Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS DIRECTIVE 6410.3 VERIFYING SANITARY DRESSING AND PROCESS CONTROL PROCEDURES.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS DIRECTIVE 6410.3 VERIFYING SANITARY DRESSING AND PROCESS CONTROL PROCEDURES."— Presentation transcript:

1 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS DIRECTIVE VERIFYING SANITARY DRESSING AND PROCESS CONTROL PROCEDURES BY OFF-LINE INSPECTION PROGRAM PERSONNEL (IPP) IN POULTRY SLAUGHTER OPERATIONS A Systems Approach OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 1

2 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service OBJECTIVES Discuss a ‘system’ as it relates to sanitary dressing and process control Role of sanitary dressing and process control as a part of the establishment’s food safety system Directive –Locations in the slaughter process where carcass contamination is most likely to occur –Verification –Establishment Interventions –Determining compliance OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 2

3 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service BACKGROUND Effective sanitary dressing and process control procedures are crucial to an establishment’s ability to produce a clean, safe, and wholesome product. Carcass contamination is a vehicle for the transfer of pathogens. As set out in 9 CFR (e), poultry carcasses contaminated with visible fecal material must be prevented from entering the chilling tank. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 3

4 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service KEY POINT Sanitary dressing noncompliances are determined based on cumulative information reflecting the food safety system Sanitary Dressing noncompliance is not documented in regard to one point in the process. Sanitary Dressing noncompliance is not documented in regard to one contamination incident. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 4

5 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FOOD SAFETY SYSTEM A food safety system includes all aspects of the operation For example: –Slaughter –Fabrication and Grinding –Product storage –Product Testing –Control Programs –Customer feedback OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 5

6 What is an example of a system? Building a house Building a house Flying an airplane Flying an airplane Making bread Making bread Sewing a dress Sewing a dress Slaughtering cattle Slaughtering cattle What is the key to making the system work? Follow the blueprints Follow the blueprints Complete a pre-flight check and follow the flight plan Complete a pre-flight check and follow the flight plan Follow the recipe Follow the recipe Follow the pattern Follow the pattern Follow Sanitary Dressing & Process Control Procedures Follow Sanitary Dressing & Process Control Procedures 6 OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska

7 7

8 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SYSTEM APPROACH It is the expectation that each time IPP evaluate the sanitary dressing & process control procedures, they look at the entire slaughter system, and beyond, not at just one point in the process NOTE: When determining compliance, IPP should consider what they are seeing at that time regarding the system, but are to also consider what has been occurring historically in the operation (i.e., consider cumulative information) OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 8

9 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service All steps in Slaughter operations including waivers Fabrication & grinding Product Testing Zero Tolerance Process control programs OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska Salmonella Category 9

10 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SYSTEM APPROACH FSIS’ role is to think about all the available information to see how the pieces interact with each other and ultimately fit together OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 10

11 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE IPP have an opportunity to gather information about the system every time they walk out onto the slaughter floor regardless of whether or not they are conducting the PHIS Poultry Sanitary Dressing task OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 11

12 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Role of sanitary dressing and process control as a part of the establishment’s food safety system OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 12

13 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SANITARY DRESSING Practice of handling carcasses and parts by establishment employees and machinery, throughout the slaughter process, in a manner that produces a clean, safe, wholesome poultry product in a sanitary environment. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 13

14 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Process Control Procedures A defined procedure or set of procedures designed by an establishment to provide control of those operating conditions that are necessary for the production of safe, wholesome food. Process Control Procedures put in place by establishments typically include: –observing or measuring system performance –analyzing the results to develop measures to ensure the process remains under control –taking action when necessary to ensure that the system continues to perform within the control criteria –planned measures taken by the establishment in response to any loss of process control OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 14

15 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE The point of sanitary dressing and process control is to reduce contamination and to ensure that poultry carcasses are as clean as possible throughout the entire slaughter operation. The establishment should not be waiting until just before the birds falls into the chiller to take care of contamination OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 15

16 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE Contamination events on carcasses should be prevented throughout the slaughter process to in order to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 16

17 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service WHY IT’S IMPORTANT Preventing carcass contamination is essential to ensuring that decontamination practices and validated antimicrobial interventions are effective to reduce Salmonella and generic E.coli Being proactive is better for food safety than being reactive OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 17

18 FSIS DIRECTIVE OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 18

19 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS DIRECTIVE Provides definitions for such terms as Process Control, Sanitary Dressing, Contamination of Carcasses and Parts, and Food safety System. Describes points in the slaughter process where carcass contamination with foodborne pathogens, such as Salmonella and Campylobacter, is most likely to occur OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 19

20 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS DIRECTIVE Explains how IPP are to gather and assess information about the slaughter operation when verifying that the establishment’s sanitary dressing and process control procedures are effectively ensuring sanitary conditions Addresses supervisory responsibilities associated with IPP verification activities OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 20

21 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DEFINITIONS Contamination of Carcasses and Parts: Carcasses and parts that, based on organoleptic inspection, have been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions that may have caused them to come into contact with filth, or that may have caused them to be injurious to health, and are condemnable unless they can be effectively reprocessed. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 21

22 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE Not all contamination is directly associated with food safety. Sound judgment must be used when determining whether the conditions observed during the slaughter process are part of the slaughter process or are present as an unavoidable consequence of the slaughter process. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 22

23 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DEFINITIONS Food Safety System: A systematic approach implemented to prevent foodborne illness. The food safety system includes the development and implementation of a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) Plan in accordance with 9 CFR 417 and a Sanitation Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) in accordance with 9 CFR 416. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 23

24 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS Poultry Chiller Makeup Water Free Available Chlorine Reuse Water OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 24

25 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION POINTS Live receiving and hanging Stunning and Bleeding Scalding Feather removal and Picking Evisceration On-line reprocessing Off-line reprocessing Product reconditioning Chilling OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 25

26 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service LIVE RECEIVING & HANGING Poultry arrive at the establishment in transport cages, are unloaded, and are hung on shackles before stunning and bleeding Potential for contamination with enteric pathogens because of the presence of these pathogens on the feathers, skin, crop, and cloaca & in the feces OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 26

27 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service STUNNING & BLEEDING Point in the slaughter process where the bird is stunned, cut, & bled Stunning methods used typically used include electrical, mechanical, or chemical Bleeding ensures death by slaughter and ensures that poultry have stopped breathing before going into the scalder OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 27

28 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SCALDING Point in the slaughter process where the birds are placed in hot water in order to facilitate feather removal Salmonella and Campylobacter contamination consistently decrease when scalding is well controlled OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 28

29 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FEATHER REMOVAL & PICKING Point in the slaughter process designed to remove feathers and, in most cases, the uppermost layer of skin before evisceration Feather removal (i.e., picking) frequently results in increased microbial contamination of poultry carcasses OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 29

30 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service EVISCERATION Point in the process where removal of the internal organs, and of any processing defects, from the poultry carcasses occurs Evisceration includes multiple processes. It begins at the transfer point (i.e., re-hang) and ends when the carcass enters the chiller. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 30

31 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service ON-LINE REPROCESSING Point in the slaughter process where contaminated eviscerated carcasses are reprocessed on-line following the provisions of a waiver granted in accordance with 9 CFR 381.3(b) OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 31

32 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE Establishments need to have requested to participate in the Salmonella Initiative Program (SIP) or have a SIP letter (i.e. a No Objection letter) on file that addresses the alternative procedures or criteria that the establishment must adhere to in order to maintain its waiver. See FSIS Directive OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 32

33 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service OFF-LINE REPROCESSING This is the point in the evisceration process where internally contaminated carcasses are reprocessed off-line according to 9 CFR (b)(1) and (b)(2) OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 33

34 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service PRODUCT RECONDITIONING Point in slaughter and further processing where contaminated eviscerated carcasses & parts that have fallen on the floor, or otherwise have become contaminated off-line, are reconditioned in order to restore sanitary conditions. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 34

35 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service CARCASS CHILLING Point when eviscerated carcasses are chilled in order to inhibit microbial growth and meet the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR (b)(1) There are two types of chilling systems: immersion and air Cross-contamination may occur when sanitary conditions are not maintained in the chiller, or when carcasses entering the chiller carry high levels of pathogens OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 35

36 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service GIBLET CHILLING Cross-contamination may occur when sanitary conditions are not maintained in the giblet chiller, or when parts entering the chiller carry high levels of contamination OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 36

37 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service PHIS SANITARY DRESSING TASK PHIS requires that each task have a “start” and “end” date IPP are not limited to conducting the Poultry Sanitary Dressing task all in one day Can be spread out over a period of days, if necessary, in order to gather as much available information so that IPP can make a sound regulatory decision about the system OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 37

38 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION The verification activities addressed in the directive are to be used in conjunction with, and can be conducted simultaneously with, those addressed in the following directives: –FSIS PHIS Directive , Verifying and Establishment’s –FSIS Directive Ante-mortem and Post-mortem Poultry Inspection –FSIS , Verification of Procedures for Controlling Fecal Material, Ingesta and Milk in Slaughter Operations –FSIS Directive , Verification of Non-food Safety Consumer Protection Regulatory Requirements, Part IV, G OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 38

39 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION IPP need to verify, in off-line activities, that preventive steps are taken to ensure carcasses and parts, including giblets, are not contaminated, and that contamination events are rare. In addition, before the carcasses enter the chiller, IPP conduct zero tolerance checks to verify that there is no visible fecal contamination on the carcasses. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 39

40 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION IPP verify compliance with 9 CFR (e) by determining whether the establishment's sanitary dressing and process control procedures are adequate to ensure that carcasses entering the chiller are not contaminated with fecal material. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 40

41 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION IPP that perform off-line slaughter verification duties are to perform the PHIS Poultry Sanitary Dressing task to verify that insanitary conditions are not being created. –Evaluate the sanitary dressing and process control procedures as they relate to the establishment’s food safety system; and not just as a single aspect of the slaughter process. –Verify that the sanitary dressing, and process control procedures, are sufficient to prevent the contamination of carcasses during slaughter operations. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 41

42 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION Conditions that could affect the sanitary dressing and process control system, include but are not limited to, the following: –An increased number of positive establishment or FSIS Salmonella or Campylobacter test results; –An increased number of establishment generic E.coli or indicator organism test results that exceed either the establishment’s or regulatory control limits; OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 42

43 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION –An increase in fecal zero tolerance noncompliances; –Documented evidence of carcass contamination that demonstrates a repeated or on-going loss of process control (e.g., incidental contamination documented under SPS, or zero tolerance noncompliances). OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 43

44 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION IPP are to gather information using the questions in the directive to determine whether an establishment’s slaughter operation meets the requirements of 9 CFR 416 or is creating insanitary conditions that may result in product contamination. The questions provided at each point in the directive may vary depending on the type of slaughter operation being conducted (e.g., a highly automated line vs. traditional hand operated line). OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 44

45 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE The questions in the directive are not to be considered to be a checklist and are not all-inclusive but are to be considered when gathering information about the establishment’s food safety system. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 45

46 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE A negative response to one of the questions in the directive is not an automatic indication of regulatory noncompliance or of a system failure. A negative response may simply mean that additional consideration is needed or other considerations apply. When making determinations of regulatory compliance, IPP performing off-line duties are to consider how all the information they have gathered relates to the food safety system. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 46

47 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS VERIFICATION This evaluation could include, but is not limited to, considering the following information: –Information regarding sanitary dressing and process control procedures, and decontamination and antimicrobial intervention treatments; –Feedback from further processing operations to the slaughter operation –Observations of the plant employees performance of their assigned duties at particular points in the process. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 47

48 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE When the information gathered suggests that the establishment has lost control of its process, IPP are to consider whether they should increase the frequency of their verification of sanitary dressing and process control procedures. They are to consult their immediate supervisor if they need guidance. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 48

49 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Establishment Interventions OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 49

50 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service ESTABLISHMENT INTERVENTIONS Interventions typically are able to reduce bacteria at a given rate (e.g., a 2 log reduction) If the bacteria is present at a 5 log level, the intervention won’t be able to address all the bacteria (i.e. the intervention is overwhelmed) OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 50

51 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service ESTABLISHMENT INTERVENTIONS Measures need to be taken from the beginning of slaughter process, including at receiving, to minimize contamination so that the interventions will work appropriately Without effective sanitary dressing and process control procedures, carcasses could become excessively contaminated, and thereby overwhelming any interventions OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 51

52 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service OVERWHELM AN INTERVENTION There is so much contamination on the bird, or the carcass, that the establishment’s intervention(s) aren’t capable of working as designed and therefore not able to achieve a desired level of pathogen reduction OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 52

53 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service OVERWHELM AN INTERVENTION When contamination overwhelms the decontamination practices and antimicrobial interventions, the establishment may no longer be able to reduce Salmonella and Campylobacter to the levels expected by the HACCP plan It is essential that slaughter operations also have interventions that are integrated with sanitary dressing and process control procedures in order to reduce pathogens OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 53

54 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Determining Compliance OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 54

55 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service BEFORE WE PROCEED…. An issue that needs to be addressed is how incidental contamination that is determined to create an insanitary condition is to be documented in PHIS OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 55

56 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service INCIDENTAL CONTAMINATION Incidental contamination (e.g., ingesta, feces, UFM, rail dust) does not automatically represent an insanitary condition. Even if there are observations of contamination on carcasses during the slaughter process, the establishment still has the opportunity to implement measures that will address the contamination before the carcasses enter the chiller. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 56

57 OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska START END ALL THE SLAUGHTER STEPS & INTERVENTIONS ALONG THE WAY 9 CFR SPS NONCOMPLIANCE 57

58 What do FSIS Personnel Need to Do to Determine Compliance ? OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 58

59 GATHER Gather as much information as possible – In-plant Observations Your own On-line IPP PHV/SPHV – Historical information NRs MOIs – Test Results Establishment Results FSIS Results – Communication with other inspectors OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 59

60 COMMUNICATION SlaughterFabrication There have been problems with sanitary dressing and several zero tolerance noncompliances Thanks…That might explain the recent positive test result of ground poultry EST A OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 60

61 COMMUNICATION SlaughterFabrication Thanks…We will check the sanitary dressing and zero tolerance There has been a positive test result in the trim EST A OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 61

62 COMMUNICATION There was a positive test result in the ground poultry Thanks…We will check the sanitary dressing and zero tolerance EST A EST B OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 62

63 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service ASSESS Sanitation is the foundation of a food safety system Sanitary Dressing and Process control is a part of that sanitation foundation Decisions made by the establishment to control enteric pathogens such as Salmonella will be affected by what the establishment does in regard to sanitary dressing and process control OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 63

64 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service REGULATORY BASIS Establishments are expected to slaughter and process poultry in a manner designed to prevent contamination of carcasses –9 CFR requires that establishments be operated such that they do not create insanitary conditions or contaminate product –9 CFR (e) requires prevention of carcass contamination OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 64

65 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service REGULATORY BASIS Other regulations can be integral to sanitary dressing and process control if procedures related to those regulations have been included in the SSOP, HACCP plan or a prerequisite program –9 CFR 416 –9 CFR 417 OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 65

66 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DETERMINE Any determination of noncompliance must be based on all the pieces of information that has been gathered regarding the system OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 66

67 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DETERMINING COMPLIANCE Determining compliance involves deciding if, overall, sanitary dressing operation and process control procedures that are in place, are effective to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions and thereby prevent contamination of carcasses OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 67

68 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DETERMINING COMPLIANCE The thought process for determining compliance of the sanitary dressing and process control procedures is different because it is about a system A single, specific event of finding contamination on a carcass may not be significant as it relates to the system OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 68

69 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service INCIDENTAL CONTAMINATION KEY POINT If IPP find that insanitary conditions exist as a result of incidental contamination, they are to document their findings using the PHIS SPS Verification task citing 9 CFR (a) and the appropriate SPS regulations related to incident OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 69

70 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTE A finding of incidental contamination that demonstrates the creation of an insanitary condition is to be addressed as a specific SPS incident (e.g., SPS/employee hygiene) HOWEVER, one specific incident will not normally be documented as a failure of the sanitary dressing or process control procedures (i.e., is not a failure of the system) OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 70

71 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DETERMINING NONCOMPLIANCE Use the information gathered while performing verification procedures to determine compliance Remember: A series of questions that IPP can ask in order to assist in the determination of compliance are provided in the directive OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 71

72 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DOCUMENTING NONCOMPLIANCE Document the creation of the insanitary condition using the Poultry Sanitary Dressing task on a Noncompliance Record (NR) (9 CFR and (a)) –Cite 9 CFR (a) to address the contamination of carcasses –Cite the appropriate SPS regulations to address the creation of the insanitary condition. Example: cite 9 CFR 416.5(a) if improper employee hygiene practices have resulted in contamination of the carcass OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 72

73 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service DOCUMENTING NONCOMPLIANCE Review available NRs to determine if a trend is developing. NRs can be associated as necessary in accordance with the instructions in FSIS PHIS Directive , Chapter 5, VII to document that a trend of noncompliance is occurring. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 73

74 SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 74

75 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY NOTE: “Supervisory personnel” refers to any Office of Field Operations (OFO) personnel that supervise IPP who conduct off-line verification activities in poultry slaughter operations. FSIS supervisory personnel are to discuss the key points addressed in the directive with IPP. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 75

76 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY Supervisory personnel are to discuss the potential contamination points in the slaughter process addressed in this directive to ensure that IPP understand their role in verifying whether the establishment is initiating measures designed to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions by preventing the contamination of carcasses. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 76

77 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY FSIS supervisory personnel are to emphasize that IPP are to verify that establishments have documentation, in accordance with 9 CFR 417.5(a)(1), sufficient to support any food safety decisions that they make based on the implementation of sanitary dressing and process control procedures. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 77

78 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY Supervisors are to discuss how sanitary dressing and process control procedures have an impact on pathogens such as Salmonella and Campylobacter testing results or raw ground poultry. Supervisors are to emphasize that IPP in the slaughter areas are to conduct a purposeful evaluation of the establishment’s sanitary dressing and process control procedures. Supervisors are to correlate with IPP in processing areas whenever poor implementation of the procedures could lead to positive results in Salmonella set sampling and in raw ground poultry testing. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 78

79 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY Supervisory personnel are to ensure that IPP are correctly applying the inspection methodology, are making informed decisions, are properly documenting findings, and are taking the appropriate enforcement actions as instructed in this directive. Supervisory personnel are to refer to the current version of the FSIS Guide for conducting In-Plant Performance System Assessments (IPPS) for additional guidance and instructions. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 79

80 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Summary The slaughter process is a system Sanitary dressing and process control procedures are key to preventing insanitary conditions and carcass contamination Reducing Salmonella is a regulatory requirement & is essential to ensuring food safety OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 80

81 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Summary (Continued) Interventions need to be capable of reducing or eliminating a food safety hazard and not be overwhelmed by the amount of contamination or number of pathogens on the carcass OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 81

82 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Summary (Continued) Incidental contamination that creates an insanitary condition is documented as SPS noncompliance OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 82

83 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Summary (Continued) Sanitary dressing noncompliances are determined based on cumulative information reflecting the food safety system Sanitary Dressing noncompliance is not documented in regard to one point in the process. Sanitary Dressing noncompliance is not documented in regard to one contamination incident. OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 83

84 OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska Incidental contamination NRs Zero Tolerance NRs Positive sample results (e.g., generic e-coli, Salmonella) Employee Hygiene NRs Failure to implement prerequisite programs Weekly Meeting MOIs 84

85 United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska 85


Download ppt "United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS DIRECTIVE 6410.3 VERIFYING SANITARY DRESSING AND PROCESS CONTROL PROCEDURES."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google