Questions and Answers - Investigation into Establishment 38, XL Foods Inc.

Will a review of the investigation into Establishment 38, XL Foods Inc., be conducted?

Canada's food safety system remains among the best in the world, but events such as this underscore the importance of ongoing review and continuous improvement.

As a result, the Government of Canada has appointed an Independent Expert Advisory Panel to conduct a review of events and circumstances related to the XL Foods Inc. E. coli O157:H7 investigation and recall.

The review team includes recognized scientific, public health, and industry experts. The team consists of Dr. Ronald Lewis (Chair), Dr. Ronald Usborne, and Dr. André Corriveau.

Based on the findings and conclusions, the team will make recommendations, within the existing resources of the CFIA, to strengthen prevention strategies and regulatory oversight. In keeping with the Government's commitment to transparency, the final report and any recommendations will be made public once completed.

If there are controls in place at this plant, how did this happen?

The CFIA's in-depth review of the plant determined that there was no single factor that would lead to E. coli O157:H7 contamination of product leaving the plant. The combination of several deficiencies probably played a role. By themselves, each of these findings would not typically signal an immediate concern during the course of normal inspection activities.

Deficiencies were identified by the CFIA in the areas of E. coli O157:H7 control measures and sampling and testing procedures.

The detection of E. coli O157:H7 in slaughter facilities is not uncommon, and plants need to have adequate measures in place to monitor higher than normal detection rates and modify control measures accordingly.

Establishment 38 had monitoring measures in place but was not properly conducting trend analysis of the data it collected. The CFIA review found that the plant needs to improve its trend analysis and also strengthen its response measures when a higher than normal number of detections are made.

In addition, the company's control measures for meat that tested positive for E. coli O157:H7 were not always being followed correctly. While containers of meat testing positive for E. coli O157:H7 were properly handled, a small number of containers produced immediately before and after the contaminated product were not always diverted from the fresh meat line. This process, known as bracketing, is an established food safety control.

The company's maintenance plan required updating in order to address minor sanitary issues, mostly related to the older age of the building. The CFIA detected issues related to adequate control of condensation and ventilation issues. These specific deficiencies are not likely related to the E. coli O157:H7 contamination.

How many inspectors does the CFIA have at XL Foods Inc. and how many inspectors does the CFIA have overall?

The CFIA currently has 40 inspectors and 6 veterinarians assigned full-time to the XL Foods Inc. plant in Brooks, Alberta providing systematic inspection and oversight. They work in two shifts to ensure full coverage whenever the plant is operating. There have been no changes to the existing staffing levels at XL Foods Inc. in the last 12 months. In fact, since 2006 we have added 2 veterinarians and six inspectors to the plant complement.

Since March 2006, field inspection staff increased by 711 from 2,823 to 3,534 in March 2012, approximately 25 per cent.

The term "field inspection staff" covers front-line inspectors and inspection managers who work in food processing plants, import service centres and field offices across the country. This includes food inspectors for meat as well as inspectors who specialize in food safety investigations.

How much money does the CFIA spend on food safety programs? Is that number changing?

The CFIA continues to increase its spending on food safety programs because our highest priority is maintaining the safety of the food supply. Canadians should know that there have been no reductions made at the CFIA that will impact food safety in Canada.

Currently, the CFIA has an approved budget of $315 million for food safety programs. As in previous years, the CFIA's approved budget is expected to be supplemented throughout the fiscal year with additional investments. For example, Canada's Economic Action Plan 2012 announced $51.2 million over two years (including this fiscal year) for the CFIA, the PHAC and Health Canada to strengthen Canada's food safety system.

While the CFIA, like all federal departments and agencies, contributed to savings as part of the Government's return to fiscal balance, there will be no reductions made at the CFIA that will impact food safety in Canada.

Changes to the CFIA's budget are publicly reported in its Quarterly Financial Report and reported annually in its Departmental Performance Report.

How does the CFIA determine how many inspectors should be at each plant?

The CFIA assigns inspection staff to facilities based on a number of factors including the size and type of operations at the plant. Based on these factors, the 40 inspectors and 6 veterinarians assigned to Establishment 38 is an appropriate number.

Is it true that the CFIA had difficulty obtaining information from the company at the onset of the investigation?

On September 6, 2012, the CFIA verbally requested distribution information and testing results from XL Foods Inc. for all products produced on the days when the affected products were made. The CFIA sent a formal letter on September 7 requesting a response from the company by September 8, and followed-up on this request on September 8 and 9. XL Foods Inc. finally provided this information in a series of submissions over two days, beginning on September 10.

During this period, the CFIA continued its food safety investigation and CFIA inspectors also continued enhanced supervision of ongoing operations at the plant, including:

• Verifying that carcasses were clean prior to processing;
• Continuing to verify that the facility's maintenance program was operating and that the processing environment was clean;
• Checking daily that all positive lots were diverted to rendering and/or cooking;
• Verifying that the company was developing and implementing action measures related to the corrective actions requested by the CFIA.

How does Canada’s approach to managing E. coli compare with the approach in the U.S.?

Foods safety systems on both sides of the border are complementary given the significant volume of trade from an integrated North American market.

While regulations in both countries are similar, there are slight variations between systems. For example, in Canada, industry must test every lot of trim using the N60 method (meaning that 60 samples from each lot are tested) and is required to adjust their food safety controls on days when the amount of positives exceeds an unusually high number of positives found.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recommends that if the number of positives on a production day is greater than 5%, the plant should not release any of that production without retesting or reprocessing it.

Although the CFIA has a similar requirement for plants to take action when an usually high number of positives are found, the specific threshold is set by the company's food safety plan.

The CFIA also has additional downstream testing requirements. Trim made at secondary processing establishments must also be tested for E. coli.

Read the Policy on the Control of E. coli O157:H7 Contamination in Raw Beef Products