"SEC. 407. For the efficient administration and enforcement of this Act, the provisions (including penalties) of sections 6, 8, 9, and 10 of the Act entitled 'An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes', approved September 26, 1914 (38 Stat. 721-723, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 46, 48, 49, and 50) (except paragraphs (c) through (h) of section 6 and the last paragraph of section 9), and the provisions of subsection 409 (1) of the Communications Act of 1934 (48 Stat. 1096, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 409(1)), are made applicable to the jurisdiction, powers, and duties of the Secretary in administering and enforcing the provisions of this Act and to any person, firm, or corporation with respect to whom such authority is exercised. The Secretary, in person or by such agents as he may designate, may prosecute any inquiry necessary to his duties under this Act in any part of the United States, and the powers conferred by said sections 9 and 10 of the Act of September 26, 1914, as amended, on the district courts of the United States may be exercised for the purposes of this Act by any court designated in section 404 of this Act.

"SEC. 408. Requirements within the scope of this Act with respect to premises, facilities and operations of any establishment at which inspection is provided under title I of this Act, which are in addition to, or different than those made under this Act may not be imposed by any State or territory or the District of Columbia, except that any such jurisdiction may impose recordkeeping and other requirements within the scope of section 202 of this Act, if consistent therewith, with respect to any such establishment. Marking, labeling, packaging, or ingredient requirements in addition, to or different than, those made under this Act may not be imposed by any State or territory or the District of Columbia with respect to articles prepared at any establishment under inspection in accordance with the requirements under title I of this Act, but any State or territory or the District of Columbia may, consistent with the requirements under this Act, exercise concurrent jurisdiction with the Secretary over articles required to be inspected under said title, for the purpose of preventing the distribution for human food purposes of any such articles which are adulterated or misbranded and are outside of such an establishment, or, in the case of imported articles which are not at such an establishment, after their entry into the United States. This Act shall not preclude any State or territory or the District of Columbia from making requirement or taking other action, consistent with this Act, with respect to any other matters regulated under this Act.

"SEC. 409. (a) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, including section 902(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 392(a)), the provisions of this Act shall not derogate from any authority conferred by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act prior to enactment hereof.

"(b) The detainer authority conferred by section 402 of this Act shall apply to any authorized representative of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare for purposes of the enforcement of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to any carcass, part thereof, meat, or meat food product of cattle, sheep, swine, goats, or equines that is outside any premises at which inspection is being maintained under this Act, and for such purposes the first reference to the Secretary in section 402 shall be deemed to refer to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.

"SEC. 410. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act."

OF ANIMAL IN

SEC. 17. The provisions relating to equine meat and meat food products beginning with the phrase "And, hereafter," under the heading "BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY" and the subheading "MEAT INSPECTION, BUREAU DUSTRY:" in the Act approved July 24, 1919, entitled "An Act making appropriations for the Department of Agriculture for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and twenty" (41 Stat. 241; 21 U.S.C. 96), and paragraph (b) of section 306 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (46 Stat. 6.9, as amended; 19 U.S.C. 1306(b)) are hereby repealed.

SEC. 18. If any provision of this Act or of the amendments made hereby or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the Act and the remaining amendments and of the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby. SEC. 19. This Act shall become effective upon enactment except as provided in paragraphs (a) through (d):

(a) The provisions of paragraph (b) (1) and (c) of section 10 and the provisions of section 20 of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, as amended by sections 7 and 10 of this Act, and the provisions of section 17 of this Act repealing paragraph (b) of section 306 of the Tariff Act of 1930, shall become effective upon the expiration of sixty days after enactment hereof.

(b) The provisions of title I of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, as amended by this Act, shall become effective with respect to equines (other than horses) and their carcasses and parts thereof, meat, and meat food products thereof upon the expiration of sixty days after enactment hereof.

(c) Section 11 of this Act, amending section 23 of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, shall become effective sixty days after enactment hereof.

(d) Section 204 of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, as added by section 14 of this Act, shall become effective upon the expiration of sixty days after enactment hereof.

Mr. PURCELL. Our hearings will continue through Thursday of this week, and then continue again on July 17. I hope possibly 1 day of hearings will be sufficient at that time, but we will take whatever time is necessary. Then we will go into executive sessions and begin. marking up this bill shortly after July 17.

It seems to me that the integrity of our meat supply in this country is most important from several aspects. Primarily, I believe that the American consumer is entitled to know that the meat she is buying for her family is pure and wholesome. I feel she has had this assurance in the past. The Meat Inspection Act that the Department is working under is now 60 years old. There have been really no major revisions made in the act by the Congress since the first decade of this century. The Department of Agriculture has done a magnificent job, in my opinion, of refining the system during these 60 years within the legal bounds that are established by the act. So many changes have taken place in meat production and slaughtering, processing and marketing during these 60 years that the industry would hardly be recognized by one who had not seen it since the beginning of this act.

There has been a major revolution in the industry as a result of advancing technology, rapid transportation, along with communications and intensified marketing and new food preserving methods.

I believe it is most important that this proposed legislation receive our attention at this time and that the Congress act to bring meat inspection up to date. About 15 percent of the commercially slaughtered animals, over 19 million head, are not slaughtered under Federal inspection. In addition, about one-fourth of the commercially produced meat products, an estimated 84 billion pounds, are processed without Federal inspection. This would be all right, I believe, if there were adequate State inspection systems to protect the consumer where there is no Federal inspection. However, only 41 States have some form of meat inspection statute. These vary widely in type and effectiveness. Two States require only mandatory licensing of packers with no provision for actual inspection of meat. Thirteen States provide for only voluntary programs and 25 of them have mandatory inspection laws. There are nine States with no meat inspection statutes of any kind.

I believe that the legislation which has been proposed offers a sound basis from which we can build legislation which will be fair to the industry and provide much more adequate consumer protection. Our first witness this morning is from the Department of Agriculture, Mr. Rodney E. Leonard, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, Marketing and Consumer Service. At this time we will be glad to hear from Mr. Leonard.

STATEMENT OF RODNEY E. LEONARD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE; ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. LOTUS PROKOP, ATTORNEY, ROBERT K. SOMERS, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, AND JAMES PAYNE, ASSISTANT TO DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, CONSUMER AND MARKETING SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Mr. LEONARD. I am here today to urge favorable action by this committee on H.R. 6168, a bill to amend the Meat Inspection Act. This legislation seeks to further improve the programs which have helped to build meat packing and processing into an industry with $16 billion in annual gross sales, and which, in turn, have created nearly $13 billion in yearly sales of livestock by American farmers.

The availability of these markets for American livestock-theprosperity and potential for the American food industry-all rest on one basic fact: the continued confidence of today's homemaker in the integrity of our meat supply.

Thus, we must insure that every effort is made to provide her with the full assurance that the meat she buys for her family is safe and wholesome: a guarantee that today is taken for granted. To do this adequately, we must forge a viable Federal-State partnership through which the consumer is fully protected, the packing industry continues to prosper, and the producer is assured of an expanding market for his livestock.

The proposed Wholesome Meat Act is designed to accomplish just that.

It recognizes the role of the States as a vitally important link in this creative program, and seeks to provide a positive means by which the States can integrate their efforts into a stronger, more unified system of meat inspection.

It proposes much-needed reforms in the present Federal system, to close existing loopholes and make it more responsive to all in the years ahead.

Sixty years ago after the consumer's confidence in her meat supply was shattered by disclosures of vast irregularities in the meatpacking industry-Congress passed legislation under which a Federal inspection system was established for meat and meat products moving in interstate and foreign commerce. This legislation, which actually is only an appropriations measure, has become known as the Meat Inspection Act.

The system developed, basically, is a good one. It has served us well over the intervening years, and has come to be recognized as a model for the world. Refinements to it are constantly being made within the legal boundaries established by Congress.

Yet, this legislation contains several flaws in light of modern conditions-flaws which we believe require corrective action by the Congress.

The most serious flaw is an absence in the present act of any provisions for coordinating Federal and State meat inspection efforts. The role of the States is a vital one. The Federal law applies only to products moving in interstate and foreign commerce. Thus, the States have sole responsibility for the products of intrastate commerce.

The volume of these nonfederally inspected products is significant. Approximately 15 percent of the commercially slaughtered animalsover 19 million head-are slaughtered animals-over 19 million headare slaughtered for intrastate commerce only. In addition, about onefourth of the commercially processed meat products-an estimated 8.75 billion pounds-are processed and sold without crossing State lines.

Significant amounts of these intrastate products are sold without any form of Government inspection. The remaining amounts are subject to inspection by State or local governments. Inspection under these programs is generally well below Federal standards. Yet, these products are intermingled in many retail stores with federally inspected products for sale to the unknowing public.

There exists considerable disparity between statutory provisions of Federal, State, and local laws which creates a form of economic separation that carries with it significant competitive advantage for the unregulated.

Excessive water and extenders, chemicals that mask the true condition of a product, and misleading or deceptive labeling are typical examples. This variation in consumer protection at the State and local levels is demonstrated by a few statistics.

Nine States do not have any laws specifically covering the inspection of meat, although they have a general type food law which partially affects meatpacking from the standpoint of specified sanitation and/or labeling requirements.

There are 41 States with some form of a meat inspection statute— two require only mandatory licensing of packers with no provisions for actual inspection of meat, 13 provide for only voluntary programs, and 26 have mandatory inspection laws.

Only 26 States provide for mandatory inspection of animals before and after slaughter-the basic foundation for effective meat inspection protection. Further, only 25 States provide for mandatory inspection of processed meat products—an important area of potential adulteration and mislabeling.

Of the 41 States with meat inspection laws, 20 derive their funds solely from State appropriations, 14 utilize a combination of appropriated funds and packer assessments, and the remaining seven derive all funds from assessments on the users.

These figures relate only to State statutes. In addition, the degree of authority, implementation, and effectiveness of State inspection programs varies greatly from State to State. Even greater variation is found between State and local inspection programs, where local inspection exists.

Administrators of State meat inspection programs generally admit that they have neither the money nor manpower to conduct an intensive, continuous inspection service for both slaughtering and processing operations. State legislators, veterinary association, industry groups, and others have tried repeatedly to obtain meaningful legislation and enforcement.

Nevertheless, the need for stronger, more effective and more uniform State inspection programs is of critical importance. In the past couple of years, there has been a tremendous upsurge among the States to initiate or improve existing programs. Eighteen States actively considered meat inspection legislation during the past year-eight of

which render such meat or meat food products unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or unfit for human food" and inserting in lieu thereof the phrase "not adulterated", and deleting the phrase "unsound, unhealthful, and unwholesome, or which contain dyes, chemicals, preservatives, or ingredients which render such meat or meat food products unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or unfit for human food" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "adulterated";

(f) in section 8 (21 U.S.C. 76), deleting the phrase "unclean, unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or otherwise unfit for human food" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "adulterated";

(g) in section 17 (21 U.S.C. 85), deleting the phrase "or goat meat, being the meat of animals killed after the passage of this Act, or except as hereinbefore provided" and substituting therefor the phrase "goat or equine meat"; (h) in section 18 (21 U.S.C. 86), deleting the phrase "sound and wholesome."; and

(i) in section 21 (21 U.S.C. 89), deleting the phrase "sound, healthful, wholesome, and fit for human food, and to contain no dyes, chemicals, preservatives, or ingredients which render such meat food product unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or unfit for human food; and to have been prepared under proper sanitary conditions, hereinbefore provided for" and inserting in lieu thereof the phrase "not adulterated".

SEC. 13. Said Act is hereby further amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section in title I:

"SEC. 24. The Secretary may by regulations prescribe conditions under which carcasses, parts of carcasses, meat, and meat food products of cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines, capable of use as human food, shall be stored or otherwise handled by any person, firm, or corporation engaged in the business of buying, selling, freezing, storing, or transporting, in or for commerce, or importing, such articles, whenever the Secretary deems such action necessary to assure that such articles will not be adulterated or misbranded when delivered to the consumer. Violation of any such regulation is prohibited. However, such regulations shall not apply to the storage or handling of such articles at any retail store or other establishment that would be subject to this section only because of purchases in commerce, if the storage and handling of such articles at such establishment is regulated under the laws of the State or territory or the District of Columbia in which such establishment is located, in a manner which the Secretary, after consultation with the appropriate advisory committee provided for in section 301 of this Act, determines is adequate to effectuate the purposes of this section."

SEC. 14. Said Act is hereby further amended by adding after title I thereof, the following new sections as:

"TITLE II-MEAT PROCESSORS AND RELATED INDUSTRIES

"SEC. 201. Inspection shall not be provided under title I of this Act at any establishment for the slaughter of cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines, or the preparation of any carcasses or parts or products of such animals, which are not intended for use as human food, but such articles shall, prior to their offer for sale or transportation in commerce, unless naturally inedible by humans, be denatured or otherwise identified as prescribed by regulations of the Secretary to deter their use for human food. No person, firm, or corporation shall buy, sell, transport, or offer for sale or transportation, or receive for transportation, in commerce, or import, any carcasses, parts thereof, meat or meat food products of any such animals, which are not intended for use as human food unless they are denatured or otherwise identified as required by the regulations of the Secretary or are naturally inedible by humans.

"SEC. 202. (a) The following classes of persons, firms, and corporations shall keep such records as will fully and correctly disclose all transactions involved in their businesses; and all persons, firms, and corporations subject to such requirements shall, at all reasonable times, upon notice by a duly authorized representative of the Secretary, afford such representative access to their places of business and opportunity to examine the facilities, inventory, and records thereof, to copy all such records, and to take reasonable samples of their inventory upon payment of the fair market value therefor

"(1) Any persons, firms, or corporations that engage, for commerce, in the business of slaughtering any cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines, or preparing, freezing, packaging, or labeling any carcasses,