#### U. S. Food and Drug AdministrationU.S. Department of AgricultureAugust 29-30, 2001

Regional Food Safety Conference for AsiaFood Safety Initiatives Influencing Public Health and Trade**Organised Jointly by the Governments of the United States and Singapore
Singapore, Singapore
Meeting Highlights
Summaries for Joint Meeting Sessions**Day 1**Panel 1: Welcome, Introductions and Keynote Speaker**Speakers**
**Dr. Johnny Braddy,***Chief, Regulatory Policy Branch, Division of Dairy and Egg Safety, Office of Plant and DairyFoods and Beverages, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)*
**Mr. David Chin,***Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Singapore Trade Development Board*
**Dr. Chua Sin Bin,***Chief Veterinary Officer and Director of Veterinary Public Health and Food Supply Division,Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore*
**Ms. Sharon Smith Holston,***Deputy Commissioner, International and Constituent Relations, U.S. Food and DrugAdministration (U.S. Delegation Leader)*
**Highlights**
**Mr. David Chin** welcomed participants and especially acknowledged the cooperative efforts of the governments ofSingapore and the United States to bring the meeting together. Mr. Chin stressed the importance of high food standard andthe need for two-way communications of food safety information between government and industry. He stated that Singaporegovernment recognises that food safety as a serious concern and it requires partnership between private and public sectorsto deal with food borne illness.
Dr. Chin provided remarks on the current key food safety issues of concern to participants. He emphasized the need tolearn U.S. requirements on food safety and the sharing of Asian food safety regimes. He also requested transparency ofrequirements to ensure food safety and trade. He states that information exchange on food safety issues is an importantstep in reaching the goal of providing public health protection and facilitates trade.
**Dr. Johnny Braddy**, the Conference Co-Chair and Coordinator for the US Food and Drug Administration, welcomeddelegates and outlined the objectives of the Conference. These were primarily outreach - sharing information about theU.S. practices and policies on food safety - particularly the key U.S. food safety initiatives and programs, these includethose pertaining the National Food Safety and Produce Initiatives; seafood, meat, poultry and juice HACCP and low acidcanned foods.
**Dr. Chua Sin Bin,** the Conference Co-Chair, welcomed the participants to the conference and expressed his pleasureat the opportunities for sharing information that the conference presented. In addition, he acknowledged the cooperativeefforts of the governments of Singapore and the United States in sponsoring the meeting and thanked the United States forsending an experienced delegation to share U.S. food safety experiences and the successes of it food safety program.
**Ms. Sharon Smith Holston,** the Keynote speaker, thanked the Singapore Trade Development Board, the Ministry ofEnvironment, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore, and the Singapore Productivity and Standards Board,for co-sponsoring this conference and thanked the participants for coming. She summarised the history of FDA and providedinformation on the role of the U.S. FDA in food safety. She indicated that many Asian countries represented in theconference are active trading partners of the U.S.
Ms. Holston informed the participants that in 1986--only 15 years ago--the United States imported fewer than one millionshipments of food from abroad. Last year, the corresponding figure was 4.1 million, or more than four times as many!Countries represented at this conference have been part of this growth. In 1996, for example, Asian nations exported tothe United States agricultural products, fish and seafood worth about $2.9 billion. Last year, our imports of theseproducts from the same region reached $3.8 billion--and increase of about one-third in just five years.
She stated that Food Imports currently account for 10% of all food consumed in the US and this is expected to rise tonearly 30% by the year 2003. FDA's role and the task ahead for all involved is to make sure that all food that reachesconsumers' tables is as safe as it can be.
Ms. Holston discussed the objectives of the United States Food Safety Initiative and the need to reduce food borneillnesses in the U.S. She informed the participants that the goal of the Food Safety Initiative is to protect publichealth, and FDA will continue doing this in the same spirit of international cooperation that has been its hallmark forthe last half century. Panel 2: The U.S. National Food Safety Initiative**Speakers**
**Ms. Marion Allen,***Inspection/Compliance Coordinator, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Foodand Drug Administration*
**Art Liang,***Director Food Safety Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention*
**Dr. Johnny Braddy,***Chief Regulatory Policy Branch, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food andDrug Administration*
**Dr. Marjorie Davidson,***National Food Safety Education Officer, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,U.S. Food and Drug Administration*
**Dr. Mark Walderhaug,***Microbiologist, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and DrugAdministration*
**Highlights**
**Overview of the U.S. National Food Safety Initiative**
**Ms. Marion Allen** reviewed the accomplishments of the Food Safety Initiative. She discussed the Imported ProduceInitiative, shared outbreak information, discussed research and risk assessment initiatives, anti-microbial agents, newdevelopments in surveillance systems, and education and outreach efforts. She also provided an overview of plans foradditional efforts.
**Dr. Art Liang** described responsibilities and methods used by CDC to monitor Outbreaks of foodborne illnesses, whichrequires a dependency on local and state health departments in the United States.
**Dr. Johnny Braddy** discussed basic principles and benefits of HACCP and reviewed the current initiatives in theUnited States.
**Dr. Marjorie Davidson** discussed activities on food producer, retail food service and consumer education. Dr.Davidson indicated that FDA is utilizing partnerships to accomplish the education programs. She also showed some of theinformation packages distributed to institutions, media and schools.
**Dr. Mark Walderhaug** discussed microbial contamination research in the United States. He provided reasons why FDAdoes research to support policy, to provide emergency response and to identify emerging issues. He stressed that FDAscientists must prepare for and identify emerging issues. He emphasized the need to transfer technology to CFSAN programoffices. Enteric viruses are a major research priority at FDA since most of the work is done on food-borne disease causedby bacteria. Dr. Walderhaug discussed intramural and extramural research programs conducted by FDA. He concluded hisremarks by discussing successes in the FDA food research program and its future directions.
**Discussant**
**Dr. Chua Sin Bin** stated that he was intrigued by the U.S. efforts on consumer and producer education techniques.He also noted the significance of food-borne illness outbreaks and their impact globally.
**Questions**
**Q:** Are the same regulations applied to imports and domestically produced products?**A:** Domestic plants are inspected as if foods are distributed domestically. Must meet requirements of importingcountry.
**Q:** What is the pesticide policy of the United States?**A:** Standards set by EPA and enforced by FDA and USDA.
**Q:** What is U.S. stand on Genetically Modified Organism?**A:** No specific labeling regulations at present, but has drafted a proposal for mandatory notification.
**Q:** Where are pilot HACCP initiatives headed?**A:** HACCP applicable worldwide. Mainly voluntary. Panel 3: US Department of Agriculture Update**Speaker**
**Mr. Ralph Stafko,***Senior Policy Manager, Federal, State and Local Government Relations Staff, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture*
**Highlights**
**Mr. Stafko** discussed the history of USDA and the various agencies within the Department of Agriculture. Hedescribed the broad scope of USDA, including forestry and conservation, ensuring open markets, technical advice, ruralarea support, prevention of hunger through food support, research, and meat safety. Mr. Stafko discussed the regulatoryauthority of USDA, and outlined USDA's enabling laws with their similarities and differences with the Food Drug andCosmetic Act. He discussed the roles of the many agencies within USD**A:**  APHIS, AMS, GIPSA, ARS, CSREES, NASS, FNS, OCE,FAS, NAL, and FSIS. He discussed the context of USDA regulation in relation to other federal agencies. He then discussedthe distinctions between Federal Laws and Regulations. Mr. Stafko emphasized the need to undertake a collaborativeapproach to food safety. He introduced and detailed the role of state and federal governments in the regulation of foodsafety in the U.S.
**Discussant**
**Dr. Chua Sin Bin** served as the discussant for this session. He pointed out that Mr. Stafko had listed numerous websites during his presentation and encouraged the regional industries in attendance to use the web sites as a resource forboth finding and posting useful information on food safety. Concurrent Sessions A and B held on Day 1 are summarized at the end of this document.**Day 2**
Panel 4: Exporting Foods to the United States**Speakers**
**Ms. Marion Allen****Dr. Johnny Braddy****Mr. Ralph Stafko****Mr. Stephen Spinak,***Food Technologist, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, US Food and DrugAdministration***Mr. John Foret,***Director Division of Compliance and Enforcement, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,US Food and Drug Administration*
**Highlights**
**Dr. John Jones Moderated Panel 4** - indicated that we have to primarily consider public health in making the importrequirements, make sure the requirements are the same for imports and domestic products, and ensure that the requirementsare based on science. He acknowledged the challenges of ensuring that science is the basis for the requirements as well asthe challenges of ensuring the transparency of the decision making behind the requirements.
**Ms. Marion Allen** opened the session with a presentation on Understanding the Legal Requirements for Exporting Foodto the United States with an overview of the various federal agencies' responsibilities for foods exported to the UnitedStates. Ms. Allen discussed import processes, inspection and product examination procedures, various registration andlabeling requirements, and FDA enforcement actions.
**Mr. Stephen Spinak** gave a brief overview of Imports of Low Acid Canned Foods. He began with the history ofoutbreaks in low acid canned foods that resulted in LACF food regulations in the United States. Mr. Spinak discussed FDAregulatory requirements and enforcement tools. He distinguished the processors' responsibilities and FDA'sresponsibilities for ensuring the safety of LACF and reviewed FDA inspection processes. Mr. Spinak emphasized that thegoal is compliance with these requirements to assure that the foods are safe and emphasized that assuring this complianceis a shared responsibility between government and industry.
**Dr. Johnny Braddy** discussed U.S. Requirements for Imported Seafood. He pointed out the 3 strategies used todetermine foreign compliance--Importer Affirmative Steps, Foreign Inspections, and country equivalence--and discussed thegoals and procedures of each of these strategies in detail.
**Mr. Ralph Stafko** presented information on Meat and Poultry Exports to the US, pointing out that the bulk of the USimports of meat and poultry come from Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. He added that roughly 83% of imports are redmeat products. Mr. Stafko discussed how the eligibility of foreign countries for exporting products to the United Statesis determined, including the equivalency requirement that foreign governments implement a slaughter/inspection systemequivalent to that of the United States. He reviewed the process for reinspection of imported products as well as thelabeling requirements and how the articles refused entry by the inspector are handled.  He closed by saying that theUnited State supports free trade and is active in the Codex Alimentarius process.
**Mr. John Foret** addressed Food Labeling Requirements. Mr. Foret reviewed the general concepts in the requirementsfor labeling, including health claims, and linked food safety to labeling with an example of incorrect labeling usedirections on infant formula labels.  He discussed the recent issues of particular concern to FDA such as allergens andpointed out new labeling requirements for eggs.
Mr. Foret highlighted the issues involving dietary supplements. He provided a definition of dietary supplements, discussedthe mandatory label elements, and distinguished the requirements of labeling for dietary supplements and "regular" foods.He talked about the particular dietary supplements that are refused entry into the United States. He mentioned that FDAhas a working group looking at preventing the entry of BSE into the US and is also examining the use of pesticides inbotanicals. He indicated that a dietary supplement guide and a dietary supplement manufacturer's guide are being developedand that these guides should be available by mid 2002.
Mr. Foret listed the exemptions from nutrition labeling requirements--such as those products produced by small businesses,low volume products and products shipped in bulk.
Mr. Foret explained the steps industry and foreign governments can take so that products don't get stopped at the borderbecause of non-compliance with U.S. labeling requirements, and emphasized that FDA doesn't do labeling reviews--thatindustry is responsible for compliance.
**Questions**
**Q:** Singapore -- Does FDA have its own product category system?**A:** FDA has a general coding system. However, an internal coding system exists for LACF. FDA has a product code listthat is posted on the Center's web page under imported food. If the agency encounters a problem with a commodity, it hasdeveloped new system that will allow a general search without a specific coding query.
**Q:** Pakistan -- (1) What is the status of GMO labeling. (2) What technical support is available to assist countriesin the establishment of a HACCP program?**A:** We don't have mandatory labelling requirements. One can look to our website to see the proposals we areevaluating to require mandatory notification and voluntary labelling.
We have developed guides with respect to Seafood HACCP. The guide is currently in its third edition. The guide iscurrently on the FDA's web site. One can also check with the Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) for support, but there are costs involved with the NMFS program.
**Q:** Mr. Tong, seafood processor. Our experience is that there are different practices with respect to time framedepending on which location in US that our products are shipped. Are there differences that account for this?**A:** The FDA guidelines and requirements are the same at all import sites. Depending on the port, practices may bedifferent, but we do use the same guidelines and requirements. Normally, there is a 72-hour turnaround time, but that goalis not always met because of backup in laboratory. There is a preference for perishable products which may account forsome time variance. There's also an overlap between commodities that are USDA and FDA.
**Q:** Vietnam -- Seafood HACCP equivalent question. Why does it take so long for equivalence to be established?**A:** The process requires a side-by-side examination of laws and regulations, on-site verification the paper review,and Federal Register notice for public comments. This can be very time consuming. It has been nine years since the startof seafood equivalence negotiation with the European Union and seven years with Canada on dairy equivalence. SingaporeOverview of Food Safety System**Speakers**
**Dr. Chew Siang Thai,***Agri-Veterinary Authority of Singapore*
**Mr. Chua Kok Swee,***Assistant Commissioner of Public Health, Ministry of Environment*.
**Dr Sam Cheuck Tatt,***Food Standards Committee, Singapore Productivity Board and Head, Industrial HealthLaboratory, Health Sciences Authority*
**Highlights**
**Dr. Chew Siang Thai** provided an overview of the Singapore Food Safety Import/Export system. He described Singaporeas a City State having a concentrated population, which depends on imports for much of its food. He informed theparticipants that the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) and the Ministry of Environment (ENV) have theresponsibility for public health. There are four divisions within AVA that ensure agri-food is safe and wholesome andcomplies with health requirements. He pointed out that requirements are stringent, but consistent with internationalstandards. Dr. Chew states that there are six legislative acts that provide the legal framework for the system. He statedthat all meat and fish export establishments would be required to have HACCP in place by April 2002.
Dr. Chew indicated that for exports, the requirements of the importing countries are enforced. He also mentioned thatimports are subjected to visual inspections and laboratory examination of samples (1:20 random sample). Violative productsare placed on automatic detention and must 3 subsequent pass inspections to be removed. Rejections are very low. Forseafood the focus is on high-risk products, such as molluscan shellfish.
**Chua Kok Swee** provided an overview of food control in Singapore. Mr Chua informed the participants that the FoodControl Department is the food safety authority in Singapore. He indicated that the Food Control Department's mission isto ensure that foods available to the nation are safe and free from harmful additives and contaminants. Mr. Chua pointedout that both the Ministry of the Environment and the Agri-food and Veterinary Authority have responsibilities for foodsafety in Singapore. The Food Control Department of the Ministry of the Environment is responsible for ensuring thesafety, wholesomeness, and quality of imported and locally manufactured and retailed food. He also reiterated Dr Chew'spoint that the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority has the responsibility for ensuring the safety, wholesomeness andquality of meat, seafood, fruits and vegetables. Mr Chua further described Singapore's Food Safety Programme and otherprogrammes including import control, factory licensing and monitoring of world food health situation. He also brieflydiscussed Singapore's current legislations, which included the Sale of Food Act, the Food Regulations, the EnvironmentalPublic Health Act and the Environmental Public Health (Food Hygiene) Regulations.
**Dr. Sam Cheuck Tatt** provided an overview of the Current Thrust of Food Standardization Strategies. He informed theparticipants that the current thrust of the Food Standardization Program is to improve health, facilitate trade andimprove the quality and safety of food; and to improve productivity through the development of standardized practices andharmonization of standards. He provided an outline of National Standardization Program and described the Food StandardsCommittee as being comprised of Technical Committees and Working Groups having the responsibility for makingrecommendations on the handling and processing of a variety foods and beverages. He stated that the mission of the FoodStandards Committee is to spearhead the development of food standards and promote the standardization of food products,food handling and processing to support the food and beverage industries. Panel 5: Food Safety and Globalization**Speakers**
**Dr. John Jones****Mr. Ralph Stafko**
**Highlights**
**Food Safety and Globalization**
The final plenary session of the Conference provided overviews of some of the activities of the World Trade Organization'sCommittee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (WTO SPS Committee) and the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex).
**Dr. John Jones** discussed the U.S. perspective on practical implementation of Article 4 of the WTO SPS Agreementpertaining to "equivalence." He noted that the concept of equivalence states that food safety regulatory and enforcement"measures" can be different between countries, but that the different food safety measures of an exporting country canachieve the "appropriate level of protection" of the importing country, i.e., the different measures can be equivalent.Although the concept of equivalence is straightforward, the process of evaluating different food safety measures orsystems is very resource intensive and difficult in practice, taking several years to complete. He indicated that theUnited States does not require a finding of equivalence as a condition for importation of FDA-regulated foods, i.e., mostfoods imported into the United States, but that a finding of equivalence is necessary for importation of USDA-regulatedmeat and poultry. He stated that the United States is working within the WTO SPS Committee to find resource-efficientmeans to conduct equivalence evaluations when they are necessary and to find alternatives to equivalence based on otherArticles of the SPS Agreement, such as technical assistance to developing countries to enable them to comply with theimport requirements of other countries.
Dr. Jones also mentioned briefly the upcoming Global Forum of Food Safety Regulators to be held October 22-24 inMarrakech, Morocco. He encouraged national governments represented at the conference to participate at the Marrakechmeeting.
**Mr. Ralph Stafko** provided an overview of the structure, procedures and activities of Codex. He stated that Codexis administered jointly by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the UnitedNations. The general purpose of Codex is to elaborate international safety and quality standards for foods that providefor public health protection and trade facilitation. Codex has developed an 8-step process to develop its consensusinternational standards, beginning with an initial proposed standard needed to address a particular international tradeissue, moving through a several step process of elaboration and refinement of the standard, with each step open to reviewand proposed revision by any Codex member, and finally culminating with adoption of the consensus standard by the CodexCommission. He pointed out that the WTO SPS Agreement recognises Codex standards as benchmark food safety/qualitystandards for foods traded internationally and that countries that satisfy Codex standards can demonstrate safety andquality of their exported foods. Finally, he indicated that Codex is taking steps to ensure that Developing Countries arefully represented in development of all codex standards, including numerical standards, codes of practice and otherguidelines. He indicated that Codex Chairman Mr. Tom Billy, is particularly anxious to ensure that the Codex processbecomes more responsive to the needs of WTO members, particularly Developing Country members.Concurrent Session Summary**Session A: The Role and Uses of Risk Analysis in the Food Safety System (Day 1)**
**Presenters:**
**Dr. Mark Walderhaug****Dr. Marjorie Davidson****Mr. Ralph Stafko**
**Highlights:**
**Risk Management and Risk Assessment --** Dr. Mark Walderhaug covered Risk Analysis, Management and Assessment. Thediscussion focused on what Risk Analysis involves and how it applied to decision-making. Risk Analysis consists of thefollowing concepts: risk communication, risk management and risk assessment. Dr. Walderhaug identified the steps to followin conducting the risk management, as well as when to consider the risk management options. He pointed out that good riskcommunication is essential before, during and after assessment. In essence, risk management is concerned with the outcomeof future events whose exact outcome is unknown and attempts to deal with uncertainties. In many ways, good riskmanagement is just like good planning.
The Risk Assessment discussion focused on identifying the steps involved in conducting the risk assessment. RiskAssessment is comprised of the following components: Hazard Identification, Hazard Characterization, Exposure Analysis andRisk Characterization. Dr. Walderhaug shared the data from to recent microbial risk assessments conducted on Vibrioparahaemolyticus in oysters and Listeria monocytogenes in multiple commodities. Dr. Walderhaug referred the participantsto the FDA website for the completed studies.
**Risk Communication** -- Dr. Marjorie Davidson discussed Risk Communication. She  provided the definition of RiskCommunication, as defined by the National Academy of Sciences as "an interactive process of exchange of information andopinion among individuals, groups and institutions. Dr. Davidson focused on two key objectives:- Provide an open exchange of food safety information to assure accountability (and trust) in the food safetysystem.   Ensure that people throughout the chain from farm to table follow safe food handling practices to decrease food-borneillnesses.
Dr. Davidson also shared with the participants the results of a consumer confidence food safety survey that was conductedfrom 1993-1998. She noted that although the results showed a decline in consumers confidence from 1996 (84%) to 2000(74%), overall knowledge about food safety has increased; concerns about food safety risks have increased and the practiceof safe food handling behavior has increased.
One of the key points that Dr. Davidson made about risk communication is that Risk Communicators (and risk managers)should be involved in the risk assessments from the very beginning.
**Risk Management --** Mr. Ralph Stafko discussed Risk Management at USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service. Hisdiscussion centered around the role of FSIS and the accomplishments that have been undertaken. Mr. Stafko mentioned themajor risk assessment initiatives for the agency:
- Salmonella Enteritidis in eggs and egg products
- E. Coli O157:H7 in ground beef
- Listeria Moncytogenes in various ready-to-eat products
- Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and variant CJD agents in food.

Mr. Stafko emphasized how the risk assessment on SE in eggs was used to develop an action plan and specific regulatoryinterventions by FSIS and FDA. Session B: Food-borne Disease Surveillance (Day 1)**Presenters**
**Dr. Art Liang**
**Highlights**
**Dr.****Arthur Liang** discussed the U.S. models and the limits of any reporting system. He also considered theinternational implications of foodborne disease. He described the difficulties regulators face in getting a true pictureof the situation. Session C: Seafood, Dairy and Egg Safety (Day 2)**Presenters**
**Dr. Johnny Braddy**
**Highlights**
**Dr. Johnny Braddy** was the only presenter for this session. He provided an overview for each of the subject topicsas noted. He begin with discussion with the provision of Seafood HACCP, followed by Dairy and Egg Safety.
**Seafood HACCP --** Dr. Johnny Braddy gave a brief overview of the Seafood HACCP requirements. His discussion focusedon the general guidelines and clearly identified the entities responsible for complying with the regulations. Thisincludes all domestic processors; foreign processors exporting to the United States and all importers. Excluded from therequirements are fishing vessels, common carriers and retail. Dr. Braddy informed the participants that under therequirements, "every processor must conduct a hazard analysis to determine whether it has likely food safety hazards thatit must control. In addition, he also identified the components of the HACCP plan. With regards to the specialrequirements for imports, the Dr. Braddy outlined the foreign processors requirements under the Seafood HACCP Regulations.The participants were provided the FDA's website address to obtain more information on the requirements and the currentversion of The Hazards and Control Guide.
**U.S. Dairy Regulatory System** -- In this session, Dr. Johnny Braddy gave an overview on the food safety agenciesthat are responsible for ensuring the quality and safety of Grade A dairy products. He also shared with the participantseach U.S. agency's responsibility for regulating dairy products and other individuals that are involved. The States andthe National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS) also play a vital part in assisting the agencies in enforcingand carrying out the responsibilities for ensuring the safety of dairy products. The participants were provided a contactlist for each agency to obtain more specific information.
**Egg Safety --** Dr. Johnny Braddy gave a brief overview on the Egg Safety Action Plan. He discussed the interim andoverarching goal. In addition, highlights on the plan implementation and the plan strategy were provided. Session D: Processed Food/Produce/Juices (Day 2)
**Presenters**
**Mr. Stephen Spinak****Dr. Mark Walderhaug****Mr. John Foret**
**Highlights**
**Mr. Stephen Spinak** served as Moderator for the session. He presented opening remarks and introduced the speakersand their topics.
**LACF/Processed Food --** Mr. Spinak gave an in-depth discussion of issues involving the import into the United Stateof Low Acid Canned Foods and Processed Food. Because many of the issues are highly technical, he identified otherinformation resources. The FDA website ishttp://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~comm/lacf-toc.html. He discussedinformation from non-government sources, especially the Institute for Thermal Processing Specialists:
- Temperature Distribution Protocol for Processing
In Stream Still Retorts, Excluding Crateless Retorts
- Protocol for Carrying Out Heat Penetration Studies

He distinguished between the processors' responsibilities and FDA's responsibilities for ensuring the safety of LACF andreviewed FDA inspection processes. Mr. Spinak emphasized that the goal is compliance with these requirements to assurethat the foods are safe and emphasized that assuring this compliance is a shared responsibility between government andindustry.
**Produce/Juice --** Dr. Walderhaug covered HACCP Procedures for the Safe and Sanitary Processing and Importing ofJuice. His handout provided an excellent summary of the pasteurized juice rule.
**Dietary Supplements -** Mr. Foret provided an indepth discussion of issues involving dietary supplements. It istempting to seek approval as a dietary supplement because it avoids some of the complex steps involved with approval offoods, on the one hand, and drugs, on the other. He provided a lengthy discussion of the definition of dietary supplementsthe implementation of which is still evolving. He cautioned against being found out of compliance since imports can bedetained without inspection. He indicated that a dietary supplement guide and a dietary supplement manufacturer's guideare being developed and that these guides should be available by mid 2002. Session E: Meat and Poultry Safety (Day 2)**Presenters**
**Mr. Ralph Stafko**
**Highlights**
**Mr. Ralph Stafko** was the only presenter for this session.
**Mr. Stafko** discussed the legislative history of various laws for the regulatory control of meat, poultry and eggproducts in the United States. He described major hazards of concern for meat and poultry products and the challengesUSDA faced in dealing with pathogenic microorganisms. Mr. Stafko discussed the 1993 outbreak of *E. Coli* 0157:H7that led to a precedent setting declaration in 1994 of this pathogen as an adulterant in raw ground beef. This outbreakalso led to safe food handling labels for raw product at retail level.
Mr. Stafko stated that the pathogen reduction program has resulted in a decrease in poultry carcasses testing positivefor *Salmonella* from a baseline prevalence of over 20% in 1996 to less than 10% last year.
Mr. Stafko described major USDA initiatives to reduce pathogens, including the promulgation of HACCP regulations. Hediscussed the meat/poultry inspections in a HACCP environment and the risk-based allocation of inspection resources. Hedescribed the concept of farm-to-table food safety strategy and the policy directions for the Food Safety and InspectionServices (FSIS), USDA in the future.
**Questions**
**Q:** What about using new technology to deal with pathogens, i.e. irradiation?**A:** We provide incentives to encourage the industry to develop new technology to minimize pathogens. For instance,the use of "steam vac" for carcass washing has been shown to be quite effective in reducing pathogens. In terms ofirradiation, the process is approved, but manufacturers are wary of the use of irradiation due to some consumerresistance.
**Q:** A number of participants had questions about exporting their products to the United States. They needclarification on the responsibilities of USDA vs. FDA on processed meat products. They inquired as to whether theimported meat must come from countries that have been evaluated for equivalence by FSIS.**A:** Mr. Stafko explained that FSIS has authority over processed products containing more than three percent meat ortwo percent cooked poultry meat. Mr. Stafko stated that the imported meat and poultry must originate in countries andfrom plants approved to export to the United States. The list of countries eligible to export the United States isavailable on the FSIS website. 
National Food Safety Programswww.FoodSafety.gov |Search/Subject Index |Disclaimers & Privacy Policy |Accessibility
Hypertext updated by dav/kwg 2002-JAN-25**