry 
practice is not to use TID's. However, as indicated in Sec.  
94.4(b)(5), a TID is an acceptable method of confirming that meat 
cooked in plastic has been cooked to the required temperature. 
Therefore, in this final rule, Sec.  94.4(b)(6) provides that meat that 
is further processed after cooking may be accompanied to the United 
States by either an indicator piece or a TID. With regard to the number 
of indicator pieces or TID's that may be taken from a batch for 
shipment to the United States, we are providing in this final rule that 
indicator pieces or TID's from up to two cooking tubes per batch of a 
cooker may be selected to accompany shipments of cooked meat to the 
United States. Following the loading of a batch of cooked meat into a 
container, any unused indicator pieces or TID's must be destroyed.
    Section 94.4(b)(6) of the proposed rule stated that the provisions 
of that paragraph pertained to meat that is cooked and then cooled 
before further processing. Several commenters stated that we should not 
require that the meat be cooled before further processing.
    Our reference to cooling before further processing was based on 
standard industry practice. However, such cooling is not necessary for 
the destruction of the FMD and rinderpest disease agents. Therefore, in 
this final rule, Sec.  94.4(b)(6) will not refer to cooling the meat 
after cooking.
    One commenter noted that proposed Sec.  94.4(b)(6)(i) used the 
wording ``tube or plastic container.'' The commenter recommended that, 
since the tubes that are used are made of plastic, it would be 
sufficient simply to refer to ``plastic container.''
    Proposed Sec.  94.4(b)(5) stated that meat to be cooked in tubes 
must be loaded into a flexible or semiflexible cooking tube constructed 
of plastic or other material approved by the U.S. Food and Drug 
Administration. The intent was to require that a tube be used, but not 
necessarily that the tube be made of plastic. Therefore, in this final 
rule, Sec.  94.4(b)(6)(i) refers to the tube required under Sec.  
94.4(b)(5), and not to a plastic container. For the same reason, we 
have also changed the heading of paragraph (b)(5) from ``Meat cooked in 
plastic'' to ``Meat cooked in tubes.''
    One commenter noted that proposed Sec.  94.4(b)(6)(i) stated that 
the certificate accompanying meat that has been further processed must 
provide the date that the tube from which the indicator piece was taken 
was selected. The commenter recommended that the term ``selected'' be 
changed to ``cooked,'' to eliminate the option of the indicator piece 
being collected at any time after cooking but before processing.
    We do not consider the precise date that the tube was selected 
(i.e., whether it was selected the day the meat was cooked or at some 
later date before the meat is further processed) as important as 
knowing that the indicator piece or piece containing a TID is, in fact, 
representative of the processed meat. Therefore, although we are not 
requiring that the indicator piece or piece containing a TID be 
selected the date the meat is cooked, we are adding a requirement in 
this final rule that the certificate include the date the meat was 
cooked, as well as the date of the selection of the tube. Additionally, 
we are requiring in Sec.  94.4(b)(6) that the indicator piece or piece 
containing a TID be selected by random sampling after the meat has been 
cooked and before the meat undergoes any additional processing (e.g., 
through cutting, slicing, or dicing), and that, once that processing is 
completed, the meat may not be processed further before being exported 
to the United States. We are requiring in Sec.  94.4(b)(8) that the 
certificate that must accompany the meat to the United States indicate 
what type of processed product (e.g., diced cubes of a particular size) 
the indicator piece or piece containing a TID represents.

[[Page 15934]]

    Several commenters who opposed the proposed rule stated it would 
increase product handling and exposure to the environment and greatly 
increase the risk of contamination by pathogens. The commenters 
expressed further concern that the Department lacks the resources to 
guarantee that foreign plants are completely and consistently in 
compliance with Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) 
systems and pathogen testing requirements, and stated that some foreign 
governments have not provided accurate information and documentation 
regarding sampling procedures.
    Even under the regulations prior to this final rule, processing of 
meat intended for exportation to the United States from regions where 
FMD or rinderpest exists needed to be carried out in an establishment 
approved by APHIS and FSIS as one in which the facilities for 
processing raw meat are separate from the facilities used for 
processing cooked meat. The additional processing allowed by this final 
rule must be carried out in accordance with those existing safeguards 
against contamination. The HACCP system referred to by the commenter is 
one that FSIS has adopted with regard to human health concerns and does 
not directly pertain to the regulations in part 94. In addition to a 
departmental inspection of the establishment prior to approval, 
periodic inspections are carried out by the Department to ensure 
compliance with the regulations. If, at any time, the Department 
determines an establishment is acting contrary to APHIS regulations, 
APHIS will take corrective action. APHIS relies on foreign governments' 
inspection and supervision of sampling, recordkeeping, and 
documentation in the same way that those governments rely on U.S. 
inspection and supervision of sampling, recordkeeping, and 
documentation.
    Several commenters expressed concern that any products brought into 
the United States because of the new regulations would be in direct 
competition with U.S. products.
    As we stated in our proposed rule, we do not expect that the 
adoption of this rule will greatly increase the volume of meat imports, 
largely because most products that would be imported in accordance with 
this final rule are already being imported. The effect of this rule 
will be to alter only the sizes of these products. Further, the 
Department must operate in accordance with international trade 
agreements, which provide that restrictions may not be imposed on 
importations unless there is a science-based justification for imposing 
such restrictions.
    Several commenters questioned why, with homeland security in mind, 
APHIS proposed a rule that the commenters stated would provide more 
opportunity for contamination or sabotage during meat processing.
    All of the mitigation measures in the animal health regulations 
governing both domestic and international commerce take a science-based 
approach to reducing the risk of the introduction or spread of animal 
diseases. The assessment of unmitigated risk is based on scientific 
evidence, historical data, and projections of expected movements of 
animals and animal products. Based on that assessment of risk, measures 
to mitigate risk are applied where necessary. Safeguards against 
potential acts of terrorism are being dealt with through procedures 
other than those set forth in 9 CFR part 94.
    Two commenters stated that, although proposed Sec.  94.4(b)(6) 
referenced only cubes, slices, and anatomical cuts of meat as being 
eligible for further processing, the provisions should also include 
ground meat that meets the prescribed conditions.
    We are making no changes based on these comments. The proposed rule 
was initiated based on a request and information specifically 
addressing the process of cutting larger pieces of meat into cubes 
prior to their being hard frozen for shipment to the United States. As 
such, the process is not relevant to cooked ground meat.
    One commenter stated that the proposed rule failed to include an 
analysis of the risk associated with the importation of cooked meat 
products, the change in risk the proposal would effect, the statistical 
validity of taking one sample per cooking batch, and the impact thawing 
and refreezing of samples would have on the pink juice test 
methodology.
    The existing provisions for cooking meat in tubes will not be 
substantively changed by this final rule. All meat intended for 
importation under this rule will need to be cooked according to the 
existing time and temperature requirements. Under the existing 
provisions, veterinary officials in the exporting country conduct a 
pink juice test and gauge the temperature of the meat. Meat is then 
frozen and shipped to the United States. Once it is thawed in this 
country, U.S. inspectors conduct their own pink juice test. This 
process will essentially remain the same, except that U.S. inspectors 
will conduct the pink juice test on an indicator piece, or inspect a 
piece containing a TID, that was randomly chosen in the exporting 
country by government representatives of the exporting country. This 
rule will simply allow for further processing of meat after the 
cooking. APHIS has historically considered taking one sample per 
cooking cycle for pink juice testing a valid method of determining the 
effectiveness of the cooker for that cycle.
    Several commenters stated that the economic impact of introducing 
FMD into the United States would be enormous, and that, even if 
contaminated imported products were removed from store shelves, the 
accompanying publicity would severely affect sales of domestic meat and 
meat products.
    We are aware of the potential negative economic effects of the 
introduction of any serious foreign animal disease into the United 
States, particularly FMD, and have established the cooking requirements 
in Sec.  94.4 to mitigate the risk of such diseases being introduced in 
imported cooked meat. As noted above, all meat intended for importation 
under this rule will need to be cooked according to the existing time 
and temperature requirements.
    One commenter expressed concern that the pink juice test might not 
be a reliable method of ensuring proper cooking.
    We are making no changes based on this comment. The pink juice test 
is an existing regulatory provision that we did not propose to change 
in any way in this rulemaking. Further, the commenter did not provide 
any specific data to support concerns regarding the efficacy of the 
pink juice test.
    One commenter recommended that officials of foreign governments 
responsible for randomly selecting tubes of meat for indicator pieces 
be Department-certified and bonded. We are making no change based on 
this comment. We currently rely on officials of foreign governments for 
numerous types of certification without requiring that such individuals 
be Department-certified and bonded, just as our trading partners do not 
require that U.S. officials be certified and bonded by their 
governments.

Ground Meat

    Under the regulations prior to this final rule, the only allowable 
method of determining whether ground meat cooked in tubes had been 
cooked to the required temperature was by means of a TID, i.e., the use 
of an indicator piece was not an option for ground meat. Because TID's 
have not been in common use, this has had the effect of restricting the 
importation of ground meat cooked in tubes. In our proposed rule, 
however, we proposed to provide that an

[[Page 15935]]

indicator piece could be used in lieu of a TID for ground meat if the 
indicator piece is of sufficient size for a pink juice test to be 
performed (i.e., 3.8 centimeters or larger in each dimension after 
cooking). We are making that provision final in this rule. This change 
may make it more feasible to import ground meat into the United States. 
Under these circumstances, we consider it necessary to clarify in the 
regulations that ground meat imported into the United States from 
regions where FMD exists after being cooked in plastic may include no 
cardiac muscle. Research has shown that when cardiac tissue that is 
virus-positive is cooked according to the provisions of Sec.  94.4, the 
FMD virus can survive the cooking.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule 
has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive 
Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget.
    In this document, we are amending the regulations regarding meat 
cooked in processing establishments located in regions where rinderpest 
or FMD exists to allow for further processing of meat after cooking and 
before importation.
    Although these amendments will apply to both ruminant and swine 
meat, the primary effect of the changes will be on beef. As described 
previously in this document, the regulations in Sec.  94.4(b)(5) prior 
to this final rule provided for the importation of ruminant and swine 
meat cooked under conditions that are largely similar to those provided 
under this rule. However, only beef and veal have been imported into 
the United States under Sec.  94.4(b)(5), primarily from Argentina, 
Brazil, and Uruguay. This rule will allow for quality improvements in 
these cubed beef and veal products and, therefore, expand their 
marketability. However, the potential effect on imports of beef and 
veal and the overall U.S. supply of beef and veal is expected to be 
small for several reasons.
    The cooked ground meat, cubes of meat, slices of meat, and 
anatomical cuts of meat that have been imported under Sec.  94.4(b)(5) 
were used primarily in the production of products such as stews and 
meat pies. This rule will allow for an improvement in the quality of 
the meat cubes by making them available in more sizes and in a more 
consistent size and shape. This will allow the products to have 
expanded marketability. However, cooked cubed beef and veal constitute 
a small portion of the U.S. beef and veal industry. Imports of prepared 
beef, including beef cooked in tubes, but not cured, pickled, salted, 
dried, or made into sausages, account for about 7 percent of all U.S. 
imports of beef and veal, but less than 1 percent of total U.S. supply.
    In addition, imports into the United States of fresh beef and veal 
from Argentina and Uruguay are no longer occurring, due to FMD 
outbreaks in those countries. Also, although Argentina, Brazil, and 
Uruguay are large producers of beef and veal, their total exports are 
small relative to U.S. supply. The production of beef and veal in these 
three countries in 2001 was about 80 percent of that of the United 
States, but their exports of these products to all countries, including 
the United States, equated to considerably less than 1 percent of the 
U.S. supply of beef and veal. Thus, the effect on price would be 
negligible even if these countries were willing and able to redirect 
all of their beef and veal exports to the production of cooked cubed 
beef and veal for export to the United States.
    Because (1) Similar products are already being imported, (2) the 
rule will alter only the sizes of these products, and (3) other types 
of beef and veal imports from Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay have 
stopped, we do not expect that the adoption of this rule will greatly 
increase the volume of beef and veal imports. These amendments may 
result in a change in the character of the imports, but should not 
greatly increase the volume of those imports.
    Imports of these products will potentially offer competition for 
domestic producers of ground meat, cubes of meat, slices of meat, and 
anatomical cuts of meat. Producers of these products are meatpacking 
plants, both those that slaughter animals directly and those that 
process purchased meats. In addition, these imports will also compete 
with domestic ruminant farms that sell to meatpacking facilities.
    The Small Business Administration's (SBA) definition of a small 
entity in the production of cattle is one whose total sales are under 
$750,000 annually. According to the most recently published U.S. 
Department of Agriculture ``Census of Agriculture,'' in 1997, there 
were 656,181 cattle farms in the United States, of which 99 percent 
would be considered small entities. However, as was discussed above, we 
expect that the economic impact on these producers will be minimal.
    The SBA's guidelines state that a small producer of beef and veal 
meat that is in the form of cooked ground meat, cubes, slices, or 
anatomical cuts is one employing fewer than 500 workers. According to 
the most recently published U.S. Department of Commerce ``Economic 
Census,'' in 1997, 98 percent or 1,297 of the meatpacking 
establishments processing purchased meats in the United States were 
small. These small establishments accounted for approximately 78 
percent of the total value of shipments of the industry, or 
approximately $25 billion. Also in 1997, 95 percent of 1,393 animal 
slaughtering establishments were considered small. These small 
establishments accounted for approximately 76 percent of the total 
value of shipments of the industry, or $41.6 billion.
    Based on the above information, we do not expect that this rule 
will have a significant effect on the volume of imports of ruminant and 
swine meat, including ground meat, cubes of meat, slices of meat, and 
cuts of meat. Given that the volume of imports will be unlikely to 
increase substantially, we do not expect that the economic effects of 
this rule on domestic producers of these products, whether small or 
large, will be significant.
    Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Executive Order 12988

    This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 
Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws 
and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no 
retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings 
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule contains no new information collection or 
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94

    Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Meat and meat products, Milk, 
Poultry and poultry products, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

0
Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR part 94 as follows:

[[Page 15936]]

PART 94--RINDERPEST, FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE, FOWL PEST (FOWL 
PLAGUE), EXOTIC NEWCASTLE DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, HOG 
CHOLERA, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY: PROHIBITED AND 
RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 94 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 
and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4331 and 4332; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, 
and 371.4.


0
2. Section 94.4 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as set forth below.
0
b. By redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(8) as (b)(7) through 
(b)(9) and adding a new paragraph (b)(6) to read as set forth below.
0
c. By revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(8) to read as set forth 
below.


Sec.  94.4  Cured or cooked meat from regions where rinderpest or foot-
and-mouth disease exists.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) Meat cooked in tubes. Ground meat (which must not include 
cardiac muscle), cubes of meat, slices of meat, or anatomical cuts of 
meat (cuts taken from the skeletal muscle tissue) weighing no more than 
5 kg (11.05 lbs) must be loaded into a flexible or semiflexible cooking 
tube constructed of plastic or other material approved by the U.S. Food 
and Drug Administration. The meat must then be cooked in either boiling 
water or in a steam-fed oven, in either a batch cooker or a continuous 
cooker, to reach a minimum internal temperature of 79.4 [deg]C (175 
[deg]F) at the cold spot after cooking for at least 1.75 hours. 
Thoroughness of cooking must be determined by a TID registering the 
target temperature at the cold spot, or by the pink juice test as 
follows:
    (i) Cubes of meat and ground meat. For cubes of meat, at least 50 
percent of meat pieces per tube must be 3.8 cm (1.5 in) or larger in 
each dimension after cooking or, if more than 50 percent of the cubes 
of meat pieces per tube are smaller than 3.8 cm (1.5 in) in any 
dimension after cooking, or if the meat is ground meat, an indicator 
piece consisting of a single piece of meat of sufficient size for a 
pink juice test to be performed (3.8 cm (1.5 in) or larger in each 
dimension after cooking) must have been placed at the cold spot of the 
tube.
    (ii) Slices of meat. At least 50 percent of the slices of meat must 
be 3.8 cm (1.5 in) or larger in each dimension after cooking or, if 
more than 50 percent of meat pieces are smaller than 3.8 cm (1.5 in) in 
any dimension after cooking, an indicator piece of sufficient size for 
a pink juice test to be performed (3.8 cm (1.5 in) or larger in each 
dimension after cooking) must be placed at the cold spot of the tube.
    (iii) Anatomical cuts of meat. An indicator piece removed from an 
anatomical cut of meat after cooking must be removed from the center of 
the cut, farthest from all exterior points and be 3.8 cm (1.5 in) or 
larger in each dimension for performance of the pink juice test.
    (6) Further processing of meat cooked in tubes. Cubes of meat, 
slices of meat, or anatomical cuts of meat (cuts taken from the 
skeletal muscle tissue) cooked in tubes in accordance with paragraph 
(b)(5) of this section may be processed further after cooking if the 
following provisions are met:
    (i) For meat that is cooked and is intended for further processing, 
up to two tubes from each batch per cooker must be randomly selected by 
the official of the National Government of the region of origin who is 
authorized to issue the meat inspection certificate required by Sec.  
327.4 of this title. If a TID is not used, a cylindrical or square 
piece of at least 3.8 cm (1.5 in) in each dimension must be cut from 
the cold spot of each tube. The cylindrical or square piece will be the 
indicator piece for the pink juice test. The indicator piece or piece 
containing the TID must be sealed in plastic or other material approved 
by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and be accompanied by a 
certificate issued by the official who selected the tube. The 
certificate must provide the date the tube was cooked and the cooker 
and batch number, and the date the tube was selected for sampling. Each 
batch per cooker must have at least one but no more than two indicator 
pieces or pieces containing TID's. All indicator pieces and pieces 
containing TID's must be individually sealed, properly labeled, and 
enclosed together in one sealed box that accompanies the shipment. Any 
indicator pieces or pieces containing TID's that are not used to 
accompany a shipment to the United States must be destroyed following 
loading of the batch into a container; and
    (ii) After removing the indicator piece or piece containing a TID, 
all remaining meat from the same batch may be cut into smaller cubes 
and sealed in plastic or other material approved by the U.S. Food and 
Drug Administration. After being processed into smaller cubes once, the 
meat may not be further processed before shipment to the United States. 
The cubes of meat and the indicator piece or piece containing a TID 
must be accompanied to the United States by a certificate as provided 
in paragraph (b)(8) of this section.
* * * * *
    (8) Certificate. (i) The cooked meat must be accompanied by a 
certificate issued by an official of the National Government of the 
region of origin who is authorized to issue the foreign meat inspection 
certificate required under Sec.  327.4 of this title, stating: ``This 
cooked meat produced for export to the United States meets the 
requirements of title 9, Code of Federal Regulations, Sec.  94.4(b).'' 
Upon arrival of the cooked meat in the United States, the certificate 
must be presented to an authorized inspector at the port of arrival.
    (ii) For cooked meat that is further processed in accordance with 
paragraph (b)(6) of this section, the certificate must include the 
following statement, in addition to the certification required under 
paragraph (b)(8)(i) of this section: ``No more than two tubes were 
randomly selected per batch per cooker for cutting an indicator piece 
or obtaining a piece containing a TID. The indicator piece or piece 
containing a TID represents a shipment of (describe form of processed 
product--e.g., diced cubes of a particular size). A piece containing a 
TID or a piece 3.8 cm (1.5 in) or larger in each dimension was cut from 
the cold spot of the tube, and was sealed and marked with the following 
cooking date, cooker, and batch: ---------- and the following date of 
selection of the tube----------. The total number of indicator pieces 
or pieces containing TID's enclosed in a sealed box is----------.''
* * * * *

    Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of March 2003.
Peter Fernandez,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 03-7847 Filed 4-1-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P