APPLICABILITY OF THE FEDERAL MEAT INSPECTION ACT TO RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS The inspection and sanitation provisions of sections 3, 4, 6 and 8 of the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply to retail establishments such as meat markets, grocery stores, or restaurants conducting ordinary retail activities in the District of Columbia and the States, and offering meat products for sale in interstate commerce, or to such establishments in a State which do an exclusively intrastate business, even though the retail establishment is located in a State designated for application of federal requirements under section 301 (c) of the Act. While there is no specific provision in the Act applying its adulteration and misbranding provisions to retail establishments, the broad scope of those provisions and the absence of legislative history indicating the contrary evinces an intention to cover retail establishments engaged in interstate commerce as well as those located in a State designated for application of federal requirements. THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE. AUGUST 17, 1972. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: This is in response to your predecessor's letter of September 1, 1971, requesting our opinion on several questions arising in the administration of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, as amended by the Wholesale Meat Act, 21 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The inquiry generally concerns the extent of the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture to provide Federal inspection and to enforce sanitation, adulteration, and misbranding provisions of the Act at retail establishments dealing in meat products, such as retail meat markets, grocery stores and restaurants. The following specific questions have been posed: (1) Whether the inspection and sanitation provisions of the Act apply to retail establishments in the District of Columbia, and to retail establishments in the States which offer meat products for sale in interstate commerce. (2) Whether these provisions apply to retail establishments in a State which has been designated as subject to Federal inspection and which do an exclusively intrastate business in meat products. (3) Whether the adulteration and misbranding provisions of the Act apply to the establishments described in questions (1) and (2).1 For the reasons hereafter set forth, it is my opinion that the first and second questions must be answered in the negative, and that the answer to the third question must be affirmative. The relevant provisions of the Federal Meat Inspection Act provide for the inspection of meat and meat products at a variety of stages in the preparation process. These are, in summary, as follows: Section 3 (21 U.S.C. 603) provides for ante mortem inspection. It requires the Secretary to cause an "inspection of all cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules and other equines before they shall be allowed to enter into any slaughtering, packing, meat-canning, rendering or similar establishment, in which they are to be slaughtered and the meat and meat food products thereof are to be used in commerce ***” Section 4 (21 U.S.C. 604) provides for post mortem inspection. It requires the Secretary to cause an inspection "of the carcasses and parts thereof of all [the animals listed above] to be prepared at any slaughtering, meat-canning, salting, packing, rendering, or similar establishment in any State, Territory or the District of Columbia as articles of commerce which are capable of use as human food * * *” Section 6 (21 U.S.C. 606) requires the Secretary to cause to be made "an examination and inspection of all meat food products prepared for commerce in any slaughtering, meatcanning, salting, packing, rendering, or similar establish Section 8 (21 U.S.C. 608) requires the Secretary to cause "such inspection of all slaughtering, meat-canning, salting, packing, rendering, or similar establishments in which [the animals listed above] are slaughtered and the meat and meat food products thereof are prepared for commerce as may be 1 The same questions have been posed as to retail establishments located in Territories organized with a legislative body, and in Territories not so organized. The discussion herein is simplified by referring only to establishments in the District of Columbia and the States. Coverage of the Act as to establishments located in the Territories will be readily inferable from my conclusions as to those located in the District and the States, and therefore warrant no separate discussion. necessary to inform himself concerning the sanitary conditions of the same, and to prescribe the rules and regulations of sanitation under which such establishments shall be maintained ***" The term "prepared” is defined in section (1) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 601(1)) to mean "slaughtered, canned, salted, rendered, boned, cut up, or otherwise manufactured or processed." Finally, the term "commerce" is defined in section 1(h) (21 U.S.C. 601 (h)) to mean "commerce between any State, any Territory, or the District of Columbia, and any place outside thereof; or within any Territory not organized with a legislative body, or the District of Columbia." Whether sections 3, 4, 6, and 8 apply to retail establishments such as restaurants, grocery stores, and butcher shops depends upon whether they are "establishments" within the meaning of those sections.2 The language of the statute, its legislative history, the overall statutory scheme, and other pertinent factors strongly support the view that such retail establishments are not covered. Considering first the literal language of the statute, it requires inspection at "any slaughtering, meat-canning, salting, packing, rendering, or other similar establishment." All of the specifically named "establishments" are usually wholesale businesses. Notably absent is any express reference to the most common retail establishments-grocery stores and restaurants. In addition, inclusion of the word "similar" is significant. Because of the obvious differences in the marketing functions performed by restaurants and grocery stores, as compared to those performed by the usual "packing” establishments, it follows that a retail establishment normally would not be considered an establishment "similar" to a slaughtering, meat-packing, canning, or rendering plant. Had Congress intended to cover retail establishments, it could have readily manifested that intention by express reference to retail establishments. Similarly, the language defining the word "prepare" appears to restrict the scope of inspection coverage to "pack In the usual situation, it is difficult to conceive of the applicability of section 3, the ante mortem provision, to retail establishments. 244-574 O - 78 - 32 |