Analysis of ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling 

Results for Salmonella species, Calendar
 

Years 2005 through 2008
 

Stephen W. Mamber, USDA 

September 2010 
 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 

This report is the result of efforts and contributions from across the Food Safety and Inspection Service. 

The Data Analysis and Integration Group (DAIG) of the Office of Data Integration and Food Protection 

(ODIFP) developed this report in consultation with experts from other program areas, including 

Headquarters and field personnel. Key contributions were made by the following individuals: 

Nelson Clinch 

Erin Dreyling 

Emilio Esteban 

Loren Lange 

Tim Mohr 

Paul Uhler 

ii 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 

Executive Summary...................................................................................................................... 1
 

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 2
 

1.1	 Background................................................................................................................ 2
 

1.1.1. Information on the Incidence of Salmonella in RTE Meat and Poultry Products
 

.....................................................................................................2
 

1.1.2. ALLRTE ..................................................................................................................... 3
 

1.1.2. RTE001 ....................................................................................................................... 4
 

2. Data Collection Design and Implementation..................................................................... 5
 

3. Data Analysis Procedures.................................................................................................... 5
 

4. Results and Discussion......................................................................................................... 6
 

4.1	 Salmonella Testing Results for the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, 

January 2005 through December 2008.................................................................... 6 

4.2	 Types/Sources of Salmonella-Positive Samples from the ALLRTE and RTE001 

Sampling Programs, 2005-2008................................................................................ 9
 

4.3	 Salmonella Isolate Serogrouping and Serotyping Results ................................... 10
 

4.4	 Salmonella Results as a Function of Establishment Lm Control Alternatives .. 11
 

4.5	 Salmonella Results as a Function of Establishment HACCP Size ...................... 13
 

4.6	 Salmonella Results as a Function of Establishment Production Volumes ......... 13
 

4.7 Results by FSIS Geographic Region...................................................................... 15
 

4.8	 Salmonella Results as a Function of Month or Season......................................... 16
 

5. Summary and Conclusions................................................................................................ 18
 

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES 

Table 4.1.1. Detection of Salmonella spp. in ALLRTE and RTE001 RTE Product Samples, 

Calendar Years 2005-2008 .....................................................................................7
 

Figure 4.1.1. Percentage of Salmonella-Positive Samples from the ALLRTE and RTE001 

Table 4.1.2. Number and Percentage of Establishments with at Least One SalmonellaFigure 4.1.2. Percentage of Establishments with Salmonella-Positive Samples in the 

Table 4.2.1. Types of Salmonella-Positive Product Samples from the ALLRTE and 

Table 4.2.2. Percent Positive Rates for the Main Types of Food Product Samples,
 

Table 4.3.1. Patterns and Occurrence of Salmonella Serogroups and Serotypes Isolated in 

Table 4.4.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Lm Control
 

Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008..................................................7
 

Positive Sample, 2005-2008.....................................................................................8
 

ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 .........8
 

RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 ..................................9
 

2005-2008.......................................................................................9
 

the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-

2008.............................................................................................10
 

Alternative, Calendar Years 2005-2008 ..............................................................11
 

iii 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.4.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Lm Control 

Alternative, Calendar Years 2005-2008 ..............................................................12 

Table 4.4.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Lm Control 

Alternative, Calendar Years 2005-2008 ..............................................................12 

Figure 4.5.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment HACCP Size, 

Calendar Years 2005-2008....................................................................................13 

Table 4.5.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment HACCP Size, 

Calendar Years 2005-2008....................................................................................13 

Figure 4.6.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Annual Production 

Volumes, Calendar Years 2005-2008...................................................................14 

Table 4.6.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Annual Production 

Volumes, Calendar Years 2005-2008...................................................................15 

Figure 4.7.1. Detection of Salmonella by FSIS Geographic Region, Calendar Years 2005-

2008 .........................................................................................................................16 

Table 4.7.1. Detection of Salmonella by FSIS Geographic Region, Calendar Years 2005-

2008 .........................................................................................................................16 

Figure 4.8.1. Detection of Salmonella Based on Month in Which Samples Were Collected, 

Calendar Years 2005-2008....................................................................................17 

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

DAIG Data Analysis and Integration Group 

EIAO Enforcement, Investigations, and Analysis Officer 

FSA Food Safety Assessment 

FSIS Food Safety and Inspection Service 

HACCP Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point 

IVT Intensified Verification Testing 

Lm Listeria monocytogenes 

LSFS Laboratory Sample Flow System 

OFO Office of Field Operations 

PBIS Performance-based Inspection System 

PHV Public Health Veterinarian 

RTE Ready-to-eat 

USDA United States Department of Agriculture 

iv 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 

In addition to Listeria monocytogenes (Lm), ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and poultry product samples from 

the Food Safety and Inspection Service’s (FSIS’s) ALLRTE and Risk-based RTE001 sampling programs 

are tested for Salmonella spp. The Agency analyzed results of Salmonella testing of meat and poultry 

product samples collected under the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs for calendar years 2005 

through 2008. The analyses, which included 11,822 ALLRTE samples collected from 2,556 

establishments and 33,276 RTE001 samples collected from 1,989 establishments in calendar years 2005 

through 2008, included the following: 

Incidence and categorization of Salmonella-positive samples from sampled establishments in the 

two programs; 

Trends in percentage of positive results for calendar years 2005-2008; 

Types and sources of positive samples; 

Serogroups and serotypes of Salmonella isolates from the positive samples; and, 

Descriptive summaries with respect to: 

– establishment HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) size, 

– establishment production volumes, 

– Lm control Alternatives employed by the establishment, 

– geographic location of the establishment, and 

– month (and season) of sample collection. 

Results showed low incidences of Salmonella-positive samples from the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling 

programs relative to the total numbers of samples collected in 2005-2008, with 8 and 14 positive samples, 

for ALLRTE and RTE001, respectively. Positive product results averaged 0.07% for ALLRTE samples 

(range, 0-0.13%) and 0.04% for RTE001 samples (range, 0.01-0.08%). Similarly, percentages of 

establishments with Salmonella-positive samples ranged from 0-0.27% for ALLRTE and from 0.07-

0.54% for RTE001. Three types of products - head cheese, pork barbecue and sausage products -

accounted for over 60% of all Salmonella-positive samples. Pork was the predominant source of the 

positive products, with the remainder being either from chicken or beef. Serogrouping and serotyping of 

23 Salmonella isolates from the 22 samples yielded 17 distinct serotypes within 8 serogroups. 

All but one of the Salmonella-positive samples were obtained from establishments with HACCP sizes of 

Small or Very Small. Results of analysis based on Lm control alternatives showed that over half of the 

positive samples were obtained from establishments employing control Alternative 3 (sanitation 

only/highest risk). Positive Salmonella samples could be found in most geographic regions at all times of 

the year. However, there were few or no Salmonella isolates from establishments in North Central and 

Southwestern regions (comprised of 15 states). It is recommended that there be an ongoing examination 

of Salmonella data from the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs with respect to applying that 

information to the prevention of foodborne Salmonella outbreaks. 

1
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

1. INTRODUCTION 

FSIS conducts regulatory microbiological testing of ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and poultry products for 

Listeria monocytogenes (Lm), Salmonella and Escherichia coli O157:H7. One such sampling and testing 

program was ALLRTE (random verification sampling of all RTE meat and poultry products). The 

ALLRTE sampling program was initiated in January of 2004. All establishments were considered at 

equal risk under the ALLRTE sampling program. Establishments and products were sampled at random, 

with the exception of certain products considered to be of low risk, such as lard. These exceptions were 

eliminated with the issuance of Directive 10,240.4, Revision 2 in 2009. 

FSIS regulations mandated the reporting of various production factors by establishments producing meat 

and poultry products that were exposed to the post-lethality production environment. This served as the 

basis for another sampling program based on the risk characteristics of the producing establishment and 

not just on product types. RTE001, a sampling and testing program for RTE products based on these 

establishment risk factors, was initiated in January 2005. Accordingly, samples collected under the 

RTE001 program are only from establishments subject to 9 CFR Part 430 (i.e., establishments in which 

RTE products are exposed to the post-lethality environment [see 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_08/9cfr430_08.html]). The selection of establishments for 

sample collection and testing is made each month using a risk-ranking multivariate equation or algorithm. 

The risk ranking of establishments selected for sampling is made on the basis of controlling Lm rather 

than Salmonella. 

In both the ALLRTE and RTE001 programs, samples are tested for Lm, Salmonella and E. coli 

O157:H7.1 This report is concerned with the collection and testing of the ALLRTE and RTE001 samples 

with respect to Salmonella only. FSIS has reported summarized percent positive Salmonella test results 

for RTE meat and poultry products collected under the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs since 

their inception (2004/2005) through calendar year 2008. Accordingly, the objectives of this report were 

to (1) obtain, tabulate and analyze ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling results for Salmonella; (2) evaluate 

the data with respect to program effectiveness; and (3) identify possible trends in the data. 

1.1 Background 

1.1.1. Information on the Incidence of Salmonella in RTE Meat and Poultry Products 

Based on the percentages of positive samples, the incidence of Salmonella in RTE meat and poultry 

products is lower than that of Lm in RTE products. However, the presence of Salmonella in RTE 

products may imply a more serious processing and public health problem compared to the presence of 

Lm. While Salmonella in an establishment may be an environmental contaminant in some 

circumstances, its presence implies underprocessing or serious deficiencies for sanitary practices. 

Salmonella can contaminate RTE products in the following ways: 

1. Underprocessing 

a. Underprocessing occurs when the cooking process is not adequate to eliminate the pathogens 

of concern. For heat-treated products, underprocessing may be the result of applying an inadequate time 

and temperature to the product or the development of bacterial heat resistance before completion of the 

lethality step. 

1 Only dry and semi-dry fermented sausages and meat patties are tested for E. coli O157:H7 as well as for Lm and Salmonella. 

2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

b. For cured and fermented products, inadequate drying, curing or fermentation are causes of 

underprocessing. 

2. Contamination from Raw Materials 

a. Raw or partially processed produce (e.g., raw or perhaps blanched), eggs, spices or other 

ingredients that are introduced to the processed meat or poultry products after the primary lethality event 

can be a source for Salmonella. 

b. Salmonella from raw meat or poultry products that are processed in the same physical area can 

contaminate processed products by direct or indirect (e.g., environmental sources or food handlers) 

contamination routes. 

3. Contamination from Food Handlers 

a. Given the incidence of human salmonellosis in the U.S. and the potential for asymptomatic 

human carriers, there is potential for product contamination from establishment employees. 

b. The food industry has a high turnover of food handlers. History has shown that personal 

hygiene and safe food handling training may not be adequate. 

4. Contamination from Animal Vectors 

a. Animals (e.g., birds, rodents) and insects have been shown to contaminate food products with 

Salmonella. 

b. Contamination from within and from outside the establishment can be carried on footwear and 

clothing into the RTE product environment. 

1.1.2. ALLRTE 

The ALLRTE sampling program began in January of 2004. ALLRTE was designed to obtain random 

samples across the full range of RTE products and across all establishments producing a RTE product, 

regardless of risk. Under the ALLRTE sampling program, establishments are randomly selected for 

regulatory samples from the total population of establishments producing RTE products. This sampling is 

conducted by FSIS on all RTE post-lethality and non-post-lethality exposed products. Testing for 

Salmonella is performed concurrently with that for Lm. The overall prevalence of Salmonella is 

evaluated from these results. Results of this regulatory testing project are used to verify the effectiveness 

of food safety systems. 

Regulations/directives/notices specific to ALLRTE include the following: 

• FSIS Directive 10,240.4 Revision 2 “Verification Procedures for Consumer Safety Inspectors for 

the Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) Regulation and Lm Sampling Program”, February 3, 2009 

• 9 CFR 430.4 “Control of Listeria monocytogenes in post-lethality exposed ready-to-eat products”

published on June 6, 2003 (68 FR 34207) [includes definitions for RTE Alternatives 1, 2, and 3] 

• FSIS Directive 10,210.1, “Unified Sampling Form”, October 14, 1997

• FSIS Directive 10,300.1 “Intensified Verification Testing (IVT) Protocol for Sampling of 

Product, Food Contact Surfaces, Environmental Surfaces for Listeria monocytogenes”, February 3, 2009.

3
 
 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

1.1.2. RTE001 

Phase 1 of the FSIS risk-based verification testing program was implemented in January 2005 with the 

RTE001 sampling project for testing of finished product samples post-lethality exposed RTE meat and 

poultry products. With RTE001, establishments are selected for sampling based on different risk factors 

for Lm. As with the ALLRTE sampling program, product samples are tested for Salmonella as well as for 

Lm (and for certain products, E. coli O157:H7). 

Regulations/directives/notices specific to RTE001 are as follows: 

• 9 CFR 430.4 “Control of Listeria monocytogenes in post-lethality exposed ready-to-eat products”

published on June 6, 2003 (68 FR 34207) [includes definitions for RTE Alternatives 1, 2, and 3] 

• FSIS Directive 10,240.4 Revision 2 “Verification Procedures For Consumer Safety Inspectors for 

the Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) Regulation and Lm Sampling Programs”, February 3, 2009

• FSIS Directive 10,240.5 Revision 2, “Verification Procedures for Enforcement, Investigations, 

and Analysis Officers (EIAOs) for the Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) Regulation and Routine Risk-Based 

Listeria monocytogenes (RLm) Sampling Program”, February 3, 2009

• FSIS Directive 10,300.1 “Intensified Verification Testing (IVT) Protocol for Sampling of

Product, Food Contact Surfaces, Environmental Surfaces for Listeria monocytogenes”, February 3, 2009

Further information regarding background/applicable regulations, directives, notices, public meetings and 

Federal Register notices for both ALLRTE and RTE001 may be found at the FSIS website on the Internet 

(http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ ). 

4
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

2. DATA COLLECTION DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 

Data routinely generated from the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs were used for all analyses. 

The data consisted of product test results for samples that were collected and tested for Salmonella. 

These data were extracted from the Data Warehouse (M2K database) via the Laboratory Sample Flow 

System (LSFS). Supplementary data were obtained using the Performance-based Inspection System 

(PBIS) reader. 

3. DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 

FSIS calculated the numbers of positive samples and percentage of positive product samples between 

January 2005 and December 2008 (four calendar years). The data analyzed were based on sample 

collection dates (January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2008)1

. These analyses focused on the 

following: 

incidence and categorization of positive Salmonella samples from sampled establishments; 

types and sources of Salmonella-positive samples; 

serogroups and serotypes of Salmonella isolates from the positive samples; 

descriptive summaries with respect to 

– establishment HACCP size, 

– establishment production volumes, 

– FSIS District, 

– geographic location of the establishment, and 

– season or month of sample collection; and 

trends in percentages of positive results from 2005 through 2008. 

Most data analyses were performed through data handling and evaluation techniques using Microsoft 

Office Excel. Statistical analysis, when required, consisted of logistic regression analysis (SAS 

LOGISTIC procedures). 

1 FSIS routinely posts summarized annual data for their microbiological testing programs for ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and 

poultry products (http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Science/Micro_Testing_RTE/index.asp#results08). Prior to calendar year 2008, 

results that were posted were based on analysis completion date. Beginning in January 2008, results are being posted by sample 

collection date to include all samples collected within the calendar year. This aligns FSIS' activities in this area with those of 

other Federal partners. However, as the 2008 results by collection date are not directly comparable with results from previous 

years, a decision was made to use sample collection date for all data reported and analyzed within the current report. 

Accordingly, some data, notably the numbers of samples tested, will appear different than those posted online by FSIS. 

5
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

Data collection began in 2004 for the ALLRTE sampling program and in 2005 for the RTE001sampling 

program. For comparative purposes, January, 2005 was selected as the start date with respect to 

Salmonella data evaluation for the two sampling programs covered in this report. The Agency has 

reported summarized Salmonella test results for calendar year 2004 at the following Internet location: 

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Science/Table13_Micro_Testing_RTE_1990-2004/index.asp. 

Some analyses, notably for types of samples and for data trends over time, required the evaluation of 

combined multi-year data. Previously, FSIS had reported summarized Salmonella data through 2007 

based on analysis completion date. Beginning in 2008, summarized Salmonella data are being reported 

based on the date of sample collection, in order to better align FSIS data reporting activities with that of 

other Federal partners. It was noted that because of the change from analysis completion date to sample 

collection date, the summarized data for calendar year 2008 cannot be directly compared to that from 

prior years. As noted in Section 3 (Data Analysis Procedures), the 2005-2008 data analyzed for this 

report were based exclusively on sample collection dates in order to make them directly comparable on an 

annualized basis. Accordingly, some of the data in the current report, notably the total numbers of 

samples tested per year, will appear different from those previously posted online by FSIS. The 

Agency’s summarized test results for calendar years 2005-2008 are found at the following Internet 

locations: 

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Science/Micro_Testing_RTE/index.asp#previous (for 2005-2007) and 

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Science/Micro_Testing_RTE/index.asp#results08 (for 2008). 

4.1 Salmonella Testing Results for the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, 

January 2005 through December 2008 

Table 4.1.1 and Figure 4.1.1 show the results of testing 11,822 samples for Salmonella spp. in the 

ALLRTE sampling program and 33,276 samples for Salmonella spp. in the RTE001 sampling program in 

calendar years 2005-2008 (all based on sample collection date). Overall, 8 (0.07%) of the ALLRTE 

samples and 14 (0.04%) of the RTE001 samples tested positive for Salmonella spp. For comparison, the 

percentage positive rates for Lm in the same samples in both sampling programs (calendar years 2005-

2008) were about 0.5%. This underscores the relatively low prevalence of Salmonella spp. in RTE meat 

and poultry samples. Quantitative most-probable number (MPN) determinations of the levels of 

Salmonella were performed for 7 samples (4 ALLRTE, 3 RTE001). All but 1 ALLRTE sample (MPN 

0.09 CFU/g) were below detectable levels of 0.03 CFU/g. It should also be noted that all the samples that 

tested positive for Salmonella were negative for Lm. This may reflect differences in the sources of 

contamination for the two pathogens. 

Changes in the percentages of Salmonella-positive ALLRTE and RTE001 samples between 2005 and 

2008 were examined using statistical analysis (SAS LOGISTIC procedures). There were no statistically 

significant changes in Salmonella results for either the ALLRTE sampling program (P>0.05) or the 

RTE001 sampling program (P > 0.4) over time. 

The numbers and percentages of establishments that had at least 1 Salmonella-positive ALLRTE or 

RTE001 sample are shown in Table 4.1.2 and Figure 4.1.2. Only 8 of 6,369 (0.13%) ALLRTE 

establishment sample collection visits (representing 1 or more sample collection from 2,556 RTE 

establishments), and 13 of 5,447 (0.24%) RTE001 establishment sample collection visits (representing 1 

or more sample collection from 1,989 establishments) yielded samples that tested positive for Salmonella 

6
 
 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

over the 2005-2008 sampling period. This also was markedly lower than the percentages of Lm in 

establishments (about 2% and 7% for ALLRTE and RTE001, respectively). One establishment with a 

Salmonella-positive RTE001 sample (head cheese) had a second positive result for the same product type 

after a second sample was collected approximately 3 months after the first. All other positive samples 

were from separate establishments. It also is noted that 2 of the 8 ALLRTE positives (25%) were from 

non-9CFR430 establishments (i.e., establishments that did not have post-lethality exposure of products to 

the processing environment). 

Table 4.1.1. Detection of Salmonella spp. in ALLRTE and RTE001 RTE Product
 

Samples, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

Year 

ALLRTE Positive Samples RTE001 Positive Samples 

Total Tested No. % Total Tested No. % 

2005 2,813 1 0.04 7,137 4 0.06 

2006 2,938 0 0.00 8,546 2 0.02 

2007 2,951 3 0.10 8,672 7 0.08 

2008 3,120 4 0.13 8,921 1 0.01 

Total 11,822 8 0.07 33,276 14 0.04 

Figure 4.1.1. Percentage of Salmonella-Positive Samples from the ALLRTE and RTE001 

Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

7
 
 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Table 4.1.2. Number and Percentage of Establishments with at Least One SalmonellaPositive Sample, 2005-2008
 

Year 

ALLRTE Establishments with 

Positive Samples 

RTE001 Establishments with 

Positive Samples 

# of Establishments 

Sampled No. % 

# of Establishments 

Sampled No. % 

2005 1,945 1 0.05 1,534 3 0.20 

2006 1,532 0 0.00 1,178 2 0.17 

2007 1,406 3 0.21 1,286 7 0.54 

2008 1,486 4 0.27 1,449 1 0.07 

Total 6,369* 8 0.13 5,447** 13 0.24 

*Represents the total of one or more sample collection visits to 2,556 RTE establishments in 2005-2008. 

**Represents the total of one or more sample collection visits to 1,989 RTE establishments with postlethality exposure (subject to 9 CFR 430) in 2005-2008. 

Figure 4.1.2. Percentage of Establishments with Salmonella-Positive Samples in the 

ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

8
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

4.2 Types/Sources of Salmonella-Positive Samples from the ALLRTE and RTE001 

Sampling Programs, 2005-2008 

Because of the relatively small numbers of Salmonella-positive samples (8 ALLRTE, 14 RTE001 over 4 

years), all positives from the two sampling programs were analyzed together. Table 4.2.1 shows a 

categorization and incidence of the types of Salmonella-positive samples obtained in the two sampling 

programs. Head cheese (a deli cold cut made up of pieces of meat from the heads of animals; 4 samples) 

and pork barbecue (4 samples) were common RTE sources of Salmonella, accounting for over one-third 

of the Salmonella-positive ALLRTE and RTE001 samples. (It should be noted that two of the four head 

cheese samples were from the same establishment, but the two samples were collected on two different 

dates). Sausage products represented another potential source of Salmonella, with 6 positive product 

types (fully-cooked sausage patties, a skinless sausage, sausage rings, smoked sweets, a brand of mild 

sausage, and a hard salami). Thus, three types of products accounted for 64% (14/22) of all the 

Salmonella-positive RTE product samples over the 4-year sampling period. Pork was the predominant 

meat source of these products. There also were several chicken products that were positive on an 

individual basis. The rates of positive product samples relative to the numbers of head cheese, pork 

barbecue and sausage products sampled between 2005 and 2008 ranged from 0.12-0.63% (Table 4.2.2). 

Table 4.2.1. Types of Salmonella-Positive Product Samples from the ALLRTE and 

RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

Product Type 

Positive Samples 

No. % 

Head Cheese 4 18.2 

Pork Barbecue 4 18.2 

Sausage Products (other than patties) 4 18.2 

Patties (Sausage and Chicken) 2 9.1 

Beef Jerky 1 4.5 

Cacciatore (Pork) 1 4.5 

Chicken & Cheese Burrito 1 4.5 

Chicken Casserole 1 4.5 

Breaded Chicken 1 4.5 

Smoked Chicken 1 4.5 

Hard Salami 1 4.5 

Pork Cracklings 1 4.5 

Total 22 100 

Table 4.2.2. Percent Positive Rates for the Main Types of Food Product Samples, 2005-2008 

Food Product Type 

Total 

Collecteda 

Positive Samples 

No. % 

Head Cheese 790 4 0.51 

Pork Barbecue 630 4 0.63 

Sausage Products (including patties and salami) 4900 6 0.12 

a

Approximate numbers from sample description listings. 

9
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

4.3 Salmonella Isolate Serogrouping and Serotyping Results 

Serogrouping and serotyping were performed on 23 isolates derived from the 22 positive samples from 

the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs. (The additional isolate was from the same cacciatore 

sample). As shown in Table 4.3.1, a total of 17 different serotypes within 8 different serogroups were 

obtained for the 23 isolates. No serotype was obtained more than twice. These results do not suggest any 

particular serotype being prevalent in Salmonella isolates from RTE meat and poultry products. 

However, 7 of the 23 isolates (about 30 %) were from serogroup B. Four of these serotypes (6 of the 23 

isolates) were present in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) ranking of the top 10 

Salmonella serotypes in 2008: S. typhimurium (2 isolates, ranked 2 of 10); S. heidelberg (2 isolates, 

ranked 8 of 10); S. newport (1 isolate, ranked 3 of 10); and S. muenchen (1 isolate, ranked 7 of 10). The 

fact that the other 17 isolates were not in the CDC top 10 ranking does not exclude the possibility that any 

of these isolates could be involved in Salmonella infections in humans. 

Table 4.3.1. Patterns and Occurrence of Salmonella Serogroups and Serotypes Isolated in 

the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Serogroup Serotype 

CDC 

Rank* ALLRTE RTE001 

Combined 

(ALLRTE & 

RTE001) 

% of 

All 

Isolates 

B agona 1 1 4.3 

B derby 2 2 8.7 

B heidelberg 8 1 1 2 8.7 

B typhimurium (copenhagen) 2 1 1 4.3 

B typhimurium 2 1 1 4.3 

C1 

choleraesuis var. 

kunzendorf 1 1 4.3 

C1 infantis 1 1 4.3 

C2 livingston 1 1 4.3 

C2 muenchen 7 1 1 4.3 

C2 newport 3 1 1 4.3 

E anatum 2 2 8.7 

E1 3,10:nonmotile 1 1 4.3 

E1 london 1 1 4.3 

E1 muenster 1 1 4.3 

E4 senftenberg 2 2 8.7 

Poly-C gaminara 2 2 8.7 

Poly-D johannesburg 2 2 8.7 

Total 9 14 23 100 

*Based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) ranking of top 10 Salmonella serotypes in 2008 - Foodborne Diseases 

Active Surveillance Network, United States. 

10
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

4.4 Salmonella Results as a Function of Establishment Lm Control Alternatives 

Establishments in the RTE001 sampling program use one or more of four possible procedures or control 

alternatives for eliminating or inhibiting the growth of Lm in the particular RTE products produced by 

each establishment. The four alternative categories are as follows: 

Alternative 1, the lowest-risk category, involves using both a post-lethality treatment (which 

could be a physical treatment or an antimicrobial agent) “that reduces or eliminates 

microorganisms on the product AND an antimicrobial agent or process that suppresses or limits 

the growth of L. monocytogenes” (FSIS Directive 10,240.4, Revision 1, 3/15/2006).

Alternatives 2a (Choice 1) and 2b (Choice 2), the next higher-risk categories, provide the 

option of either a post-lethality treatment that kills or inhibits microorganisms (2a) or an 

antimicrobial agent or process that specifically inhibits Lm (2b). 

Alternative 3, the highest-risk category, requires the “use of sanitation procedures only” (FSIS 

Directive 10,240.4). 

These establishments also are referred to as 9 CFR Part 430 establishments, based on the above 

description in the Code of Federal Regulations. For the ALLRTE sampling program, samples of RTE 

meat and poultry products can be collected from any RTE establishment - those that are produced under 

9 CFR 430 as well as those that are not (non-9 CFR 430 establishments). Figure 4.4.1 and Table 4.4.1 

show the percentages of ALLRTE and RTE001 samples that tested positive for Salmonella with respect 

to the four major RTE Lm control Alternatives (1, 2a, 2b and 3) for calendar years 2005 through 2008. 

Salmonella-positive samples were found in establishments that employ any of the four types of Lm 

control alternatives (Figure 4.4.1). This may be simply because the Lm control alternatives were not 

designed to control Salmonella. That said, over half (about 55%) of the 22 Salmonella-positive samples 

were from establishments that used Alternative 3 (sanitation only). Another 18% of the positive samples 

were from establishments that used Alternative 2b or a combination of Alternatives 2b and 3 (Table 

4.4.1). 

11
 
 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Figure 4.4.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Lm Control 

Alternative, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

Note: Data presented as percentages (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (error bars). Large error 

bars indicate greater variability (or lower confidence) in the results. 

Table 4.4.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Lm Control 

Alternative, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Alternative 

No. of Positive 

Samples 

(ALLRTE) 

No. of Positive 

Samples 

(RTE001) 

No. of Positive 

Samples 

(Combined) 

% of All Positive 

Samples 

(Combined) 

3 4 8 12 54.5 

2B 1 1 2 9.1 

Mixed 2/3 0 2 2 9.1 

1 1 0 1 4.5 

Mixed 1/2 0 1 1 4.5 

Mixed 1/2/3 0 1 1 4.5 

2A/2B 0 1 1 4.5 

Non-9CFR430 2 0 2 9.1 

Total 8 14 22 100.0 

12
 
 

 

 

1/3575

10/24575

11/16916

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

Large Small Very Small

% Positive Samples

HACCP Size

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

4.5 Salmonella Results as a Function of Establishment HACCP Size 

The percentages of ALLRTE and RTE001 samples positive for Salmonella with respect to each 

establishment’s HACCP size of Large, Small, or Very Small for calendar years 2005-2008 are shown in 

Figure 4.5.1 and Table 4.5.1. All but one of the positive samples were from establishments that were 

either Small (10) or Very Small (11). 

Figure 4.5.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment HACCP Size, 

Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

Table 4.5.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment HACCP Size, Calendar 

Years 2005-2008
 

HACCP Size 

No. of Samples 

(ALLRTE) 

No. of Samples 

(RTE001) 

No. of Samples 

(Combined) 

% of All Positive 

Samples (Combined) 

L 0 1 1 4.5 

S 2 8 10 45.5 

V 6 5 11 50.0 

Total 8 14 22 100.0 

4.6. Salmonella Results as a Function of Establishment Production Volumes 

Results were analyzed as a function of the annual production volumes of RTE food products. This 

information, when available, is provided by the producing establishments on FSIS Form 10,240-1. The 

observations made thus are dependent on the accuracy of the production volumes supplied. The 

percentages of Salmonella-positive ALLRTE and RTE001 with respect to the production volumes for 

13
 
 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

calendar years 2005 through 2008 are shown in Figure 4.6.1 and Table 4.6.1. The results show that 

Salmonella-positive samples were most commonly found in establishments with production volumes in 

the range of 10,000-10,000,000 pounds per year. 

Figure 4.6.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Annual Production 

Volumes, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

14
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Table 4.6.1. Detection of Salmonella as a Function of Establishment Annual Production 

Volumes, Calendar Years 2005-2008
 

Establishment 

Annual 

Production 

Volume Range, 

Pounds* 

Total 

ALLRTE 

Samples 

Positive 

ALLRTE 

Samples 

Total 

RTE001 

Samples 

Positive 

RTE001 

Samples All 

Samples 

All Positive 

Samples 

No. % No. % No. % 

~10 23 0 0.00 14 0 0.00 37 0 0.00 

~100 97 0 0.00 55 0 0.00 152 0 0.00 

~1000 1084 0 0.00 1046 0 0.00 2130 0 0.00 

~10000 3204 3 0.09 5794 0 0.00 8998 3 0.03 

~100000 3102 2 0.06 8669 6 0.07 11771 8 0.07 

~1000000 1895 0 0.00 8601 3 0.03 10496 3 0.03 

~10000000 952 1 0.11 7780 5 0.06 8732 6 0.07 

~100000000 83 0 0.00 1266 0 0.00 1349 0 0.00 

#N/A 1382 2 0.14 51 0 0.00 1433 2 0.14 

Total 11822 8 0.07 33276 14 0.04 45098 22 0.05 

*Approximate, based on information collected on FSIS 10,240-1 forms. #N/A = volumes not available. 

4.7 Results by FSIS Geographic Region 

To explore possible geographic influences on the detection of Salmonella, individual states were 

classified into the following geographic regions1

: 

Northeast: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 

Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, DC 

North Central: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin 

Southeast: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands 

Southwest: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma and 

Texas 

West: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, Nevada, 

Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, American Samoa, Guam and the Northern 

Marianas Islands 

The percentages of ALLRTE and RTE001 samples that tested positive for Salmonella within these five 

broad geographic regions for calendar years 2005-2008 are shown in Figure 4.7.1 and Table 4.7.1. 

Salmonella were present in ALLRTE and RTE001 samples from all geographic regions except the 

Southwest. Also, less than 10% of the positive samples came from the North Central region. The 

absence or low incidence of Salmonella-positive RTE meat and poultry product samples in the Southwest 

and North Central regions (which are comprised of 15 states) may merely be a function of the relatively 

low incidence of positive samples nationwide over a 4-year sampling period. On the other hand, there 

1 This classification is taken from the following FSIS manuscript: Naugle et al., Journal of Food Protection 69:2607-2614, 2006. 

15
 
 

 

 

8/7218

7/9441

5/9093

2/11536

0/7812

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

Southeast Northeast West North 

Central

Southwest

% Positive Samples 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

may be a rational scientific reason(s) for the absence or low incidence of Salmonella in product samples 

from these two geographic regions that may require further investigation. One speculative possibility is 

that climatological factors (temperature, humidity, precipitation) could be responsible in part for the 

observed differences. 

Figure 4.7.1. Detection of Salmonella by FSIS Geographic Region, Calendar Years 2005-

2008 

Note: Data presented as percentages (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (error bars). 

Table 4.7.1. Detection of Salmonella by FSIS Geographic Region, Calendar Years 2005-

2008 

Geographic Region 

No. of Positive 

Samples 

(ALLRTE) 

No. of Positive 

Samples 

(RTE001) 

No. of Positive 

Samples 

(Combined) 

% of Positive 

Samples 

(Combined) 

Northeast 3 5 8 36.4 

Southeast 3 4 7 31.8 

West 2 3 5 22.7 

North Central 0 2 2 9.1 

Southwest 0 0 0 0.0 

8 14 22 100.0 

4.8 Salmonella Results as a Function of Month or Season 

To explore possible seasonal influences on the detection of Salmonella, positive ALLRTE and RTE001 

results were categorized based on month of the year in which positive samples were obtained. The 

16
 
 

 

 

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Jan Feb Mar AprMayJun Jul AugSep Oct NovDec

% Positive Samples

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

percentages of samples positive for Salmonella by month for calendar years 2005-2008 are shown in 

Figure 4.8.1. Salmonella-positive samples could be isolated from RTE establishments during all seasons 

or months of the year. These data indicate the lack of a seasonal effect with respect to the detection of 

Salmonella in ALLRTE and RTE001 samples. 

Figure 4.8.1. Detection of Salmonella Based on Month in Which Samples Were Collected, 

Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Note: Data presented as percentages (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (error bars). 

17
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

FSIS analyzed data with respect to the detection of Salmonella in meat and poultry product samples 

collected under the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs between January, 2005 and December 

2008. Overall, 11,822 samples from 6,369 establishment sample collection visits (representing visits to 

2,556 individual establishments) and 33,276 samples from 5,447 establishment sample collection visits 

(representing visits to 1,989 individual establishments) were tested for Salmonella in ALLRTE and 

RTE001, respectively (all based on sample collection date). 

Results based on percentages of Salmonella-positive samples and percentages of establishments 

with Salmonella-positive results. The incidence of Salmonella-positive samples was low relative to the 

total numbers of samples collected in each year. Yearly percentages of Salmonella-positive ALLRTE 

samples ranged from 0 to 0.27%, while percentages of Salmonella-positive RTE001 samples ranged from 

0.01% to 0.08%. In comparison, the percentages of Lm-positive samples for both the ALLRTE and 

RTE001 programs over the same 4-year period were about 0.5%. Changes in the percentages of 

Salmonella-positive ALLRTE and RTE001 samples from 2005 to 2008 also were examined using 

statistical methods. Changes over the 4-year sampling period for both sampling programs were not 

statistically significant. 

The percentages of establishments with Salmonella-positive samples collected between 2005 and 2008 

ranged from 0 to 0.27% for ALLRTE and from 0.07% to 0.54% for RTE001. These percentages also 

were low relative to establishments with Lm-positive samples, which averaged about 2% for ALLRTE 

and about 7% for RTE001. 

Results based on the type of Salmonella-positive sample. Of the 22 samples that were positive for 

Salmonella, 4 head cheese samples, 4 pork barbecue samples and 6 sausage products (including a sausage 

patty product and a hard salami) were positive, accounting for over 60% of all Salmonella-positive 

ALLRTE and RTE001 samples. The data suggest an increased likelihood of encountering Salmonella in 

head cheese, pork barbecue and various types of sausage products relative to other types of RTE meat and 

poultry products. The reasons for this are not clear at this time. The other 8 products with positive results 

were individual isolations, with 4 of these being chicken products. Pork was the predominant source of 

the positive products (about half of all positives), with smaller numbers of positives among chicken and 

beef products. 

Salmonella isolate subtyping and serotyping results. There were 23 isolates that underwent subtyping 

and serotyping (two isolates came from the same positive product). This yielded 17 different serotypes 

within 8 serogroups. About 30% of the isolates were from serogroup B. Four serotypes from about 25% 

of the isolates were on the CDC ranking of the top 10 Salmonella serotypes associated with foodborne 

diseases in the United States in 2008. However, no serotype was recovered more than twice. These data 

suggest marked diversity in the serotypes of Salmonella isolates recovered from RTE products. 

Salmonella results based on Lm control alternative, HACCP size, geographic region, and 

month/season. Results based on Lm control alternatives employed by the establishments showed that 

Salmonella-positive samples could be obtained from establishments that employ any of the Lm control 

Alternatives. However, the majority of positive samples were from Alternative 3 (sanitation only/highest 

risk) and Alternative 2b (antimicrobial treatment/higher-risk) establishments. Results based on 

establishment HACCP sizes showed that all but 1of the 22 positive RTE product samples came from 

either HACCP Small establishments (10 samples) or from HACCP Very Small establishments (11 

samples). Evaluation of results by geographic region showed that there were few or no positive 

18
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results of Data Analysis for Salmonella in the ALLRTE and RTE001 Sampling Programs, Calendar Years 2005-2008 

Salmonella samples from 15 North Central or Southwest states. Finally, analysis of results by 

month/season indicated that Salmonella-positive RTE samples are obtained at all times of the year. 

In summary, 8 of 11,822 ALLRTE samples (0.07%) and 14 of 33,276 RTE001 samples (0.04%) collected 

in calendar years 2005 through 2008 have tested positive for Salmonella. Head cheese, pork barbecue 

and sausage products represented over 60% of all positive samples. Pork was the source of about half of 

all positive products. All but 1 of the 22 positive samples came from establishments that were HACCP 

sizes of Very Small or Small. Over half of the positive samples came from establishments that employed 

Lm control Alternative 3 (sanitation only). There were some geographic differences in Salmonella 

presence in RTE products. It is recommended that there be an ongoing examination of Salmonella data 

from the ALLRTE and RTE001 sampling programs with respect to applying the information obtained to 

preventing foodborne Salmonella outbreaks. This would include modifications of existing compliance 

guidelines and other regulatory practices that help protect public health. 

19