Survey Questions and Frequency of Responses for Poultry Slaughter
and Processing Plants
These
are the responses to the questionnaire
answered by 135 poultry slaughter and processing plant respondents about
HACCP costs and food safety technologies.
Questions and responses are grouped by topic in the following order:
The following list of tables is also available in Excel
format.
Effects of the PR/HACCP Rule on Plant Operations
and Costs
(Question # Q1): In your opinion, since the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP
Rule has been implemented, how costly has each aspect of it been to this
plant?
| Q1 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't
know" or no response (Number) |
| No Cost To Plant |
Slight Cost |
Somewhat Costly |
Very Costly |
| Writing, maintaining, and complying w/SSOPs |
0.75 |
33.83 |
47.37 |
18.05 |
2 |
| Writing, maintaining, and complying w/HACCP plans |
0 |
19.55 |
48.87 |
31.58 |
2 |
| E. coli and other testing |
6.02 |
21.05 |
50.38 |
22.56 |
2 |
| Zero fecal matter standard |
15.27 |
9.16 |
25.95 |
49.62 |
4 |
| Salmonella standard |
15.02 |
22.22 |
38.10 |
24.60 |
9 |
| Pre-shipment review requirements |
4.51 |
54.14 |
35.34 |
6.02 |
2 |
| Other (please specify) |
26.32 |
10.53 |
26.32 |
36.84 |
116 |
(Question # Q2): In your opinion, of the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule
identified in Q1, which one has been most effective for pathogen reduction
up to now?
| Most effective HACCP component for path reduction |
| Q2 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Writing/complying with SSOPs |
28 |
20.74 |
| Writing/complying with HACCP plan |
32 |
23.70 |
| E. coli testing |
15 |
11.11 |
| Salmonella standard |
16 |
11.85 |
| Other |
3 |
2.22 |
| Missing |
3 |
2.22 |
| No benefit |
22 |
16.30 |
| Zero fecal matter standard |
16 |
11.85 |
(Question # Q3): In your opinion, of the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule
identified in Q1, which one has been most costly for pathogen reduction
up to now?
| Most costly HACCP component for path reduction |
| Q3 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Writing/complying with SSOPs |
7 |
5.19 |
| Writing/complying with HACCP plan |
33 |
24.44 |
| E. coli testing |
17 |
12.59 |
| Salmonella standard |
21 |
15.56 |
| Preshipment review |
4 |
2.96 |
| Other |
4 |
2.96 |
| Missing |
2 |
1.48 |
| Zero fecal matter standard |
47 |
34.81 |
(Question # Q4): How much change has this plant made to each of the following
operational areas since 1996?
| Q4 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Not Applicable" or no response (Number) |
| No Change |
Slight Change
|
Some Change |
Great Deal of
Change |
| Suppliers or producers |
22.13 |
29.51 |
35.25 |
13.11 |
13 |
| Raw and finished product flows |
12.78 |
22.56 |
42.86 |
21.80 |
2 |
| Product rework |
13.33 |
28.15 |
33.33 |
25.19 |
0 |
| Frequency of cleaning/sanitizing |
30.60 |
32.84 |
23.13 |
13.43 |
1 |
| Purchase/installation of equipment for pathogen control |
9.70 |
14.93 |
26.87 |
48.51 |
1 |
| Plant facilities for better pathogen control |
19.55 |
24.81 |
33.83 |
21.80 |
2 |
| Other (specify) |
28.57 |
0 |
14.29 |
57.14 |
121 |
(Question # Q5): In your opinion, which one of the six operational areas
in Q4 has had the greatest impact on pathogen control?
| Operational changes with greatest impact on pathogen
control |
| Q5 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Requirements for meat suppliers |
11 |
8.15 |
| Raw and finished product flows |
16 |
11.85 |
| Product rework |
2 |
1.48 |
| Purchase and installation of equipment |
54 |
40.00 |
| Plant facilities for better pathogen |
11 |
8.15 |
| Other pathogen control |
4 |
2.96 |
| Missing |
3 |
2.22 |
| No impact |
15 |
11.11 |
| Frequency with operations |
19 |
14.07 |
(Question # Q6): In your opinion, which one of the six operational areas
in Q4 has been the most costly for pathogen control?
| Operational areas most costly for pathogen control |
| Q6 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Requirements for meat suppliers |
4 |
2.96 |
| Raw and finished product flows |
9 |
6.67 |
| Product rework |
7 |
5.19 |
| Don't know |
1 |
0.74 |
| Purchase and installation of equipment |
72 |
53.33 |
| Plant facilities for better pathogen |
14 |
10.37 |
| Other pathogen control |
5 |
3.70 |
| Missing |
2 |
1.48 |
| No impact |
4 |
2.96 |
| Frequency with operations |
17 |
12.59 |
(Question # Q7): How many additional employees has this plant hired due
to the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule enacted in 1996? (Answer ZERO if
this plant hired no one. New employees should include additional quality
control personnel as well as production workers. Each part-time worker
should be counted as one-half of a worker).
| Q7 |
Mean number of workers from reporting
plants |
Number of plants reporting |
Number of plants not reporting |
| Number of production workers |
6.12 |
129 |
6 |
| Number of lab and other nonproduction workers |
3.42 |
127 |
8 |
(Question # Q8): In your opinion, how costly have additional labor and
other operating requirements and additional capital expenditures been
to this plant due to the following components of the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP
Rule?
| Q8 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't
know" or no response (Number) |
| No Cost To Plant
|
Slight Cost |
Somewhat Costly
|
Very Costly |
| Writing, maintaining, and complying with SSOPs |
3.70 |
42.22 |
40.00 |
14.07 |
0 |
| Writing, maintaining, and complying with HACCP plans |
2.96 |
27.41 |
42.96 |
26.67 |
0 |
| Zero fecal matter standard |
17.56 |
16.03 |
28.24 |
38.17 |
4 |
| Salmonella standard |
15.20 |
33.60 |
29.60 |
21.60 |
10 |
(Question # Q9): In your opinion: how much of a change has there been
to the annual downtime of this plant due to the following components of
the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule?
| Q9 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't know" or no response (Number) |
| Reduced |
No Change |
Small increase
(less than 8 hours) |
Some increase
(less than 24 hours) |
Great deal of
increase (more than 24 hour) |
| Writing, maintaining, complying with SSOPs |
3.76 |
39.85 |
26.32 |
16.54 |
13.53 |
2 |
| Writing, maintaining, complying with HACCP plans |
2.26 |
41.35 |
30.08 |
15.04 |
11.28 |
2 |
| Zero fecal matter standard |
4.62 |
25.38 |
33.08 |
20.77 |
16.15 |
5 |
| Salmonella standard |
7.14 |
70.63 |
17.46 |
4.76 |
0 |
9 |
(Question # Q10): How has the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule affected
finished product yields from incoming raw meat or animals?
| Impact of HACCP on product yields of incoming
raw poultry |
| Q10 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Yield reduced |
37 |
27.41 |
| Yield not changed |
93 |
68.89 |
| Yield increased |
5 |
3.70 |
(Question # Q11): Please estimate the amount this plant has spent on
fixed capital expenditures for the reconfiguration of production lines
and other factory modifications, and for the installation and purchase/construction
of steam vacuum units, organic/antimicrobial spray washers, equipment
that raises raw product surface temperature over 160 degrees, or other
equipment in order to comply with the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule of
1996.
| Q11 |
Mean value of fixed capital expenditures. |
Number of plants reporting |
Number of plants not reporting |
| Mean value of fixed capital expenditures per plant. |
$593,850 |
118 |
17 |
(Question # Q12): Over and above that which was required under the
Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule, has this plant...
| Q12 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't know" or no response (Number) |
| No |
Yes |
| Exceeded HACCP Rule requirements in making factory
modifications to better control pathogens since 1996 |
23.48 |
76.52 |
3 |
| Exceeded HACCP Rule requirements in the purchase
of equipment to better control pathogens since 1996 |
30.53 |
69.47 |
4 |
(Question # Q13): Do you think capital expenditures for the factory modifications
and equipment purchases and installations described in Q12 exceeded the
fixed capital expenditures that this plant incurred in order to comply
with the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule?
| The number of plants with private investments
in food safety exceeding expenditures due to HACCP |
| Q13 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
55 |
41.98 |
| Yes |
53 |
40.46 |
| Don't Know |
23 |
17.56 |
| Frequency Missing = 4 |
(Question # Q14): By about how much has water usage at this plant changed
due to the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule?
| Change in water usage change due to HACCP |
| Q14 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Water usage has not changed |
15 |
11.19 |
| Water usage has increased but not double |
101 |
75.37 |
| Water usage has more than doubled |
15 |
11.19 |
| Don't Know |
3 |
2.24 |
| Frequency Missing = 1 |
(Question # Q15: Please estimate how much water sanitizer, electricity,
maintenance, and other nonlabor variable costs increased per year due
to the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule of 1996?
| Q15 |
Mean expenditures on nonlabor costs
per year |
Number of plants reporting |
Number of plants not reporting |
| Mean nonlabor cost increase per plants |
$224,350 |
105 |
20 |
(Question # Q16A: How many persons in this plant were involved in developing
SSOPs, the HACCP plan, and other operating plans required by the Pathogen
Reduction/HACCP Rule of 1996?
| Q16A |
Mean number of workers |
Number of plants reporting |
Number of plants not reporting |
| Mean number of workers developing plans. |
9.93 |
99 |
36 |
(Question # Q16B: How many days were spent by individuals, in total in
your plant, in developing SSOPs, the HACCP plan, and other operating plans
required by the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule of 1996?
| Q16B |
Mean number of days |
Number of plants reporting |
Number of plants not reporting |
| Mean number of days developing SSOPs and HACCP plans. |
60.0 |
120 |
15 |
(Question # Q19): Which ONE answer best describes how the shelf life
of products sold by this plant has changed since 1996?
| Change in shelf life of products sold since 1996 |
| Q19 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Shelf life decreased |
1 |
0.75 |
| Shelf life not changed |
78 |
58.21 |
| Shelf life increased 1-2 days |
19 |
14.18 |
| Shelf life increased by more than 2 days |
13 |
9.70 |
| Shelf life increased by more than 7 days |
2 |
1.49 |
| Don't Know |
21 |
15.67 |
| Frequency Missing = 1 |
characteristics of the surveyed plants
(Question # Q42: How many pounds of meat and poultry products did this
plant sell under its own name or other names last year in 2000?
| Q42 |
Mean pounds of output produced in
2000 in millions. |
Number of plants reporting |
Number of plants not reporting |
| Output |
109.85 |
115 |
20 |
(Question # Q43): Does this plant export products outside of the United
States?
| Plants exporting products outside
of the United Sates |
| Q43 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
25 |
18.80 |
| Yes |
108 |
81.20 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
(Question # Q44: Is more than 75% of the product from this plant sold
within the same state and/or adjacent states?
| Plants selling most production sold within or
to adjacent states |
| Q44 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
91 |
69.47 |
| Yes |
35 |
26.72 |
| Don't Know |
5 |
3.82 |
| Frequency Missing = 4 |
(Question # Q45): Do some major customers of this plant test product
for pathogens or harmful bacteria or require sanitation and product handling
practices that are more stringent than those demanded by FSIS?
| Plants with major customers with more stringent
requirements than FSIS |
| Q45 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
32 |
23.70 |
| Yes |
80 |
59.26 |
| Don't Know |
23 |
17.04 |
(Question # Q46): Does this plant produce products under its own brand?
| Plants producing products under their own brands |
| Q46 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
12 |
9.02 |
| Yes |
121 |
90.98 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
(Question # Q47): Does this plant produce cooked or otherwise further
processed products?
| Plants producing cooked or otherwise further
processed products |
| Q47 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
92 |
69.70 |
| Yes |
37 |
28.03 |
| Answered no, but also answered Q48 |
3 |
2.27 |
| Frequency Missing = 3 |
(Question # Q48): What percentage of total production in 2000 was accounted
for by each of the following further processed products?
| Q48 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Missing or skipped
(Number) |
| Items Not Produced 0% |
Very Little 1 to 20% |
Some 21 to 40% |
About Half 41 to 60% |
Most 61 to 80% |
Almost All 81 to 99% |
All 100% |
| Poultry bologna, frankfurters, other luncheon meats |
51.35 |
18.92 |
10.81 |
2.70 |
2.70 |
2.70 |
10.81 |
98 |
| Smoked poultry ham or other type |
71.43 |
11.43 |
5.71 |
5.71 |
0 |
5.71 |
0 |
100 |
| Cooked poultry ham other cooked/ processed poultry |
31.43 |
8.57 |
14.29 |
8.57 |
8.57 |
11.43 |
17.14 |
100 |
(Question # Q49): Does this plant produce raw products?
| Plants producing raw products |
| Q49 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
5 |
3.79 |
| Yes |
126 |
95.45 |
| Answered no, but answered Q50 |
1 |
0.76 |
| Frequency Missing = 3 |
(Question # Q50): What percentage of total annual production in 2000
was accounted for by each of the following raw products?
| Q50 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Missing or skipped
(Number) |
| Items Not Produced 0% |
Very Little 1 to 20% |
Some 21 to 40% |
About Half 41 to 60% |
Most 61 to 80% |
Almost All 81 to 99% |
All 100% |
| Cut-up poultry and parts |
11.48 |
20.49 |
16.39 |
22.95 |
11.48 |
9.02 |
8.20 |
13 |
| Raw chicken processed beyond cut-up |
23.53 |
15.97 |
23.53 |
18.49 |
4.20 |
8.40 |
5.88 |
16 |
| Other raw products |
31.58 |
31.58 |
9.47 |
8.42 |
6.32 |
9.47 |
3.16 |
40 |
(Question # Q51): Does this plant slaughter chickens, hens, capons, or
turkeys?
| Plants slaughtering chickens, hens, capons, or
turkeys |
| Q51 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
17 |
13.49 |
| Yes |
107 |
84.92 |
| Answered no, but also answered Q52-Q63 |
2 |
1.59 |
| Frequency Missing = 9 |
Miscellaneous Survey Questions
(Question # Q17): Did this plant use schematics or flow diagrams to identify
critical pathogen control points before the Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule
of 1996?
| Usage of schematics or flow diagrams prior to
PR/HACCP |
| Q17 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
66 |
48.89 |
| Yes |
60 |
44.44 |
| Don't Know |
9 |
6.67 |
(Question # Q18): Did this plant routinely review operations and make
adjustments to operations for better pathogen control before the Pathogen
Reduction/HACCP Rule of 1996?
| Reviewed operations and made adjustment for
pathogen control before HACCP |
| Q18 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
26 |
19.26 |
| Yes |
96 |
71.11 |
| Don't Know |
13 |
9.63 |
(Question # Q30): Assuming that irradiation is permitted, do you think
this plant will irradiate SOME of its finished products within the next
three years?
| Plants planning to irradiate SOME finished products
within 3 years |
| Q30 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
85 |
63.43 |
| Yes |
9 |
6.72 |
| Not Applicable |
2 |
1.49 |
| Don't Know |
38 |
28.36 |
| Frequency Missing = 1 |
(Question # Q63): Did this plant use equipment designed to minimize biofilm
build-up, equipment that raises product surface temperatures, TSP or other
antimicrobial spray equipment, or other equipment (either purchased or
modified by your company) to better control pathogens before 1996?
| Equipment for pathogen control prior to 1996 |
| Q63 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
64 |
56.64 |
| Yes |
42 |
37.17 |
| Don't Know |
7 |
6.19 |
| Frequency Missing = 22 |
(Question # Q65): Did you need to consult others within the plant to
answer all the questions in this questionnaire?
| Did respondent consult others to complete the
questionnaire |
| Q65 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
71 |
58.68 |
| Yes |
50 |
41.32 |
| Frequency Missing = 14 |
Food Safety Technology Questions Dealing
with Plant Operations
(Question # Q22): Which ONE answer best describes how this plant cleans
and sanitizes the unprocessed, raw, and finished product conveyors?
| How plant cleans and sanitizes unprocessed, raw,
and finished product conveyors |
| Q22 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Conveyors are not run when cleaned |
13 |
9.70 |
| Only unprocessed raw product conveyors run while cleaned |
7 |
5.22 |
| Only finished product conveyors run while cleaned |
1 |
0.75 |
| Both unprocessed raw product and finished product conveyors
are run while cleaned |
94 |
70.15 |
| Plant has automatic self-sanitizing conveyor |
3 |
2.24 |
| Don't Know |
3 |
2.24 |
| Not Applicable, no conveyors |
13 |
9.70 |
| Frequency Missing = 1 |
(Question # Q25): Which ONE answer best describes what this plant does
with product that needs to be reworked?
| Method of handling product that needs to be reworked |
| Q25 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Use in next and subsequent lots |
71 |
53.38 |
| Use in next and subsequent lots, rework remaining at the end
of the day is sold or transferred to another plant |
6 |
4.51 |
| Hold until end of the day before using |
19 |
14.29 |
| Sell to a further processor or transfer to another plant for
cooking only |
0 |
0 |
| Discard, sell, or transfer to another plant for uses other than
human consumption |
5 |
3.76 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0.75 |
| Other |
31 |
23.31 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
(Question # Q26): If you responded OTHER in Q24, please specify.
| Other (please specify) |
| Q26 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Comments |
32 |
96.97 |
| No |
1 |
3.03 |
| Frequency Missing = 102 |
(Question # Q31): Which ONE answer best describes the instructional training
programs on safe food handling practices for new and experienced workers
of this plant?
| Nature of instructional training programs on
safe food handling |
| Q31 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| On-the-job training only |
20 |
15.04 |
| Instructional training for new workers only |
9 |
6.77 |
| Instructional training for experienced only |
1 |
0.75 |
| Specific instructional training for both |
102 |
76.69 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0.75 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
(Question # Q32): Does this plant offer worker incentives, such as gifts
or compensation, for detecting and reporting possible sources of contamination
or unsanitary conditions?
| Plant provision of worker incentives for reporting
contamination |
| Q32 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
114 |
84.44 |
| Yes |
19 |
14.07 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
1.48 |
(Question # Q33) For each situation described, please tell us what
production workers do if they detect feces, condensation, or other contamination
on the meat, or some other unsanitary condition near the meat.
| Q33 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't
Know" or No Response (Number) |
| No |
Yes |
| Take corrective actions on their own initiative if in their
personal work area |
25.00 |
75.00 |
11 |
| Notify the production worker responsible for work area if outside
worker’s personal area. |
34.75 |
65.25 |
17 |
| Notify the supervisor for all unsanitary conditions |
5.34 |
94.66 |
4 |
(Question # Q34): Has this plant required growers or meat suppliers to
make changes to their management practices that have had a measurable
impact on reducing pathogens?
| Number of plants imposing food safety requirements
on growers or poultry suppliers |
| Q34 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
37 |
28.03 |
| Yes |
66 |
50.00 |
| Not Applicable |
12 |
9.09 |
| Don't Know |
17 |
12.88 |
| Frequency Missing = 3 |
(Question # Q35): Does this plant have a color-code or other system to
ensure that unprocessed and finished products are not mixed and supplies
and equipment are not shared between unprocessed and finished product
areas?
| Use of color-code or other system to ensure no
mixing of unprocessed/ finished products |
| Q35 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
44 |
34.92 |
| Yes |
79 |
62.70 |
| Don't Know |
3 |
2.38 |
| Frequency Missing = 9 |
(Question # Q36) For each type of product, what is the common practice
for maintaining product temperature in the chiller?
| Q36 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't
know," "Not Applicable," or no response (Number) |
| At FSIS standard for temperature
|
Slightly below FSIS standard
|
5 or more below standard
for temperature |
| Unprocessed raw product |
31.30 |
41.74 |
26.96 |
20 |
| Processed raw product |
24.04 |
38.46 |
37.50 |
31 |
| Cooked product |
28.13 |
21.88 |
50.00 |
103 |
(Question # Q52): For each area of plant operations, how much change
has occurred for better pathogen control since 1996?
| Q52 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Missing, Not Applicable,
or Skipped |
| No Change |
Slight Change |
Some Change |
Great Deal of Change |
| Pathogen control at the grower houses |
25.00 |
39.42 |
27.88 |
7.69 |
31 |
| Evisceration, cropper, and neck removal |
16.07 |
21.43 |
26.79 |
35.71 |
23 |
| Reprocessing area |
14.02 |
18.69 |
27.10 |
40.19 |
28 |
| Chiller room or product chilling areas |
12.50 |
22.32 |
37.50 |
27.68 |
23 |
| Product fabrication and packaging |
16.82 |
34.58 |
36.45 |
12.15 |
28 |
(Question # Q53): Does this plant require that purchased birds be removed
from feed prior to shipment to the plant?
| Are birds removed from feed prior to shipment |
| Q53 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
4 |
3.57 |
| Yes |
105 |
93.75 |
| Don't Know |
3 |
2.68 |
| Frequency Missing = 23 |
(Question # Q54): What is the feed withdrawal time prior to bird processing
(including transportation time)?
| Length of the feed withdrawal time prior to bird
processing |
| Q54 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| 0-8 hours |
28 |
24.78 |
| 9-16 hours |
68 |
60.18 |
| 17-24 hours |
15 |
13.27 |
| More than 24 hours |
1 |
0.88 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0.88 |
| Frequency Missing = 22 |
Food Safety Technology Questions Dealing
with Sanitation
(Question # Q37: Does this plant issue cleaned and sanitized smocks or
uniforms to employees at the beginning of the shift?
| Issue cleaned and sanitized uniforms for each
shift |
| Q37 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
18 |
13.53 |
| Yes |
115 |
86.47 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
(Question # Q38): Outside of direct contamination, which ONE statement
best describes the routine practice in this plant for sanitizing hands
or gloves that contact raw or cooked product in the finished product processing
area?
| Routine practice of the plant for sanitizing
hands or gloves contacting raw or cooked product |
| Q38 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No routine, sanitize when contaminated |
24 |
18.18 |
| Sanitize one or more times per shift, less than once per hour |
76 |
57.58 |
| Sanitize one or more times per hour, less than each unit |
29 |
21.97 |
| Sanitize after each unit of product |
2 |
1.52 |
| Don't know |
1 |
0.76 |
| Frequency Missing = 3 |
|
(Question # Q39): Outside of direct contamination, which ONE statement
best describes the routine practice in this plant for sanitizing worker
cut-up knives that contact raw or cooked product in the finished product
processing area?
| Routine practice of the plant for sanitizing
cutup knives contacting raw or cooked product |
| Q39 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No routine, when contaminated |
23 |
18.25 |
| Sanitize one or more times per shift but less than once per
hour |
70 |
55.56 |
| Sanitize one or more times per hour but less than after each
unit |
19 |
15.08 |
| Sanitize after each unit of product |
7 |
5.56 |
| Sanitize two knives in rotation |
3 |
2.38 |
| Don't know |
4 |
3.17 |
| Frequency Missing = 9 |
(Question # Q40): Which ONE statement best describes how often drains
are?
| Frequency that plant sanitizes drains |
| Q40 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Less than once per week |
26 |
19.70 |
| More than once per week, less than once per day |
38 |
28.79 |
| More than once per day, less than once per shift |
48 |
36.36 |
| One or more times per shift |
13 |
9.85 |
| Don't Know |
7 |
5.30 |
| Frequency Missing = 3 |
(Question # Q41): Does this plant have a mid-shift clean-up in which
workers clean all product contact surfaces?
| Plants with mid-shift clean-ups for cleaning
contact surfaces |
| Q41 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
34 |
25.56 |
| Yes |
99 |
74.44 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
Food Safety Technology Questions Dealing
with Equipment
(Question # Q20): Which ONE answer best describes the type of conveyor
belts used for unpackaged, raw and finished product in this plant?
| Type of conveyor belts used for raw and finished
products. |
| Q20 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Mainly cloth-backed belts |
8 |
5.93 |
| Mainly plastic or stainless steel belts |
83 |
61.48 |
| A mixture of cloth-backed, plastic, and SS |
26 |
19.26 |
| Not Applicable |
11 |
8.15 |
| Other |
7 |
5.19 |
(Question # Q21): If OTHER, please specify the belt used.
| Type of belt used for raw and finished products |
| Q21 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Comments |
7 |
100.00 |
| Frequency Missing = 128 |
(Question # Q23): For new equipment purchases, does this plant specify
surfaces that minimize biofilm build-up?
| Plant specifications for bio-film build-up for
new equipment |
| Q23 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
38 |
28.57 |
| Yes |
76 |
57.14 |
| Don't Know |
19 |
14.29 |
| Frequency Missing = 2 |
(Question # Q24): Does this plant maintain positive air pressure in the
final product (raw or cooked) processing areas?
| Does plant have positive air pressure in the
final product areas |
| Q24 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
33 |
24.63 |
| Yes, in some of the final product areas |
38 |
28.36 |
| Yes, in all of the final product areas |
47 |
35.07 |
| Don't Know |
6 |
4.48 |
| Not Applicable |
10 |
7.46 |
| Frequency Missing = 1 |
(Question # Q55): Does this plant use a counter flow scalding tank?
| Plants using counter flow scalding tank |
| Q55 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
32 |
28.32 |
| Yes |
78 |
69.03 |
| Don't Know |
3 |
2.65 |
| Frequency Missing = 22 |
(Question # Q56): After dehocking the bird, are birds transferred manually
or automatically to the eviscerator entry conveyor?
| Type of transfer after dehocking |
| Q56 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Manual transfer |
69 |
62.16 |
| Automatic transfer |
41 |
36.94 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0.90 |
| Frequency Missing = 24 |
(Question # Q57): Does the eviscerator completely separate the viscera
from the bird?
| Plants in which the eviscerator completely separates
the viscera from the bird |
| Q57 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
71 |
65.14 |
| Yes |
15 |
13.76 |
| Birds are eviscerated manually |
23 |
21.10 |
| Frequency Missing = 26 |
(Question # Q58): How does the cropper remove the crop?
| The nature of crop removal by the cropper |
| Q58 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| Pulls out rear |
29 |
26.85 |
| Pushes through front |
77 |
71.30 |
| Don't Know |
2 |
1.85 |
| Frequency Missing = 27 |
(Question # Q59): Are bird carcasses rinsed with an inside-outside antimicrobial
water spray prior to entry into the chiller vat?
| Number of plants in which bird carcasses are
rinsed with inside/outside antimicrobial spray |
| Q59 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
20 |
17.70 |
| Yes |
93 |
82.30 |
| Frequency Missing = 22 |
(Question # Q60): Is chlorinated water used in the chiller vat?
| Plants that use chlorinated water used in the
chiller vat |
| Q60 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
18 |
15.93 |
| Yes |
95 |
84.07 |
| Frequency Missing = 22 |
(Question # Q61): Is an in-line TSP or other antimicrobial system used
in this plant?
| Plants using in-line TSP or other antimicrobial
systems |
| Q61 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
56 |
49.56 |
| Yes |
56 |
49.56 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0.88 |
| Frequency Missing = 22 |
(Question # Q62): Does this plant use an on-line reprocessing system
for fecal matter control and other contamination?
| On-line reprocessing system for fecal matter
control |
| Q62 |
Frequency |
Percent |
| No |
58 |
51.79 |
| Yes |
53 |
47.32 |
| Don't Know |
1 |
0.89 |
| Frequency Missing = 23 |
food safety technology questions dealing with
product and environmental testing
(Question # Q27) Over and above that which is required under the Pathogen
Reduction/HACCP Rule, does this plant test raw or cooked product with...
| Q27 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't
know"
or no response (Number) |
| No |
Yes |
| Aerobic plate counts (APC) tests |
28.80 |
71.20 |
10 |
| Tests for Salmonella or generic E. coli |
15.79 |
84.21 |
2 |
| Tests for E. coli O157 or Listeria |
53.66 |
46.34 |
12 |
(Question # Q28) Over and above that which is required under the Pathogen
Reduction/HACCP Rule, does this plant test environmental cleanliness in
the production area or production equipment with...
| Q28 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Responded "Don't
know"
or no response (Number) |
| No |
Yes |
| Microbial swab tests |
17.16 |
82.84 |
1 |
| Tests for Salmonella or generic E. coli |
45.67 |
54.33 |
8 |
| Tests for E. coli O157 or Listeria |
59.35 |
40.65 |
12 |
(Question # Q29): Over and above that which may be required under the
Pathogen Reduction/HACCP Rule, for each type of test how has the frequency
of bacterial testing changed since 1996?
| Q29 |
Response Category
(Percentage of Respondents) |
Missing
(Number) |
| Decreased |
No Change |
No testing in 1996, but test
now |
Increased but not doubled
|
Doubled or more than doubled
|
| Tests for Listeria, E coli, Salmonella |
2.31 |
18.46 |
23.85 |
40.77 |
14.62 |
5 |
| Generic tests or microbial swab of environment |
3.17 |
34.13 |
12.70 |
34.92 |
15.08 |
9 |
|
