[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14668-14669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6817]



========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 14668]]

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 381

[Docket No. 94-022E]
RIN 0583-AB86


Use of the Term ``Fresh'' on the Labeling of Raw Poultry Products

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period; solicitation of 
comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On January 17, 1995, the Food Safety and Inspection Service 
(FSIS) proposed to amend the Federal poultry products inspection 
regulations to prohibit the use of the term ``fresh'' on the labeling 
of raw poultry products whose internal temperature has ever been below 
26 deg. F. FSIS is extending the comment period on the proposal for 60 
days in order to: Allow time for public review and comment on the 
findings of the Agriculture Research Service's (ARS) evaluation of the 
sensory, chemical, and physical properties of raw poultry products that 
have been exposed to and held at temperatures from 0 deg. F to 40 deg. 
F; allow the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria 
for Foods the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule; and solicit 
public comments on options for reconciling the FSIS proposal to require 
a ``previously frozen'' disclosure on product whose internal 
temperature has ever been below 26 deg. F with existing FSIS 
regulations that require poultry labeled as ``frozen'' to have been 
chilled to an internal temperature of 0 deg. F or below.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments in triplicate to Diane Moore, Docket 
Clerk, Room 3171, South Building, Food Safety and Inspection Service, 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250. Oral comments 
should be directed to Mr. Charles R. Edwards, (202) 254-2565.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles R. Edwards, Director, Product 
Assessment Division, Regulatory Programs, Food Safety and Inspection 
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, Area 
Code (202) 254-2565.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 17, 1995, FSIS published a 
proposed rule (60 FR 3454) to amend the Federal poultry products 
inspection regulations to prohibit the use of the term ``fresh'' on the 
labeling of raw poultry products whose internal temperature has ever 
been below 26 deg. F. The proposal would require such poultry products 
to be labeled with a descriptive term reflecting the fact that the 
product had been ``previously frozen.'' The proposed action would help 
ensure that poultry products distributed to consumers are not labeled 
in a false or misleading manner and are not misbranded. Such action 
would also meet consumer expectations that the term ``fresh'' should 
not be applied to raw poultry products that have been subjected to 
processes that would cause such products to become chilled to 
temperatures below 26 deg. F.
    Interested persons were given until March 20, 1995, to submit 
comments on the proposed regulatory amendments. FSIS has received 
requests from two trade associations to extend the comment period for 
the proposed rule. The trade associations have requested that FSIS 
extend the comment period to allow the public time to obtain and review 
the findings of the Agricultural Research Service's (ARS) evaluation of 
the sensory, chemical, and physical properties of raw poultry products 
that have been exposed to and held at temperatures from 0 deg. F to 
40 deg. F, with respect to their written comments on the proposed rule. 
The ARS report was not available for public review in the FSIS Docket 
Clerk's office at the time the ``fresh'' labeling proposal was 
published and, thus, its availability was not stated in the rulemaking 
docket. The report is now available for public review in the FSIS 
Docket Clerk's office, and FSIS concludes it is reasonable to allow 
additional time for interested parties to obtain, review, and comment 
on it.
    Further, FSIS has previously stated its intention to seek comments 
from the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for 
Foods on the Agency's conclusion stated in the preamble to the proposed 
rule that ``there should be no increased microbiological safety risks 
associated with the growth of pathogenic microorganisms,'' by changing 
the labeling definition for ``fresh'' poultry. The next meeting of the 
Committee will be held in mid-April and, thus, an extension of the 
comment period is necessary to allow the Committee's views to be 
received within the comment period.
    Finally, in this notice, FSIS is soliciting comments on options for 
reconciling the element of its ``fresh'' labeling proposal that would 
require product whose internal temperature has ever been below 26 deg. 
F to bear a ``previously frozen'' disclosure with existing FSIS 
regulations (9 CFR 381.129(b)(3) and 381.66(f)(2)) that require poultry 
labeled as ``frozen'' to have been chilled to an internal temperature 
of 0 deg. F or below. Under the proposal, product chilled to an 
internal temperature of 0 deg. F or below could be labeled as 
``frozen'' or ``previously frozen,'' as the case may be.
    FSIS has received a comment noting the conflict between the 
proposal and the existing regulatory definition of ``frozen.'' FSIS is 
aware that the products directly affected by its ``fresh'' labeling 
proposal, which are frequently frozen to temperatures in the range of 
20 deg. F to 25 deg. F and sold in a thawed state have different 
attributes than product frozen to an internal temperature of 0 deg. F 
or below. The product chilled to temperatures in the range of 20 deg. F 
to 25 deg. F is hard-to-the-touch and thus ``frozen'' in common 
consumer parlance, even though only about 80 percent of the water in 
that product is frozen. Further, although the product exhibits a longer 
shelf life than product held at higher temperatures, e.g., 28 deg. F to 
32 deg. F, the product will spoil in several weeks. In the product 
frozen to 0 deg. F or below, over 99 percent of the water in the 
product is in a frozen state, microbial growth is stopped, and the 
product can last a year or more, depending on packaging and storage 
temperature, without discernable quality changes. The purpose of the 
existing definition of ``frozen'' is to ensure that poultry products 
labeled simply as ``frozen'' would be suitable for long-term storage 
and subsequent use. The terms [[Page 14669]] ``frozen,'' as currently 
defined in FSIS regulations, and ``previously frozen,'' as proposed by 
FSIS for use on poultry products held below 26 deg. F and subsequently 
sold in a thawed state, both would provide truthful and useful 
information to consumers. FSIS is concerned that the existence of two 
definitions which make use of the word ``frozen'' could be confusing to 
industry and consumers. FSIS believes that the existing definition and 
the Agency's proposed use of the term ``previously frozen'' need to be 
reconciled. The Agency invites comments on how this can be 
accomplished. FSIS has identified three possible options as follows:
    a. Use a term or phrase other than ``previously frozen'' to 
identify products in the temperature range from above 0 deg. F to below 
26 deg. F. In its proposed rule, FSIS requested comments on other 
descriptive terms to describe the nature of the product. However, as of 
this time, no satisfactory substitute terms have been suggested. FSIS 
has identified other possible terms that do not use the unqualified 
word ``frozen.'' Such terms include: ``previously semi-frozen,'' ``held 
semi-frozen,'' ``previously partially frozen,'' ``previously chilled to 
semi-solid state,'' ``shipped/stored/handled semi-frozen (insert 
optional statement, e.g., to preserve quality),'' or ``previously 
frosted.'' FSIS continues to be interested in receiving comments on 
alternate terms including those that do not contain the unqualified 
word ``frozen.''
    b. Eliminate the current requirement that poultry products labeled 
as ``frozen'' must be brought to an internal temperature of 0 deg. F or 
below and require use of the term ``frozen'' to identify all poultry 
products whose internal temperature has ever been below 26 deg. F. This 
option would eliminate any confusion that might be caused by having 
more than one temperature associated with products whose labels make 
use of the word ``frozen,'' and satisfy the need to label appropriately 
all products that have been chilled to the point where they are hard-
to-the-touch. Such action would in no way prevent manufacturers from 
continuing current practices regarding freezing to 0 deg. F for long-
term storage or from making supportable claims about the storage life 
or appropriate ``use by'' date for their products. However, such action 
might require adjustment in government and industry purchasing 
standards, codes of practice, or product specifications that evolved 
from the current freezing regulations. FSIS does not believe that 
elimination of the 0 deg. F requirement for labeling a product 
``frozen'' would pose a safety concern. However, purchasers who expect 
that a product was frozen for long-term preservation based on use of 
the term ``frozen'' on the labeling might be misled in the absence of 
explanatory labeling, if the shelf life and quality differs from 
products frozen to 0 deg. F or below because the product was not 
actually brought to such low temperatures.
    c. Use the proposed term ``previously frozen'' on labeling of 
products with internal temperatures above 0 deg. F and below 26 deg. F 
but require use of a term other than ``frozen'' or ``previously 
frozen'' on the labeling of products that are frozen to 0 deg. F or 
below. The latter products could be labeled with a phrase such as 
``frozen for long-term preservation'' in order to distinguish them 
clearly from chill pack products whose temperatures were at one time in 
the lower 20-degree Fahrenheit range. This labeling option 
differentiates the two types of frozen products so that the product 
labeled ``previously frozen'' would not be confused with the deep-
frozen product. The descriptive term for the 0 deg. F product reflects 
the purpose of the processing procedure and can be linked to the 
special qualities associated with these products.
    FSIS is interested in receiving comments on these options and any 
others that would appropriately reconcile the existing definition of 
``frozen'' and the proposed use of the term ``previously frozen.''
    For all these reasons, FSIS is extending the comment period on its 
``fresh'' labeling proposal for 60 days. The comment period will close 
May 19, 1995.

    Done at Washington, DC, on: March 15, 1995.
Michael R. Taylor,
Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety.
[FR Doc. 95-6817 Filed 3-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P