1996 Could Be the End of a Long Road-Or the Beginning of More Headaches
by Gary Jay Kushner
Meat and poultry inspection has been the subject of more controversy and examination in 1995 than in several years.
It has dominated the regulatory and legislative agenda, and 1996 will be more of the same, though presumably building on the foundation laid this year.
Expectations and apprehension were high as 1995 approached, with USDA promising to deliver a sweeping reform of the inspection process through the proposal of significant regulatory changes in the form of mandatory Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point programs.
Meanwhile, the prospect of legislative reform remained a popular topic on Capitol Hill.
Those who thrive on controversy were not disappointed when USDA published its proposed pathogen reduction/HACCP rule. The agency chose not only to propose that federally and state inspected plants adopt and implement HACCP, but go way beyond HACCP with proposed "near term" prescriptive measures including mandatory antimicrobial treatments, sanitary standard operating procedures, microbial testing, and the establishment of time-temperature parameters for meat and poultry products.
The proposal touched off a firestorm of reaction in the meat industry, the inspectors' union, consumer groups and others. Not only were the substantive aspects of the proposal controversial, but the rule-making process engaged by FSIS became the subject of heated debate.
In a purported attempt to maximize public input, FSIS held a series of public hearings and meetings around the country concerning the proposal. The absence of meaningful dialogue, coupled with the perception that agency officials were selectively providing greater access to unions and consumer groups, however, led to a pitched confrontation as many called for negotiated rule-making in lieu of the traditional notice and comment rule-making process.
Although the purpose of negotiated rule-making is to find consensus among affected parties in order to craft the most workable regulation possible, it was vigorously opposed by USDA.
A compromise was reached when USDA Secretary Dan Glickman agreed to hold a series of public meetings at which USDA's present thinking about the pathogen reduction/HACCP proposal would be revealed.
USDA held a Food Safety Forum in November and discussed broader issues involving meat and poultry inspection. Among those issues would be how USDA can best improve food safety through organizational changes, regulatory reform, resource allocation, and whether legislative changes are necessary.
Michael R. Taylor, acting undersecretary for Food Safety, has promised that the rule will be finalized by the end of 1995. A spokeswoman for FSIS confirmed this timetable to Meat Marketing & Technology in early November, but that appears to be extremely ambitious.
Meanwhile, there are some who continue to call for legislation. But even if a final rule is not published until sometime in early 1996, congressional leaders may be willing to wait before considering any overhaul of the existing statutes, especially during an election year.
On the other hand, Congress may decide that even with the regulatory changes, there are other aspects of the laws-bird-by-bird and carcass-by-carcass inspection-that are outdated and hinder efforts to move to a science-based inspection system, preventing the agency from using its resources most effectively.
And government efficiency is becoming increasingly important as the budget axe swings aggressively at USDA's inspection funds.
In short, the inspection reform debate that shifted into high gear during 1995 is by no means at an end.
Yet, much of the ground work has been done, and regulatory changes are imminent. But the scope of these changes, their legal viability, and the extent to which they will truly modernize inspection and make it more cost effective is left to be seen.
Whether USDA's initiatives quell or fuel demands for comprehensive legislative reform will be perhaps the biggest question addressed early in 1996. Only time will tell, but one thing is for sure: 1996 will be yet another "year of inspection" for the meat industry.