Tag Archives: Food Code

Nerd alert: US FDA releases supplement to the 2013 Food Code

Posted on by
Reply

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued the Supplement to the 2013 Food Code. The update addresses recommendations made by regulatory officials, industry, academia, and consumers at the 2014 Biennial Meeting of the Conference for Food Protection.

nerd.finance.barfblogThe Food Code and its Supplement provide government and industry with practical, science-based controls for reducing the risk of foodborne illness in retail and foodservice establishments of all types. The Food Code and the Supplement are joint projects of the FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the United States Department of Agriculture – Food Safety Inspection Service.

The Supplement modifies the 2013 Food Code to:

Expand the duties of the Person in Charge in a food establishment to include overseeing the routine monitoring of food temperatures during hot and cold holding.

Expand and clarify the type of information that should be included when a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Plan is required by a regulatory authority.

Emphasize that cleaning and sanitizing agents should be provided and available for use during all hours of operation.

Clarify the difference between Typhoid Fever and nontyphoidal Salmonellosis with regard to the reporting of illness and the exclusion and restriction of ill food employees.

Suggest that regulatory authorities ensure that inspection staff has access to the necessary training and continuing education.

The Food Code is the model for retail food regulations in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The FDA encourages its state, local, tribal, and territorial partners to adopt the latest version of the FDA Food Code, including the Supplement to the 2013 Food Code.

FDA’s National Retail Food Team assists regulatory officials, educators, and industry in their efforts to understand, adopt, and implement, the FDA Food Code. Inquiries may be sent to: retailfoodprotectionteam@fda.hhs.gov or directly to a Regional Retail Food Specialist.

The 2013 FDA Food Code and its Supplement is available on the FDA website at http://www.fda.gov/FoodCode. 

 

 

‘It’s a macho thing’ Inspecting the inspectors in Ohio

Posted on by
Reply

Friend of the barfblog, Pete Snyder, president of Snyder HACCP, a food safety consulting firm near St. Paul, Minn., told WCPO Cincinnati, “The food code is supposed to be uniform everywhere, but it’s only as uniform as the local inspector.”

pete.snyderDifferences in the restaurant population accounts for much of the variation between jurisdictions, but Snyder said some departments are just more aggressive than others.

“There’s always been in the 30 years I’ve been teaching this macho thing. They rate themselves based on how many deficiencies they find.”

When the city of Sharonville shut down its health department at the end of 2014, food inspection scores dramatically improved at Currie’s Indian restaurant on Lebanon Road.

Hamilton County’s Public Health Department, which took over restaurant inspections for Sharonville this year, cited three violations in a Feb. 12 visit to Curries and no violations on Feb. 24. That’s a far cry from the 24 violations cited by Sharonville inspectors Nov. 19. Or the 23 violations that followed in two December visits.

Sharonville inspectors “didn’t like anything,” said Hiral Agrawal, owner of the buffet-style restaurant that has operated in Sharonville Plaza for four years. “They were trying to give me a hard time.”

Sharonville Mayor Kevin Hardman said he wasn’t familiar with Curries’ enforcement history, but he doesn’t recall any complaints about the city’s food inspectors being too aggressive.

Hardman said the dismantling of the city’s health department was “largely a budgetary move” that city council approved Dec. 16. But the performance of the food safety program is one of the factors that made it hard to gain support for the idea.

A WCPO analysis of inspection records from five local health departments shows Agrawal’s account may not be an isolated incident. Inspection results can vary widely by department.

City of Cincinnati inspectors, for example, wrote an average of 1,355 violations in 2014, three times more than those in Warren County. Clermont County inspectors averaged 8.2 violations for every facility they inspected, more than double Warren County’s rate.

This year’s Dirty Dining database has 37,432 violations observed by 42 inspectors at 5,852 food establishments. That’s up from last year’s total of 32,474 violations at 5,579 locations. In 2013, we tracked 33,334 violations at 5,022 facilities.

Florida to adopt 2009 Food Code, no raw/undercooked foods on kids’ menus

Posted on by
Reply

ABC Action News reports that beginning Jan. 1, 2013, Florida’s Division of Hotels and Restaurants is implementing the new 2009 Food Code from the 2001 version. The agency claims it will make the inspection process easier to understand.

It includes a new three-tiered safety and sanitation system of high priority, intermediate and basic violations. This replaces the current critical and non-critical violation system. 

“Either it was critical or non-critical but that put a lot of minor violations into the critical category,” said Chef Clyde Tanner. Tanner is the Academic Director at the Art Institute of Tampa’s Culinary School and he already teaches the new rules. He says they better evaluate a kitchen’s conditions. 
“The high priority items are critical violations that will most likely lead to a foodborne illness. The intermediate is for violations that could potentially lead, if not corrected. And the bottom tier is just for minor violations,” Tanner explained. 

The new 2009 Food Code will also prohibit serving raw or undercooked foods on a children’s menu and Tanner says that’s important as kids are more susceptible to pathogens. 
“This is just for their safety and it decreases the liabilities against restaurants and does protect our children,” Tanner said. 

We don’t need no stinking bare hand rule; Portlandia rebels

Posted on by
2

Taking smugness to a new level, which is a worthy achievement given the level of smugness already found in Oregon, restaurant owners and chefs have successfully delayed a new no-hands rule for food contact.

Michael Russell of OregonLive writes the rule could make dining out more expensive, create waste and, despite its good intentions, do little to protect public health and isn’t safer than the state’s current rigorous handwashing practices.

Except no one has validated whether those handwashing practices are actually followed or just sound smugly superior.

"The idea that using rubber gloves is going to stop people from getting sick is ludicrous," said Andy Ricker, chef and owner of Pok Pok restaurants in Portland and New York. His New York locations already comply with that state’s no bare-hand-contact rule.

"For it to be safe, every time you touch something, you’d have to take your gloves off, wash your hands, and put on new gloves." Ricker said.

At least a half-dozen recent studies have concluded the same: Counter intuitively, wearing gloves does little to prevent the spread of bacteria compared with effective hand washing.

But wearing gloves is not the same as a no-bare-hand contact rule. They’re called tongs (not thongs).

Wearing gloves has been found to reduce the number of times people wash their hands, while warm, moist conditions create a hothouse for bacteria to grow. A 2005 report from the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center that analyzed grilled tortillas found more staph, coliform and other harmful bacteria on the samples prepared by workers wearing gloves.

Eric Pippert, a manager with the Oregon Health Authority’s Foodborne Illness Prevention department, said the measure was created to prevent the spread of norovirus, the most common cause of food poisoning. It’s often spread through improper hand washing by employees after they use the bathroom.

Norovirus spreads easily; a don’t work while sick rule would be more effective at reducing the spread of norovirus (ask Harvard or Heston).

In response to those who favor hand washing, Pippert points to a 2003 health authority survey in which restaurant inspectors found at least one hand-washing violation at nearly two-thirds of Oregon eateries.

"Anybody who tells you hand washing is so darned good, well, yeah, except when you’re not doing it," he said.

But restaurant owners argue that handwashing has since been drilled into cooks across the state. And they contend the rule — which will affect bakeries and barrooms, fine dining and food carts — would make gloves mandatory for many tasks, creating new headaches and new costs in a notoriously low-margin business. And those added costs might end up passed along to customers.

When asked for his thoughts on the new rule, sushi chef Bruce Lee at Hillsboro’s Syun Izakaya replied, "When’s that happening again, in January?"

For Lee, wearing gloves presents a concern beyond potential health risks.
"If you wear the glove, you’re not able to feel the rice tenderness, or softness," he said. "Even wasabi — you can feel how much you need with your fingers. But if you wear the glove, you’re never going to feel it.

"If I had a choice, I wouldn’t wear it."

And I wouldn’t want anyone temping food with their fingers.

Young E. coli victim to speak to Arizona county supervisors on food safety

Posted on by
Reply

On June 4, 2012, Brian Supalla, health program manager at Yavapai County Community Health Services went before the supervisor-types to discuss plans to introduce the 2009 FDA Food Code to the area.

Supalla wasn’t far into his PowerPoint presentation when he mentioned one of the provisions of the new code – that restaurants would not be allowed to offer hamburgers cooked less than well-done on their children’s menus.

He said that’s because kids don’t have well-developed immune systems and are more susceptible to food-borne illnesses.

But Supervisor Chip Davis stopped him. "Do we have a lot of kids getting sick in Yavapai County from eating rare hamburgers?" Davis asked.

Couldn’t find one of those but did find a kid sickened by E. coli O157:H7 in the 2006 spinach outbreak.

As reported by the Verde Independent, Community Health Services Director Robert Resendes asked the family of Jacob Goswick, a Prescott Valley eighth-grader who was in the second grade when he ate spinach contaminated with E. coli bacteria, if Jacob would testify at the meeting.

Jacob spent two months in Phoenix Children’s Hospital – one month on dialysis – after his kidneys shut down, which is one of the potential side effects of food poisoning.

Since the spinach E. coli outbreak in 2006, both Jacob and his mother, Juliana Goswick, have lobbied in Washington, D.C., to improve food safety.

In his email to the Goswicks, Resendes said, "To have a family of your caliber and unfortunate compelling experience (speak to the board) would be ideal for the cause."

He said that experience would show the supervisors "that indeed foodborne illnesses can and do affect area residents and that some of the newer pathogens, e.g., E. coli, are particularly dangerous to children."

Juliana said she and Jacob would be willing to appear at the meeting, on Monday.

Giving thanks to local public health types

Posted on by
1

The daily grind for health department professionals is underappreciated.

Armchair quarterbacks are quick to point out the failings of health types without recognizing the pressures of a standard epidemiological investigation, along with requirements to test pools, investigate dog bites, and soothe political egos.

As reported by The Daily Courier, Brian Supalla went before the Yavapai County Board of Supervisors Monday (that’s in Arizona) with new food safety regulations expecting a rubber stamp.

Instead, he found himself under fire.

Supalla, county health program manager, was holding a "courtesy public hearing" intended to introduce the board to the 2009 FDA Food Code – safety regulations which the Yavapai County Community Health Services Board of Health wants the supervisors to adopt.

Supalla wasn’t far into his PowerPoint presentation when he mentioned one of the provisions of the new code – that restaurants would not be allowed to offer hamburgers cooked less than well-done on their children’s menus.

He said that’s because kids don’t have well-developed immune systems and are more susceptible to food-borne illnesses.

But Supervisor Chip Davis stopped him. "Do we have a lot of kids getting sick in Yavapai County from eating rare hamburgers?" Davis asked.

"That’s a difficult question to answer," Supalla said, because most people who become ill from contaminated food will never go to a doctor. "In the 15 years I have been with the county, we have never had a death reported to us determined to be associated with food (contamination)," he said.

Supalla went back to his presentation, outlining the changes to be adopted.
When he was finished, Supervisor Carol Springer spoke up.

"I have a real problem with this," she said. "How did all of us manage to survive without health departments?"

With that door open, she began to talk about events like farmers’ markets and chili cook-offs, which are not specifically addressed by the food code changes.

"I think that’s kind of a trend these days, and we’ve had a number of complaints about the health department stepping in," Springer said. "I’m having a real problem with our county health department saying, ‘No, you can’t have this kind of event’ because you’re serving some food product."

Supalla, unprepared for the topic, did his best to answer Springer, but she pressed on.

"I think this is too much government control when you say, ‘You can’t have a salsa contest," she said, referring to Cottonwood’s Old Town Sizzlin’ Salsa competition, which was planned for spring.

"We have not disapproved any requests for a chili cook-off or a salsa competition," Supalla replied. "Every facet of that salsa-tasting complaint, our investigation found, was based on a complete misunderstanding by the event organizers," who were new to the event this year.

Davis called the new regulations "burdensome" and said he didn’t "see the necessity to increase to an additional level of scrutiny on the restaurant business."

From the cut leafy greens file: just because it’s hard to enforce doesn’t make it a bad rule

Posted on by
Reply

I’m a fan of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Model Food Code process. Every two years interested folks get together as part of the Conference for Food Protection to discuss the minutiae surrounding food service food safety rules(what temperatures need to be changed and practices augmented). The combatants come armed with new science, references, data and duke it out for a couple of days. At the end of the meeting delegates from each state vote on proposed rule changes and a list gets sent to the FDA.

Sometimes the FDA agrees, sometimes not, but the whole process is out in the open – and it allows for emerging risks to be added when new evidence (outbreaks and research) is generated.

Pathogens, once attached to the surface or internalized into cut surfaces of leafy greens, are only marginally affected by sanitizers (their use is not considered an adequate control strategy for pathogens) leaving time/temperature as the most effective control. This is supported by published data. Luo and colleagues (2010) demonstrated ten-fold growth over a 4-day period after inoculating cut lettuce with E. coli O157:H7 at 53.6F (12C). Luo and colleagues also showed that if stored at 41F (5C), E. coli O157:H7 populations do not grow and experience slight decline. Lee and Baek (2008) showed that spinach inoculated with E. coli O157:H7 and stored at 44.6F (7C) would support pathogen growth This finding, coupled with other data, was modeled by Danyluk and Schaffner (2011) and supports assumptions that cut leafy greens that are temperature abused will support the growth of E. coli O157:H7 and that the pathogen’s populations may increase by as much as ten-fold each day (at optimum temperatures). 

In the 2008 version of the Conference, following over 20 multi-state outbreaks between 1998 and 2008, cut leafy greens were suggested as an addition to the list of foods requiring time and temperature control for safety (joining cut melons, sprouts and tomatoes from the world of produce). The rationale is available here (Issue 2008-III-022).

FDA agreed with the recommendations of the Conference and the change appeared in the 2009 code (and is already followed in three states New Hampshire, Mississippi and Delaware — as well as Puerto Rico).
 
Some folks, cited in today’s The Packer, have argued that the rule is unenforceable.
 
A push for North Carolina to adopt the federal food code could result in receivers of fresh-cut leafy greens having the bark in a regulation that some say will have virtually no bite.

[Larry] Michael [Food Protection Program Head NC Division of Public Health] said the code leaves it up to the receivers to enforce the temperature requirement. He also said that unless a receiver already has a very low inspection score, the two points off would likely not effect their operations.

Some growers are opposed to the requirement, saying is an unnecessary burden, especially if the greens are grown and cut in close proximity to receivers. Michael said the state division has asked food safety researchers at the University of North Carolina (N.C. State -ben) to look into the issue and make a recommendation.

Tim Greene, director of marketing and sales for Hollar & Greene Produce Inc., Boone, N.C., said he doesn’t believe adoption of the FDA food code would make food any safer. Greene doubts the state’s ability to enforce the provisions of the code and said buyers already require appropriate temperatures (except the rule applies to food service, not retail –ben).

“Wal-Mart already requires 42 degrees,” Greene said. “(The FDA code) won’t make any difference at all unless they enforce it, and they don’t have any way to do that.”

Endpoint cooking temperatures of meats are pretty unenforceable as well (inspectors have to be there at the exact right time), but that’s not a good reason to avoid having risk-reduction rules based on the best available science.
 

North Carolina’s adoption of the FDA Model Food Code and requiring cut leafy greens to be received at 41F

Posted on by
Reply

North Carolina is set to adopt the FDA Model Food Code by reference, with a couple of state-specific adjustments, starting with the 2009 iteration. This means the Food Code becomes the law that commercial food service businesses will be required to follow. According to the code, commercial buyers of cut leafy greens should receive them at 41F (5C) or below. This requirement is to curb the growth of pathogens. Based on past outbreaks, the two pathogens of most concern are shiga-toxin producing E. coli and Salmonella spp. There is lots of debate around the validity of the guidance, as well as the economic impact the cooling requirement might have on producers marketing salad ingredients.

Cut leafy greens (as defined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration) are fresh leafy greens whose leaves have been cut, shredded, sliced, chopped, or torn –beyond a root zone cut or harvest cut. The term leafy greens includes iceberg lettuce, romaine lettuce, leaf lettuce, butter lettuce, baby leaf lettuce (i.e., immature lettuce or leafy greens), escarole, endive, spring mix, spinach, cabbage, kale, arugula and chard. The term leafy greens does not include herbs such as cilantro or parsley (see here).

Cut leafy greens have not always required temperature control for safety. Following over 20 multi-state outbreaks between 1998 and 2008, ‘cut leafy greens’ was added to the definition of potentially hazardous food requiring time-temperature control for safety (TCS).

Storage and transport time and temperature are contributing factors for pathogen growth in cut leafy greens; water and nutrient availability, along with a suitable pH create an environment to support the growth of lots of food borne bacteria

Luo and colleagues (2010) demonstrated one log growth over a 4-day period after inoculating cut lettuce with E. coli O157:H7 at 53.6F (12C). Luo and colleagues also showed that if stored at 41F (5C), E. coli O157:H7 populations do not grow and experience slight decline. Lee and Baek (2008) showed that spinach inoculated with E. coli O157:H7 and stored at 44.6F (7C) would support pathogen growth This finding, coupled with other data, was modeled by Danyluk and Schaffner (2011) and supports assumptions that cut leafy greens that are temperature abused will support the growth of E. coli O157:H7 and that the pathogen’s populations may increase by as much as ten-fold each day (at optimum temperatures). Pathogens, once attached to the surface or internalized into cut surfaces of leafy greens, are only marginally affected by sanitizers (their use is not considered an adequate control strategy for the pathogens) leaving time/temperature as the most effective control.

While adoption of the FDA Model Food Code has brought attention to a potential barrier, the process of taking a raw agriculture product and turning it into a cut leafy green (for example heads of iceberg lettuce being shredded and sold in a package/box to retail) already requires refrigeration in post-processing and storage by FDA’s CFR 21 110.80 (as it’s applied in North Carolina).

While folks might argue the validity of the 41F or lower requirement for cut leafy greens, producers who are marketing cut leafy greens should focus on risk reduction through refrigeration (at of below 41F) in storage and transport regardless of the law (which also likely provides a higher quality product). Or harvest, cut and transport to a restaurant quickly, where time in lieu of temperature would be a valid control measure.

Maintaining temperatures below 41F for fresh-cut leafy greens has been raised as a practical and economic barrier for producers (as it is suggested that processors of these products do not typically have the means to control temperatures post-processing and during transport). There isn’t a whole lot of data available to support or refute this – so we’re going to generate some by quickly evaluating regular food coolers and ice/icepacks as a potential way for a producer to get the product to a buyer at 41F.

References:

Danyluk, M and Schaffner, D. 2011.  Quantitative assessment of the microbial risk of leafy greens from farm to consumption: Preliminary framework, data, and risk estimates. J. Food Prot. 74:700–708.

Lee, S. Y., and Baek, S. 2008. Effect of chemical sanitizer combined with modified atmosphere packaging on inhibiting Escherichia coli O157:H7 in commercial spinach. Food Microbiol. 25:582–587.

Luo, Y., He, Q., and McEvoy, J. 2010. Effect of storage temperature and duration on the behavior of Escherichia coli O157:H7 on packaged fresh-cut salad containing romaine and iceberg lettuce. J. Food Sci. 75:M390-M397.

 

NC considers long overdue overhaul of food safety standards: ‘safe food is good business’

Posted on by
Reply

WRAL reports that North Carolina state legislators considered changes Thursday to overhaul food safety standards that were implemented over 35 years ago.

Larry Michael, a spokesman from NC Dairy & Food Protection, said people are now realizing that "safe food is good business."

Some of the proposed changes include prohibiting workers from handling ready-to-eat food with their bare hands and doing away with the bonus points restaurants can earn by completing a two-day food safety course.

New regulations would require a certified food protection manager to be on site whenever the establishment is open. Employees would be able to earn that certification online.

If the changes are accepted, they won’t go into effect until September at the earliest.

Lack of food safety costly for diners, eateries; Alabama training center tries to fix errors

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s a common scene from many of the mom and pop restaurants I’ve visited: a towel used to sop up juice from raw hamburger meat also is used to wipe down counters.

Phyllis Fenn, a standardization officer with the Alabama Department of Public Health’s bureau of environmental services, has seen the same thing – too often.

The Montgomery Advertiser reports today the Food Safety Training Center on Atlanta Highway is an attempt both to help restaurant owners avoid bad inspections and to protect their customers’ health.

When Alabama adopted the 2005 Food Code, one provision was that at least one person in restaurants where raw foods are handled, including fast-food eateries and sushi bars, would become food safety certified. When the state adopted the code, it opted to go with a lead-in time — Jan. 1 of this year.

The classes can help restaurants improve their health department inspection scores, which is exactly what they are designed to do, Fenn said.

She said the certification class helps restaurants reduce food-related illnesses as well as teaching them about the proper temperatures to cook and hold food (the temperature of food that sits out at a buffet) and proper hygiene.