Photobucket


La Vida Locavore
 Subscribe in a reader
Follow La Vida Locavore on Twitter - Read La Vida Locavore on Kindle

The Tester Amendments Part 1: Exemption from Produce Safety Standards

by: Jill Richardson

Sun Apr 18, 2010 at 22:25:27 PM PDT


Bookmark and Share
Several people have asked just exactly what Jon Tester's amendments do. It took a bit of fishing around to get the exact bill language that the amendment corresponds to - even AFTER I got the language of the amendment itself. So, here's the first one and I'll post the second one soon.

Here's the language of Tester's amendment:

On page [146], between lines [18] and [19], insert the following:

(f) EXEMPTION FOR DIRECT FARM MARKETING. This section shall not apply to a farm if, with respect to such farm, the annual value of sales of food directly to consumers, hotels, restaurants, or institutions exceeds the annual value of sales of food to all other buyers.

Below, you can see exactly what farms selling directly to consumers and institutions are exempted from. Essentially, they won't be required to follow the FDA's "science-based minimum standards for the safe production and harvesting of those types of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities for which the Secretary has determined that such standards minimize the risk of serius adverse health consequences or death."

This requirement for "science-based" safety standards scares the hell out of many small farmers and for good reason. The government tends to think that something sterile that has been sprayed with every pesticide in the book is safer than something organic if the organic item has been touched by human hands or grown with manure as fertilizer.

That's not to say that the government has bad intentions here. I don't think they do. I don't doubt that this part of the bill was written with nothing other than food safety in mind. But also remember that humans have farmed for millennia without an FDA to tell them how to farm safely. It's only now that we've got big, industrialized food production that we see these food outbreaks where one screw-up can sicken people in every state in the country and result in millions of pounds of food recalled.

Consumers Union is concerned about this amendment because they are afraid that enormous farms (domestic or foreign) may engage in direct sales and then qualify for this exemption. And that may be true. I would definitely prefer this amendment specify that the exemption is only for farms grossing under $500,000 per year. However, I'd still rather see this amendment pass as is than not. If this amendment passes, it won't do anything to make food LESS SAFE. It's not changing the status quo. It just makes the bill a little less encompassing than it would otherwise be.

Jill Richardson :: The Tester Amendments Part 1: Exemption from Produce Safety Standards
SEC. 419. STANDARDS FOR PRODUCE SAFETY
(a) PROPOSED RULEMAKING
(1) IN GENERAL - Not later than 1 year afte the date of enactment of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture (including with regard to the national organic program established under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.)), shall publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production and harvesting of those types of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities for which the Secretary has determined that such standards minimize the risk of serius adverse health consequences or death.

(2) PUBLIC INPUT. During the comment period on the notice of proposed rulemaking under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall conduct not less than 3 public meetings in diverse geographical areas of the United States to provide persons in different regions an opportunity to comment.

(3) CONTENT. The proposed rulemaking under paragraph (1) shall
(A) provide sufficient flexibility to b appropriate to various types of entities engaged in the production and harvesting of raw agricultural commodities, including small businesses and entities that sell directly to consumers, and be appropriate to the scale and diversity of the production and harvesting of such commodities;
(B) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, packing, and storage operations, minimum standards related to soil amendments, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water;
(C) consider hazards that occur naturally, may be unintentionally introduced, or may be intentionally introduced, including by acts of terrorism;
(D) take into consideration, consistent with ensuring enforceable public health protection, conservation and environmental practice standards and policies established by Federal natural resource conservation, wildlife conservation, and environmental agencies; and
(E) in the case of production that is certified organic, not include any requirements that conflict with or duplicate the requirements of the national organic program established under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 22 6501 et seq.), while providing for public health protection consistent with the requirements of this Act.

(4) PRIORITIZATION. The Secretary shall prioritize the implementation of the regulations for specific fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities that have been associated with foodborne illness outbreaks.

(b) FINAL REGULATION.
(1) IN GENERAL. Not later than 1 year after the close of the comment period for the proposed rulemaking under subsection (a), the Secretary shall adopt a final regulation to provide for minimum standards for those types of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities for which the Secretary has determined that such standards minimize the risk of serious adverse health consequences or death.

(2) FINAL REGULATION. THe final regulation shall
(A) provide a reasonable period of time for compliance, taking into account the needs of small businesses for additional time to comply;
(B) provide for coordination of education and enforcement activities by State and local officials, as designated by the Governors of the respective States; and include a description of the variance process under subsection (c) and the types of permissible variances the Secretary may grant.

(c) CRITERIA.
(1) IN GENERAL. The regulation adopted under subsection (b) shall
(A) set forth those procedures, processes, and practices as the Secretary determines to be reasonably necessary to prevent the introduction of known or reasonably foreseeable biological, chemical, and physical hazards, including hazards that occur naturally, may be unintentionally introduced, or may be intentionally introduce,d including by acts of terrorism, into fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities and to provide reasonable assurances that the produce is not adulterated under section 402; and
(B) permit States and foreign countries from which food is imported into the United States, subject to paragraph (2), to request from the Secretary variances from the requirements of the regulations, where upon approval of the Secretary, the variance is considered permissible under the requirements of the regulations adopted under subsection (b)(2)(C) and where the State or foreign country determines that the variance is necessary in light of local growing conditions and that the procedures, processes, and practicies to be followed under the variance are reasonably likely to ensure that the produce is not adulterated under section 402 to the same extent as the requirements of the regulation adopted under subsection (b).

(2) APPROVAL OF VARIANCES. A State or foreign country from which food is imported into the United States shall request a variance from the Secretary in writing. The Secretary may deny such a request as not reasonably likely to ensure taht the produce is not adulterated under section 402 to the same extent as the requirements of the regulation adopted under subsection (b).

(d) ENFORCEMENT. The Secretary may coordinate with the Secretary of Agriculture and, as appropriate, shall contract and coordinate with the agency or department designated by the Governor of each State to perform activities to ensure compliance with this section.

(e) GUIDANCE.
(1) IN GENERAL. Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, the Secretary shall publish, after consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, representatives of State departments of agriculture, farmer representatives, and various types of entities engaged in the production and harvesting of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities, including small businesses, updated good agricultural practices and guidance for the safe production and harvesting of specific types of fresh produce.

(2) PUBLIC MEETINGS. The Secretary shall conduct not fewer than 3 public meetings in diverse geographical areas of the United States as part of an effort to conduct education and outreach regarding the guidance described in paragraph (1) for persons in different regions who are involved in the production and harvesting of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities, including persons that sell directly to consumers and farmer representatives.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
One concern on the language (4.00 / 3)
At first blush, I really like the idea, but there's a small movement which should be supported and wouldn't fall within the language.

Zone 7 is a group in Eastern PA/South Jersey that's basically acting as a distributor for small farms to restaurants and grocers.  They can coordinate many farms and many restaurants much better than the individuals, which allows chefs and growers to concentrate on doing their magic.  Since the farms would no longer be direct to user, they'd lose the exemption.  

http://www.freshfromzone7.com/  - the site isn't fully active, but it has some info & contact info.


Red Tomato's farm suppliers would probably also be in the same boat (4.00 / 3)
as Zone 7.

I wonder if the farms would be covered under the Tester ammendment for exemption if the distributor was doing the coordinating but the farms were actually selling the produce to the store, or perhaps selling through the store would mean that the farms couldn't be exempt anyway, as the store is acting as a 'middle man' between the farm and the end consumer.

Kind of like when I sell produce to the produce stand down the street, I'm selling to the owner of the produce stand, and he's selling that to the consumer. I wouldn't have to worry, because it's only a very small percentage of my production that gets sold that way, but if a farm's primary venue for its production was to stores, then they wouldn't be exempt.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
yikes that's rough (4.00 / 2)
it's really hard to write language that keeps all of the good guys IN and keeps all of the bad guys OUT!!!

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

[ Parent ]
Great point... (4.00 / 2)
I 'know people who know those people' (I'm originally from New Jersey), and they're good folks.

Any ideas how to fix things here without throwing the baby out with the bath water?

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!


[ Parent ]
Good question (4.00 / 3)
Any ideas how to fix things here without throwing the baby out with the bath water?

But I'm afraid the answer is probably "no". It's a delicate, fine line we all have to walk between regulation which can come with one set of pitfalls, and freedom which comes with another set of pitfalls.

Like the guy said, "There jest ain't no easy way".

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
"Freedom"... (4.00 / 2)
...is not the opposite of regulation, though.  Especially in our system.

Just sayin', trying to get the language framing right here.

Cargill's "freedom" = doom for the vast majority of the rest of us.  Just one example...

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!


[ Parent ]
I was talking about freedom from regulation (4.00 / 2)
you've got that right, if I understood your reply correctly.

Cargill's "freedom" = doom for the vast majority of the rest of us.  Just one example...

That is pretty much what I was talking about as far as a pitfall of freedom, especially if taken to the extreme where there is no regulation. Good for a large corporation/company, not necesarilly for the consumer.

On the other hand, over regulation, which while burdensome on the large corporation/company, and impossible for a small company/producer like myself, might keep the consumer safer. I say might, because I'm so far, unconvinced that more regulation automatically equals more safety, regardless wheather you're aiming the big guns at large producers or small producers.

One of the things I see most often is a 'one size fits all' aproach to regulation, which is what the Tester ammendments appear designed to alter. However, even those won't protect everyone, consumer or producer.

One of the drawbacks of regulation, especially national and international regulation, is that it takes the shotgun approach. I prefer the sinper approach. Target specific problems associated with specific industry segments.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
Oh, I know... (4.00 / 1)
I know that's what you meant, but I'm also pointing out that language matters.

We simply can't let the word 'freedom' become the accepted alternative to the word 'regulation', lest we cede all the meaning and connotation of that word over to the very same people who'd like to stomp all over and deny our own freedom.

It may seem like picking at nits, but framing truly is something to pay attention to these days.

One of the drawbacks of regulation, especially national and international regulation, is that it takes the shotgun approach. I prefer the sinper approach. Target specific problems associated with specific industry segments.

Agreed, but even there we tend to come up short.  Witness the Oregon State Senate voting against the baby bottle BPA ban* over the special session.  Even when you do aim for specific bad actors, some other interests along the way are always bound to feel threatened somehow and exert their own influence on the outcome.  I think that's part of why "shotgun approaches" happen.  Certain industries pretty much make it necessary at times.

*Well, they "tied" on the vote - mainly because all Republicans voted for poisoning babies; while the Democratic "leadership" played political games to ensure that "liberal" (i.e. - Portland and Eugene area) Senators were able to vote against poisoning babies, while at the same time making sure that enough Coast, Salem and Bend-area "Democrats" voted so that Pendleton food-packing companies could continue to go on and claim that nobody sees anything wrong with BPA.  I still have to write something on this.


Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!

[ Parent ]
I think your second quote (4.00 / 3)
must be an example of the sausage analogy to law making.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.

[ Parent ]
Not really... (4.00 / 1)
The second quote (actually, a 'footnote' in my blogging style, heh) is less "sausage-making", and more an example of collusion between the "two" parties.

The BPA vote was the thing that pushed me over the edge, I'm no longer a Democrat.  I may still be registered as one, and I may have voted straight-ticket Democrat every election since my first in 1997, and I may have spent too many evenings and weekends knocking on doors for Democratic candidates; but that has all finally come to an end courtesy of Barack Obama, the "Democratic" Congress and the historically cowardly Oregon State Legislature, both houses of which have "Democratic Supermajorities" at the moment, but won't pass anything worth shit.  So, what good are they?  No BPA protection, no kicker reform, etc...

At least the Republicans are willing to admit they don't give a shit about regular working folks.  Gotta give 'em points for honesty, I guess.  The "Democrats" still rely on defrauding us of our votes and our volunteer and financial support, though.

Fuck 'em both.  I'd love to have someone to vote for, rather than against these days...

Coming soon to a Philadelphia near you!


[ Parent ]
Welcome to the club (4.00 / 2)
I gave up on both parties long ago. I registered with the deomocratic party when I turned 18, almost 30 years ago.

I've never voted a straight party ticket. I asked a woman I knew once - "If the Devil were a democrat and God was a republican, who would you vote for?". She said she's vote for the devil even if she knew he would destroy the world, just because he wasn't a replublican. Makes no sense to me.

I vote for the person, their experience and past record, not for a D or an R associated with their name. The only reason I'm still a registered democrat is so that I can vote in the primary, and as sucky as the democratic primary candidates have been in the past 20 or so years, they're not as sucky as the replublican primary candidates..... Which ain't sayin' a whole lot.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
consignment and co-op (4.00 / 1)
jrking232's concern is crucially important, I think. JoanneRigutto apparently has limitless energy and is able to handle everything from dirt to sales, but intermediary aggregators and distributors are important elements of a robust supply chain.

Does the consignment concept have a role to play? The producer places goods on consignment and the "seller" takes a commission upon sale - the producer pays the "seller" a service fee.

How about co-op? Zone 7 becomes the marketing arm of a producer co-op? Could the legislation accomodate this?


[ Parent ]
probably not (4.00 / 1)
language that keeps all of the good guys IN and keeps all of the bad guys OUT

Jill's point probably invalidates my suggestions. Does something that protects good guys give bad guys a path?


[ Parent ]
I think you're right about the distributors and aggregators (4.00 / 2)
I've read before about their importance in the supply chain for restaurants and grocery stores. Instead of dealing with many different suppliers (farms), it's a lot easier to deal with one or two distributors, and the distributors coordinate harvest and delivery to a warehouse for distribution.

One of the largest distributors here in Oregon is SYSCO. There was a big article in the Capital Press a while ago about SYSCO sourcing from more and more local farms for vegetables, and other edibles, as that's what their customers were demanding. So if you're a large farm, producing lots of vegetables, fruits, berries, etc. it's a lot easier to work with someone like them than it is to sell direct to the consumer.

When you farm and run the type of business that I'm running, you really need to like 16 hour days and be able to multitask constantly. Most people aren't into that type of work load.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
Jill is right above (4.00 / 3)
It is nearly impossible to write legislation (especially) that keeps the good actors in and excludes the bad ones.  Sometimes you have to pressure legislators to craft the best language and then raise holy hell to close the loopholes that show up inevitably.  Also, the small guys need sharp minds who can parse the legalese and tell them what can be done.  Creativity is usually frowned upon by regulators, but most will work with you if you frame it right.
It may be as simple a workaround as a consignment system, or a paypal system where the distributor runs a website where Rest.A buys from Farm.B & pays via "paypal", but the distributor/aggregator does the logistics for a cut of the order.  

Like Joanne's example, it's what a SYSCO does, except they handle the money in the middle, and aren't quite as worried about what is fresh that day.  Of course, SYSCO can buy net-45 and sell at net-30 because of their marketing power.  Having the money for an extra 15 days really adds up over the year.  


[ Parent ]
Political Activism Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Notable Diaries
- The 2007 Ag Census
- Cuba Diaries
- Mexico Diaries
- Bolivia Diaries
- Philippines Diaries
- My Visit to Growing Power
- My Trip to a Hog Confinement
- Why We Grow So Much Corn and Soy
- How the Chicken Gets to Your Plate

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Blogs
- Beginning Farmers
- Chews Wise
- City Farmer News
- Civil Eats
- Cooking Up a Story
- Cook For Good
- DailyKos
- Eating Liberally
- Epicurean Ideal
- The Ethicurean
- F is For French Fry
- Farm Aid Blog
- Food Politics
- Food Sleuth Blog
- Foodgirl.ca
- Foodperson.com
- Ghost Town Farm
- Goods from the Woods
- The Green Fork
- Gristmill
- GroundTruth
- Irresistable Fleet of Bicycles
- John Bunting's Dairy Journal
- Liberal Oasis
- Livable Future Blog
- Marler Blog
- My Left Wing
- Not In My Food
- Obama Foodorama
- Organic on the Green
- Rural Enterprise Center
- Take a Bite Out of Climate Change
- Treehugger
- U.S. Food Policy
- Yale Sustainable Food Project

Reference
- Recipe For America
- Eat Well Guide
- Local Harvest
- Sustainable Table
- Farm Bill Primer
- California School Garden Network

Organizations
- The Center for Food Safety
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Community Food Security Coalition
- The Cornucopia Institute
- Farm Aid
- Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance
- Food and Water Watch
-
National Family Farm Coalition
- Organic Consumers Association
- Rodale Institute
- Slow Food USA
- Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
- Union of Concerned Scientists

Magazines
- Acres USA
- Edible Communities
- Farmers' Markets Today
- Mother Earth News
- Organic Gardening

Book Recommendations
- Animal, Vegetable, Miracle
- Appetite for Profit
- Closing the Food Gap
- Diet for a Dead Planet
- Diet for a Small Planet
- Food Politics
- Grub
- Holistic Management
- Hope's Edge
- In Defense of Food
- Mad Cow USA
- Mad Sheep
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Organic, Inc.
- Recipe for America
- Safe Food
- Seeds of Deception
- Teaming With Microbes
- What To Eat

User Blogs
- Beyond Green
- Bifurcated Carrot
- Born-A-Green
- Cats and Cows
- The Food Groove
- H2Ome: Smart Water Savings
- The Locavore
- Loving Spoonful
- Nourish the Spirit
- Open Air Market Network
- Orange County Progressive
- Peak Soil
- Pink Slip Nation
- Progressive Electorate
- Trees and Flowers and Birds
- Urbana's Market at the Square


Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox