AUSTIN,~.TEXAU 

November 25, 1959 

J. E. Peavy, M. D. Opinion No. WW-747 

Commissioner of Health 

State Departmen,; of Health Re: Questions relating to 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Dr. Peavy: 

the program of meat inspection under the provisions of the Meat Inspection Law, Article 

4476-3, Vernon's Civil 

Statutes. 

You have requested an opinion of this office on 

seven questions relative to the legality of a meat inspection program contemplated by your department. Each question will be stated and answered individually. 

Question No. 1: "Would a City passing an orc?lnance as outlined in Section 12 of the Meat Inspection Law 

and providing the necessary facilities for inspection be required to 

include noultry and rabbits as a 

of thei~r meat inspection program? Fart 

Section 3, Article 4476-3, Vernon's Civil Statutes, 

as amended by Acts 55th Legislature 1957, chapter 32, page 

68, provides in part as follows: 

"(a) Meat Product: Any edible part 

of the carcass of any cattle, calf, sheep, 

swine, goat, poultry, or domestic rabbit which 

is not manufactured, cured, smoked, processed, 

or otherwise treated. As used in this Act, 

the word 'poultry' means any slaughtered domesticated bird or commercially-produced game bird. 

"(b) Meat Food Product: Any article of 

food or any article which enters into the composition of food for human consumption, which is 

derived or prepared in whole or in part from 

any portion of the carcass of any cattle, calf, 

sheep, swi~~ne, goat, poultry, or domestic rabbit, 

if such portjon is all or a considerable and 

definite portion of the article, except such 
J. E. Peavy, M.D., page 2 (WW-747) 

articles as organotherapeutic substance, 

meat juice, meat extract, and the like, 

which are only for medicinal purposes and 

are advertised only to the medical profession. 

"(c) Meat and Products: Carcass, 

parts of carcass, meat, products, focd 

products, meat products, and meat food 

products, of or derived from cattle, calf 

sheep, swine, goats, poultry, and domestic 

rabbits, which $re capable of being used 

as food by man. 

Section 12, Article 4476-3, Vernon's Civil Statutes, 

provides: 

"The governing body of any city in the 

State of Texas may make mandatory the provisions of this Act and the inspection and 

labeling of meat and meat food products produced, sold, or offered for sale within their 

respective jurisdictions by adopting any ordinance to that effect and by providing the necessary facilities for inspection and for the enforcement of this Act. 

"Any city adopting any specifications and 

regulations as a basis for issuing any permit 

for the use of the 'Texas State Approved Meat 

for Human Food' label on meat and meat food products shall be governed by the specifications and 

regulations promulgated by the State Board of 

Health as herein authorized." 

It is' the opinion of this Department that a city passing an ordinance as outlined in Section 12, Article 4476-3, 

Vernon's Cfvll Statutes, would be required to include 

poultry and domestic rabbits as a part of their meat inSpeCtion program, along with cattle, calves, sheep, swine and 

as set out in Subsections (a), (b) and (c), Section 

;ya%icle 4476-3, quoted above. 

Question No. 2: "In the event of development of the program as described 

above, who (the municipality in question 

or the State) would issue and revoke 
J. E. Peavy, M.D., page 3 (W-747) 

permits for the use of Texas State Approved labels?” 

Section, 5 of Article 4476-3, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, provides : 

“The meat inspection provided by 

this Act shall be under the supervision of 

the State Health Officer of the State of 

Texas. ” 

Section 13, Article 4476-3 of Vernon’s Civil Statutes, reads as follows: 

“Any person, firm, association,, or 

corporation desjrfng to use the ‘Texas State 

Approved ’ meat label In representing, publishi.ng, or advertising any meat, or meat 

foor products offered for sale or to be sold 

withIn this State for food for human consumption shall make application to the State Board 

of Health, prior to the use of such a label 

for a permit to use any such label in advertising, represent!ng, or labeling such meat 

or meat food products.” 

Section 14, ArtLcle 4476-3 of Vernon’s Civil Statutes, reads as follows: 

“The State Health Officer receiving 

such applications as provided for in Section 4 of this Act 3s hereby authorized and 

empowered to award to such applicant a permit 

to use the ‘Texas State A[~,proved’ meat label 

according to the requirements of this Act. 

The State Board of Health shall have the power to revoke any permit issued, after notice 

by registered mail to the affected permittee 

and after a hearing to be held In accordance 

with regulation~s issued covering th1.s subject, 

when upon examination, and hearing it is found 

that any penal provision or Section of this 

Act has been violated. The State Health Officer shall keep a record for public inspection of all reports received, and the issuance 

or revocation of permits under this Act .‘I 
J. E. Peavy, M. D., page IL (NW-71L7) 

It is apparent under Section 5 that the entire 

meat inspection program is to be supervised by the State 

Health Officer, and that the language under Sections 13 

and 14 indicates that permits to use the Texas State Approved label are to be issued on an individual basis by 

the State Board of Health even though these individuals 

operate under the inspection service provided by a city 

ordinance in compliance with Section 12 of this Act. 

In view of the foregoing, it is our opinion that 

where there is a local meat inspection ordinance, as provided under Section 12, this activity should not be by-passed, and any application for a permit to use the Texas State 

Approved label in those cities should be channeled through 

the local meat inspection department and should have the 

approval of the local authority, as well as the State 

Board of Health, before being issued. 

Question No. 3. I'Can the State 

Health Department collect money, 

from packers who receive a permit 

to use the Texas State Approved 

label, in order to defray the cost 

of State supervision necessary to 

determine the initial and continued 

compliance with the State law and 

State regulations promulgated under 

the law. 

Section 14a, Article 4476-3 of Vernon's Civil Statutes, reads as follows: 

"Any person, firm, association, or corporatio“ des!ring to use the 'Texas State AIproved' meat label in representing, publishing, or advertising any meat or meat food products offered for sale or to be sold in this 

State for human consumption shall pay for the 

necessary inspection service, and the State 

Board of Health shall adopt rules and regulations relating to such inspection charges 

which will, in effect, provide that the fees 

ch?rged shall be fixed as nearly as possible 

with reference to the cost of maintaining the 

inspection service by the State Health Department which is necessary to permit the use 

of the 'Texas State Approved Meat for Human 

Food' label. Any such moneys charged and 
J. E. Heavy, M. D., page 5 (m-747) 

and collected for such inspection service 

shall be payable to the State Health Department and shall be deposited in the 

State Treasury in a special account to 

the credit of the State Health Department 

and used for the purpose of carrying out 

the program of inspection which is necessary before the issuing of permits for the 

use of the 'Texas State Approved Meat for 

Human Food' label." 

Section 14a specifically authorizes the State Board 

of Health to collect money from applicants who wish to use 

the Texas State Approved label to defray the cost of supervision by the State Board of Health. 

Question No. 4. 'Can monies already 

collected under the State Meat Inspection Program be utilized to defray the cost of meat inspection 

supervision, where this supervision 

is performed by the State and the 

activity supervised is a municipal 

inspection service which has adopted the provisions of the State law 

and the State rules and regulations 

as provided for under Section 12, 

Article 4476-31" 

If, under Section 12, Article 4476-3, the governing body of any city in the State of Texas has adopted an 

ordinance making the provisions of the Meat Inspection Act 

mandatory, the necessary facilities for the enforcement of 

this Act must be provided on the local level. However, 

under Section 5 of this Act, the responsibility of the State 

to supervise the local activity remains. 

The language ,under Section 14a gives the State the 

authority to use moneys already collected ,under the State 

Meat Inspection Program to defray the cost of meat inspection supervision, generally, and there is nothing in the 

language of Section 14, which would prohibit the money collected from being used to supervise a municipal inspection 

service activity where the municipality has adopted an OPdinance as provided under Section 12, Article 4476-3. 
J. E. Peavy, M. D., Page 6 (WlJ-747) 

Q,uestion No. 5. "Would meat stamps, 

labels and other identifying markings 

on meat products come within the provlslons of the Meat Inspection Law if 

such legends, labels and stamps carried 

the wording 'Insp. & Psd. City of 

Est.&. Texas State 

Approved'." 

Section 7, Article 4476-3, reads in part, as follows: 

"The State Health Officer is hereby 

authorized and empowered to have designed 

a distinctive inspection mark, stamp, tag, 

or label which shall state 'Texas State Agproved Establishment No. . . . 

The first sentence of Section 10, Article 4476-3, 

reads as follows: 

"No meat or meat products sold, produced, or offered for sale within this State by 

any person, firm, association, or corporation 

shall carry a label, device, or design marked , 

'Texas State Approved Establishment No. 

. which does not conform to the definitio; 

ini requirements of this Act.? 

We think it is $learly the intention of the Legislature that tie words Texas State Approved Establishment 

NO. be prominently displayed on the inspection 

mark, stamp, or label designated by the State Board of 

Health as the official label of the Meat Inspection Act. 

It is the opinion of this Department, however, that where, 

under Section 12 of this Act a city ordinance has,,been 

paased, the words "Insp. & Psd. City of may 

be added and would not be inconsistent with this Act where 

the inspection service is a joint effort between the city 

and State. 

Question No. 6. "Under this portended 

program described above would compliance 

with Section 12 by a municipality require 

the Texas State Department of Health to 

permit use of the 'Texas State Approved' 

label by all plants under thatnmunicipality's inspection j,urisdiction. 

As stated in our answer to question number 2, where 

there is a local meat inspection activity operating under 

Section 12, the local agency should not be by-passed and 
J. E. Peavy, M.D., page 7 (m-747) 

the application for a permit to use the Texas State Approved label by individuals should be channeled through 

the local meat inspection department with the approval of 

both the local and State agencies before being issued. 

It is our opinion that compliance with Section 12 

by a municipality, standing alone, would not require the 

Texas State Department of Health to permit use of the Texas State Approved label by all plants under that municipality's inspection jurisdiction, but those plants or individuals approved by both the State Department of Health 

and the local department would be issued such permits. 

Question No. 7: "It is further desired to know whether or not in circumstances where the health jurisdiction of a local health officer 

extends by agreement beyond the geographic limits of a municipality complying with Section 12 of the law, can 

the meat inspection law be then applied by the said health officer to the 

full geographic limits of the agreed 

j,urisdiction." 

Since there is no provision in Article 4476-3, 

either express or implied, for a city adopting the provisions of the Meat Inspection Act under Section 12 to 

operate beyond the corporate limits of the municipality, 

it is the opinion of this Department that supervision 

of activities under the Meat Inspection Act by the cities 

cannot extend beyond the territory of the municipality. 

Artic!.e 4476-3 was amended as late as 1957, and 

the Legislature made no change in the language which could 

in any way be interpreted as giving extra territorial jUriSdiction to a city coming under this Act, which in our opinion 

indicates that such grant of power was not intended. 

SUMMARY 

The inspection of poultry and domestic rabbits is required under Article 

4476-3 Vernon's Civil Statutes, in a 

city passing an ordinance as outlined 
J. E. Peavy, M.D., page 8 (W-747) 

under this Act. 

Any permits iss,ued for the use of the Texas 

State Approved label under the Meat Inspection Act in a city having passed an ordinance 

to come under this Act, should be issued only 

after inspection and approval on both the 

State and local levels. The State Health Department alone has the power to revoke any 

permit issued when, after notice and hearing, 

it is determined that a section of this Act 

has been violated. 

The State Health Department may collect fees 

from individuals who desire to use the Texas 

State Approved label to defray the cost of 

State supervision. 

Fees collectecr by the State Health Department from individuals who desire to use 

the State Approved label may be used to defray the cost of supervision of both individual packers and plants under the jurisdiction of a municipality complying with the 

Meat Inspection Act. 

The official legend, label or stamp adopted by the State Health Department for the 

Meat Inspection Program must bear the words 

"Texas Stat$ Approved Establishment No. 

but where the permits are issued in coop&ation with the local meat inspection service, it is not inconsistent 

with this Act to add the wo;ds "Insp. & 

Psd., City of 

All plants under a municipality inspection 

jurisdiction must have the approval of 

both the local and State Health Department 

before they can be issued the Texas State 

Approved label. 

A city may not go beyond its corporate 

limits, in its program of supervision 

under the Meat Inspection Act since extra 
_ ..-. 

J. E. Peavy, M.D., page 9 (WW-747) 

territorial powers were not granted 

by the Legislature under Article 

4476-3, Vernon's Civil Statutes. 

Yours very truly, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney General of Texas 

Iola Wilcox 

Assistant 

1W:mg:ms 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

C. Dean Davis 

Robert G. Scofield 

Marietta Payne 

iFVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

: Leonard Passmore