MEAT+POULTRY - April 2015 - 14

WA S H I N G T O N

Advisors' idle hands at issue
Most federal government departments and agencies have
"advisory committees" that are set up to help them carry
out their responsibilities. Some are made up of experts in
areas related to the government department they advise.
Other committees' members come from a wide variety of
backgrounds that would be helpful to the department or
agency in accomplishing its work.
The Secretary of Agriculture appoints an advisory
committee for the US Dept. of Agriculture's (USDA) Food
Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS) that concentrates on
meat and poultry inspection. The
National Advisory Committee
on Meat and Poultry Inspection
(NACMPI) is assigned to look at
how FSIS carries out its regulation
and inspection duties. It's
supposed to advise the secretary
on issues affecting federal and
state inspection.
Unlike some other government
advisory committees, the
members of NACMPI come from a
wide variety of backgrounds, and
"The committee represent most of the competing
interests the meat and poultry
is supposed
inspection agency has to deal
to serve as
with. That's intentional. The idea
is for the secretary of agriculture
a forum for
and FSIS officials to be exposed
significant
to all the issues and arguments
sharing of
affecting how meat and poultry
inspection is carried out.
ideas and
According to USDA, the
insight..."
committee is supposed to serve
as a forum for significant sharing of ideas and insight
about how the meat and poultry regulatory system can
best serve both consumers and industry. In fact, the
membership of the advisory committee has been widened,
with members of the advisory committee coming from
organizations and interests representing consumers,
big companies and small processors, academia, state
agriculture and health departments and even one member
listed as a "private individual."
This all sounds good. But the problem is that USDA
gives its advisory committee very little to do. The
organization meets very infrequently. In fact, during

14

MEAT+ POULTRY | 04.15 | www.meatpoultry.com

the past six years, NACMPI has met only once a year.
And when it does meet, USDA doesn't give the advisory
committee much of a workload.

EXAMINING ISSUES
Take the most-recent meeting, which took place in
Washington, DC on Jan. 13-14. The committee looked at
two issues: (1) How FSIS evaluates and manages chemical
hazards within the National Residue Program, and (2) A
cost-calculation model for the Economic Research Service.
FSIS wanted NACMPI to provide feedback on how the
agency is managing chemical hazards within the residue
program. Specifically, the agency wants to know if the
committee agrees with the agency approach, and if not,
what it should do. The committee said it supports the
program, but thinks FSIS needs to tell its stakeholders
- industry, consumers, the public and others - what the
National Residue Program is and why it's important...if it is.
Then the committee got into more specifics about what how
the agency could do this.
But the real question is how important to public health
is the National Residue Program? Since there's a been a
great ignorance about it and FSIS hasn't exactly killed itself
to tell the world about the program, how important is it
really to the base mission of FSIS, which is to make sure
that meat, poultry and processed egg products are safe for
American consumers? Since the Economic Research Service
is planning its five-year update of cost-of-illness estimates,
FSIS wants to know what additional hazards should be
considered. Then FSIS asked the committee how it should
develop disease estimates if the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) doesn't have such estimates.
The committee said it believes the current list of 15
pathogens is adequate. Well, what else was the committee
going to say about the list of 15 pathogens? It also
recommended FSIS continue to work with CDC to identify
disease estimates. What else would the committee say,
except that CDC should develop them because it's the
agency in charge of doing that.
I've watched the NACMPI for a long time and attended
some of its meetings. There's been criticism of FSIS by
committee members because sometimes members didn't
even receive meeting materials until the day of the meeting.
The committee could be very helpful in improving poultry
and meat inspection in the US. The committee needs to meet
more frequently and be given more important work to do.
B E R N A R D S H I R E | MEATPOULTRY@SOSL AND.COM
http://www.meatpoultry.com
MEAT+POULTRY - April 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of MEAT+POULTRY - April 2015
