USDA gives Washington Post 'four Pinocchios'
Jared DuBach, Voice Correspondent
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Sharp criticism and pushback against news reporters by the executive branch was until recently relegated to President Donald Trump and his communications team. But on Monday, the otherwise placid U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service took aim at The Washington Post following the newspaper's recent report on proposals to change pork inspection rules.
The FSIS — which typically publishes consumer food product warnings and recall notices — issued a condemnation citing nine instances of false statements within an April 3 Washington Post story titled "Pork industry to gain power over inspections." The media release, which is attributed collectively to the FSIS Office of Congressional and Public Affairs, begins with the statement: "The Washington Post says that democracy dies in darkness. If that's the case, then The Washington Post's story about the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is a solar eclipse."
The article by the Washington Post addresses concerns by advocacy groups and former USDA veterinary officials as the USDA FSIS moves forward with proposed changes to the meat inspection process. The story by The Post compares meat inspections to aviation regulations and collectively asserts changes in both industry regulations are part of a greater Trump administration initiative. However, the FSIS contends that much of The Post's article contains information that is simply not correct. At one point, the FSIS states The Post earns "four Pinocchios," referring to the children's story of the wooden puppet that came to life with a nose that grew every time it told a lie.
The original Washington Post article can be read online at: https://wapo.st/2Ub3gZB.
The USDA's condemnation of The Post article can be read online at: https://bit.ly/2OWB6R2
Despite claims in The Post's story that meat inspection responsibilities will be shifted to plant employees under the proposed inspection change, FSIS asserts only federal inspectors can do meat inspections.
"To imply otherwise is sloppy, inaccurate and reckless," the media release states.
FSIS also countered the inference by The Post that the Trump administration was using results from the pilot program to shift inspections back to the private sector. Proposed inspection process changes come after 20 years (beginning in 1999) of conducting a pilot program called the HACCP-Based Inspection Model Project (HIMP) in five market hog processing plants.
The Excel Corporation facility in Beardstown is among those five, according to the USDA. Although USDA lists the facility as "Excel Corporation," it currently goes by the name Swift Pork Company under JBS USA ownership after the facility was bought from Cargill in 2015 according to a Cargill media statement and industry news reports. The pork processor is located at 8295 Arenzville Road in Beardstown.
According to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, JBS/Swift Pork was issued fines totaling $12,504 on March 28, 2019, for a case opened Nov. 28, 2018. The case status is pending abatement of violations. Although specific details of the violation are not available through OSHA's online search, two violations were found with one being "serious." The official industry standard cited in serious violation is 19100212 A03 II, which states a point of operation of machines that exposes an employe to injury shall be guarded.
The proposed Modernization of Swine Slaughter Inspection rules, first made public in February 2018, includes a voluntary opt-in inspection system called New Swine Slaughter Inspection System (NSIS) for market hog processing establishments and separate mandatory testing requirements for all hog establishments.
A statement by Acting Deputy Under-Secretary for Food Safety Carmen Rottenberg reads: "In this proposal, USDA would also amend the regulations that apply to all establishments that slaughter swine. The new requirements would ensure that establishments implement measures to control enteric pathogens that can cause food-borne illness. Specifically, all swine slaughter establishments would be required to implement appropriate measures to prevent contamination throughout the entire production process in their Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans, Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures (Sanitation SOPs), or other prerequisite programs. The new requirements would ensure that both USDA and the establishment have the documentation they need to verify the effectiveness of these measures on an ongoing basis."
"FSIS is excited to continue modernizing inspection practices, while allowing opportunities for industry to innovate and streamline food production," said Rottenberg. "There is no single technology or process to address the problem of food-borne illness, but when we focus our inspections on food safety-related tasks, we better protect American families."
The NSIS system would increase "offline USDA inspection tasks," while continuing 100 percent FSIS carcass-by-carcass inspection. The move to offline inspection areas will still place inspectors in areas of the production process where they can "perform critical tasks that have direct impact on food safety," according to Rottenberg's 2018 statement.
Under the USDA FSIS proposal and traditional inspection procedure, processing facility employees sort market hogs prior to federal inspection. Some animals may not be presented for inspection as long as they are not processed for market. According to the FSIS, "This is consistent with current policy for establishments under traditional inspection. It's important to understand that under the proposal, establishment employees will not conduct inspections, and they will not condemn animals."
FSIS also countered The Posts's claim that the number of federal inspectors would be reduced by 40 percent.
"Should the proposed rule become final, federal inspectors won't be performing quality assurance tasks," the FSIS statement reads. "Instead they would be able to focus on critically important activities." In other words, federal inspectors would still be responsible for inspecting meat for signs of disease or contamination; not necessarily for quality or visual appeal of meat.
FSIS further accused The Post of "deliberately misleading readers because the facts did not fit their headline and opinion" with regard to testing for salmonella and E. coli bacteria in hogs.
"As we explained in the proposed rule, FSIS discontinued its Salmonella verification sampling program for market hogs (carcasses) in 2011. Why? Because we were finding very low rates of Salmonella on whole carcasses," the FSIS statement read. "FSIS is removing the carcass Salmonella performance standards for market hogs in the proposed rule because 1) the standards have not been used since 2011, and 2) the standards were not being verified because of the low rates of Salmonella on whole carcasses. What is true is that FSIS is currently testing pork cuts and other pork products (different from whole carcasses) for Salmonella and will decide in 2019 whether to develop new pathogen performance standards for these products or take other actions to address Salmonella in these products. This is in line with what we told the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in public documents."
Moving federal inspectors to areas offline (not at the main production line) raised concerns that a lack of USDA inspectors directly on the processing or production line may lead to an increase in worker injuries. U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, D-Ill., along with 16 other Democrats, recently sent a letter to the USDA inspector general demanding an investigation into why the USDA did not disclose data publicly until after the public comment period had passed. According to the report by The Post, FSIS analysis and data were not made public and had to be obtained through public information request by National Employment Law Project. Texas State University researchers, after analyzing the data stated, "it is impossible for FSIS to draw any statistically valid conclusion about worker injury rate differences."
"Using flawed data, the USDA is rushing to approve a rule concerning slaughter rates on hog farms, and it could jeopardize worker safety for a job that already comes with considerable risks and dangers," Durbin said in a statement to The Washington Post. "The safety of tens of thousands of workers in pork processing plants should be USDA's priority, and right now it clearly isn't."
In its response to The Post story, FSIS stated it is concerned with worker safety, but confirmed it is not responsible for workplace safety and health, as that is the responsibility of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
The USDA FSIS' Modernization of Swine Slaughter Inspection proposal can be found online at: https://bit.ly/2nNbrxT. The docket along with related documents is located at the bottom of the web page.
For questions or comments, email editor@mcdonoughvoice.com.