Court Rules Against USDA in Meat Case

May 26, 2000

A Texas federal court has ruled against USDA’s meat testing program. The winner in the case, Supreme Beef Processors, Inc., said the decision confirms the company’s position, that the salmonella test to determine sanitary conditions at a meat plant "is flawed and outside the scope of USDA’s authority."

The Center for Science in the Public Interest branded the decision "misguided" and said it "strikes at the core of USDA’s new program to improvement and poultry products." The decision should be overturned on appeal, said CSPI, or Congress should "step in immediately to protect consumers by restoring enforceable limits on harmful bacteria in meat."

U.S. District Judge A. Joe Fish of Dallas said that because USDA"s performance standards and salmonella tests "do not necessarily evaluate the conditions of a meat processor’s establishment, they cannot serve as the basis for finding a plant’s meat adulterated. Indeed, a plant could, in theory, be completely sanitized from top to bottom, but if the meat in it tests positive for salmonella, the USDA could withdraw its inspectors, effectively closing a plant that is sanitary."

Company President and CEO Steven F. Spiritas said the case was not about food safety but about a bad policy. "Except for our concerns about USDA’s improper enforcement policy, we have strongly supported the new government food safety inspection program (hazard analysis and critical control point, or HACCP). We remain committed to our HACCP plan, because it is effective in helping locate and correct potential food safety problems."

Supreme Beef hard argued that salmonella tests did not necessarily reflect a plant’s actual sanitary conditions, because beef could become contaminated before it reached a processor – at a slaughter plant, for example.

"While the vast majority of meat and poultry plants in the United States have had little trouble meeting our salmonella standard, Supreme Beef has failed to do so three times," said Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman. "The company has not taken the steps necessary to remedy its poor performance." He indicated USDA would appeal Fish’s ruling.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) said, "If USDA lacks the ability to enforce microbial standards, it is a severe setback to our country’s efforts to address our most significant food safety threat, microbial pathogens. If this ruling stands, industry still has the flexibility (to find the best way to control pathogens), but there is no accountability."