Retained Water in Poultry Products; Protocols for Obtaining Data on Meat and Poultry Chilling Processes

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 381 and 441

[Docket No. 97-052N]

Retained Water in Poultry Products; Protocols for Obtaining Data

on Meat and Poultry Chilling Processes

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is notifying the

public of its interest in receiving and reviewing protocols for

obtaining data on chilled, ready-to-cook poultry products and

simultaneously requesting comments on the principles which it has

tentatively identified to guide its review of those protocols. The data

may be used: to benchmark the effectiveness of washing, chilling, and

draining operations in minimizing pathogen growth and moisture

retention in poultry products; and to develop proposed new regulations

limiting retained moisture in poultry products. FSIS views the data

collection as a necessary step in strengthening the basis for its

regulations in the wake of a recent Federal District Court decision

setting aside as ``arbitrary and capricious'' the regulatory limits on

moisture absorption and retention in ready-to-cook whole chickens and

turkeys. FSIS and the poultry industry have relied on these limits for

many years to gauge the effectiveness of chilling processes in meeting

the regulatory objective of minimizing moisture retention in poultry

products. Any new regulatory limits on moisture retention must be based

on sound data. The Agency is willing to review protocols developed

according to the specifications published in this document or

alternative protocols that may be suggested by commenters.

In view of a recent petition from a meat and poultry industry

association, FSIS is also willing to review similar protocols for

obtaining data on processes for the chilling of raw meat carcasses and

parts.

DATES: Comments on the protocol specifications discussed in this

document should be received on or before January 8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and two copies of comments to FSIS

Docket Clerk, DOCKET #97-052, Room 102 Cotton Annex Building, 300 12th

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Patricia F. Stolfa, Assistant

Deputy Administrator for Regulations and Inspection Methods

Development, FSIS, Room 402 Annex Building, Washington, DC 20250-3700;

(202) 205-0699.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FSIS carries out the mandates of the Federal

Meat Inspection Act (FMIA; 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and the Poultry

Products Inspection Act (PPIA; 21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.) to ensure that

meat, meat food, and poultry products prepared for interstate and

foreign commerce are wholesome, not adulterated, and properly marked,

labeled, and packaged. The Agency maintains continuous inspection

oversight of operations in meat and poultry slaughtering and processing

establishments. Among the requirements enforced by the Agency are those

having to do with the post-evisceration handling and storage of

carcasses and parts.

Dressed carcasses typically move through washes and sprays to

remove slaughter debris and foreign matter before being conveyed to

chilled, refrigerated, or frozen. FSIS regulations governing the

chilling of livestock and poultry carcasses reflect accepted commercial

practices. Prior to shipment, livestock carcasses have traditionally

been air-chilled and shipped in refrigerated trucks or railroad cars;

they are commonly divided into primal and subprimal parts at the

slaughtering establishment, cut-up, or boned-out and boxed before being

shipped frozen or refrigerated. Prior to shipment, livestock carcasses

are usually held in large cooling rooms and may be subject to spraying

or ``misting'' processes intended to prevent them from shrinking. It is

technologically feasible and commercially practical to air-chill

livestock carcasses, combining this process with a spray system in a

manner that, on average, does not result in an increase in the carcass

weight. The regulations affecting chilled livestock carcasses and parts

concern the sanitation conditions of storage or transport.

Poultry carcasses have traditionally been immersion-chilled and are

shipped as chill-packed, ice-packed, or frozen. The poultry chilling

regulations require that carcasses be chilled to 40 deg.F or less

within a specified time after slaughter and limit the amount of

retained water in product.

Poultry carcasses are chilled in immersion chilling tanks filled

with water or water and ice to remove animal heat and inhibit microbial

growth. Modern chillers are equipped with refrigeration units and

systems for controlling water flow volume, direction, and agitation.

They are efficient and effective, but inevitably, immersion-chilled

poultry carcasses absorb water, mostly under the skin. The absorption

of water during chilling has been considered acceptable in good

commercial practice since the 1940's as a trade-off to gain the food-

safety benefits of rapid chilling. The immersion chilling of poultry

was considered good commercial practice in 1957, when Congress enacted

the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.) (PPIA).

The Department promulgated regulations limiting moisture absorption

in poultry in 1959, 1961, and 1970 (December 1, 1959, 24 FR 9566; July

19, 1961, 26 FR 6471; October 7, 1970, 35 FR 739). The regulations,

covering the various kinds and weight classes of frozen, ice-packed,

and chilled poultry, allow processors flexibility in adjusting their

chilling systems as long as the maximum water absorption limits are not

exceeded. Each processor establishes procedures to comply with the

chilling and water absorption control requirements. Inspectors sample

carcasses each day from each chilling system before washing and after

chilling, and with limited draining time to determine if the poultry is

in compliance with the absorbed moisture limits. If the moisture limits

are exceeded, the poultry is retained until enough moisture has drained

to allow the birds to be in compliance.

As a practical matter, establishments must keep their overall

moisture absorption averages below the maximum limitations to meet the

water absorption limits on a day-to-day basis.

[[Page 64768]]

The average percentage below the limits varies from establishment to

establishment, depending on the individual operation. Most poultry

establishments consistently comply with the water control requirements.

The moisture retention limits and other differences between the

meat and poultry inspection regulations have become a focus of

attention. Early in 1996, for example, FSIS received a petition from

several national livestock industry associations concerning perceived

inequities between the meat and poultry regulations. Among other

issues, the petitioners questioned the difference between water

absorption allowances for meat and for poultry.

FSIS has studied the regulations to determine where the regulatory

treatment of different species can be made the same. In 1992, FSIS

commissioned the Research Triangle Institute (RTI) to compare the two

sets of regulations. In June 1993, RTI issued a comprehensive report,

which attributed the differences on water absorption to ``traditional

industry practice.''1 FSIS has also adopted a regulatory

reform plan that will lead to a consolidated set of regulations that

apply to all inspected species. The Agency's ``Pathogen Reduction;

Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points Systems'' (PR/HACCP) final

rule (61 FR 38806; July 25, 1996) and the recent proposed rulemaking on

sanitation (62 FR 45046; August 25, 1997) are examples of initiatives

in this plan.

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

\1\ From the ``Summary Report'' in RTI Report: Comparison of

USDA Meat and Poultry Regulations. Title 9 CFR: Subchapter A,

Subchapter C, June 1993.

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

In 1994, a group of poultry consumers and red meat producers

brought an action against the Department in a Federal District Court

challenging several differences in the regulatory requirements for meat

and poultry, including the regulations which allow the absorption and

retention of water in chilled poultry.

Plaintiffs in Kenney et al. v. Glickman alleged that poultry

products containing absorbed water were both economically adulterated

and misbranded within the meaning of the PPIA. They also alleged that

the regulations violated the Administrative Procedure Act because they

were arbitrary and capricious when compared to the regulatory

prohibition on absorbed water in meat carcasses. The Court found that

poultry containing absorbed water was not economically adulterated or

misbranded under the PPIA. However, the Court also found that the

regulation specifying moisture absorption and retention limits for

ready-to-cook poultry that is to be frozen, cooked, or consumer-

packaged as whole poultry (9 CFR 381.66(d)(2)) was arbitrary and

capricious because the rulemaking record failed to adequately explain

how the particular water retention levels were set and why meat and

poultry should be treated differently.

Need for Current Data on Chilling and Moisture Retention

The Court left in place the general requirement at 9 CFR

381.66(d)(1) for establishments to minimize moisture absorption and

retention in poultry at the time of packaging. The Court also left

standing the regulations at 9 CFR 381.66 (d)(3)-(d)(6) controlling the

amount of retained moisture in chickens and turkeys that are to be cut

up or ice-packed. But the Court's decision left FSIS with no regulatory

maximum limit for retained moisture in chilled or frozen whole poultry

carcasses.

FSIS believes it is necessary to clarify what percentages, if any,

are permissible in raw meat and poultry, and under what circumstances.

Otherwise, the controversy that was brought to a head in the Kenney

case will remain unresolved--a situation the Agency considers

unsatisfactory. FSIS needs better quantitative information before

considering whether to amend the current requirements limiting moisture

retention in poultry products, and particularly in ready-to-cook whole

birds. For example, FSIS needs baseline data reflecting the performance

capabilities of technology now in use in inspected establishments. The

data should be collected under acceptable protocols in accordance with

the specifications described below.

On October 2, 1997, the American Meat Institute, a trade

association representing meat and poultry slaughtering and processing

establishments, petitioned the Department to allow incidental levels of

moisture in meat and poultry as part of chilling practices that improve

food safety. In view of this petition, FSIS also is willing to consider

data on processes for the chilling of meat carcasses and parts. The

data should be collected under acceptable protocols in accordance with

the specifications described below, as applicable in meat

establishments.

Protocol for Gathering Moisture Retention Data

A protocol should state a purpose. The Agency would prefer that the

purpose be to determine the amount or percentage of moisture absorption

and retention that is inevitable using a particular chilling system

while achieving the regulatory pathogen reduction performance standard

for Salmonella (for chickens) as set forth in the PR/HACCP final rule

and the time/temperature requirements set forth in 9 CFR 381.66.

The protocol should state the type of washing and chilling system

used by the establishment. For poultry establishments, the main chiller

types, identified by the mechanism used to transport the birds through

the chiller or to agitate the water in the chiller, are the drag-

through, the screw type, and the rocker-arm type.

The protocol should also describe the configuration of the chiller

system components, modifications of the components, and steps in the

chilling process. The description should include the number of chillers

in a series and arrangements of chilling system components, and the

number of evisceration lines feeding into a chiller system. If there is

a pre-chilling step in the process, its purpose and the type of

equipment used should be accurately described. Any mechanical or design

changes made to the chilling equipment should be described.

All special features in the chilling process, such as antimicrobial

treatments, should be described. Also, the length and velocity of the

dripping line should be described, as well as the time allowed for

dripping. Any special apparatus, such as a mechanism for squeezing

excessive moisture from chilled birds, should be explained.

Next, the protocol should contain a description of variable factors

in the chilling system that affect water absorption and retention. Such

factors are typically considered to be the time in chiller water, the

water temperature, and agitation. The protocol should consider air

agitation, where applicable.

Additional factors that may affect water-absorption and retention

are scalding temperature and the pressure or amount of buffeting

applied to birds by feather removal machinery, and the resultant

loosening of the skin. Another factor that should be considered is the

method used to open the bird for evisceration. Commenters may suggest

additional factors that should be considered.

The protocol should also state the standards to be met by the

chilling system. For example, the chilling system may be designed

simply to achieve a reduction in temperature of ready-to-cook poultry

to less than 40 deg.F. within the time limit specified by the

regulations, or in less time. As to the standard for pathogen

minimization, the Salmonella pathogen reduction

[[Page 64769]]

standards, as set forth in the PR/HACCP final rule, have been

suggested. Although there is not yet an applicable Salmonella standard

for turkeys, commenters are free to suggest a practicable standard for

use in gathering data on turkeys under the protocols here suggested.

Commenters are also free to suggest the use of other microbiological

targets, such as a standard for reduction in generic E. coli counts or

reductions in numbers of other microorganisms.

Finally, the protocol should describe the testing methods to be

employed both for measuring water absorption and retention and for

sampling and testing product for pathogen reductions. With respect to

the latter, FSIS recommends the methods to be used for E. coli and

Salmonella testing under the PR/HACCP final rule. The number of

samples, the type of samples, the sampling time period and the type of

testing or measurement should be included in the protocol. There also

should be a provision for reporting data obtained, summarizing the

results and drawing conclusions.

FSIS requests that interested parties submit their comments on the

foregoing protocol specifications at their earliest opportunity, and

preferably by the date indicated in the DATES section of this document.

Should FSIS decide to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking on retained

moisture, sound, readily available data will be needed during the

comment period to avoid a protracted rulemaking.

Done at Washington, DC: December 3, 1997.

Thomas J. Billy,

Administrator, Food Safety Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97-32193 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P