**TESTIMONY OF ALFRED V. ALMANZA**

**ADMINISTRATOR**

**FOOD SAFETY & INSPECTION SERVICE**

**BEFORE THE**

**U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES**

**COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE**

**October 30, 2007**

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to
appear before you today to discuss technologies in the meat industry and
the processes that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
Food Safety and Inspection System (FSIS) use to review new technologies
and to protect public health.

Before I begin, as this is the first time I am appearing before this
committee, let me take a moment to introduce myself. I am Al Almanza,
Administrator of USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). I've
been with FSIS for almost 30 years and held numerous positions,
beginning on the slaughter line in Dalhart, in the Texas panhandle.
Prior to becoming Administrator at FSIS, I was the Dallas District
Manager. I believe my field experience at the front lines of the Agency
helps my work a great deal as Administrator. As a District Manager, and
now as Administrator, I know that there are things that can be done at
the Agency that would benefit all -- consumer groups, industry, and
employees. One such thing is encouraging the use of beneficial new
technologies in the meat industry.

**FSIS' New Technology Staff**

Application of new technologies may help protect consumers from
physical, chemical, or biological hazards; reduce or eliminate such
hazards in the product itself; and improve product quality. Conversely,
the use of an inappropriate technology could result in a product that
could endanger public health.

At FSIS, we recognize the value that new technologies can offer for
public health. Many new technologies have resulted in significant
improvements in the safety of meat and poultry products. For this reason
alone, FSIS would like to see new technological advances continue,
provided those advances are deemed safe and appropriate.

Because the development of new technologies often requires large amounts
of capital and extensive infrastructure, many establishments --
especially small and very small establishments -- have difficulty taking
advantage of new technologies. This is one of the reasons why FSIS set
up a New Technology Staff (NTS). NTS, working with our training,
outreach, and education employees, provides assistance and disseminates
information on new technologies.

**Evaluating New Technologies**

The development of new technologies is largely initiated by industry
itself, as it responds to consumer demands. There are two different
types of technologies that are subject to review: processing
technologies and ingredient technologies. Processing technologies are
those technologies developed to aid in the production of meat, poultry,
and egg products. Examples of processing technologies that have been
reviewed include carcass washes, the steam vacuum, and steam
pasteurization.

Ingredient technologies are those technologies that involve the addition
of an ingredient to a product or the use of packaging to ensure safety,
increase shelf life, or provide other consumer benefits. Examples of
this kind of technology include carbon monoxide packaging and
irradiation.

**Processing Technologies**

There are four basic questions FSIS asks when evaluating a new
processing technology:

-   Will this technology affect product safety?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Will this technology affect inspection program personnel safety?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Will this technology interfere with inspection?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Will this technology be consistent with existing regulations?

Establishments planning to use a new technology are responsible for
ensuring the continued safety of their workers, their products, and the
environment, inside and outside the establishment, as well as
responsible for providing the information necessary for FSIS to examine
the impact of the new technology on inspection procedures and inspection
program personnel safety. We encourage facilities wishing to employ new
technologies to notify to FSIS before they implement them. That way, the
Agency can assess the technology in light of the four questions I
listed. The Agency convenes an ad hoc group of experts from all relevant
parts of the Agency to perform this assessment. FSIS attempts to
complete its assessment of the technology within 60 days. Once the
assessment is complete, the Agency lets the company know if it has a
concern in any of the four areas. If the Agency does, the company has an
opportunity to do a study to address that concern.

If the Agency finds no basis for objection to the use of the technology,
it posts a brief description of the technology on the FSIS web site in
order to inform all interested parties.

**Ingredient Technologies**

A second aspect of new technology involves the use of new food
ingredients in meat food products. Prior to 2000, the review process for
new ingredients was lengthy and cumbersome. FDA was responsible for the
initial safety review. This was then followed by a review by FSIS to
determine the acceptability or suitability of the technology; that is,
to determine whether the ingredient served the purpose for which it was
intended. In 2000, FSIS and FDA entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding allowing simultaneous review of new technologies to
increase the speed with which useful new food ingredients could be used.

FDA now determines the safety of a food ingredient and its safe levels
of use, while simultaneously FSIS evaluates whether the ingredient has
its intended technical effect. Allowing these evaluations to occur at
the same time effectively decreases the time any food ingredient spends
in review.

**Carbon Monoxide in Meat Packaging**

One form of technology used by the meat industry that has received a
great deal of attention in recent months is carbon monoxide in
packaging. Carbon monoxide is used to stabilize the color pigment of
meat, when it is red and, therefore, most appealing to consumers. Use of
carbon monoxide in packaging does not impart a color to the meat; it
simply maintains its naturally occurring color.

In 2002, carbon monoxide, for use as a component of modified atmosphere
packaging, was accepted by FDA as being "Generally Recognized as Safe,"
or GRAS. Carbon monoxide does not become a part of the product and
dissipates as soon as the package is opened. This is unlike other
ingredients used to stabilize the red color of meat, such as citric
acid, sodium ascorbate, and rosemary extract, all of which actually do
become a part of the product. However, to be sure consumers are not
misled, FSIS has established a use-by/sell-by date to be included on
meat products that use carbon monoxide packaging. This is to ensure that
the shelf life of the product ends before spoilage occurs.

As members of the committee are no doubt aware, FDA has received a
petition asking it to withdraw its decision that carbon monoxide in meat
packaging is Generally Recognized as Safe. FSIS will continue to make
its labeling decisions and its suitability reviews on the basis of FDA's
safety conclusions.

**Conclusion**

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I look
forward to addressing any questions you might have.