1. Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 2 HACCP Impacts on Contamination Levels in Meat and Poultry Products: FSIS Perspective Delila R. Parham, DVM Office of Public Health and Science Food Safety and Inspection Service May 6, 2002

2. Discussion The Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule The Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule  Escherichia coli performance criteria  Salmonella performance standards Assessing Impact Assessing Impact  Salmonella Compliance Sampling Results  Other Measures of Impact

3. FSIS’ Daily Mission To protect the public’s health through ensuring – to the greatest extent possible – the safety of meat, poultry, and egg products, both domestic and imported.  The Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule

4. Need for the Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule 1993 Outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 1993 Outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Organoleptic System of Inspection Organoleptic System of Inspection Pathogenic Microorganisms Pathogenic Microorganisms

5. Objective of the Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule Build effective measures for reducing and controlling pathogenic microorganisms into food production processes. Build effective measures for reducing and controlling pathogenic microorganisms into food production processes.

6. Elements of the Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures (SSOPs) Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures (SSOPs) HACCP System HACCP System Microbiological Testing Microbiological Testing

7. Elements of the Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Rule Microbiological Testing  Generic Escherichia coli  Process Control – Prevent Fecal Contamination  Plant Testing Requirement  Salmonella  Pathogen Reduction Performance Standards  FSIS Testing Program

8. Escherichia coli Performance Criteria Testing Requirements Effective January 27, 1997 Testing Requirements Effective January 27, 1997 Cattle, Swine, Chicken, Turkey Plants Cattle, Swine, Chicken, Turkey Plants Frequency of Testing Based on Production Volume: Minimum Once Per Day Frequency of Testing Based on Production Volume: Minimum Once Per Day Acceptable, Marginal, and Unacceptable Categories of Performance Acceptable, Marginal, and Unacceptable Categories of Performance

9. Escherichia coli Testing Slaughter Class Lower Marginal Range (m) Upper Marginal Range (M) Number of Samples Maximum in Marginal Range CattleNegative 100 cfu/cm2 133 Swine 10 cfu/cm2 10,000 cfu/cm2 133 Broilers 100 cfu/ml 1,000 cfu/ml 133 TurkeysN.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. N.A. = Not applicable.

10. Salmonella Performance Standards HACCP Implementation Schedule: Large Plants: January 26, 1998 (>500 employees) Small Plants: January 25, 1999 (10 to 499 employees) Very Small Plants: January 25, 2000 (<10 employees)

11. Salmonella Performance Standards Salmonella was selected as a target organism because it: Is a common cause of food-borne illness. Is a common cause of food-borne illness. Occurs often enough to be detected and monitored. Occurs often enough to be detected and monitored. Is recovered using current methodologies. Is recovered using current methodologies. Is reduced or eliminated by intervention strategies effective against other pathogens. Is reduced or eliminated by intervention strategies effective against other pathogens.

12. Salmonella Performance Standards Product Class Performance Standard for Salmonella Number of Samples in a Sample Set Number of Positives in a Sample Set Steers/Heifers 1.0 % 821 Cows/Bulls 2.7 % 582 Hogs8.7%556 Broilers20.0%5112 Ground Beef 7.5%535 Ground Chicken 44.6%5326 Ground Turkey 49.9%5329

13. Salmonella Progress Report 1998-2001 report released April 2002. 1998-2001 report released April 2002.  http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPHS/haccp/salm4year.htm Prevalence declined in all product classes to levels below baseline prevalence estimates. Prevalence declined in all product classes to levels below baseline prevalence estimates.

14. Salmonella Sample Collection Computer generated sample request Computer generated sample request Sample collected daily by FSIS inspectors according to protocol for specific product class Sample collected daily by FSIS inspectors according to protocol for specific product class Analyzed at FSIS laboratories Analyzed at FSIS laboratories Reported as positive or negative Reported as positive or negative Positive isolates sent to National Veterinary Services Laboratory to identify serotype Positive isolates sent to National Veterinary Services Laboratory to identify serotype

15. Salmonella Progress Report Product Class Std.(%) All Plants 1998199920002001 Steers/Heifers1.00.0%(214)0.3%(782)0.4%(1,092)0.6%(1,695) Cows/Bulls2.71.1%(179)2.2%(1,521)2.2%(1,995)2.4%(2,176) Hogs8.75.8%(1,390)9.8%(1,923)6.2%(5,170)3.8%(8,090) Broilers20.010.8%(5,659)11.4%(6,768)9.1%(10,057)11.9%(8,955) Number of samples provided in parenthesis.

16. Salmonella Progress Report Product Class Std.(%) All Plants 1998199920002001 Ground Beef 7.56.4%(1,296)4.3%(16,375)3.3%(32,844)2.8%(24,243) Ground Chicken 44.64.2%(24)16.2%(297)13.8%(414)19.5%(262) Ground Turkey Turkey49.936.5%(591)31.6%(1,050)25.7%(1,551)26.2%(520) Number of samples provided in parenthesis.

17. Salmonella Progress Report 2,684 5,879 8,955 61 2,821 7,175 10,057 0 0 14 5,645 5,659 2,238 4,530 6,768 392 %

18. Limitations to FSIS Salmonella Data Regulatory testing program best at tracking plant performance, not estimating prevalence. Regulatory testing program best at tracking plant performance, not estimating prevalence. Not all size plants are represented each year. Not all size plants are represented each year. Testing not based on plant production volume. Testing not based on plant production volume. Testing scheme does not consider factors such as seasonality. Testing scheme does not consider factors such as seasonality.

19. FoodNet Report FoodNet: Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network FoodNet: Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network  Determines burden of foodborne disease, monitors disease trends, determines proportion of foodborne diseases due to specific food commodities Preliminary report on incidence of foodborne illnesses at selected sites released April 2002 Preliminary report on incidence of foodborne illnesses at selected sites released April 2002  During 1996-2001, estimated incidence of Salmonella infections decreased 15%.  http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/m5l1 5a3.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/m5l1 5a3.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/m5l1 5a3.htm

20. Limitations to FoodNet Data Variations in testing for pathogen may account for variations in incidence. Variations in testing for pathogen may account for variations in incidence. Some illnesses may be acquired through non-foodborne sources. Some illnesses may be acquired through non-foodborne sources. Data not reflective of entire U.S. population. Data not reflective of entire U.S. population.

21. Food for Thought How do we assess impact? How do we assess impact? Would we be as confident that HACCP has had a beneficial impact on contamination levels in meat and poultry if the incidence of human illnesses attributed to Salmonella had not decreased? Would we be as confident that HACCP has had a beneficial impact on contamination levels in meat and poultry if the incidence of human illnesses attributed to Salmonella had not decreased?