[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 209 (Monday, October 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65555-65560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26472]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0547]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey on the
Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected Retail and
Foodservice Facility Types (2013-2022)
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA).
DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by
November 28, 2012.
ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-NEW and
title ``Survey on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in
Selected Retail and Foodservice Facility Types (2013-2022).'' Also
include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this
document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B,
Rockville, MD 20850, 301-796-7726, Ila.Mizrachi@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.
Survey on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected
Retail and Foodservice Facility Types (2013-2022)--(OMB Control Number
0910-NEW)
I. Background
In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's National Retail
Food Team initiated a 10-year voluntary survey to measure trends in the
occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors--preparation practices and
employee behaviors most commonly reported to the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) as contributing factors to foodborne
illness outbreaks at the retail level. Specifically, the survey
included data collection inspections of various types of retail and
foodservice establishments at 5-year intervals (1998, 2003, and 2008)
in order to observe and document trends in the occurrence of the
following foodborne illness risk factors:
Food from Unsafe Sources.
Poor Personal Hygiene.
Inadequate Cooking.
Improper Holding/Time and Temperature.
Contaminated Equipment/Protection from Contamination.
FDA developed reports summarizing the findings for each of the
three data collection periods (1998, 2003, and 2008) (Refs. 1 to 3).
Data from all three data collection periods were analyzed to detect
trends in improvement or regression over time and to determine whether
progress had been made toward the goal of reducing the occurrence of
foodborne illness risk factors in selected retail and foodservice
facility types (Ref. 4).
The research obtained from these studies provides FDA a solid
foundation for developing a national retail food program model that can
be used by Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies to:
Identify essential food safety program performance
measurements;
Assess strengths and gaps in the design, structure, and
delivery of program services;
Establish program priorities and intervention strategies
focused on reducing the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors;
and
Create a mechanism that justifies program resources and
allocates them to program areas that will provide the most significant
public health benefits.
Using this 10-year survey as a foundation, FDA is proposing to
conduct a new voluntary survey encompassing annual data collections
over a 10-year period. The survey will
[[Page 65556]]
determine the following for each facility type included in the study:
The foodborne illness risk factors that are in most need
of priority attention during each data collection period;
Trends of improvement or regression in foodborne illness
risk factor occurrence over time; and
The impact of industry food safety management systems in
controlling the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors.
The results of the proposed study will be used to:
Formulate Agency retail food safety policies and
initiatives;
Identify retail food work plan priorities and allocate
resources to enhance retail food safety nationwide;
Generate nationally representative estimates of the
progress being made to reduce the occurrence of foodborne illness risk
factors in retail and foodservice establishments; and
Recommend best practices and targeted intervention
strategies to assist the retail and foodservice industry and state,
local, and tribal regulators with reducing foodborne illness risk
factors.
The statutory basis for FDA conducting this survey is the Public
Health Service Act (the PHS Act) (42 U.S.C 243, section 311(a)) (Also
21 CFR 5.10(a)(2) and (4)), which requires that FDA provide assistance
to state and local governments relative to the prevention and
suppression of communicable diseases. In addition, the PHS Act requires
that FDA cooperate with and aid state and local authorities in the
enforcement of their health regulations and provide advice on matters
relating to the preservation and improvement of public health.
Additionally, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301)
and Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535) require that FDA provide assistance to
other Federal, State, and local governmental bodies.
In early 2013, FDA will conduct a pilot data collection to practice
the use of the data collection form and methods and test exportation of
the pilot data into a central repository. Following the pilot, the
Agency plans to conduct annual data collections beginning in 2013 with
the initial data collection for select restaurant facility types,
followed by the initial data collection for select institutional
foodservice facility types in 2014 and select retail food store
facility types in 2015. The results of the initial data collection for
each of the facility types will serve as the baseline measurement from
which trends will be analyzed. Two additional data collection periods
for each of the facility types are planned at 3-year intervals after
the initial data collection for purposes of analyzing trends.
Table 1--Summary of Data Collection Timeframes \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year for initial
Facility types data collection Second data Third and final
Industry segment included in the (baseline collection period data collection
survey measurement) period
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restaurants...................... Full Service 2013 2016 2019
Restaurants.
Fast Food
Restaurants.
Institutional Foodservice........ Hospitals........... 2014 2017 2020
Nursing Homes.......
Elementary Schools
(K-5).
Retail Food Stores............... Deli Departments/ 2015 2018 2021
Stores.
Meat & Poultry
Departments/Markets.
Seafood Departments/
Markets.
Produce Departments/
Markets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data collections for each of the facility types within an industry segment will be conducted using a 3-year
interval period. Initial data collection will serve as the baseline. Subsequent collections will provide the
data needed to analyze trends.
A description of the facility types included in the proposed survey
is included in table 2:
Table 2--Description of the Facility Types Included in the Survey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry segment Facility type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restaurants.................. Full Service Establishments where
Restaurants. customers place their
order at their table,
are served their meal
at the table, receive
the service of the wait
staff, and pay at the
end of the meal.
Fast Food Also referred to as
Restaurants. quick service
restaurants and defined
as any restaurant that
is not a full service
restaurant.
Institutional Foodservice.... Hospitals...... Foodservice operations
that serve patients,
staff, and hospital
visitors in a
traditional hospital
setting. Individuals
who are acutely ill to
those who are
immunocompromised are a
target population for
data collection.
Nursing Homes.. Foodservice operations
that serve highly
susceptible populations
living in a group care
setting. The elderly
(55+ years) is the
target population for
the data collection.
Also includes assisted
living facilities.
Elementary Foodservice operations
Schools (K-5). that serve students
from one or more grade
levels from preschool
through grade 5. Young
children are a target
population for the data
collection.
[[Page 65557]]
Retail Food Stores........... Deli Departments in retail
Departments/ food stores where
Stores. potentially hazardous
foods (time/temperature
control for safety
foods) such as luncheon
meats and cheeses are
sliced for the customer
and where sandwiches
and salads are prepared
on site or received
from a commissary in
bulk containers,
portioned, and
displayed. Freestanding
cheese shops are
categorized as delis.
Parts of the deli may
also include:
Salad bars
and other food bars
maintained by the
deli department
manager;
Areas where
meat or poultry are
cooked and offered
for sale as ready-to-
eat;
Pizza
stands; and
Limited
bakery operations
attached to or
adjacent to the
deli.
Meat and Meat and poultry
Poultry departments in a retail
Departments/ food store, as well as
Markets. any freestanding meat
market or butcher shop
that sells raw meat or
poultry directly to the
consumer.
Seafood Seafood departments in
Departments/ retail food stores and
Markets. freestanding seafood
markets that sell
seafood directly to the
consumer including the
preparation and sale of
raw and/or ready-to-eat
seafood. In-store sushi
bars are considered
part of the seafood
department for the
purposes of the data
collection.
Produce Areas or departments
Departments/ where produce is cut,
Markets. prepared, stored, or
displayed. A produce
department may include
salad bars that are
managed by the produce
manager, as well as
juicers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A geographical information system database containing a listing of
businesses throughout the United States will be used as the
establishment inventory for the data collections. FDA's Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) Biostatistical Branch, in
collaboration with the FDA National Retail Food Team, will perform a
series of filtering processes of the various database food
establishment categories to ensure establishments are correctly
classified and considered eligible to participate in the survey based
on the descriptions in table 2.
To further determine the pool of establishments eligible for
selection, an effort will be made to exclude operations that handle
only prepackaged food items or conduct low-risk food preparation
activities. The FDA Food Code contains a grouping of establishments by
risk, based on the type of food preparation that is normally conducted
within the operation (Ref. 5). The vast majority of selected
establishments are to be chosen from risk categories 2 through 4.
FDA has approximately 25 Regional Retail Food Specialists
(Specialists) who will serve as the data collectors for the 10-year
study. The Specialists are geographically dispersed throughout the
United States and possess technical expertise in retail food safety and
a solid understanding of the operations within each of the facility
types to be surveyed. The Specialists are also standardized by FDA's
CFSAN personnel in the application and interpretation of the FDA Food
Code (Ref. 5). The geographical distribution of Specialists throughout
the United States allows for a broad sampling of facility types in all
regions of the United States; therefore, establishments will be
randomly selected to participate in the study from among all eligible
establishments located within a 150-mile radius of each of the
Specialists' home locations.
The pilot will include approximately 4 data collection inspections
for each of the approximately 25 Specialists, or a total of 100
inspections. In order to obtain a sufficient number of observations to
conduct statistically significant analysis, the FDA CFSAN
Biostatistical Branch has determined, based on the previous 10-year
foodborne illness risk factor study that was performed, that
approximately 400 data collection inspections of each facility type are
needed during the initial and subsequent data collection periods. The
sample for each data collection period will be evenly distributed among
Specialists. Given that participation in the study by industry is
voluntary and the status of any given randomly selected establishment
is subject to change, substitute establishments will be selected for
each Specialist for cases in which the restaurant facility is
misclassified, closed, or otherwise unavailable, unable, or unwilling
to participate.
Prior to conducting the data collection, Specialists will contact
the state or local jurisdiction that has regulatory responsibility for
conducting retail food inspections for the selected establishment. The
Specialist will verify with the jurisdiction that the facility has been
properly classified for the purposes of the study and is still in
operation. The Specialist will also ascertain whether the selected
facility is under legal notice from the state or local regulatory
authority. If the selected facility is under legal notice, the
Specialist will not conduct a data collection and a substitute
establishment will be used. An invitation will be extended to the state
or local regulatory authority to accompany the Specialist on the data
collection visit.
A standard data collection form will be used by the Specialists
during each inspection. The form is divided into three sections:
Section 1--Establishment Information; Section 2--Regulatory Authority
Information; and Section 3--Foodborne Illness Risk Factor and Food
Safety Management System Assessment. Section 3 includes three parts
(parts A-C) for tabulating the Specialists' observations of the food
employees' behaviors and practices in limiting contamination,
proliferation, and survival of food safety hazards (part A); the
industry food safety management being implemented by the facility (part
B); and the frequency of food employee hand washing (part C).
In completing Section 1--Establishment Information of the form,
Specialists will ask a standardized set of questions to the
establishment owner or person in charge. In completing Section 2--
Regulatory Authority Information, the Specialist will ask a
standardized set of questions to the program director (or
[[Page 65558]]
other designed personnel) of the state or local jurisdiction that has
regulatory responsibility for conducting inspections for the selected
establishment. The information for completing Section 3, part A of the
form will be collected from the Specialists' direct observations of
food employee behaviors and practices, supplemented by infrequent,
nonstandardized questions to industry personnel when clarification is
needed of the food safety procedure or practice being observed. For
Section 3, part B of the form, Specialists will ask industry management
a standardized set of questions to obtain information on the extent to
which the food establishments have developed and implemented food
safety management systems. Section 3, part C of the form will involve
only direct observations of hand washing frequency by the Specialists.
No questions will be asked in the completion of this part of the form.
In the Federal Register of June 19, 2012 (77 FR 36544), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. There were five comments received:
(Comment 1) Jane Public commented that she does not see the
usefulness of the study. She also commented that most foodborne illness
resulting from food from unsafe sources was caused by agribusiness. She
commented that having a Web site on which the public or doctors
treating the sick and deceased can post information about foodborne
illness would be more effective and targeted than the data collection
being proposed by FDA.
(Response) FDA believes that many of the comments made by this
submitter are unrelated to the proposed data collection. Relative to
the suggestion to have a Web site on which the public or doctors
treating the sick or deceased can post information about foodborne
illness, surveillance systems like this are already used in the United
States to provide information about the occurrence of foodborne disease
including, but not limited to, the following: Foodborne Disease Active
Surveillance Network (FoodNet); National Antimicrobial Resistance
Monitoring System--enteric bacteria (NARMS); National Electronic
Norovirus Outbreak Network (CaliciNet); National Molecular Subtyping
Network for Foodborne Disease Surveillance (PulseNet); National
Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS); National Outbreak
Reporting System (NORS); Environmental Health Specialists Network (EHS-
Net); and the Public Health Laboratory Information System (PHLIS).
While each surveillance system plays an important role in detecting and
preventing foodborne disease and outbreaks, surveillance statistics
reflect only a fraction of the cases that occur in the community. This
is because foodborne illnesses are largely underdiagnosed and
underreported. In addition, surveillance statistics are, by nature,
reactive, meaning information is obtained on foodborne illness that has
already occurred. In contrast, the data collection proposed by FDA is
proactive in nature because it seeks to collect data on the behaviors
and practices that could lead to foodborne illness or deaths if not
controlled. Using this data, FDA will formulate and implement
intervention strategies to proactively reduce foodborne illness risk
factors that lead to illness or death if not controlled. For these
reasons, FDA does not agree with the submitter that another
surveillance-type reporting system would be more effective or targeted
than the data collection being proposed by FDA.
(Comment 2) The Food Marketing Institute (FMI) commented that FDA
appears to have underestimated the amount of time needed at 15 minutes
per event. The commenter states that based on the retail industry's
experience during the last survey (2008), the time spent collecting and
monitoring data points took up 120 minutes per event per retail grocer,
and this caused an undue interruption to business operations and passed
on unnecessary costs to those surveyed.
(Response) OMB's regulations at 5 CFR 1320.3(h) define the term
``information.'' Numbered paragraphs under (h) list categories of data
that are not ``information,'' and thus do not require OMB approval
under the PRA. Under paragraph (h)(3), ``[f]acts or opinions obtained
through direct observation by an employee or agent of the sponsoring
agency or through nonstandardized oral communication in connection with
such direct observations,'' is not ``information collection'' subject
to OMB approval under the PRA. Thus, the estimate of burden is not
required to account for the duration of the entire inspection since the
data collector's questions will largely be nonstandardized, oral
communication in connection with his or her direct observations.
In contrast, information collected in Sections 1 and 2 and Section
3, part B of the data collection form is not available to the data
collectors by direct observation together with nonstandardized, oral
communication and can only be obtained by asking the establishment's
representatives to respond to a set of standardized questions. Thus,
the burden is accurately calculated based solely on the time it will
take for the data collectors to interview the respondents to complete
these specific sections of the form. However, in consideration of FMI's
comment and recent data collection training that was conducted with
FDA's National Retail Food Team in September 2012, FDA believes that
the original burden for the respondents that was published in table 1
of the 60-day notice may have been underestimated. For this reason, FDA
is increasing the burden estimate for each respondent to 30 minutes per
response.
(Comment 3) FMI commented that FDA is not aligned with CDC in the
development of the study. According to CDC data, most foodborne illness
outbreaks occur in restaurants (39 percent compared to <1 percent
foodborne illness events occurring in grocery stores as well as 21
percent compared to <1 percent actual foodborne illnesses occurring in
grocery stores). Based on the data, FMI believes the study seems to put
an unnecessary burden on retail grocery stores as retail grocery stores
will be surveyed at a 4:1 ratio. The study should be more balanced
between the restaurants and grocers.
(Response) FDA has kept and will continue to keep key CDC staff
informed of the plans for and results of the Risk Factor Study so that
areas in which our concurrent studies reinforce or run counter to one
another can be analyzed and appropriate prevention-based messages
developed.
The proposed sample size for each facility type is not intended to
mirror the respective burden of foodborne illness caused by each type,
but rather represents the minimum number of inspections needed to
obtain the number of observations needed to draw statistically
significant conclusions. If FDA reduced the number of establishments
inspected for the retail food store facility types, it is likely FDA
would not obtain the number of observations needed to draw
statistically valid conclusions or have the desired confidence level in
the data that is obtained.
The restaurant industry segment includes two facility types,
institutional foodservice includes three facility types, and the retail
food store industry segment includes four facility types. While the
total number of data collection inspections in retail food store
segment will be higher than that for the restaurant segment, the number
[[Page 65559]]
of data collection inspections for each facility type will be the same.
(Comment 4) FMI believes the proposed study fails to meet FDA's
Information Quality Guidelines and the requirements of the Data Quality
Act because its structure will not provide information of utility to
the public or the Agency as it is disproportionately focused on retail
food stores when statistics indicate that far more foodborne illness
events occur in restaurants.
(Response) Information dissemination is an important part of FDA's
mission to promote and protect the public health. FDA recognizes that
public access to high quality information is critical to achieving this
mission and public input, in turn, improves the quality of the
information we disseminate. Because of the nature of this information,
our goal has been and remains to ensure that all the information we
disseminate meets the high standards of quality (including objectivity,
utility, and integrity) described in the OMB and HHS Guidelines and the
Data Quality Act (DQA).
To that end, FDA does not agree with FMI's comment that the
proposed information collection fails to meet FDA's Information Quality
Guidelines and the requirements of the DQA. The sample size in the
proposed information collection is not intended to mirror the
respective burden of foodborne illness caused by each facility type.
Rather, it represents the minimum number of inspections needed for each
facility type in order to obtain a sufficient number of observations to
draw statistically significant conclusions. If FDA were to reduce the
sample size of the retail food store facility types to be more
reflective of the burden of foodborne illness caused by these entities,
the quality of the data would be compromised and its utility would be
severely limited. This is because it would be unlikely that FDA could
obtain the number of observations needed to draw statistically valid
conclusions or have the desired confidence level in the conclusions we
are able to make.
(Comment 5) The American Meat Institute Foundation (AMIF) commented
that they support FDA's proposed survey of selected retail and
foodservice facility types. According to AMIF, the survey findings will
have practical utility by enhancing the knowledge of foodborne illness
risk factors in these types of facilities, informing decisions for
developing and implementing risk mitigation strategies, and guiding
food safety resource allocation. The followup data collection periods
will be useful tools to track trends and benchmark improvements in
reducing risk factors.
(Response) FDA thanks the AMIF for their comments and appreciates
their support in this undertaking.
Regarding the burden estimation, due to the infrequent and
nonstandard nature of the questions that may or may not be asked to
clarify direct observations made by the Specialists in completing
Section 3, parts A and C of the data collection form, only the burden
associated with the information collection related to the completion of
Sections 1 and 2 and Section 3, part B of the form is included in
burden estimates. For each data collection, the respondents will
include the person in charge of the selected facility and the program
director (or designated individual) of the respective regulatory
authority. In consideration of FMI's comment to the 60-day notice and
recent data collection training that was conducted with FDA's National
Retail Food Team in September 2012, FDA believes that the original
burden that was published in table 3 of the 60-day notice may have been
underestimated. For this reason, FDA is increasing the burden estimate
for each respondent by 15 minutes per response. For the pilot, 25
Specialists will conduct 4 data collection inspections; thus, FDA
estimates the number of respondents to be 200 (25 Specialists x 4 data
collection inspections x 2 respondents per data collection). The
estimate of the hours per response is based on its previous experience
with collecting similar information in previous data collection
efforts. We estimate that it will take each of the respondents 30
minutes (0.5 hours) to answer the questions related to Sections 1 and 2
and Section 3, part B of the form, for a total of 100 hours. FDA bases
its estimate of the number of respondents during the subsequent
activities (data collections) on 400 inspections being conducted in
each facility type. FDA CFSAN's Biostatistical Branch has determined
that 400 inspections are necessary to provide the sufficient number of
observations needed to conduct a statistically significant analysis of
the data. The data collections in the Restaurant Segment will occur in
2013, 2016, and 2019 and will each consist of 1,600 respondents. We
estimate that it will take each respondent 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to
answer the questions related to Sections 1 and 2 and Section 3, part B
of the form, for a total of 800 hours. The data collections in the
Institutional Foodservice Segment will occur in 2014, 2017, and 2020
and will each consist of 2,400 respondents. We estimate that it will
take each respondent 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to answer the questions
related to Sections 1 and 2 and Section 3, part B of the form, for a
total of 1,200 hours. The data collections in the Retail Food Store
Segment will occur in 2015, 2018, and 2021 and will each consist of
3,200 respondents. We estimate that it will take a respondent 30
minutes (0.5 hours) to answer the questions related to Sections 1 and 2
and Section 3, part B of the form, for a total of 1,600 hours. Thus,
the total estimated burden is 10,900 hours.
Table 3--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Activity Number of responses per Total annual Average burden Total hours
respondents respondent responses per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot Data Collection to 200 1 200 0.5 100
Practice Use of Form and
Methods and Exportation of Data
into Central Repository........
2013 Baseline Data Collection-- 1,600 1 1,600 \2\ 0.5 800
Restaurant Segment (includes
two facility types)............
2014 Baseline Data Collection-- 2,400 1 2,400 \2\ 0.5 1,200
Institutional Foodservice
Segment (includes three
facility types)................
2015 Baseline Data Collection-- 3,200 1 3,200 \2\ 0.5 1,600
Retail Food Store Segment
(includes four facility types).
2016 Second Data Collection-- 1,600 1 1,600 \2\ 0.5 800
Restaurant Segment (includes
two facility types)............
2017 Second Data Collection-- 2,400 1 2,400 \2\ 0.5 1,200
Institutional Foodservice
Segment (includes three
facility types)................
[[Page 65560]]
2018 Second Data Collection-- 3,200 1 3,200 \2\ 0.5 1,600
Retail Food Store Segment
(includes four facility types).
2019 Third and Final Data 1,600 1 1,600 \2\ 0.5 800
Collection--Restaurant Segment
(includes two facility types)..
2020 Third and Final Data 2,400 1 2,400 \2\ 0.5 1,200
Collection--Institutional
Foodservice Segment (includes
three facility types)..........
2021 Third and Final Data 3,200 1 3,200 \2\ 0.5 1,600
Collection--Retail Food Store
Segment (includes four facility
types).........................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... .............. .............. .............. ................ 10,900
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
information.
\2\ 30 minutes.
II. References
The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov. (FDA
has verified the Web site addresses, but we are not responsible for any
subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in
the Federal Register.)
1. Report of the FDA Retail Food Program Steering Committee,
``Database of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors (2000).'' Available at:
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/RetailFoodProtection/FoodCode/FoodCode2001/ucm123544.htm.
2. ``FDA Report on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk
Factors in Selected Institutional Foodservice, Restaurant, and
Retail Food Store Facility Types (2004).'' Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/RetailFoodProtection/FoodborneIllnessandRiskFactorReduction/RetailFoodRiskFactorstudies/ucm089696.htm.
3. ``FDA Report on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk
Factors in Selected Institutional Foodservice, Restaurant, and
Retail Food Store Facility Types (2009).'' Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodSafety/RetailFoodProtection/FoodborneIllnessRiskFactorReduction/RetailFoodRiskFactorStudies/ucm224682.pdf.
4. FDA National Retail Food Team, ``FDA Trend Analysis Report on
the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected
Institutional Foodservice, Restaurant, and Retail Food Store
Facility Types (1998-2008).'' Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/RetailFoodProtection/FoodborneIllnessandRiskFactorReduction/RetailFoodRiskFactorStudies/ucm223293.htm.
5. ``FDA Food Code.'' Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/RetailFoodProtection/FoodCode/default.htm.
Dated: October 23, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-26472 Filed 10-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P