Mr. LENNARTSON. For instance, in the processed fruit and vegetable

Mr. REIDY. I am talking about poultry now-the program under which you provide a plant inspection service for sanitation.

Mr. LENNARTSON. As Mr. Miller pointed out, if they are not following the regulations and so forth, the service is jerked from them. Mr. REIDY. That is regarding sanitation.

Mr. LENNARTSON. That is correct.

Mr. REIDY. But that is all; and the sanitarian cannot condemn any poultry that he sees moving along that perhaps should be condemned, nor can he condemn the plant? You can just withdraw the service from the plant?

Mr. LENNARTSON. That is correct.

Mr. REIDY. Has the Department ever asked that you be given the power to protect the public by actually condemning food or poultry products that you know to be unhealthful or disease bearing?

Mr. LENNARTSON. Well, in the case of the poultry inspection service, they do condemn carcasses and so on that are found to be unfit for human consumption.

Mr. REIDY. But the Department has never requested the authority to condemn on a mandatory basis? You have not asked for mandatory control?

Mr. LENNARTSON. That is part of the regulations under which the service is being given; that is one of the provisions of it.

Mr. REIDY. Now, on page 3 of your statement, Mr. Butz, you say that participation in the poultry inspection program is voluntary, and you go on to say, "However, once under this program, each processor subjects his operations to rigid regulations which are as strict as any that exist in any food inspection field." Would you clarify that for me, please?

Mr. BUTZ. Once he accepts this poultry inspection service, he must make his plant conform to the requirements set out by our inspection service with respect to sanitation, with respect to toilet facilities, and with respect to the control of surroundings that might be insect- or rodent-breeding grounds, with respect to the health of his employees, and with respect to all of those things that go into the production of a wholesome and healthy product.

Mr. REIDY. Now, these 2 programs one involving the sanitation of the plant itself, its sanitary facilities; and the other involving the wholesomeness of the bird-are those 2 programs necessarily part of a continuous process?

Mr. BUTZ. They are, once the processing plant accepts this service, They are a part of a continuous process.

Mr. REIDY. Are there some plants that only accept the sanitary inspection service and do not have the inspection for wholesomeness? Mr. BUTZ. I would like to have Mr. Miller explain that, please. Mr. MILLER. I do not know what point you are trying to get at, but there are plants—if we are addressing ourselves to ready-to-cook poultry that may have drawing operations where this is a voluntary program and the indication that the product has been inspected is this mark that I mentioned. There may be drawing operations where no inspection for wholesomeness takes place.

Mr. REIDY. Is there poultry moving in interstate commerce which comes from plants that have had the benefit of your sanitation inspection service, but not of the inspection for wholesomeness?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. REIDY. That is true?

Mr. MILLER. Yes.

Mr. REIDY. And that sanitation program can be carried out by men who are licensed by the Secretary but are not employees of the Federal Government?

Mr. MILLER. That is right.

Mr. REIDY. It has been done, has it not, by men who are employees of the company whose plant they are inspecting?

Mr. MILLER. That would be the kind of licensee that would be used there.

Mr. REIDY. And it has been the case that sometimes a plant has been inspected by the man who owned the plant?

Mr. MILLER. There may be a case or two on that. I am not aware of it.

Mr. REIDY. Does the Department of Agriculture favor carrying on an inspection service where the inspector is the owner of the plant being inspected?

Mr. MILLER. Our regulations are specific on that point, and if any case like that develops it is properly taken care of.

Mr. REIDY. When were those regulations issued?

Mr. MILLER. Well, the last issuance was March 1955, and they have been issued and amended in their present form I think since 1950 or 1951.

Mr. REIDY. You mean since March of 1955, no one with a financial interest in a plant has been able to be employed as an inspector, or has been able to pass that plant?

Mr. MILLER. I would not want to say no one, because I am not familiar with the complete details, but that is not in compliance with the regulations and certainly any case of that kind would be dispensed with very promptly.

Mr. REIDY. If anyone with a financial interest in a plant now applied for a license to become a licensed inspector in his own plant, he would be turned down.

Mr. MILLER. He would not be accepted as a licensee.

Mr. REIDY. If there are any such people now employed and they came to your notice, is it the Department policy to withdraw their licenses?

Mr. MILLER. Just as quickly as we can get the license back in our hands.

Mr. REIDY. Thank you. Now, you say the processor subjects all of his operations to rigid regulations. Is that true or does he subject only that proportion of his operations that he chooses to? Or put it this way, can he be running a plant and bringing out Reidy superfine chickens and have your poultry inspection service 1 day of the week and the next 2 days run the same plant without your services and still put out a product which will not carry your label but it can be in the same Reidy superfine chicken package?

Mr. MILLER. There is a provision in our regulations that makes it permissible for a user of the service to process poultry without the benefit of the inspection for wholesomeness. That is a post-mortem

examination. The reason for that is that it is a very competitive industry that these men are in, and as long as the program is not compulsory, these people have, we feel, the same right to operate.

Mr. REIDY. Then the answer on my question is "Yes"?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. REIDY. And I could ask you to establish this service

Mr. MILLER. Let me just interrupt for a moment. You said the inspection program. So far as sanitation is concerned, it is maintained completely at all times. A plant cannot be under the service so far as sanitation is concerned one day, and without it the next.

Mr. REIDY. I was referring to the statement made in the testimony that "Once under the program, each processor subjects his operations to rigid regulations," and it would seem that he subjects to these rigid regulations only what portion of his operations he chooses to.

Mr. MILLER. So far as the sanitation is concerned, that is not true. Mr. REIDY. I am talking about the other.

Mr. MILLER. As to the post mortem, there are very few instances where there are operations where a processor does not use inspection 100 percent of the time.

Mr. REIDY. It is possible for me, is it not, to open a plant and ask for your service and use your service for 4 or 5 months, and market my product with the USDA seal upon it, and then decide that I only want the service for 2 days out of the week and I keep marketing and processing poultry every day of the week, and marketing it in the same package, with the seal for the first 2 days of the week and without it for the rest of the time? The consumer has already accepted my product.

Mr. MILLER. That is right.

Mr. REIDY. Is it possible for a man under this program to run one line of poultry through his plant under inspection, and in the same plant run another line of poultry through without inspection? Mr. MILLER. Not without complete segregation.

Mr. REIDY. In what sense, separate walls?

Mr. MILLER. A wall to divide the two operations. If they have one roof over the total operation, it might be called one building, but there would have to be a wall to separate the operations.

Mr. REIDY. If I am running such an operation, and in this room I am having the poultry inspection service, and in the next room I am running chickens through without inspection, and I have my own man at the door receiving the poultry as it comes from the market, first looking them over and picking out the ones that I think would not get by your inspector and running them through this line and running only the better ones through the inspected line, could I do

that?

Mr. MILLER. Yes.

Mr. REIDY. Therefore, the fact that a plant has this voluntary service does not mean that all of the operations are subject to rigid regulations. He may very well be running through diseased poultry in the same plant as long as there is some wall or something so your inspector cannot see it going by.

Mr. MILLER. We define the plant in this instance as the approved plant. The other part of the plant where he did this other operation would not be a part of his approved establishment.

Mr. REIDY. Now, here is a point where I am not at all clear on it and I wish you could straighten me out on it. You say on page 4, in paragraph 2, "When the inspection service is finally inaugurated, each bird is inspected by a qualified licensed operator and the licensed inspector makes sure that the killing operation, processing, packaging, freezing, and other operations are carried on in compliance with the regulations to insure that the product is wholesome when it leaves the processing establishment." Now this may be right or wrong but we are advised that birds may be killed in a plant which does not have anyone authorized to inspect the poultry for wholesomeness and they may be killed, let us say, in a sanitary, supervised plant with a licensed man not authorized to check birds for wholesomeness, then transported to a plant where a second man does inspect them for wholesomeness. Is that possible?

Mr. MILLER. That is right.

Mr. REIDY. Then the killing process is not under the supervision of anyone competent to inspect them for wholesomeness.

Mr. MILLER. The sanitarian is in charge of the killing operation in a plant where the product is sold as dressed or leaves the plant in dressed form. There are the sanitation requirements to the point where the product leaves the plant in dressed form.

Mr. REIDY. I am not talking about the sanitation requirements now. The licensed inspector makes sure that the killing operation is carried on in compliance with regulations to insure that the product is wholesome. Mr. Harvey testified that one most important job to do to protect the public health in this instance is to provide for ante mortem inspection. Now, if this bird that comes to the plant where you inspect for wholesomeness is already dead, and already killed in a plant where you have nobody but a sanitarian who has no authority to inquire into the wholesomeness of the bird itself, it is true, is it not, that you are passing on a product for wholesomeness where the killing operation is not necessarily supervised?

Mr. MILLER. There was no ante mortem inspection at the time of killing, that is right.

Mr. REIDY. I think we should strike out of your statement that phrase "killing operation", should we not?

We have here a wire which I would like to ask the Senator to place in the record, concerning the resolutions adopted today by the Association of Food and Drug Officials of the United States at their 60th annual conference in New York, and they say that whereas diseased poultry can be eliminated during slaughter and processing operations, and by adequate ante mortem and post mortem inspection procedures, and, whereas, if these procedures are not followed during slaughter, dressing, and evisceration, the evidence of disease will be largely removed by the eviscerating process and making its subsequent detection by control officials impossible, and thereby depriving the consumer of adequate protection.

Would you agree with the Food and Drug officials that if these procedures are not followed during slaughter and dressing and evisceration, the evidence of disease may be largely removed?

Mr. MILLER. There has been no mandatory requirement for ante mortem inspection in our voluntary program. There have been operations that have been carried on under the authority in the regulation

for ante mortem procedures when our personnel feel that that would contribute to the program. The matter of ante mortem is something that is under debate, and the Department has set up a project or is developing projects to study whether it will make a contribution to inspection because there are great differences of opinion between certain people. We feel that ante mortem is necessary under certain conditions, but the type of ante mortem is something that needs to be studied.

Mr. REIDY. Our Food and Drug officials say that they believe that if there is not an ante mortem inspection, we are depriving the consumer of adequate protection. You are saying that the Department either does not agree or has not made up its mind yet or has this under consideration.

Mr. MILLER. I did not say we did not agree with that. We feel that the type of ante mortem inspection is important.

Mr. REIDY. You feel there should be ante mortem inspection. Is that provided for in the other bills, other than 3176?

Mr. MILLER. Yes; it is our interpretation that it is included in there.

Mr. REIDY. I do not want to stop you now, but I wish you would let us know later where there is provision for a requirement of that

sort.

Mr. BUTZ. We are definitely making a recommendation in other bills for requiring ante mortem inspection.

Senator MCNAMARA. Before you go into your next question, or before Mr. Reidy goes into his next question, I wonder if this farmerconsumer exemption will take care of the religious groups who might be involved in such a program? We always hear from those people on these kinds of regulations, and what would that be?

Mr. REIDY. We have not yet on this one. I do not see where the question would arise.

Senator MCNAMARA. Because of the farmer-consumer relationship, and that exemption would take care of this group.

Mr. REIDY. I think so, sir.

Senator MCNAMARA. That is all right? You agree with that? Mr. BUTZ. Mr. Reidy, I might point out here, in this other bill, S. 3588, under section 5, it specifically says―

Inspection, ante mortem or post mortem or both.

Mr. REIDY. Thank you.

Senator MURRAY. I have to be on the floor at 12 o'clock and so does Senator McNamara, but the witness will contiuue, and we will then recess until 2 o'clock. We will finish the other witnesses this after

noon.

Mr. REIDY. Mr. Butz, I have here a copy of a poultry division mimeographed document, dated August 1, 1955, captioned, "Poultry Inspection Performed on a Resident Inspection Basis, Charges and Other Provisions." I am advised that it contains the provisions which go into contracts with applicants for voluntary poultry inspection; is that correct?

Mr. MILLER. Yes; that is with regard to our fees.

Mr. REIDY. I direct your attention to an item on page 2 of this poultry inspection mimeographed release where it states that when a