... A Compilation of Progress Reports III
Page 1

Summer 2002

View state progress reports by selecting from the following list:

• Colorado

• Georgia

• Wyoming

• Rhode Island

• Minnesota

• Washington

• Missouri

• South Carolina

• New Hampshire

• Texas

• Wisconsin

• Virginia

Colorado
By Chuck Henry

DENVER - A Food Safety Task Force meeting was convened in Glendale on November 6, 2001. The purpose of this meeting was to provide a forum for regulators, industry and academia to discuss and promote a mechanism for ensuring safe food production in Colorado. The goal of this Task Force is to improve communication among all stakeholders so that the effectiveness of our food safety efforts is enhanced. The participants included representatives from the Colorado Restaurant Association, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration, Colorado Department of Agriculture, Colorado State University Cooperative Extension Service, Disease Control and Epidemiology Division, Consumer Protection Division and local organized/contract county health departments. The agenda items discussed were:  Statewide Computer Standardization/Computer Application Sharing, Foodborne Illness Investigations, Retail Food Manager Certification/Food Safety and Security/Plan Reviews; and Wholesale Food/Shellfish Issues.

The following subcommittees were assigned the task of identifying a statewide issue of concern, proposing a solution to this issue, and preparing a report that would be shared with other Task Force members: Manager Certification; Statewide Computer Standardization/Computer Application Sharing; and Foodborne Illness Investigations. The Manager Certification subcommittee met on January 15, 2002 to begin developing a Food Protection Manager Certification Program that conforms to the national standards that were approved by the Conference for Food Protection. These standards were developed with broad-based consensus among representatives from regulatory agencies, industry, academia, certifying organizations and consumer groups. We are looking forward to the challenge of developing a Certification Program in partnership with industry and academia.

For information concerning this effort, contact Chuck Henry at 303-692-3629.

Introduction:

The management certification subcommittee is a board coalition of regulators, public health officials, food industry representatives and academic professionals who agree that food safety training should be required for those who repeatedly fail to correct critical violations and do not understand the Food Code as it relates to those critical items.

This document outlines a draft proposal that mandates training for managers/operators of licensed retail food establishments who fail to meet the “demonstration of knowledge” requirement of section 2-102 of the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations.  The proposed provision provides a wider range of regulatory responses allowing local health departments to take actions that are in line with the nature of the violations.

Background:

Section 2-101 of the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations states that the operator or the person in charge shall educate and monitor employees to ensure conformance with these rules and regulations. Section 2-102.11 of the 2001 FDA Food Code requires retail food establishments to have a “person in charge” who shall demonstrate to the Regulatory Authority that they have the knowledge to:

• Prevent foodborne disease.
• Apply Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles. HACCP is a food management system that identifies and controls the points at which food can become contaminated.
• Understand and apply the requirements of the Food Code as it relates to the scope of the establishment’s food service operations.

Examples of person in charge responsibilities:

• Directing food preparation activities and taking corrective action as needed to protect the health of the consumer;
• Ensuring that potentially hazardous foods are held at the proper temperatures during storage, preparation, display and service;
• Ensuring that employees cook potentially hazardous foods to proper temperatures.

Other recommended person in charge responsibilities may include:

1. Conducting self-inspections of daily food operations and verifying that food safety policies and procedures are followed;
2. Conduct routine in-house employee food safety training.

A “person in charge” demonstrates knowledge by one or more of the following ways:

1. The most important way a person in charge may demonstrate the required level of knowledge is by compliance with the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations. That is, if during the routine inspection the inspector finds no critical violations, the requirement of manager knowledge is met. However, if the inspector observes repeated critical violations and a lack of knowledge about how to prevent their recurrence, the regulatory authority has the option of requiring training alone or in conjunction with other enforcement measures. Training should not be required for a first time failure to correct a critical violation.  (Specific criteria will be developed to provide guidance for regulators as to when this training requirement will be imposed.)
2. By being a certified food protection manager who has shown proficiency of required information through passing a test that is part of an accredited program. The accredited program must be accredited by a Conference for Food Protection sanctioned accrediting organization. This accreditation refers to the testing organization and not to a training program. Documentation of repeated failure to correct critical violations gives regulators sufficient evidence to question whether the problem results from lack of knowledge, inappropriate behavior or both.  Regardless of attendance at previous training courses, the local health department has authority to require additional management training if inadequate knowledge is a contributing factor to non-compliance.     If the manager has a valid certificate from an accredited program, additional training does not have to involve re-certification but training appropriate to address non-compliance violations.
3. Correctly responding to an inspector’s questions about the food operation.  This does not mean an inspector will be going down a list or  “quizzing” the person in charge.  However, during the course of the routine inspection, the safe food practices and procedures used by the establishment will be discussed.  The person in charge should be able to show a working knowledge of those areas of the Rules and Regulations specific to the practices in place.  For example, a night manager at a convenience store does not need to demonstrate knowledge of cooking times and temperatures if the store does not perform any cooking of food.  However, a person in charge at a large restaurant may need to know most of the requirements found in the Rules and Regulations.

Food Safety Training:

Title 25 Article 4 Part 1606(2), C.R.S. (1998), authorizes the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) or local board of health to assess whether a retail food establishment license applicant can operate an establishment in accordance with the Rules promulgated by the CDPHE to provide a safe food product. The most advantageous way to assess the ability of an operator to provide a safe food product is test this person’s knowledge of basic food safety principles. According to section 2-102.11(B) of the FDA Food Code, one way that the person in charge can demonstrate this knowledge is by being a certified food protection manager who has shown proficiency of required information through passing a test that is part of an accredited program.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) will list food safety training resources on their web page to aid the implementation process for the demonstration of knowledge requirement and help ensure that all individuals responsible for food safety in retail food establishments have access to training programs. In some rural areas of the state, applicants for manager certification training may need to travel significant distances to attend a training class. Therefore, the CDPHE will provide a link on their web page. Testing can be arranged through the state or local jurisdiction.

Accredited Management Certification Programs

The key points of management certification bear emphasizing:

1. The Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations will not require certification of all food protection managers.  Food safety training will continue to be voluntary for managers and operators who comply with the "demonstration of knowledge" requirement.  The best way to demonstrate knowledge is by compliance with the Rules and Regulations with critical violations observed during routine inspections by the local health department.
2. Being a certified food protection manager is a recognized method of demonstrating knowledge.  The CDPHE will recognize, as meetingfood safety knowledge requirements, individuals who have their knowledge of food safety certified by an examination provided by a program accredited by a Conference for Food Protection sanctioned accrediting organization.

GUIDANCE CRITEIA FOR REGULATORS AS TO WHEN TO REQUIRE MANDATORY TRAINING OF MANAGEMENT AND/OR STAFF WORKING IN RETAIL FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS IN COLORADO.

The subcommittee investigating the need for "mandatory" manager certification in Colorado will recommend that the be amended to give CDPHE and local health departments the authority to require food safety training for retail food establishment personnel when it is determined to be appropriate.  Training is to be required only for establishments where managers and/or employees cannot demonstrate basic knowledge of food safety due to the lack of adequate training conducted within the operation.

The Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations require:

2-101 Responsibilities

The operator shall be the person in charge or shall designate a person in charge and shall ensure that a person in charge is present at the retail food establishment during all hours of operation. *The operator shall educate and monitor employees to ensure conformance to these rules and regulations.

*2-102 Demonstration

Upon request the person or persons performing a specific task shall demonstrate to the regulatory authority knowledge of foodborne disease prevention as it relates to the specific task. Demonstration can be determined by the following:

1. Knowledge of when, where, and how handwashing is required;
2. Knowledge of when to prohibit an employee from handling food, clean equipment and utensils;
3. Knowledge of the required temperatures and times for safe cooking, refrigerated storage, hot holding, cooling, and reheating of potentially hazardous food;
4. Knowledge of the prevention of cross-contamination;
5. Knowledge of correct procedures for cleaning and sanitizing utensils and food contact surfaces of equipment.

At the time of inspection, the food handling practices and procedures related to handwashing, prohibiting or restricting workers, food temperature control, cross-contamination, cleaning and sanitizing practices must be discussed with management or individuals performing specific tasks.  It is important that sound professional judgment be utilized in determining when to require mandatory training so as not to over-regulate, target training for the wrong workers, or require a level of training that may be inappropriate for the situation.  Regulators should utilize the following criteria when considering when to require mandatory training for management personnel and/or staff working in retail food establishments.

• During an inspection, if a trend is identified that indicates managers and/or other employees working in the establishment cannot demonstrate basic food safety knowledge as it relates to Section 2-102 of the Rules and Regulations, then food safety training needs to be required.
• If it is identified that the lack of knowledge by managers and/or employees results in violations of the Rules and Regulations, then food safety training needs to be required.  Most critical would be violations that are found associated with cooling, reheating, hot holding, lack of handwashing, or prohibiting or restricting workers.
• If the establishment is not utilizing a formal food safety training program for their workers, and the managers and/or employees cannot demonstrate basic food safety knowledge as it relates to Section 2-102 of the Rules and Regulations, then food safety training needs to be required*.
• If the establishment is actively utilizing a formal food safety training program for their workers, and the managers and/or employees still cannot demonstrate basic food safety knowledge as it relates to Section 2-102 of the Rules and Regulations, then no additional training should be required. ^# Other enforcementactions should then be pursued.   “You can lead a cook to a hand sink, but you cannot make him wash his hands.”

Again, it is important that sound professional judgment be utilized in determining when to require mandatory training.  Who within the establishment needs training, and what depth or level of training is needed, should be evaluated for each individual establishment.  A check sheet or list of quiz questions should not be used because of the uniqueness of the situations that may arise.

^# - Establishments with food safety training programs should at the time of inspection be capable of providing course descriptions, policies that describe requirements for worker attendance, certificates or some other records indicating which workers have completed training, and when individuals who have not completed the training will be attending the training program.  Written records are preferred.

ATLANTA - The Georgia Food Safety Task Force group meets quarterly to discuss current issues that require multi-agency response.  The meetings are conducted to focus on food safety.  Topics include: foodborne illnesses and outbreaks, data sharing between regulatory agencies, better communication with the public, media and consumers.  Team members work cooperatively to promote uniform standards, program assessment and evaluation, laboratory operations coordination, food safety education, training and certification.  The meetings were held on July 11, 2001, October 23, 2001, January 2, 2002, and April 17, 2002.

Due to the unfortunate events of September 11, various agencies received numerous telephone calls from concerned citizens.  Guest speakers from the Governor’s Office of Home Land Security and Georgia Emergency Management Agency were invited to the meetings to share information with the group concerning Biosecurity and Agro terrorism.   The Georgia Division of Public Health, Epidemiology Branch developed several draft documents giving guidance and advice on how to best handle potential bioterrorism events related to anthrax.  The documents are posted on the internet at http://health.state.ga.us/programs/emerprep/bioterrorism.shtml and will be updated as additional guidance is received from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Mr. James Casey of the Food and Drug Administration stated that partnerships with the FDA, Health and Agriculture Departments are being established to promote food and agricultural security from bioterrorists.  He encouraged GFSTF team members and representatives of the various agencies to develop partnerships for joint planning, communication, investigations and data sharing with other State and Federal partners in the prevention and response to food biosafety and agro terrorism. 

The Georgia Food Safety Task Force was awarded a $35,000.00 grant from USDA/FSIS for food safety education of small, independent, and ethnic retail food establishments.  The grant will be utilized to complete the following projects: 

• Networking with organized associations representing ethnic and small business operators to provide assistance with interpretation of laws, rules and regulations of the various regulatory agencies.  This will be accomplished by developing a series of workshops and seminars. Food safety professionals and participants will discuss jurisdictional responsibility, food safety, sanitation, CDC risk factors, pest control and other topics of interest during the scheduled programs.
• Purchasing computer software for language translation in order to effectively communicate with the ethnic business operators and their employees.  Publishing booklets in the different languages regarding food safety regulations, sanitation practices, and self control program for food safety.  The booklet will be specifically tailored to retailers in the grocery store and restaurant environment.
• Development of a quick ready reference card in multiple languages (Spanish, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese).  The material will highlight critical public health concerns:  food temperatures, hot and cold holding, receiving and storage, HACCP, re-heating, preventing cross-contamination, hand washing, cleaning and sanitizing.
• Establishing a web site regarding food safety and sanitation practices in relationship to the rules and regulations of the Georgia Department of Human resources and Georgia Department of Agriculture.  The web site will be linked to the agencies.  A question and answer format will be designed to provide pertinent information.  
• Locate, compile and distribute educational materials that various public health agencies and food service organizations have already published in the targeted foreign languages.  These training and educational materials will be used to augment the materials designed and prepared by the GFSTF for the various workshops and seminars. 
• Purchasing equipment for educational purpose in order to conduct workshops and seminars. 

The Georgia Food Safety Task Force was awarded a $5,000.00 grant from the Food and Drug Administration to develop a brochure for consumers featuring public health agencies and their jurisdictional responsibilities.  The brochure will list the agency representatives, addresses, e-mails, and telephone numbers.  The consumers will be able to contact the appropriate agency to report foodborne illnesses, complaints, foods recall, and ask other related food safety questions.  We are in the process of seeking additional funds from FDA in order to complete the project and print additional brochures.       

The Rhode Island Food Safety Task Force meets monthly and holds an annual conference.  A considerable amount of the task force's time is spent developing the program for the annual conference.  This year the task force co-sponsored the 39th Annual Yankee Conference September 26th, 27th and 28th in Providence with the Rhode Island Environmental Health Association.  The conference was attended by well over 100 individuals over the three days. Topics covered at the conference were as follows:

• Three Inspectors Killed in California:  How to Identify Warning Signs of a Potentially Violent Situation
• Food Allergies, Latex Gloves as a Life Threatening Allergen:  Why RI has Banned Latex Gloves in Food Establishments
• Preparing Environmental Health Cases for Prosecution, lead, mercury..
• Emerging Environmental Health Concerns, Year 2010 Health Objectives, and CDC Priorities in Identifying and Building Model Environmental Health Programs
• Outbreaks and Illness Trends Identified Through the National Foodnet and Pulsenet system
• Innovative Training, the Future of Food Safety Education.
• Inspector Training, Standardization, and Salary Increases
• Food Safety at Temporary Events
• Dealing Effectively with Health Issues in Multicultural Populations
• How Industry and Inspectors Can Reduce the Likelihood of Being Sued
• Insect and Rodent Control to Prevent Asthma, West Nile, EEE, Lyme Disease and Other Vector Associated Illnesses
• Latest Developments in Biotechnology
• Chemical and Biological Terrorism (Workshop)

Other activities and accomplishments of the RI Food Safety Task Force for 2001-2002 are as follows:

• Members of the task force developed a review course for the National Environmental Health Association Certified Food Safety Professional Exam.  The review course was given on September 24, 2001 and the exam was offered on September 26, 2001.  Twelve individuals took the exam including two RI Environmental Health Food Inspectors.

• An informational brochure about the RI Food Safety Task Force was developed and distributed at the 39th Annual Yankee Conference.
• A meeting was held with industry on October 24, 2001 to discuss liability issues.
• A food borne illness complaint procedure, to be utilized by industry, was developed at the request of industry.
• The RI Department of Health, Office of Food Protection developed a web site with links to various other web sites (Foodsafety.gov, University of RI, and Fight Bac),
• Rhode Island is in the third year of a  three year grant from CDC to develop and implement a comprehensive school food safety program as a pilot for the country.

The task force is currently busy developing the agenda for the October2, 2002 annual conference.  The theme will be food biosecurity.

Back to Directory Table

Minnesota
By Shirley Bohm

The Minnesota Food Safety Task Force is a statutorily created task force with the members appointed by the Governor.  Members and regular visitors include representatives from the MN Department of Agriculture (MDA), FDA, USDA, food retailers, food processors, the University of MN, Farm Bureau, commodity groups, local health departments, consumers and other food safety and health professionals. The Task Force has three active subcommittees, Training and Education, Irradiation and Consumer Education, which meet in addition to the Task Force.

July 11, 2001 Meeting:  The MN Food safety Task Force Chair convened the meeting with 13 members and visitors present. The Training and Education Subcommittee reported on the development of 10-15 critical food safety messages that were incorporated into a food safety booklet and posters and put on the MDA’s website (www.mda.state.mn.us).  A food retailer provided the group with a number of “lessons learned” following a multi-state ground beef recall.  His primary point was the excellent cooperation and communication between the industry, Agriculture and Health during the investigation.  The Irradiation Subcommittee reported on the taste tests for irradiated beef by the MN Beef Council, the multi-state irradiation grant project by the University of MN and a need to re-examine the direction and purpose of the subcommittee.  This was followed by a round table discussion on the retail industry’s response to MDA’s recent delegation of certain retail food store inspections to LHDs, ideas for food safety task forces from other states (from FDA’s task force summary), MDA’s Food Allergen Partnership with FDA, potential state government shutdown in Minnesota, HACCP training programs and more.

September 5, 2001 Meeting:  The MN Food Safety Task Force Chair convened the meeting with 21 members and visitors present.  The Training and Education Subcommittee summarized the member activities scheduled for Food Safety Education Month (distributing thermometers, Food Safety Booklets and Posters; putting food safety articles in the local newspaper; Governor’s proclamation that September is Food Safety Education Month in Minnesota; press releases; send letter to organizations asking them to promote food safety messages; distributing information to food shelves, schools, LHDs, State Fair; giving food safety talks at stores, schools, churches; giving radio interviews; development and promotion of a hand washing video; messages on food safety distributed on an internal intranet; and food safety messages included in newsletters).  MDA reported on their Allergen Awareness initiative and the new chair of the Irradiation Subcommittee solicited members and ideas.  A round table discussion followed with discussions on TV and media cooks; FDA’s priority on food safety; grilling and summer food safety; ventilation guidelines; new partnership agreements with FDA on Listeria and GMPs; the up-coming Regional Retail Food Seminar; NFPA’s Code of Practice for food allergens; web-based HACCP course; agency performance measures; etc.

November 7, 2001 Meeting:  The MN Food Safety Task Force Chair convened the meeting with 18 members and visitors present.  The guest speaker from the University of MN presented an overview of bioterrorism in the U.S. and other countries with a focus on sentinel animals and FADs, the feed industry, possible agents and their dissemination, our surveillance system and surge capacity, and response plans.  MDA distributed handouts on security and prevention of terrorist attacks (also on the MDA website) and discussed the training on bio-terrorism with the University of MN.  General Mills reported the formation of the Food Security Alliance, 80 trade organizations that meet weekly.  Round table discussions covered the expected hiring by FDA; a report on Food Safety Education Month activities (more than 77 different events and 12,000 contacts); development of MDA’s allergen awareness training; promotion of irradiated beef by the MN Beef Council in other states; biotechnology; BSE; anthrax; etc.

January 16, 2002 Meeting:   The MN Food Safety Task Force Chair convened the meeting with 15 members and visitors present.  One of the Task Force members reported on the development of the Allergen Awareness training efforts.  Planning was also started for Food Safety Education Month in September.  The Task Force identified topics/speakers that they would like to hear in the coming year, including anti- terrorism activities, “just in time” video conferencing, and something from the state epidemiologist.  Plans for educational initiatives for consumers, regulators and school children were initiated.  Other themes were also identified including organic foods, food/vegetable contamination levels, survey of pathogens, irradiation, allergens, biotechnology/GMO’s, and antibiotic resistance.  Roundtable discussions from Task Force participants covered food safety at food banks and pantries, getting the Task Force on the MDA website, MDA’s new Excellence Awards for Food Safety, Environmental Stewardship and Promoting Minnesota, capital bonding bill for a co-located Ag and Health lab, “Be Alert” posters to help dairy and food processors increase security and prevention activities against terrorists (on MDA website), promoting irradiated beef, ethnic groups and cultural issues in food safety,  FDA’s budget and new hiring, FDA contracts with states and FMD.

March 6, 2002 Meeting:  The MN Food Safety Task Force Chair convened the meeting with 27 members and visitors present.  Dr. Mike Osterholm from the U of M’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy gave a presentation on Foodborne Safety and Diseases and Bio-Security.  He addressed concerns about shifting food safety employees from state and local agencies to FDA’s new positions, wider acceptance of irradiated foods, antibiotic use in food production animals, a Food Safety and Information Sharing Center (ISAC) involving all parties, provision of laboratory services, partnerships and continuous surveillance. Commissioner Hugoson presented Joe Scimeca, General Mills, with a certificate acknowledging his work with the Allergen Awareness Training for the food processing course by industry on Feb. 20, 2002.  An MDA communications officer offered ideas on how the Task Force could promote food safety.  The Consumer Education Subcommittee reported on their efforts for Food Safety Education Month. The Training and Education Subcommittee listed target audiences for food safety training.  The Irradiation Subcommittee identified misperceptions about irradiated foods.  The round table discussion covered current legislative issues impacting MDA, budget cuts, humane slaughter, FMD protocols, standardized allergen testing, GPS capabilities, and MDA’s internal assessment against FDA’s Retail Food Program Standards, milk protein concentrate uses, water quality and translation of food safety materials into other languages.

May 1, 2002 Meeting.  The MN Food Safety Task Force was convened with 26 members and visitors present.  Reports from the Consumer Education, Irradiation and Education and Training subcommittees were heard.  A presentation on foreign animal diseases and FMD in particular with responsibilities of MDA was also heard.  The round table discussion covered information on the dioxin in feed supplement investigation, FDA’s 4-State meeting on counter terrorism June 24-26, 2002, rapid response risk communication, acrylimide formed in foods, and two restaurant chains serving irradiated beef.

Back to Directory Table