Imagini ale paginilor

Mr. Houser pointed out that when he had met with the State of Washington, Mr. Girard had thought it was acceptable because we did not specify how it was to be done. It could be embossed, rubber stamped, gum labeled, etc. Mr. Girard said if this were passed, the State of Washington would require that it be legible and that if the rest of the States could do it, Washington will do it. Mr. Pringle inquired if this passed, would it apply as to date of pack only or to repack only? Mr. Houser replied that it applied to date of pack and date of repack. Mr. Harrison objected to the need for code-dating of frozen oysters as he believed customers could detect the code date meaning and might reject a package of frozen shellfish which were entirely satisfactory because of the date. Mr. Houser pointed out that the code-dating requirements in the Manual for frozen shellfish did not require it to be on the outer wrap.

Without further discussion, the Workshop adopted the proposal, with the deletion of the word "uniform".

(Note: The following proposed change and subsequent discussion is based in part on the paper by Mr. C. B. Kelly entitled ''Time-Temperature Effect on Bacteriological Quality of Stored Oysters". This paper was not presented at the Workshop but was distributed in advance to Workshop participants as the basis for a change in the refrigeration requirements for shucked oysters. (Mr. Kelly's paper is included in these Proceedings as Appendix Y.)

10. Suggested Change. Page 19. Section B. Item 25 "Refrigeration of Shucked

Shellfish'': That the Public-Health Reason for this include the following additional paragraphs:

In addition, research by the Public Health Service with
Crassos trea virginica and Crassos trea gigas stored in ice and
at 37.5°F. sustained slight increases in coliform MPN's during
the first five days of storage. After the storage period of
five days, there was a continuous increase in MPN values until
the 25th day, at which time the coliform MPN's exceeded the
original values by at least 50 times. Oysters from the same
lots stored at 50°F. sustained a continuous increase in coli-
form MPN's exceeding 1000 times the original count within five

In the same studies oysters stored in ice and at 37.5° F.
sustained only slight increases in standard plate counts after
being stored for five days. However, with a storage temper
ature of 50°F. the same oysters sustained plate count increases
which exceeded 180 times their original count within five days.

[ocr errors]

The fecal coliform MPN's decreased slightly from their origi-
nal MPN values during storage in ice, at 37.5° F. and at 50° F.
with the exception that there was a frequent increase in fecal
coliform MPN's at the 50° F. storage temperature. (See Time
and Temperature Effects on Stored Oysters by C. B. Kelly,
Proceedings 1964 Shellfish Sanitation Workshop, available from
Shellfish Sanitation Branch, Public Health Service, Department
of Health, Education, & Welfare, Washington, D. c. 20201.)
Appendix B contains charts, figures 1,2, and 3, which present
the above information in graphic form.

It was concluded that to avoid adverse bacterial multiplication
it is necessary to refrigerate shucked oysters immediately after
shucking to 40° F. or lower.

Discussion: In previous proposals to the industry and the States it was recommended that this item be changed to require a refrigeration temperature of 40° F. or 45° F. Several States and some portions of the industry were opposed to this on the basis that it would create undue hardship.

Recommendation: That the Workshop endorse the above addition.

In introducing the above proposal Mr. Houser pointed out that it constituted a change only in the Public Health Explanation" and did not require cooling of shucked shellfish to 40° or 45° F. but merely pointed out the desirability of cooling to these temperatures. Mr. Jensen indicated he thought it was a poor way to handle the cooling problem inasmuch as it was reported earlier to the Workshop that shellfish spoils rapidly at temperatures above 40° F. He suggested that the consumer has the right to expect that he will get a product that will not make him sick but will also be fit to eat. Mr. Kelly noted that it had been demonstrated that when we get multiplication of E. coli we get multiplication of salmonella. Also that the Workshop would be well advised to require lower refrigeration standards for shucked shellfish. Mr. Girard indicated there was no doubt that we get better quality shellfish with lower cooling temperatures. However, there was no public health reason for a different temperature than the 50° F. currently required. He further indicated that the State Board of Health in Washington is supreme in developing laws or regulations relating to the sanitary aspects of shellfish but such laws and regulations had to relate to the transmission of disease.

Mr. Brown asked for a show of hands for and against the proposal, however, an unidentified person wanted to know if the vote was for a lower temperature. Mr. Brown replied that the vote was on the change as proposed, which only pointed out the desirability of cooling to 40° F. and was not a requirement. Another unidentified voice inquired whether the workshop was being asked to accept a temperature of 45° F. within two hours after packaging? Mr. Houser explained the proposal was only to include in the Manual under the ''Public Health Explanation" some of the research material which indicated the need for cooling of shucked shellfish to 40° F. or below. Mr. Hobbs pointed out that the Region 111 States had had a long discussion with the Public Health Service representatives at the Old Point Comfort meeting and it was agreed there that the requirement would require cooling to 45° F. or below. He inquired whether this was in the proposal or whether we were talking about cooling to 40° within two hours after shucking. Mr. Houser said "ne i ther': that we were only pointing out the need for lower cooling temperatures in the "public health explanation". Mr. Hobbs then said that if lower temperatures were needed, why was 'nt the Public Health Service asking for them? Mr. Houser stated that the major i ty of the States and some of the industry had opposed the requirement of lower temperatures during their regional meetings, consequently we had ended up with a public health recommendation. Mr. Brown pointed out that if the Workshop favored a more stringent cooling standard, there would be nothing to preclude such a change being considered in lieu of the present proposal., Mr. McIntyre indicated that considerable information had already been provided that 50° was not a satisfactory cooling temperature; that other portions of the food industry had dropped their cooling temperatures to 450 F.; that the present proposal was superfluous in that it does not require any change in cooling temperatures; and that for the Manual to be worthwhile the proposal should be changed from a recommendation to a requirement. Mr. McIntyre then made a motion that the temperature cooling requirement in the Manual be changed from 50° F. to 45° F. This motion was seconded by Mr. Hansell.

Dr. Mosley commented that more sophisticated epidemiological techniques are being used and are particularly helpful in salmonella surveillance. He pointed to the problem of cracked eggs in the poultry industry which had been recently discovered by epidemiological techniques and indicated he thought it would be much to the shellfish industry's interest to adopt a safe cooling temperature as a requirement.

Mr. Brown indicated it was the purpose of the motion to change the cooling requirement in the Manual from 500 F. to 45° F. and that until the issue was disposed of, discussion should be confined to this motion.

Mr. Willerford incicated that Connecticut at this time was considering lowering their temperature requirements and would probably go ahead and do so.

Mr. Bower commented that the West Coast industry did not oppose the temperature decrease but objected to the time allowed to reach the lower temperature. He indicated chat without precooling the product, which is practically impossible for all shuckerpackers, it is impossible to refrigerate the center of a large container to 40° F. within two hours after packing. He proposed an amendment to the proposal which would permit the shellfish to be cooled to 45° F. "as soon as practical after packing."

Dr. Mosley pointed out that the classic way to cause food poisoning is to refrigerate egg salad in too large a container, "The center portion may be warm, he said,

and remain warm for a long time." "If staphylococci are present, a number of people may get food poisoning. He suggested that it is the responsibility of industry to package foods so that they are quickly cooled to a proper temperature."

After some further discussion the Workshop agreed to adopt the requirement for "cooling of shucked shellfish to 45° F. as soon as practical after packing." (Note: This decision was reviewed by the Workshop at the Thursday morning session and changed to read as follows:

"Shucked shellfish shall be cooled to an internal temperature of 45° F. within 5 hours after shucking. Storage temperatures shall not exceed 45° F. Storage at 34-40° F. is strongly recommended to preserve quality."

Mr. Brown then brought up the original proposal to change the Public Health explanation of i tem 25 to read as indicated in No. 10 above. Without further discussion, it was adopted by the Workshop.

The Workshop was then recessed at 5:15 p.m. to reconvene at 9:30 a.m. the following


[blocks in formation]

The Workshop reconvened at 9:30 a.m. on November 19, 1965, with Mr. Ralph Van Derwerker, Regional Program Director, DEEFP, PHS, New York Regional Office, as Chairman in lieu of Mr. John Faulkner who was unable to be present. Mr. Van Derwerker called on Mr. Eugene Jensen to review the actions taken by the Workshop during the latter phases of the previous afternoon's discussion.

Mr. Jensen noted that the Workshop had several items of unfinished business which should be handled at this time. The first one was the position the Workshop might take on the problem of depuration. He reminded the Workshop that on Tuesday, in his presentation on Depuration, he had suggested four points for the Workshop to consider; that Mr. Loring had presented in his paper on depuration seven points as a substitute for Mr Jensens four points; and that he and Mr. Loring had reworked together the several points into eight and had them circulated the previous day. The eight points were as follows:

It is the consensus of the Fifth National Shellfish Sanitation Workshop:

1) That the Cooperative-State-PHS-Industry Program for the Certification of

Interstate Shellfish Shippers can be effective in assuring the production of shellfish of acceptable quality, but with the recognition that technical and administrative changes may be needed.

2) That much additional emphasis needs to be placed on pollution control and

abatement in terms of protecting shellfish growing areas. 3) That relaying should be used wherever practical to reduce shellfish populations

in contaminated areas.

4) That the potential value of depuration is recognized and that research and

pilot plants be continued to gain additional information on the process.


That control over harvesting and transport to certified dealers be improved in any way possible. (in many areas this could be accomplished through use of designated "landing areas.'')


That present schedules of fines and penalties for removal of shellfish from polluted areas be reviewed by the individual State and PHS. The objective of such review should be to better inform the courts on the public consequences of illegal sale of polluted shellfish and should seek fines and penalties commensurate with the probable public damage.

7) That the State recognize the need for strong marine police supervision of

polluted areas, harvesting practices, and relaying, and that adequate financial resources be made available for these activities.


That Federal support for State shellfish sanitation programs be further
investigated as recommended by the Association of State and Territorial
Health Officers.

"That the Public Health Service be requested to study
the feasibility of securing Federal funds to assist
States in shellfish control. Explorations should
include the possibilities of weighted formula grants,
project grants, contractual systems between Federal
and State governments and also the possibility of
building a weighting i tem for this purpose into
present stream pollution funds."

Mr. Jensen asked if anyone had negative comments on the above proposals.

Mrs. Wallace said the revisions seemed to be quite in keeping with the spirit and the ideas presented on behalf of the Oyster Institute, and suggested that the industry support them.

Mr. Jensen then inquired if they would have any effect one way or the other on the Canadian-U.S. Program and asked Mr. Edmonds to state his views.

Mr. Edmonds said he believed the eight points would be acceptable insofar as Canada was concerned.

Mr. Jensen asked Dr. Mosley of the Communical Disease Center to express his views.

Dr. Mosley indicated he thought the position as stated in the eight points was reasonable, and that all present should be interested in depuration and its potential. He indicated CDC had been most concerned with the problems of hepatitis in relation to raw shellfish. He further indicated that there is sufficient evidence at hand, that some shellfish distributed through commercial channels is associated with a slightly increased risk of hepatitis. This risk is in addition to the ep i demics which are known to have occured. ''Depuration may be an answer to this problem" he said.

Mr. Sarraf indicated that Pennsylvania concurred in regard to the eight points.

After further discussion the Workshop adopted the eight point resolution.

Mr. Jensen then brought up the subject of refrigeration of shucked shellfish, indicating that there was some confusion as to what had been decided on the subject the previous afternoon. He said that an immediate cooling temperature of 40° F. had been discussed with the States and the industry and that there were general reservations and the feeling that the temperature set was too stringent and could not be met. He indicated that if the bacteriological standards previously agreed to were to be met, the storage temperatures should be held somewhere close to 32 or 33° F. Some of the States had suggested a cooling temperature of 45° F. as being more attainable.

Mr. Brinsfjeld pointed out that most food control programs require the cooling of products to 45° F. and that the National Shellfish Sanitation Program would be remiss in its duties if it did not seek to achieve a requirement of at least 45° F., even though it was known that 40° F. was more ideal. He indicated that the industry had not favored cooling to 45° F. and it seemed to him that they should favor a temperature which would provide the best quality product, one which would help lengthen shelflife.

Mrs. Wallace commented that the industry was very much interested in quality control and did not oppose the 45° F. cooling temperature requirement, but did oppose the establishment of an unrealistic time limit for the 45° F. temperature to be reached.

At Mr. Jensen's request, Dr. Mosley commented that although he had no personal experience with salmonella, he wanted to point out that where the opportunity exists for salmonella to multiply, there is very definitely a potential hazard. He indicated that through the salmonella surveillance program of CDC in cooperation with State laboratories throughout the country, certain food products had been definitely established as hazardous. So far, shellfish have not been involved. It would be much better to adopt a cooling temperature at which salmonella could not multiply before shellfish are found to be involved, he said.

Mr. Kelly pointed out that according to his charts a temperature of 45° F. would not do the job desired, and that it was merely a compromise figure between 40° F. and 50° F.

Dr. Litsky mentioned, in connection with Salmonella, that there is a new technique which enables bacteriologists to isolate one salmonella in a gram of material. Previously laboratory workers had been lucky to isolate one salmonella in 100 grams of material. This means, he said, that the sensitivity of the test is increased. This may reduce the bacteriologic standards by a factor of 10 to 1000. He urged the Workshop to adopt 45° F. now and think about 32° F. in the future because the bacteriologists are going to find certain bacteria with greater ease and accuracy in the future.

Mr. Brinsfield pointed out that the Region 111 group of States agreed and recommended that with the use of ice or refrigerated water, shellfish could be cooled to 45° F. within two hours, and that the storage temperature should be no higher than 40° F.

Mr. Gregory indicated they had two meetings in Virginia, one with their packers and one with the Public Health Service. Virginia repackers had pointed out that they had to maintain the oysters currently during repacking at 50° F. or below and if this temperature were changed to 40° F. it would be impossible for them to comply. They therefore had agreed to a 45° F. temperature although this would be difficult to comply with. At the meeting with the Public Health Service, taking into consideration the views of packers, it had been agreed that all shellfish should be cooled to 45° F. within two hours after packing and stored at 40° F. or lower. Mr. Gregory made a motion of his statement and this was seconded by Mr. Brinsfield.

Mr. McGinnes speaking for the Virginia industry group remarked that they preferred a 40° F. temperature requirement but even getting it down to 45° F, within two hours was the problem. If ice were used there was the danger of increase in bacteria count because i ce plants roll the ice on the floor and it can thereby become contaminated. The Southern States where the temperatures are warmer would have an even greater problem. He mentioned that there was one packer who has refrigerated water running over the skimmer and who gets the oyster down to temperature of 450 F. as they go into the 5 gallon can, but that there were 5 other packers not having that kind of equipment.

Mr. Van Derwerker commented that the Workshop seemed to have an impossible situation in that the words ''soon as practical" could be inferred to mean a week. He further pointed out that the discussion concerned reducing the temperature of the shellfish to 45° F. within two hours of packing and asked that consideration be given to the thought of amending the two hours to some thing which can be accomplished.

Mr. Blair indicated that they in Oregon, had in preparation for this discussion on cooling, had made some limited investigations. They found, that in using oysters in a gallon tin, they could not bring them down from 61° F. in a dry refrigerator set at 32° F. to 450 F. in two hours, but could achieve 45° F. in 3 minutes over four hours. Using flake ice at another plant and refrigeration set at 32 degrees, it still took over two hours to bring the temperature down. He suggested that the Workshop consider a period of 4 hours as being the minimum which could be considered in establishing a time standard.

Mr. Van Derwerker indicated that since Mr. Blair had proposed the above as an amendment to the motion that the discussion should be confined to "cooled to 45° F. within four hours."

Mr. Harrison spoke in opposition to the above amendment to the motion as creating an undue hardship in the industry. Mr. Hobbs indicated that better than 90 percent of the Maryland packers are now chilling their oysters to 50° F. or below within two hours and could reach the 45° F. within that time.

Mr. Kelly quoted from research previously accomplished. One gallon cans of oysters at a temperature 78° F. were packed in crushed ice and reached a temperature of 450°F. after 345 minutes (5 3/4 hrs.). One gallon cans of oysters packed in crushed ice at a starting temperature of 63o F. reached a tempersture of 45° F. in 250 minutes (45 hours). One-half gallon cans of oysters packed in crushed ice at a starting temperature of 85° F. reached 45° F. in 200 minutes (3 1/3 hours). Starting at 66° F. half gallons of oysters in crushed ice required 144 minutes (23 hours). If stored under dry refrigeration at 31-320 F., oysters in gallon cans at a starting temperature of 86° F. required 360 minutes (6 hours) to reach 45° F. Gallon cans stored at 31-32° under dry refrigeration but at a starting temperature of 67° F. required 390 minutes (6Ż hrs.) to reach 45° F. One pint containers under dry refrigeration at 31-32° F. took 120 minutes (2 hours) to reach 45° F. from a starting point of 66° F.

« ÎnapoiContinuați »