Continuous Chilling of Split Poultry Portions

SUMMARY: FSIS is amending the poultry products inspection regulations

to specify that the continuous immersion chilling of the front or rear

portions of transversely-split carcasses is permitted. The existing

regulations permit the continuous chilling of whole carcasses or

``major portions,'' including front or rear portions, resulting from

trimming or salvage. The final rule defines ``major portions'' to

include the front or rear portions of transversely-split carcasses,

without identifying the operation creating the portions. This change

will afford flexibility to poultry establishments in adopting efficient

production techniques, such as on-line carcass splitting, that meet

food safety performance standards. This final rule is compatible with

FSIS initiatives addressing fecal contamination and moisture absorption

of raw poultry products.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 10, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Alice Thaler, Chief, Concepts and

Design Branch, Inspection Methods Development Division, Office of

Policy, Program Development, and Evaluation, (202) 720-3219.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The poultry products inspection regulations contain general and

specific requirements for the chilling of ready-to-cook poultry. The

current regulations (at 9 CFR 381.66(b)(2)) require that poultry

carcasses, and major portions of poultry carcasses, that is, ``parts of

major size, either front or rear portions, wherein the major portion of

the poultry carcass remains intact,'' be chilled to 40 deg.F. or lower

within a specific time, depending on the weight of the bird. The

regulations state that partial trimming and salvage of poultry

carcasses often result in these major portions (9 CFR

381.66(c)(2)(iv)). Trimming operations remove some part of a poultry

carcass. For example, a broken wing may be trimmed from a breast.

Salvage operations, on the other hand, are intended to save a portion

of the carcass by cutting it away from an unacceptable portion. An

example of a salvage procedure is the splitting of the carcass into

front and rear portions to save the breast portion while condemning the

rear portion that has become adulterated.

The regulations governing the chilling of poultry parts, including

the provisions addressing ``major portions,'' were intended to prevent

the marketing of products containing excessive moisture. Excessive

moisture is a form of economic adulteration . It can occur if, for

example, individual poultry parts, such as drumsticks, thighs, split

breasts, or split halves (carcasses split longitudinally along the

sternum into ``mirror image'' portions), are permitted to be cooled in

continuous immersion chillers. Under most current processing

conditions, such individual parts are likely to absorb more water than

``major portions.'' Under 9 CFR 381.66(c)(2)(iv), these individual

parts may be cooled only in the air, in ice, or under a spray of water

with continuous draining. The regulation does, however, permit whole

carcasses and major portions of carcasses to be cooled in continuous

chillers, provided that the moisture absorption limits prescribed in 9

CFR 381.66 are not exceeded.

The issue in this rulemaking is whether 9 CFR 381.66 should permit

the immersion chilling of split poultry portions that are created by

procedures other than trimming or salvage.

Establishments that have tested transversely-split-carcass

processing methods under FSIS supervision have achieved favorable

results in keeping water absorption low, in chilling product rapidly to

a safe temperature, and in maintaining product wholesomeness. Proper

application of these carcass splitting methods yields product that is

not adulterated, even though, like the whole carcass, the front or rear

portions of transversely-split carcasses absorb incidental amounts of

moisture when placed in continuous chillers. This is true whether the

portion was created by trimming, salvage operations, or a procedure

such as on-line carcass-splitting.

Nonetheless, 9 CFR 381.66 was developed during the late 1960's and,

on its face, it reflects the production and market conditions of that

period, when poultry industry operations were oriented primarily toward

the marketing of whole birds. At that time, the sale of poultry parts

constituted a minor segment of the raw poultry market. Consequently, it

does not make any provision for chilling of split carcasses produced by

means other than trimming and salvage.

FSIS tentatively determined that the regulatory provision for

chilling major portions should be revised to specifically include

transversely-split carcass portions, as described above, regardless of

the operation used to create the portions. On June 6, 1997, FSIS

proposed to amend the regulations to modify the definition of ``major

portion'' to include transversely-split-carcasses and carcasses from

which small pieces have been removed. The proposal was not intended,

however, to affect the existing regulatory restrictions on the chilling

of individual parts.

Comments on the Proposal

FSIS received six letters commenting on the proposal. Two were from

poultry processing companies, one was from a company that processes

both meat and poultry, and three were from trade associations.

One letter strongly objected to the proposal and suggested that it

be ``set aside,'' at least until the completion of rulemaking

addressing the larger regulatory issues concerning water absorption by

poultry. The other five letters supported the proposal in general but

suggested modifications to the proposal.

A poultry processor, an association representing the turkey

industry, and an association representing meat and poultry producers

and processors suggested that the scope of the proposed rule be

broadened to permit the continuous chilling of split halves and other

poultry parts. They argued that such a change would give greater

flexibility to, and encourage innovation by, the poultry industry;

would have the same advantages for the inspection service and food

safety as the proposal; and would be consistent with Agency policy to

reduce command-and-control regulations. They also pointed out that

regulations limiting retained moisture would continue to apply to

continuously chilled parts. The meat and poultry association said there

should be a single standard for incidental moisture, without regard to

poultry portion or part.

The two poultry processors and the turkey association also

requested that the Agency consider amending the regulations to reduce

the minimum amount of fresh water intake per bird in continuous

immersion chillers. They argued that because major portions are smaller

than whole birds, the required minimum gallons of fresh water per bird

should be proportionally reduced. The turkey association also asserted

that the current regulations permit the

[[Page 48959]]

adjustment of fresh water intake according to the proportion of the

carcass chilled. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FSIS

is proposing new moisture-retention requirements for raw meat and

poultry products and changes in the regulations on poultry chilling

that include removing the required minimum amount of fresh water intake

per bird.

The letter objecting to the proposed rule was submitted by three

associations representing, respectively, cattle producers and beef

establishments, pork producers, and the sheep industry. These

associations called the proposal ``inappropriate'' and asked that it be

``set aside'' pending a rulemaking on retained water in poultry

products. They presented four arguments for their position: (1) that

the proposal would increase the percentage of poultry products subject

to immersion chilling and to what the associations view as excess water

absorption; (2) that the Agency did not provide data concerning the

amount of water absorbed by transversely-split carcasses; (3) that the

Agency is affording additional flexibility to poultry establishments

while restricting beef processors using spray chill systems to zero-

percent carcass weight gain from water retention; and (4) that, before

proceeding with a rulemaking on the chilling of split poultry portions,

FSIS should amend the regulations on water retention by poultry

products that were set aside July 23, 1997, by order of a Federal

district court in Kenney v. Glickman. As mentioned, elsewhere in this

issue of the Federal Register, FSIS is proposing new retained-water

requirements for raw meat and poultry products.

As noted in the preamble, the proposal clarifying the regulations

regarding the chilling of transversely-split carcasses. (62 FR 31019).

It was developed to address an issue concerning the interpretation of

regulations governing the chilling of ``parts of major size'' or

``major portions'' of poultry resulting from trimming or salvage. Some

persons had interpreted the regulations as not permitting the

continuous chilling of major portions that did not result from trimming

or salvage operations (62 FR 31018). To correct that interpretation,

FSIS proposed to amend the regulations to specify that the immersion

chilling of major portions is permitted, regardless of whether the

portions were the result of trimming, salvage, or other handling of

carcasses. It proposed to define ``major portions'' to include

transversely-split poultry carcasses.

The suggestion that the regulations be further amended to permit

the continuous chilling of split halves and other poultry parts may

have merit and perhaps should be considered, but it is outside the

scope of this rulemaking. FSIS was able to determine that methods used

in continuously chilling transversely-split poultry portions yield

product that complies with the water absorption and retention

regulations. As indicated in the preamble to the proposal (62 FR

31019), establishments using such methods under FSIS supervision

achieved favorable results in keeping water absorption low. Because the

Agency had observed the application of these processing methods to the

chilling of transversely-split portions, and because the portions so

processed were consistently in compliance with the regulations

controlling retained moisture, the Agency believed there was a sound

basis for proposed rule.

In sum, the purpose of this rulemaking is to clarify the meaning

and applicability of the existing regulations with respect to the

chilling of major portions. The Agency has significant evidence to

support this clarification. The commenters' request to permit the

continuous chilling of all kinds of poultry parts is outside the scope

of this rulemaking. While this issue may warrant consideration in a

future rulemaking, it is not appropriately before the Agency in this

proceeding.

The Agency did not intend to address, in the rulemaking, the

possiblity of changing the required minimum fresh water intake for

continuous chillers. This issue is outside the scope of the rulemaking

that the Agency instituted with the June 6, 1997, proposal.

Regarding the comments by the three livestock associations opposing

the proposed rule, FSIS responds as follows:

(1) As noted above, the purpose of this rulemaking is to clarify

the existing regulation, not to expand the percentage of product that

would be able to absorb moisture during the chilling process. In fact,

as noted in the third point of our response below, the proposed could

result in less immersion-chilled product. The proposal was developed to

address an issue concerning the interpretation of regulations governing

the chilling of ``parts of major size'' or ``major portions'' of

poultry resulting from trimming or salvage.

(2) The Agency based the proposal on findings that continuously

chilled transversely-split portions are in compliance with retained

moisture requirements. As noted in the preamble to the proposal,

results of in-plant trials of transversely-split carcasses processed

under FSIS supervision showed that product was chilled rapidly to a

safe temperature, and that water absorption was within the limits

established by the Agency's regulations. The Agency had sufficient

retained-moisture data from these trials to make an informed decision

on the continuous chilling of transversely-split carcass portions. The

data was available for viewing in the FSIS Docket Room during the

public comment period.

(3) It is true that the proposal concerned only a limited class of

poultry products, and that efficiency gains would be realized only by

poultry establishments. However, the limited scope of the proposal does

not preclude future consideration of changes that would address a wider

range of meat and poultry products. (As previously mentioned, a

proposed rule on poultry chilling standards and retained moisture in

raw meat and poultry products is being published elsewhere in this

issue of the Federal Register.)

The efficiency gains foreseen by the Agency would result primarily

from the use of automation and large-scale processing techniques to

make front and rear portions available for a variety of uses. For

example, the use of the rear, dark-meat portions, for processing into

such products as turkey salami and turkey ham, was discussed in the

preamble (62 FR 31018). An efficiency gain sought with respect to these

dark-meat portions would involve routing them past the immersion

chilling step altogether (62 FR 31018). The front, or white-meat

portions, on the other hand, would be permitted to enter the continuous

chillers. Since the rear portions constitute 40% of carcass weight,

potentially 40% less turkey would be chilled.

(4) While the U.S. District Court's order in Kenney v. Glickman set

aside the moisture retention limits for all classes of poultry to be

marketed as whole birds (9 CFR 381.66(d)(2)), the requirement to

minimize moisture absorption and retention at the time of packaging (9

CFR 381.66(d)(1)) was left in place, as were the moisture absorption

and retention limits for poultry intended to be cut up and for ice-

packed poultry (9 CFR 381.66(d)(3)-(5)). Thus, the moisture retention

limits that would apply to transversely-split poultry portions were

left in place by the Court's order. Split poultry portions are intended

to be routed to cut-up or further processing operations and obviously

cannot be marketed as whole birds.

[[Page 48960]]

The Final Rule

This final rule concerns the application of existing moisture

retention standards to transversely-split carcass portions, rather than

the standards, themselves. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal

Register, FSIS is publishing a proposal that addresses the limits on

moisture absorption and retention in raw meat and poultry carcasses and

parts.

This final rule is limited to clarifying the regulations to

accommodate the processing of transversely-split poultry carcasses. The

rule amends the chilling requirement at Sec. 381.66(b)(2) to apply both

to whole carcasses and to major portions, as defined at proposed

Sec. 381.170(b)(22), which includes transversely-split carcasses. FSIS

is amending Sec. 381.66(b)(2) to refer to the new Sec. 381.170(b)(22)

rather than to Sec. 381.66(c)(2)(iv).

The final rule also amends Sec. 381.66(c)(2)(iv) by removing the

word ``carcasses'' from the term ``split carcasses'' and replacing it

with ``halves.'' As mentioned previously, ``split halves'' is a term

widely used in the poultry industry to denote the left and right halves

of a poultry carcass divided lengthwise. (i.e., carcasses split

longitudinally along the sternum into ``mirror image'' portions). The

amended paragraph continues to prohibit the continuous chilling of

split halves.

FSIS will continue to require establishments creating transversely-

split carcass to meet the same moisture absorption and retention limits

as for whole carcasses. These limits are set forth in 9 CFR

Sec. 381.66(d)(3), Table 3, and Sec. 381.66(d)(4)(ii).

Finally, a new paragraph Sec. 381.170(b)(22) defines ``major

portions'' as carcasses from which small parts may be missing or the

front or rear portions of transversely split carcasses. As mentioned,

the amended Sec. 381.66(b)(2) refers to this new definition.

Executive Order 12866

This final rule has been determined to be not significant and was

not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive

Order 12866.

Executive Order 12988

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,

Civil Justice Reform. States and local jurisdictions are preempted by

the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) from imposing any marking or

packaging requirements on federally inspected poultry products that are

in addition to, or different than, those imposed under the PPIA. States

and local jurisdictions may, however, exercise concurrent jurisdiction

over poultry products that are outside official establishments for the

purpose of preventing the distribution of poultry products that are

misbranded or adulterated under the PPIA, or, in the case of imported

articles, which are not at such an establishment, after their entry

into the United States.

This final rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.

There are no applicable administrative procedures that must be

exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this

rule. However, the administrative procedures specified in 9 CFR

Sec. 381.35 must be exhausted prior to any judicial challenge of the

application of the provisions of this proposed rule, if the challenge

involves any decision of an FSIS employee relating to inspection

services provided under the PPIA.

Effect on Small Entities

The Administrator has determined that this final rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small

entities, as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601).

This final rule will not impose any additional requirements on poultry

processors. Compliance with this final rule is voluntary; poultry

processors that intentionally split poultry carcasses into major

portions as a result of a trimming or salvage operation do not have to

cool the product using ice and water in a continuous chiller. They may

cool major portions using air, ice, or under a spray of water with

continuous drainage. Poultry processors opting to chill major parts

resulting from production techniques such as on-line carcass-splitting

could do so in a continuous ice and water chiller. This would allow

them to appropriately handle the separated carcass portions immediately

after splitting. The white meat portion could immediately be chilled to

the proper temperature for further processing or direct sale to

consumers, while the dark meat portion, which is usually processed,

could be directly deboned and used in further processed cooked

products.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 381

Poultry and poultry products.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, FSIS is amending 9 CFR

part 381, as follows:

PART 381--POULTRY PRODUCTS INSPECTION REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 381 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 138f; 7 U.S.C. 450; 21 U.S.C. 451-470; 7 CFR

2.18, 2.53.

2. Section 381.66 is amended by revising the first sentence of

paragraph (b)(2); by removing the first and second sentences of

paragraph (c)(2)(iv) and adding in their place one sentence; and, in

the last sentence of (c)(2)(iv), by removing the words ``from salvage

operations,'' and by replacing the word ``carcasses'' with the word

``halves'' to read as follows:

Sec. 381.66 Temperatures and chilling and freezing procedures.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) Major portions of poultry carcasses, as defined in

Sec. 381.170(b)(22), and poultry carcasses shall be chilled to 40 deg.

F. or lower within the following specified times: * * *

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(iv) Major portions of poultry carcasses, as defined in

Sec. 381.170(b)(22), may be chilled in water and ice, including

chilling in continuous chillers. * * *

* * * * *

3. Paragraph (b)(22) is added to Sec. 381.170 to read as follows:

Sec. 381.170 Standards for kinds and classes, and for cuts of raw

poultry.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(22) ``Major portions'' of eviscerated poultry carcasses are either

carcasses from which parts may be missing, or the front or rear

portions of transversely-split carcasses.

Done at Washington, DC, on September 3, 1998.

Thomas J. Billy,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98-24308 Filed 9-8-98; 12:22 pm]

BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P