"§ 3.58 Animal Feeds contaminated with salmonella microorganisms "(a) Investigations by the Food and Drug Administration, the Communicable Disease Center of the U.S. Public Health Service, the Animal Health Division of the Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and by various State public health agencies have revealed that processed fishmeal, poultry meal, meat meal, tankage, and other animal byproducts intended for use in animal feed may be contaminated with salmonella bacteria, an organism pathogenic to man and animals. Contamination of these products may occur through inadequate heat treatment of the product during its processing or through recontamination of the heat-treated product during a time of improper storage or handling subsequent to processing. "(b) Articles used in food for animals are included within the definition of 'food' in section 201 (f) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Further, salmonella contamination of such animal feeds having the potentiality for producing infection and disease in animals must be regarded as an adulterant within the meaning of section 402 (a) of the act. Therefore, the Food and Drug Administration will regard as adulterated within the meaning of section 402 (a) of the act shipments of the following when intended for animal feed and encountered in interstate commerce and found upon examination to be contaminated with salmonella microorganisms: Bone meal, blood meal, crab meal, feather meal, fishmeal, fish solubles, meat scraps, poultry meat meal, tankage, or other similar animal byproducts, or blended mixtures of these." In the Salmonella Surveillance Report No. 62 covering the period of May 1967, there is a progress report on the food and feed surveillance program. Included in the types sampled were corn, oats, cracked corn, wheat and mixed feed. Salmonella was not isolated from any of these samples. Report No. 63 from the Center lists 13 recommendations developed by a Committee of the World Association of Veterinary Food-Hygienists at the National Institute of Health, Bilthoven, Netherlands. All these recommendations are significant. They are indicative of the fact, as stated in the recommendation numbered 10, "Certificates which guarantee that foods and feeds are free from salmonellae are misleading because in the present stage of the art of production and processing of certain foods and feeds, it is impossibe to guarantee the absence of these organisms." This is far short of a conclusion that animal feed is an important source of samonella contamination. Report No. 73 covering the month of April 1968 and issued last month, summarizes the Food and Drug Administration's Product Analysis for Salmonellae for the year April 1, 1967-April 1, 1968. Among the products examined that year were 52 samples of wheat, rice and cereals. None of these was positive for salmonellae. The present state of the record warrants the conclusion that feed grains are not an important source of salmonellae contamination, and that this Committee should not, therefore, approve, as part of any legislation to amend the Poultry Products Inspection Act, Section 25 of S. 3383. [From the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Nov. 29, 1966] USDA STUDIES MAY LEAD TO REDUCTION OF SALMONELLOSIS IN HUMANS AND Studies conducted this year point the way to substantially reducing bacterial disease caused by Salmonella infection of both man and animals, Secretary of Agriculture Orville L. Freeman said today. Under the vo professional guidelines un animal origin Elimination duction of th veterinarians monella occu environment animals for USDA's Agricultural Research Service has determined sources of Salmonella bacterial contamination in animal feeds. Intensive sampling of animal feed and feed ingredients in 26 States showed that feed ingredients of animal origin— tankage, meat, meal, feather meal, poultry by-product meal and similar products are a frequent source of Salmonella contamination in animal feeds. With the cooperation of rendering companies, the animal feed industry and State agencies, ARS is working to reduce and eliminate the contamination. Voluntary improvement of sanitary practices will make use of guidelines that have been developed by ARS and industry. A survey indicates that 43 percent of the renderers who received the guidelines had made an evaluation of their rendering operation for Salmonella control. It is expected that with State or Federal officials working with renderers, nearly all could be stimulated to initiate and maintain a Salmonella control program. In coopera cies, 12,500 basic feed finished pro annually. L showed det and Univer and tabulat Of the i expected, s percent. Th taining an percent. The cere lowed by s tein-1.10 3.73 perce The am may reflec Congres fiscal year Under the voluntary control program an official will visit each plant to give professional guidance on a continuous basis. If all renderers apply the sanitary guidelines under the program, Salmonella contamination of feed ingredients of animal origin can be elminated, ARS officials state. Elimination of this source of Salmonella should contribute to the overall reduction of the organisms in the total environment, ARS Animal Health Division veterinarians reported. They point out, however, that hundreds of types of Salmonella occur throughout the world, and some occur naturally throughout the environment. Several types cause Salmonellosis that has afflicted both man and animals for more than a century. In cooperation with the livestock and poultry feed industries and State agencies, 12,500 samples of feed and feed ingredients were collected from over 600 basic feed mills using a variety of ingredients and producing many forms of finished products. The industry produces about 60 million tons of finished feeds annually. Less than 4 percent of all samples of ingredients and finished feeds showed detectable levels of Salmonella contamination, as determined by State and University laboratories. Over 10,000 of the samples have now been analyzed, and tabulations by USDA are nearing completion. Of the ingredients going into mixed feeds, animal protein samples, as was expected, showed the highest incidence of Salmonella contamination-about 29 percent. This higher level of contamination in turn was reflected in feeds containing animal proteins. Poultry feed showed 3.97 percent and swine feed 2.65 percent. The cereal-grain samples showed the least contamination, 0.51 percent; followed by samples of finished cattle feed-which likewise contains no animal protein-1.10 percent; and plant protein, 1.60 percent. Marine protein samples showed 3.73 percent. The amount of contamination in cereal grains, plant proteins, and cattle feeds may reflect general environmental contamination. Congress appropriated $153,300 for ARS Salmonella control work during this fiscal year. [From the U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Food and Drug Administration, July 12, 1967] NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES TO CONDUCT SALMONELLA STUDY The National Academy of Sciences is undertaking a broad study of Salmonella and its impact on human health, food technology, and animal agriculture in the United States. The project will be carried out under the joint sponsorship of two agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture-the Agriculture Research Service and the Consumer and Marketing Service and of the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health, Education and Welfare. The study will cost $64,000. Salmonella is a pathogenic microorganism which is a common cause of food poisoning in the United States. Hundreds of distinct strains of the organism are found in man, in animals, and elsewhere in the environment. The National Academy project will include a survey of the problem of Salmonella contamination in the food and agricultural industries, the chain of infection that leads to outbreaks of salmonellosis in man, and the effectiveness of current control methods. A review and evaluation of FDA's surveillance and enforcement activities to control Salmonella will be part of the study. National Academy scientists also will seek answers to such questions as: What is the economic cost of Salmonella, in terms of livestock and human disease as well as industrial losses? What are the roles of humans and livestock as carriers of Salmonella? What changes are occurring in the incidence of salmonellosis and what factors underlie the changes? At what point in the chain of transmission of the organism can control methods be most effective in preventing outbreaks of disease? What new data are required on the Salmonella problem and how can the research be carried out to acquire it? How can the combined resources of Government, the academic world, and industry be utilized most effectively to reduce the potential Salmonella threat to public health and animal health? The National Research Council, operating arm of NAS, expects to spend 18 months on the study. The Food Microbiology Subcommittee of the NAS-NRC'S Food Protection Committee and the Animal Health Committee of the Agricultural Board will provide guidance and support for the work. Specialists in microbiology, epidemiology, microbial genetics and physiology, immunology, food technology, and agriculture will be called upon to assist in the project. contaminate Senator [From the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Aug. 8, 1967] USDA SCIENTISTS LEARN BEETLE IS CARRIER OF SALMONELLA Research entomologists have learned that the dermestid beetle, Dermestes maculatus, can be a carrier of Salmonella, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported today. Salmonella is a genus of bacteria frequently associated with various types of food poisoning, with acute gastrointestinal inflammation. Despite elaborate precautions taken by industry, it appears sporadically in processed foods and feeds. In testing beetles collected at one location, it was determined that crushed larvae placed on a culture medium were all positive for Salmonella. Adult beetles found infected externally were cleansed on the outside and on testing were found to carry an internal infection also. Agricultural Research Service entomologists speculate that in a plant infested with these bettles it would be possible for the insects to carry the Salmonella organism from infected areas into clean areas, including holding or packer bins, and so infect products that had earlier been pasteurized or sterilized. It has previously been established that rats, birds, and even humans can be vectors of Salmonella organisms. The entomologists say that controlling the beetle infestation, and so breaking this chain of transmissions, would be of tremendous importance to the food and feed industries. But, they point out, their present findings are preliminary. They are continuing their observation, to obtain sound data upon which they hope to be able to base positive recommendations to the food and feed industries. [From the U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 10, 1968] SALMONELLA SURVIVES UP TO 24 WEEKS ON SOME FABRIC Salmonella bacterium that can cause illness remained alive and infectious on fabrics for as long as 24 weeks in research sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA scientists say that although these studies do not prove that this organism can be transmitted to humans by contaminated linens or clothing, the potential of such transmission is indicated. Microbiologists at the Southern Research Institute, Birmingham, Ala., working under an Agricultural Research Service contract, conducted the research. They used three methods to contaminate fabrics with the organism, Salmonella typhimurium. Swatches of 2 wool materials (blanketing and gabardine) and 4 cotton (sheetting, knit jersey, terry cloth, and wash-and-wear shirting) were contaminated by (1) placing a bacterial suspension directly on the fabric, (2) using an aerosol spray containing bacterial suspension, and by (3) placing household dust containing the bacteria on the fabric. Swatches of material were then kept at 77° F. in relative humidities 35 or 78 percent. They were examined at intervals to determine the number of living cells and the infectivity of the cells on mice. The samples of wool gabardine, cotton sheeting, knit jersey, and terry cloth exposed by direct contact and held at 35 percent humidity retained high numbers of living bacterial cells at the end of 24 weeks. At 78 percent humidity, the bacteria lived only 6 to 12 weeks. Swatches exposed to dust-containing bacteria and kept at 35 percent humidity retained significant levels of the Salmonella organism for 6 to 14 weeks. The bacteria lived for the shortest period (from 1 to 4 weeks) when the fabric was meetings standards the small S. 2932 several y bility for to the Se can be as While it is imp appropri I wou expresse Indiana: high sta provided we hope Mr. W reservati pieces. I ment of carcass This i to the f and pro contaminated through use of aerosol spray. Here, the humidity did not appear to be important. This research is an outgrowth of earlier bacteriological research by the Department to improve sanitation in the home. Senator JORDAN. Thank you. We appreciate your testimony, and we appreciate you being with us. Thank you, sir. I believe that concludes our witnesses for the day. Thank you very much, gentlemen. Is there anybody who wishes to put a statement in the record? If so, the record will be kept open until July 3 for any insertion that may come in later. Thank you, again, very much. This concludes the hearing. (Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the hearing was concluded and the subcommittee arose.) (Additional statements filed for the record are as follows:) STATEMENT OF HON. VANCE HARTKE, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to present my views on S. 2932, which amends the Poultry Inspection Act of 1957 to promote Federal-State cooperation and to strengthen poultry inspection requirements. S. 2932 is an important extension of better protection for the consumer. I am pleased to be a Senate sponsor of this legislation. In my own State of Indiana, which ranks 17th in all poultry production, this vital industry last year accounted for almost $28 million in income to farmers and producers. Processing of poultry products is a big business in Indiana. Most firms and producers are above the $15,000 a year limitation. However, it is my understanding that our Indiana people under this volume limitation agree to cooperate. During 1967 and early 1968 the Indiana State Poultry Association conducted meetings with poultry producers and processors-large and small-to work out standards which should meet Federal approval and not cause undue hardship on the smaller producers. The consumer benefits by such working agreements. S. 2932 further promotes State-Federal cooperation, a trend which began several years ago. As a result, the States accept more and more of the responsibility for their residents. However, the provision in S. 2932 of initiative power to the Secretary of Agriculture is necessary so that housewives in all the states can be assured of the purchase of wholesome products for their families. While we encourage the States' acceptance of responsibility in these areas it is important that we share the cost of the program and provide Federal appropriations for the technicians-inspectors. I would like to restate for the Committee and the record the concern as expressed by one of our largest processors of poultry, Central Soya, Ft. Wayne, Indiana: "We believe that all poultry processed in this country should meet high standards of quality and be subject to the continuous inspection now provided for processing plants which are in Interstate Commerce. Consequently, we hope that the legislation is passed. Mr. William H. Small, Staff Attorney for Central Soya, did express some reservation about the required stamping of poultry merchandised in small pieces. I hope that the legislative history of the bill and the subsequent development of administrative guidelines will show that certification of an inspected carcass may be transferred to a package of smaller pieces. This is a good bill, Mr. Chairman, and I urge its favorable recommendation to the full Senate. By passing S. 2932, we fulfill our obligation to the public and provide a workable law for producers and processors. WASHINGTON, D.C., July 2, 1968. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I will appreciate it very much if you will make this letter a part of the record of the hearings on bills to amend the Poultry Products Inspection Act. We in the Farmers Union traditionally have supported legislation to insure that wholesome food products reach the consumer. We farmers, of course, are consumers ourselves. But over and above this, we are convinced that effective inspection programs which build confidence on the part of the consumer in food products is in the interest of producers over both the short and long range. Therefore, in 1956 when legislation was introduced in the Senate to provide mandatory federal inspection for poultry, Farmers Union joined a coalition of consumer organizations and civic groups in support of the best possible legislation. As you will recall, that action culminated in the enactment of the Poultry Products Inspection Act of 1957. We look back with considerable pride on our organization's efforts on behalf of this law. We think it has been of great benefit to all concerned-consumers, employees in poultry processing plants, farmers and the industry generally. We point out, however, that the Poultry Products Inspection Act of 1957 necessarily related to the Meat Inspection Act which has been amended by Congressional action this year. In keeping with the traditional relationship between inspection procedures for red meat and poultry we should move in this the 90th Session of Congress to update the Poultry Products Inspection Act to reflect improvements made this year in the Meat Inspection Act. Therefore, we support the bill of Senator Ellender and 13 cosponsors-S. 2932. We consider all of the bills before the Committee as generally good bills. For example, we can see considerable merit in the measure introduced by Senator Mondale-S. 3383-since it comprises effectively the issue of Federal-State authority and at the same time assures strong consumer safeguards. But, we agree with other proponents of Congressional action this year that Senator Ellender's bill basically in the form of the House passed bill, H.R. 16363, will more realistically be assured of Congressional approval before adjournment. There are several provisions, however, we would like to see improved. Section 5(c) (5) of S. 2932 would permit state-inspected plants to ship into interstate commerce. Any and all plants which ship into interstate commerce or to federallyinspected plants can and should get federal inspection. If the line between federal and state programs, between inter-state and intra-state plants, is to be erased, then we suggest that the intra-state plants be brought under federal inspection rather than inter-state plants being brought under state programs which have yet to prove themselves. The fact is that there is unlikely to be many state poultry inspection programs. There are too few states which have a sufficient number of intra-state poultry plants to make it worthwhile to establish an inspection program. We regard Section 5(c) (5) to be aimed not so much at poultry inspection, but rather to provide a wedge for reopening the meat inspection law. Because the mass of the poultry industry is concentrated in comparatively few areas of the nation and because few states will probably go to the expense of establishing a program, we suggest that either S. 2932 or H.R. 16363, whichever the Committee will use as its poultry inspection bill, should contain a state waiver provision. This section would allow the Governor or the elected state Secretary of Agriculture to indicate to the federal government that the state will not provide inspection and ask the federal program to inspect its intrastate plants. As a result, consumers could be protected before the two year period runs out. There is no reason why preparation for inspection and the inspection, itself, should wait two years if the state does not intend to establish a poultry program. Section 9(a), the prohibited acts section, of H.R. 16363 contains the word "knowingly." With this word, the Government would find it much more difficult to prosecute violations than it would under S. 2932, the Wholesome Meat Act or the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. The Depart (c) of H.R. We hope t and Forestry Respe Senator A Chairman, ton, I DEAR MI ates and v to S. 2932 Poultry P S. 2932 Secretary inspection improvin Hower activities is not i congressi should b their se authorit heartedl that it Commit Depart We w placing that th and He that th Act res Meat of the It is t most With proble and th of dis direct of the Whole H.H Feder Sec. produ creat the W |