Senator LEVIN. One more question on that. Where they do take those samples, under our current process it takes a couple of days I gather to really do the test to determine whether or not there is salmonella or other bacteria or chemical residues or what-have-you in meat or poultry. Are we now working on a faster process to give us answers to tests?

Dr. HOUSTON. Right. Research is underway both in the area of chemical residues and microbiological hazards, but I must tell you the technology is not available today to make an immediate determination on the presence of salmonella. We do have some in-plant tests that are now available for residue detection. They still take 12 to 18 hours in order to make a determination, but work is underway.

Senator LEVIN. Could you give us a guesstimate as to when you think the technology might be available to do the salmonella testing on the spot, say within a matter of a few minutes?

Dr. HOUSTON. That's a matter of years and I can't tell you.

Senator LEVIN. So we are not on the verge of a breakthrough in that kind of equipment as far as you know?

[Dr. Houston confers with Dr. Crawford.]

Dr. HOUSTON. Dr. Crawford advises me there is a great deal of research not only here but in Europe, but it's hard for us to say when that breakthrough might come.

Senator LEVIN. As far as you know we're not on the verge of it, and if we are, you don't know about it.

Dr. HOUSTON. I'm not aware of it.

Senator LEVIN. Okay. Now just for the sake of consumers who might be watching or listening or read what we're talking about here, would you go through the precautionary steps which they should take relative to the preparation and cooking of meat and poultry.

Dr. HOUSTON. First of all, as Senator Pryor mentioned a while ago, poultry should be thoroughly cooked and one should wash their hands between handling raw product and cooked product. Once product is cooked it should not be placed back on a platter which has raw juices on it. Leftovers from a meal should be promptly refrigerated. Cutting boards and other utensils should be washed between different uses. In most cases it's just a common sense approach that will usually correct the problem.

Senator LEVIN. Thank you, Doctor.

Senator Cohen.

Senator COHEN. Dr. Houston, in the 132 meat and poultry plants reviewed by the Inspector General last year some 2,000 sanitation and chemical deficiencies were cited. What follow-up did FSIS make to ensure that those deficiencies were corrected?

Dr. HOUSTON. We do have inspectors, inspectors-in-charge and circuit supervisors who are every day looking at plants, and I might say that there is not a day that goes by that hundreds of deficiencies aren't noted and corrected. That occurs every day in the 7,000 plants.

Senator COHEN. And you did take follow-up steps to correct those deficiencies?

Dr. HOUSTON. Those are taken right by the inspectors at the plant level.

Senator COHEN. I mean do you have a record of it?

Dr. HOUSTON. Every plant has a sanitation report that is filed every day, but those are maintained at the plant level.

Senator COHEN. Well, the GAO, and they will be testifying momentarily, has made a preliminary finding that FSIS doesn't adequately track plant performance. Are you aware of that?

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, I've seen their testimony. I don't know that they have made a finding yet. They've only gotten into this review for just a few months or a few weeks.

Senator COHEN. You can say preliminary findings.

Dr. HOUSTON. Preliminary findings. I would emphasize that this is a highly decentralized program because of the fact that it is an in-plant inspection program where a great deal of authority is delegated to the inspector in charge in that plant; the authority to destroy another person's product with no recourse, the authority to shut down a plant or a part of a plant; the authority to slow down lines, the authority to retain product. Those kinds of actions go on every day in the thousands of meat and poultry plants.

We have to delegate that authority. If we don't, then no action can be taken and operations would be-

Senator COHEN. What I'm asking you is is there an adequate record in dealing with that kind of enforcement recorded for your oversight?

Dr. HOUSTON. Each day there is a sanitation report carried out and is a matter of record at the plant level. So it is maintained there. The answer to your question is yes.

Senator COHEN. And we would have that available to review?
Dr. HOUSTON. Certainly.

Senator COHEN. In last year's Inspector General's report they recommended a sliding scale of fines be instituted by FSIS to provide financial disincentives for repeated willful violations at the socalled medium level. So you support that?

Dr. HOUSTON. That was a recommendation that came forward in the Carter Administration, and when Secretary Block became the Secretary of Agriculture he reviewed that position and did not adopt it. It is the policy of this Administration not to support that sliding scale of civil penalties.

Senator COHEN. Why not?

Dr. HOUSTON. I believe that there is already enough authority in place for the inspection service at this point. In addition, the Administration asked for increased authority when the Processed Products Inspection Improvement Act was passed, and that authority was provided.

Senator COHEN. But that doesn't answer my question. What's wrong with having a sliding scale for those who are more egregious in their conduct and for those who have a superlative record? Why not have the kind of flexibility to have a real disincentive for those who are the most constant violators? I don't understand why the Administration or you would be opposed to that?

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, we believe there is enough authority there already and that-

Senator COHEN. You're saying they have the authority now to have a sliding scale?

Dr. HOUSTON. No, we have enough authority to take regulatory action.

Senator COHEN. The question is what kind of regulatory action would serve as an adequate disincentive for those who are the most frequent violators?

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, they have to every day face up to regulatory action on the part of inspectors if they are found not complying with regulations, such as I——

Senator COHEN. But we have procedures for almost every other facet. If you have somebody who is a repeat offender, you treat them somewhat differently than you would for the first time offender. What's wrong with that?

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, as I mentioned, we have authority to prosecute people. We had 33 prosecutions last year. Every day inspectors are stopping operations or retaining product. There is a tremendous amount of authority in the Federal Meat Inspection Act and Poultry Products-

Senator COHEN. Well, it's clear to me you don't want to answer the question. I'm asking you the rationale of what is wrong from your perspective with having a sliding scale for having some flexibility to have more penalties imposed on those who are more frequent violators. I don't understand the rationale for your opposition.

Senator PRYOR. Dr. Houston, I think for the record it would be well if you would in a paragraph or so state your credentials. I know you are a doctor, but I would like, if you would, for you to state your credentials, and also Dr. Crawford's. I think that would be well stated at this point for the record.

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, I'm a 1959 graduate of the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Illinois, and I have spent my entire professional career in food hygiene. I came to work for the Department of Agriculture in 1961 as an in-plant inspector, and since that time I have maintained employment with the program. I have worked in a number of field locations and here in Washington, and have been the Administrator for the past 8 or 9 years.

Senator PRYOR. And what about Dr. Crawford, if he would state his credentials.

Dr. CRAWFORD. I graduated from the Auburn University School of Veterinary Medicine in 1963 with a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, and I graduated from the University of Georgia with a Ph.D. in pharmacology in 1969. I was in poultry inspection as a trainee in college. After that I worked in research with American Cyanamide Company. I taught veterinary medicine for 16 years at the University of Georgia. I was Director of the Center for Veterinary Medicine in the Food and Drug Administration for five years, and have been at FSIS for the past year and a half.

Senator PRYOR. Thank you.

Dr. Houston, I would like to look at just all food production and inspection just for a moment. Would you explain the difference in the type of inspection that USDA or your operation gives to beef

and poultry and the type of inspection given to other food products by_the_Food and Drug Administration or other inspection services. Dr. HOUSTON. Well, maybe we could take a food as an example and answer that question. Let's take soup and talk about our friends at Campbell Soup.

They make vegetable soup, as you know, and thousands of cans a day come down the line and that is subject to FDA jurisdiction. FDA, as you mentioned a while ago, has about 400 staff years devoted to 60,000 food plants in this country. They may go into Campbell Soup once a year or once every two years or once every three years. They may show up at the plant and make a sanitation review and generally look at what's going on.

If Campbell decides to put a one-ounce piece of beef in that vegetable soup

Senator PRYOR. And make it beef vegetable or chicken vegetable

Dr. HOUSTON. It now becomes vegetable and beef soup. It's still got more vegetables than beef, but it's-

Senator PRYOR. But then you assume jurisdiction.

Dr. HOUSTON. Then we assume jurisdiction. The first thing they have to do is have their blueprints approved before they can operate under USDA inspection and get a license to operate from the Department of Agriculture. They must have all their labels approved. They will have an inspector there every day to check on the formulation, to check on labeling and so forth.

We can take another example of a cheese pizza. If you want to open up a pizza plant you can do it. You may have some local requirements to follow and you may see the FDA every three or four years or whatever. But if you want to put pepperoni on it, you've got to come to us and get a license and follow all of our regulations and be inspected.

As you can see, there is quite a diverse food safety policy in the United States. Meat and poultry industries are regulated. It's the zenith of regulation, if you will, and we have very, very diverse policies in this country on how we regulate various foods.

Senator PRYOR. How many inspectors does the Food and Drug Administration have?

Dr. HOUSTON. I talked to them last week. Their total budget for food safety is $107 million.

Senator PRYOR. And your budget is what?

Dr. HOUSTON. Almost $400 million. And they have about 400 staff years devoted to food, but they have large numbers of person-years devoted to drug regulation.

Senator PRYOR. Senator Levin asked just a moment ago about the bird-by-bird inspection system, I believe

Senator LEVIN. Relative to those thousand that he said he would like to move in the poultry industry to the systemic.

Senator PRYOR. Right. Now the National Academy report spent quite a bit of time in this report discussing this particular concept-

Dr. HOUSTON. Yes, sir.

Senator PRYOR [continuing]. Versus, as they say, a better concept. What was their finding? You were attempting, I think, a

moment ago to read from that report, and if you would like to, feel free to.

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, there was one paragraph. It says "If substantial public resources are to continue to be dedicated to bird-by-bird poultry inspection as it is currently conducted, even under the most streamlined circumstances, it is important for the Food Safety and Inspection Service to demonstrate the associated public health benefits, if any, as soon as possible. If esthetic improvements are the only benefits derived from the present system, the committee believes there is no justification for continuing the government's intense involvement.'

The Academy did review, I might say, a number of hazards associated with poultry and concluded that the bird-by-bird program is not eliminating those hazards and we should divert those resources elsewhere.

Senator PRYOR. The naked eye cannot see or depict salmonella; is this correct?

Dr. HOUSTON. That's right.

Senator PRYOR. Would more inspectors, say if an increase from 7,000 or 8,000 now to 50,000 help to eradicate salmonella?

Dr. HOUSTON. No, sir, not under the present system, not under the visual inspection. We've got to be able to inspect smarter. Senator PRYOR. Smarter?

Dr. HOUSTON. We've got to be able to inspect smarter than what we are now. We've got to use more science and more technology. Senator PRYOR. Now I believe it was you, if I'm not mistaken, who requested the National Academy to do a study on this whole system; is this correct?

Dr. HOUSTON. Yes, sir. In fact, back in 1985 I requested a study to be made and from that study flowed this last study which again we asked for. The changes, Senator, that we have contemplated and we've talked about over the last 10 years are controversial, but they are based on science, and that's why we went to the National Academy to have them judge what we're doing and to come back to us with recommendations.

I might add that my initial reading of the report is that I'm very pleased with it. I think it supports the direction we're taking and gives us very good recommendations on how to continue.

Senator PRYOR. Let's talk just a minute about beef and poultry and how you inspect, or how your inspectors inspect for beef vis-avis poultry. Would you describe that process?

Dr. HOUSTON. Well, in the situation with beef more attention is given

Senator PRYOR. I would like to limit this question to salmonella if we could.

Dr. HOUSTON. There is really very little difference at this point. We are still mostly a visual, organoleptic inspection program. Now we do have very intensive regulatory schemes in place for ready-toeat products, products that are cooked and have to be either reheated or eaten as such in the home. An example is rare roast beef that you might see in a deli. For a number of years this was a significant source of human salmonellosis because contaminated products were going into delis and then being temperature abused, and salmonella would grow and create disease.