Printable Page

Food System Biosecurity Workgroup
December 17, 2001

University of Minnesota Academic Health Center Conveners:

• Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy
• Center for Animal Health and Food Safety
• School of Public Health Division of Environmental and Occupational Health

Meeting Summary
Workgroup Mission and Goals
Current Activities
Future Activities
Appendix: Meeting Participants

Meeting Summary

On December 17, 2001, the University of Minnesota convened the second meeting of the Food System Biosecurity Workgroup, including representatives from the food industry, trade associations, federal and state government agencies, and academia (for list of participants, see Appendix).

An annotated summary of the agenda follows.

Review of recommendations from the November 12 meeting
A brief summary of the previous meeting was provided. Issues mentioned include: the potential for deliberate microbial or chemical attack on the food system; current needs for industry and government to achieve adequate safety and security of the food supply through improved prevention, detection, and response; and proposed action steps for project staff. Click here for November 12 meeting summary.

Agent risk-assessment discussion
Using anthrax in meat as a model, possible risks, consequences, and prevention strategies of a bioterrorist attack on the food system were discussed. Participants reiterated the need for an information matrix on a broad range of potential biological, chemical, and agricultural agents affecting various types of food products.

Information sharing and analysis center concept
James St. Clair (R.M. Vredenburg & Co.) presented the basic features of an Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ISAC), a concept developed as part of the federal government's Critical Infrastructure Protection initiative. ISACs have been created for several critical infrastructure sectors (such as water resources and financial services), though not yet for the food system. As outlined, the Food ISAC would provide an organized means to collect, analyze, and disseminate information about actions that may threaten the safety or supply of food products. It would allow for secure information sharing within the food industry about threats, vulnerabilities, and incidents of product contamination or consumer illness. It would also provide ISAC members access to information from relevant outside sources, such as government agencies, security organization, and others. These data would provide the basis for a critical surveillance system and early alert network, which would facilitate an effective, coordinated response among industry groups and government agencies in the event of credible threats, intentional contamination of food products, or outbreaks of foodborne illness. The University of Minnesota conveners are currently exploring the development of a Food ISAC, a likely topic of discussion for the next workgroup meeting (see below).

Operational risk management for food safety and security
Col. Larry Barrett (US Air Force, Mobilization Assistant to the Chief, Public Health) presented the process of operational risk management (ORM), as outlined in the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) recent document "Food Safety and Security: Operational Risk Management Systems Approach." The process consists of six main components of risk assessment and risk management:

• Identifying the hazards in an operation or activity that could cause illness, injury or death, property damage, or business degradation
• Assessing the risks of each hazard in terms of probability, severity, and exposure and ranking them into priority order
• Analyzing the risk control measures to reduce or eliminate these risks
• Designing a plan of action to implement these measures
• Carrying out the plan
• Supervising and reviewing implementation of the plan

The goal of ORM is to minimize the risks and to increase operational effectiveness by anticipating hazards and reducing their potential to cause harm. Col. Barrett discussed specific ways in which ORM can be applied to issues in food safety and security.

Framework for guidelines and emergency response
One of the action steps identified at the first meeting was to develop a framework for security guidelines and emergency response for industry to use as a blueprint for company-specific security guidelines or as a quality assurance tool for reviewing existing guidelines. A draft of this framework was reviewed and discussed with the workgroup.

Rapid assessment of credible threats and small group discussions
Craig Watz (FBI), Craig Hedberg (University of Minnesota) and James Dahl (FDA) presented their perspectives on assessing credible and noncredible (hoax) threats to the food system. They each described various ways in which law enforcement, industry, and public health agencies could respond to such threats and highlighted the need for more effective coordination among those groups. Participants at each table were then assigned specific topics to discuss, each group focusing on a different scenario in which credible or noncredible threats might be encountered and the steps the food industry could take in responding. Useful information and specific suggestions offered in these discussions are now being used to develop written protocols for handling threats in the food industry (see current activities below).

Workgroup Mission and Goals

Discussions at both workgroup meetings reflected a general sense that efforts to protect the food system against bioterrorist attack will necessitate new security measures within the industry, beyond those currently in place to assure product safety, and also will require improved cooperation among industry, trade associations, and each of the government agencies with jurisdiction over food safety. To clarify the role of the workgroup, a draft mission statement and draft program goals are presented below for discussion at the next workgroup meeting. University of Minnesota workgroup conveners anticipate that the group will function at least though 2002. Further activities of the group will be determined on the basis of ongoing need.

Proposed mission statement
"To assist the food industry and government in developing effective measures to prevent, detect, and respond to a potential bioterrorist attack involving the food system."

Proposed specific goals

1. Identify critical issues in food system biosecurity and assess strategies for addressing them.
2. Provide a forum for sharing information and coordinating activities among the food industry, trade associations, government, and academia, e.g., through web-based sources and the development of an industry-based information sharing system.
3. Serve as an information clearinghouse for national resources on food system biosecurity.
4. Identify training needs in food system biosecurity and develop training materials for organizations to meet those needs.
5. Develop a research agenda for food system biosecurity and explore ways to implement it.

Current Activities

Develop a protocol for rapid assessment of credible threats
Based on the ideas generated during the small group discussions at the last meeting, a protocol for rapid assessment of credible threats is being developed by project staff. The protocol highlights strategies for dealing with serious threats or risks related to food products, such as evidence of physical contamination of a food item, suspicious behavior or security breaches, written or verbal threats of contamination, reports of consumer illness, or any combination thereof. A draft of this protocol will be sent to workgroup participants for review in early February.

Security guidelines for the food industry
One of the action steps identified by the workgroup at the first meeting was the need to develop a set of security guidelines for the food industry. On January 9, 2002, FDA released two new sets of such guidelines, including all sectors of the system from agriculture to retail service. These guidelines offer a checklist of security concerns that companies may use to judge the adequacy of their current procedures and to address important gaps.

• FDA guidance document for food producers, processors, transporters, and retailers
• FDA Guidance document for importers and filers

Initial response to these documents from industry has been favorable. Publication of these guidelines has prompted the workgroup activities on security guidelines to move to a lower priority.

An inventory of bioterrorism preparedness initiatives
Workgroup staff members are in the process of compiling an inventory of government and industry activities related to food system biosecurity. Progress on this inventory will be shared with the workgroup at the next meeting. Information also will be posted on the CIDRAP Web site as it is collected and reviewed.

List of laboratories that perform food testing for industry
At the last meeting, the need was raised for a comprehensive, up-to-date list of laboratories that perform food testing for industry, since food testing often is rapidly needed in threat assessment activities. Therefore, project staff will compile a list of available laboratories, based on data provided by workgroup member William Krueger, Director, Laboratory Services Division, Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture. This also will be sent to the workgroup participants in early February.

Future Activities

The next meeting of the workgroup is scheduled for Wednesday, March 13, 2002, noon to 4 pm, continuing on Thursday morning, March 14, 8 am until noon. The primary focus of this meeting will be discussion of the Food ISAC, including its goals, structure, funding, and the University of Minnesota's role in the process. Feedback from industry, trade associations, and government is crucial for ensuring the effectiveness of this major initiative. Further details will be sent via e-mail.

Additional activities for ongoing consideration include:

• Development of an information matrix of biological and physical characteristics of a range of potential biological and chemical agents in various media (e.g., meat, baked goods, produce, drinks), for use in conducting risk assessment in a non-regulatory setting (i.e., within industry)
• Development of a primer for clinicians on foodborne illness and food bioterrorism
• Development of training materials for food industry representatives on preparedness and response to food terrorism
• Development of food safety and security training materials for law enforcement
• Coordination of the food industry's preparedness and response capabilities with regulatory, law enforcement, and public health agencies

Appendix: Meeting Participants

Joe Baca Office of Field Programs, CFSAN Washington, DC Larry Barrett, DVM, MS, Diplomate, ACVPM California Department of Health Services Sacramento Mark Becker, PhD Dean, School of Public Health University of Minnesota Minneapolis Jeff Bender, DVM, MS Diplomate, ACVPM College of Veterinary Medicine University of Minnesota St. Paul John Besser, MS Minnesota Department of Health Minneapolis Shirley Bohm Minnesota Department of Agriculture St. Paul Phillip Brooks President, H. Brooks and Company New Brighton, Minnesota Frank Busta Institute for Food Technologists, Food Science    and Nutrition St. Paul Jim Dahl Food and Drug Administration Rockville, Maryland Richard Danila, PhD Minnesota Department of Health Minneapolis Mark Dopp American Meat Institute Arlington, Virginia Forrest Dryden, PhD Hormel Foods, LLC Austin, Minnesota Wyatt Elder Cargill, Incorporated Wayzata, Minnesota Chet England Burger King Corporation Miami David Fairfield National Grain and Feed Association Washington, DC Susan Ferenc, DVM, PhD Grocery Manufacturers of America Washington, DC Bill Fry Vice President, HEB Grocery Co, LP San Antonio Donna Garren Vice President, United Fresh Fruit and    Vegetable Association Alexandria, Virginia Patricia Griffin Chief, Foodborne Epidemiology Section CDC, NCID Atlanta Craig Hedberg, PhD, MS School of Public Health University of Minnesota Minneapolis Karen Henderson, PhD USDA/FSIS Washington DC 20250 Jill Hollingsworth Food Marketing Institute Washington, DC William Hueston, PhD, DVM University of Minnesota St. Paul LeeAnne Jackson, PhD FDA College Park, Maryland William Krueger Minnesota Department of Agriculture St. Paul

Ken Kulick FDA College Park, Maryland Mahesh Kumar, DVM, MS, PhD,    Diplomate ACPV St. Cloud, Minnesota Beth Lautner, DVM, MS Vice President, National Pork Board Des Moines, Iowa Michael Loftis, RS Director of Quality Assurance Ruby Tuesday, Inc Maryville, Tennessee Judy Mandy Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy University of Minnesota Minneapolis Ann Marie McNamara Sara Lee Foods Cincinnati Graham Miller Buffets, Inc Eagan, Minnesota Kris Moore MD, MPH Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy University of Minnesota Minneapolis Ellen Morrison Directo, Division of Emergency and    Investigational Operations FDA Rockville, Maryland Gene Novak  H. Brooks and Company New Brighton, Minnesota Michael Osterholm, PhD, MPH Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy University of Minnesota Minneapolis Julie Ostrowsky Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy University of Minnesota Minneapolis Christine Roberts Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy University of Minnesota Minneapolis Sara Thurin Rollin Cargill, Incorporated Wayzata, Minnesota Jenny Scott National Food Processors Association Washington, DC Kirk Smith DVM, PhD Minnesota Department of Health Minneapolis COL Scott Severin, DVM Department of Defense Veterinary Service Activity Falls Church, Virginia James St. Clair CIP Consultant, R.M. Vredenburg & Co HHS OIRM Arlington, Virginia Katherine Swanson, PhD General Mills St. Paul Donald Vesley, PhD School of Public Health University of Minnesota Minneapolis Craig Watz FBI Washington, DC Dave Wiemer SUPERVALU, Inc Minneapolis David R. Yost FDA Minneapolis