Underprocessed RTE Chicken Jerky Product Recalled in Tennessee

A Pigeon Forge, Tenn. establishment, is recalling approximately 23 pounds of ready-to-eat chicken jerky products due to a processing deviation that may have led to underprocessing of products.  The problem was discovered on Oct. 10, 2018 by FSIS inspection program personnel during a records review verification.

https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/recalls-and-public-health-alerts/recall-case-archive/archive/2018/recall-089-2018-release
Jerky Boyz Chicken Jerky Recalls Chicken Jerky Products due to Possible Processing Deviation
Class I Recall 

089-2018
Health Risk: High 

Oct 11, 2018

New Development to Modify Stainless Steel to Prevent Bacterial Growth

A new process was developed in which stainless steel can be modified to prevent the growth of bacteria. This is an interesting new development for application to the medical field.  Is it something that can be applied to food operations?

Technology Networks.com
https://www.technologynetworks.com/applied-sciences/news/stainless-steel-that-is-more-resistant-to-bacteria-296387
Stainless Steel That Is More Resistant to Bacteria
News Jan 17, 2018 | Original Story from the University of Montreal.

Reusable Plastic Containers - Best Practices Guide

 The Reusable Packaging Association (RPA) released a best practices guide for safe use of reusable plastic containers (RPCs).   Reusable containers have become a integral part of the food supply chain, and like other tools/equipment used in the food chain, they can impact food safety.   It is silly to argue this even if there haven't been any outbreaks of illness that have pinpointed the returnable containers as responsible.  Studies have shown that contamination can be carried by the containers, and thus, it can serve as a source of contamination.

So expanding a little on a few keys from this guideline:

• Risk analysis - as part of a HACCP or HARPC analysis, what impact would contamination on the containers have.  Is the food carried in the containers destined for the processing line or is it RTE.  But even if the item is to be processed, contamination by spoilage organisms also needs to be considered.
• Clean - With food items where there is higher risk, whether that be pathogens or spoilage organisms, cleaning is probably necessary.   And this is where there may be an issue....cleaning is not easy.  Equipment that automatically cleans may be expensive, and doing it manually can be a challenge.  But the basics of cleaning for food contact surfaces still apply - remove the solids, clean with an appropriate cleaner, rinse, sanitize, air dry.
• Cover - Once cleaned, that surface can be contaminated if not protected, during both storage and shipping.  Storing in a covered storage area or shipping in a closed trailer to prevent those aerial poop bombers (birds) may be necessary.  Wrapping in plastic may also be necessary.
• Verify - Is cleaning and protective measures for shipping and storage adequate.  Visual observation is important, but microbiological testing can  tell if the sanitation process really works.  Swab testing for APCs may be enough, but sponge sampling for pathogens may also be needed.
• Usage - traceability is important, so follow the accepted practice for labeling the RPCs.

If using RPCs, it needs to be included in your food safety plan.  This guide will give you some...guidance for writing SOPs.


Reusable Packaging Association
http://reusables.org/4613/general/rpa-guidelines-and-best-practices-for-the-safe-use-of-returnable-containers-in-food-supply-chains
RPA Guidelines and Best Practices for the Safe Use of Returnable Containers in Food Supply Chains

The RPA Guidelines and Best Practices for the Safe Use of Returnable Containers in Food Supply Chains was created by the Reusable Packaging Association (RPA) to collectively insure a safe and wholesome food supply chain by users and suppliers of reusable containers. To learn more read RPA Best Practices Guide_FINAL and RPA Guidelines_ FAQs_FINAL

Study - Analyzing Listeria Contamination in a Processing Plant Over Time

Listeria contamination within a processing facility if often an ongoing battle.  In a paper published in the International Journal of Food Microbiology, researchers analyzed Listeria contamination over time in a cheese processing plant.  While they made progress in getting the Listeria contamination under control, they were never able to eliminate it.  In this study, they found that certain species of Listeria are well geared to establish themselves in the facility, making eradication impossible.

International Journal of Food Microbiology
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2014.08.001
L. monocytogenes in a cheese processing facility: Learning from contamination scenarios over three years of sampling

Industry Guidelines for Handling Foodborne Illness Investigation

CIFOR (The Council to Improve Foodborne Outbreak Response) released guidelines for industry to follow in the event of a foodborne illness outbreak investigation. This is very nice resource that warrants a review by every food company.  It provides a thorough review of the steps that occur when there is a foodborne illness that may be associated with an establishment.

The 78 page document lists procedures as well as forms that should be incorporated into a company’s crisis management plan. It details the roles of government and the food establishment in the event of a food emergency.

It was developed through a collaboration of food industry professionals and government authorities including FDA, USDA, and CDC.

Food industry owners or managers, need to print, review, and implement this document as part of the crisis management planning. Then keep it along with the required documentation as part of the company’s proactive action plan in the unfortunate event of the establishment may be involved in food illness outbreak. 

Print it today! 

CIFOR Industry Guidelines

 

HHS News Release 7/30/13

HHS, USDA and the food industry welcome new guidelines promoting industry

Guidelines provide tools for companies aiding government outbreak responders

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/07/20130730b.html

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today commended the Council to Improve Foodborne Outbreak Response (CIFOR) for the new CIFOR Foodborne Illness Response Guidelines for Owners, Operators and Managers of Food Establishments.

Issues with meat processing availability as local demand increases

This USDA-ERS report, Slaughter and Processing Options and Issues for Locally Sourced Meat, (http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/ldp/2012/06Jun/ldpm21601/ldpm21601.pdf), points out what we have seen for some time - the lack of ‘local’ animal processing capabilities. This has become more of an issue as the trend to local food increases. An important point made in the report is whether a local facility can be viable when taking into account potential inconsistency in supply and the difficulty of determining actual consumer demand. Not discussed to any great extent are the regulatory challenges.

 Abstract

Demand for locally sourced meats has increased in recent years, although it remains a small share of total demand. This report evaluates the availability of slaughter and processing facilities for local meat production and the extent to which these may constrain or support growth in demand for locally sourced meats. Types, number, location, and other salient characteristics of slaughter and processing facilities are outlined by State. Further disaggregation of facilities by capacity and annual volume by species also provides information on slaughter and processing options for local meat producer/marketers. Findings suggest that access to Federal or State-inspected slaughter and processing facilities is limited in some parts of the country. In addition, alternative small-scale slaughter and processing facilities may not be economically feasible in all areas due to a lack of consistent throughput. Alternative methods for slaughter and processing geared toward local markets—such as the use of mobile slaughter units (MSUs) and local and regional market aggregators—can help meet some of the need for increased slaughter and processing capacity in localized areas and enable the growth of small livestock producers marketing product to consumers in their region or community. However, growth in small-scale slaughter and processing facilities depends on whether producers in need of these services can provide enough throughput, for enough of the year, and pay a high enough fee for the services to make such facilities economically viable. This, in turn, depends on the strength of consumer demand for local meats in the coming years.

Underweight meat items results in fine

Kraft recently received some bad publicity for selling packages of food that were deemed underweight by Wisconsin Department of Agriculture. One can be certain that the company was not trying to take advantage of the consumer. Rather, issues happened during processing that impacted pack weight, in this case, the product may have been cooked a little more and thus drove off more moisture.

Each year, a company of two will be caught selling underweight units and then publicly chastised by the press. Each case occurs in roughly the same way. State officials, who regulate retail, pull a dozen or so product units from the store shelf and then weigh the contents of the package to see if those packages meet label weight. In this case, a number of units were below weight.   

In general, the companies try to minimize the give-away (weight above the stated label weight). Weight loss must be factored in (moisture loss through the package, purge, etc). Process variation must be calculated. Taking all this into account, a target weight is determined. Now there will be a few packages that are underweight, but in general, these conditions must be met. For any sample lot (a dozen or so units from a lot), the average weight must exceed label weight, the number of containers at or above weight must be greater than the number of units below weight, and no containers must be more than the MAV (maximum allowable variance).

Those who package food should be aware of Handbook 133 (good document to download and keep on file)
http://dps.sd.gov/licensing/weights_and_measures/images/NISTHandbook133.pdf


Kraft fined for underweight Oscar Mayer packageshttp://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/story/2012-05-08/kraft-fined-over-oscar-meyer-packaging-weight/54844906/1

MADISON, Wis. (AP)–Kraft Foods Group has paid a fine of nearly $37,000 to settle allegations of short-weight Oscar Mayer meats found in Wisconsin stores.

State inspectors found 24 packages of Oscar Mayer meats that were below their stated weight. The packages were found in Wisconsin stores between last August and this February.
An official of the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection calls the shortages "very significant."

None were packaged at the Madison factory of Oscar Mayer, which is based in Madison.

A Kraft spokeswoman tells the Wisconsin State Journal some oven heat changes and other manufacturing changes "resulted in unplanned and unwanted variances." She says corrections have been made.

As part of the civil forfeiture agreement, Northfield, Ill.-based Kraft did not admit to violating any Wisconsin laws.