ment-that is about the number. There are some, of course, in areas such as Jersey City that would be involved in interstate commerce that might not be of that size. I think the best figure on the numbers would be between 900 and 1,000.

Senator CLEMENTS. Very well. You may proceed.

Mr. BUTZ. The provision enabling persons who apply for the inspection service to receive it prior to July 1, 1958, is good because it permits the inspection program to be put into effect gradually and in a more orderly manner than if all plants had to meet the program requirements on one specific day.

Now I would like to have Mr. Hermon I. Miller, Director, Poultry Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, present and discuss the various amendments which the Department is proposing.

Before doing so, I want to emphasize that the legislation now under consideration is extremely important from the standpoint of consumers, producers, and the poultry industry in general.

We in the Department want to do all we can to assist in the development of a good bill. We shall be glad to answer any questions you may have and also assist the committee staff in any way that may be desired. Senator CLEMENTS. Would you prefer to hear Mr. Miller on this subject?

Senator WILLIAMS. I think we might just as well.

Senator CLEMENTS. Before asking any questions?
Senator WILLIAMS. Unless Mr. Butz has to leave early.

Mr. BUTZ. No; I will remain.

Senator CLEMENTS. You may proceed, Mr. Miller.

Mr. HERMON I. MILLER. I would like to suggest, if the committee would find it useful, we have marked up a copy of the bill in this notebook and I will be glad to leave it with the committee so you can see our suggestions alongside the bill.

Senator CLEMENTS. We appreciate your thoughtfulness and will be very happy to receive it.

Mr. HERMON I. MILLER. My name is Hermon I. Miller. I am Director of the Poultry Division of the Agricultural Marketing Service, United States Department of Agriculture. I am here to present and discuss various amendments to S. 3588 which the Department of Agriculture recommends to this committee and that the bill be revised accordingly.

With respect to section 5: On page 4, at the end of line 4, delete the comma and insert "or adulterated." The word "adulterated" is defined in a subsequent amendment, the reason for which will be explained later. The addition of the word here is to make section 5 consistent with the definition.

On page 4, line 6, delete "inspection (ante mortem,". We are suggesting that the language now which reads "inspects," etc., be changed to read "examination, ante mortem and post mortem inspection, and reinspection, as he determines necessary." The Department feels that this change clarifies the intent that both ante mortem and post mortem inspections be authorized under the act.

On page 4, line 7, delete "post mortem, or both" and insert "ante mortem and post mortem inspection". This amendment is also intended to clarify the Department's intent that both ante mortem and post

mortem inspections be required, as the Secretary determines neces

sary.

On page 4, line 11, after the word "All" insert the ford "poultry." This amendment is necessary to identify the carcasses.

On page 4, line 12, after the word "unwholesome," insert "or adulterated." This is to make it consistent with the previous language. This is necessary to conform with amendments to be suggested for section 21.

With respect to section 6: On page 5, line 12, delete the period at the end of that sentence and insert a comma and add "or adulterated." With respect to section 7: On page 6, line 17, insert after the period following "prohibited" the following new sentence:

No poultry products inspected or required to be inspected pursuant to the provision of this Act shall be sold or offered for sale by any person, firm, or corporation under any false or deceptive name; but established trade name or names which are usual to such products and which are not false and deceptive and which shall be approved by the Secretary are permitted.

This amendment incorporates language presently in the Meat Inspection Act to make clear that the Secretary's authority with respect to labeling under S. 3588 is comparable to that exercised under the Meat Inspection Act for which there is long precedent.

Senator CLEMENTS. You say "long precedent." Not that the chairman is endeavoring to indicate his views so far as this bill is concerned, but for which there is a great confidence in this country?

Mr. HERMON I. MILLER. Yes; as well as a long period of operation. With respect to section 8: On page 7, lines 13 and 14, delete after the word "sale" in commerce, or the introduction, delivery for introduction." On page 7, line 15, insert after the word "or" the words "delivery or" and delete the comma after "in commerce" and insert “or in a designated city or area,". We think this addition in subsection "a” will make it possible to eliminate subsection "b." It will make the same provisions for the product produced with requirements for the product in designated areas as for interstate commerce.

On page 7, delete lines 20 to 23, and reletter the subsequent subsections in alphabetical order starting with (b) respectively. The reason for the above three suggested amendments is to provide for uniform provision applicable to interstate commerce transactions and transactions in designated areas.

On page 8, line 2, insert after the word "unwholesome" the words "or adulterated." I think the reason for that has been explained. This is a conforming amendment required by reason of the forthcoming proposed definition of the word "adulterated."

On page 8, line 3, subsection (d) we recommend be amended to read as follows:

This would be a complete rewriting of that.

(c) Knowingly and falsely making or issuing, altering, forging, simulating, or counterfeiting any official inspection certificate, memorandum, mark, or other identification, or device for making such mark or identification, used in connection with the inspection of poultry or poultry products under this act, or knowingly causing, procuring, aiding, assisting in, or being a party to, such false making, issuing, altering, forging, simulating, or counterfeiting, or knowingly possessing, without promptly notifying the Secretary of Agriculture or his representative, uttering, publishing, or using as true, or causing to be uttered, published, or used as true, any such falsely made or issued, altered, forged, simulated, or counterfeited official inspection certificate, memorandum, mark, or

ร

other identification, or device for making such mark or identification, or knowingly representing that any poultry or poultry product has been officially inspected under the authority of this act when such poultry or poultry product has in fact not been so inspected.

This proposed amendment is for the purpose of making the same prohibitions applicable to inspection marks, devices, certificates, and so forth, under S. 3588 as are applicable to all permissive programs by reason of Public Law 272 of the 84th Congress.

Senator WILLIAMS. Mr. Miller, you identify that new section as paragraph "c," but I understand it to take the place of paragraph "b" of the bill.

Mr. HERMON I. MILLER. That is correct. We eliminated paragraph b.

On page 9, at the end of line 10, delete the comma after the word "courts." The punctuation of the provision as presently written may be construed as limiting the availability of information to Government officials to that relevant in judicial proceedings under the act.

With respect to section 10: On page 10, line 5, after the word "Act," strike the remainder of the section and insert in lieu thereof the following:

persons engaged in the business of processing, transporting, shipping, or receiving poultry slaughtered for human consumption or poultry products in commerce or in a designated city or area, or holding such products so received shall maintain records showing, to the extent that they are concerned therewith, the receipt, delivery, sale, movement, or disposition of poultry and poultry products and shall, upon the request of a duly authorized representative of the Secretary, permit him at reasonable times to have access to and to copy all such records.

This amendment is for the purpose of requiring the keeping of records by persons subject to the proposed bill and the making of such records available and also the elimination of immunity and exemption of carriers from the provisions of the act.

The requirement of availability without a requirement for the keeping of records could, in the opinion of the Department, well be meaningless.

On page 11, line 9, delete the words "six months" and insert in lieu thereof "one year." On page 11, line 10, delete the figure "$1,000" and insert "$5,000."

On page 11, line 13, delete the word "one" and insert the word "two."

The 3 above amendments would change the penalties for a first offense from 6 months and $1,000 fine to 1 year and a $5,000 fine.

The Meat Inspection Act presently provides penalties of 2 years or $10,000 fine for all offenses. The amendment would change the penalty for a repeated violation of 2 years, which is comparable to the Meat Inspection Act. This will bring the penalties for similar offenses under both acts closer.

On page 11, insert at the end of line 15, the following:

When construing or enforcing the provision of said sections, the act, omission, or failure of any person acting for or employed by any individual, partnership, corporation, or association within the scope of his employment or office shall in every case be deemed the act, omission, or failure of such individual, partnership, corporation, or association as well as of such person.

This amendment would make the principal responsible for the acts of his agent committed within the scope of his employment so that

both the agent and the principal would be held responsible for such acts constituting violations.

This same provision is incorporated in numerous other regulatory statutes. It would seem desirable to have a similar provision for enforcement against violating principals under this act who otherwise may shift the blame to subordinate employees.

With respect to section 13: On page 11, line 21, delete the word "and" and insert the word "or." The proposed bill presently requires that before referring a matter for prosecution the person affected be given an opportunity for both oral and written presentation of views. This proposed amendment would leave the discretion with the Secretary as to the means of submission of views. We know of no comparable legislation which makes it mandatory for oral submissions. With respect to section 14: On page 12, line 6, delete the comma after the word "Act," insert a period, and delete the remainder of the section. This proposed amendment eliminates language which merely restates the general law that an act must be administered consistently with the provisions thereof.

As presently written, it is the same as the language in the Meat Inspection Act; however, the language suggested to be deleted does not add any legal effect to the remaining language.

With respect to section 15: On page 12, line 11, delete section 15, and insert the following new section:

SECTION 15. (a) The Secretary is authorized, by regulation and under such conditions as to sanitary standards, practices, and procedures as he may prescribe, to exempt from specific provisions of this Act

(1) Poultry producers with respect to poultry of their own raising on their own farms which they sell directly to household consumers only, provided that such poultry producers do not engage in buying or selling poultry products other than these produced from poultry raised on their own farms.

This is a new proposal.

(2) Retail dealers with respect to poultry products sold directly to consumers in individual retail stores provided that the only processing operation performed by such retail dealers is the cutting up of poultry products on the premises in which such sales to consumers are made.

That is added to make it possible to exempt retail dealers who are just cutting up with respect to poultry and not force the Department to provide an inspection service in an individual retail store doing that operation.

Senator WILLIAMS. This would exempt a farmer who is marketing his own product?

Mr. HERMON I. MILLER. That is right.

(3) At any time prior to July 1, 1960, poultry and poultry products where the Secretary determines that it would be impracticable to provide inspection and the exemption will aid in the effective administration of this Act, but no exemption under this paragraph shall continue in effect on and after July 1, 1960. That clears up a misunderstanding.

.(b) The Secretary may by order suspend or terminate any exemption under this section with respect to any person whenever he finds that such action will aid in effectuating the purposes of this Act.

This amendment would allow the Secretary to provide exemptions. by regulation rather than requiring individual certificates where large numbers of persons are affected. It would also provide for authority to exempt retail dealers in designated areas from the require

ments of the act with respect to processing connected with direct sales to consumers in the store where done.

This amendment also makes clear that no exemption granted on the grounds of impracticability during the first 2 years can extend beyond that period and provides for the termination or suspension of exemptions.

With respect to section 16: On page 13, lines 8 and 9, delete the words "under an exemption certificate issued," and insert the words "which are exempt." This amendment would conform section 16 to the amended section 15.

With respect to section 17: On page 13, line 17, to page 14, line 15, strike section 17 and insert in lieu thereof the following:

SEC. 17. (a) No slaughtered poultry, or parts or products thereof, of any kind shall be imported into the United States unless they are healthful, wholesome, and fit for human food and contain no dye, chemical, preservative, or ingredient which renders them unhealthy, unwholesome, or unfit for human food and unless they also comply with the rules and regulations made by the Secretary of Agriculture.

All imported slaughtered poultry, or parts or products thereof, shall after entry into the United States in compliance with such rules and regulations be deemed and treated as domestic slaughtered poultry, or parts or products thereof, within the meaning and subject to the provisions of this Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and acts amendatory of, supplemental to, or in substitution for such acts.

(b) The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to make rules and regulations to carry out the purposes of this section and in such rules and regulations the Secretary of Agriculture may prescribe the terms and conditions for the destruction of all slaughtered pouitry, or parts or products thereof, offered for entry and refused admission into the United States unless such slaughtered poultry, or parts or products thereof, be exported by the consignee within the time fixed therefor in such rules and regulations.

(c) All charges for storage, cartage, and labor with respect to any product which is refused admission pursuant to this section shall be paid by the owner or consignee, and in default of such payment shall constitute a lien against any other products imported thereafter by or for such owner or consignee.

This proposed amended language would make provision for import controls on poultry similar to that which now exists on other classes of meats under the Meat Inspection Act. We propose to retain the applicable provisions of the "proviso" which is a part of subsection (b) of S. 3588 to establish the financial responsibility of owners of products which is in violation of this section.

With respect to section 18: On page 14, line 19, delete the words "in the fields."

On page 14, line 21, delete the word "also."

On page 14, line 23, delete the words "That they are covered by” and insert in lieu thereof the words "of the application or the extension thereto of."

Section 18 of the proposed bill delineates the exclusive jurisdiction of the Secretary under the bill and deals with the matter of supercedure of local law as well as the extent of supercedure relating to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The suggested amendments would delineate the extent of supercedure in both fields to that presently in effect under the Meat Inspection Act with regard to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

With respect to sections 19 through 22: Beginning on page 15, line 8, renumber sections 19 through 22 as sections 20 through 23, respectively. This change is to provide a new section for the amendment