The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Agricultural Marketing Service has proposed revisions to the origin of livestock requirements that govern the transition of dairy animals to organic production. Clarifying that a producer can transition dairy animals into organic production only once, the amendments would ensure that “after completion of this one-time transition, any new dairy animals that a producer adds to a dairy farm would need to be managed organically from the last third of gestation or sourced from dairy animals that already completed their transition into organic production.” The proposed rule also includes provisions for the management of breeder stock on organic livestock farms. “This proposed rule would create greater consistency in the implementation of a standard for the transition of dairy animals into organic production and for the management of breeder stock,” explains AMS in an April 28, 2014, Federal Register notice. “This proposed rule would update the regulation…
Category Archives U.S. Government and Regulatory Agencies
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) has filed a petition with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) arguing that the agency does not adhere to the goals of its Scientific Integrity Policy because the policy “fails to clearly prohibit political suppression and interference.” The policy was released in 2013 after President Barack Obama directed executive department heads to promote scientific integrity within each department, and PEER argues that USDA’s policy does not protect its scientists to the extent that other agencies’ policies protect theirs. USDA’s policy fails its scientists, PEER argues, because it does not (i) include political suppression and interference in its definition of misconduct; (ii) establish procedures for handling scientific integrity complaints; (iii) protect whistleblowers; or (iv) include “any process or mechanism for preventing politically motivated suppression or for challenging it once it occurs.” PEER also argues that USDA has failed to adhere to its policy because it…
The Center for Food Safety, Center for Environmental Health and Beyond Pesticides have filed a lawsuit against the leaders of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service and National Organic Program (NOP) arguing that USDA failed to allow public comments on a contaminated compost rule before issuing a guidance document on the subject. Ctr. for Envtl. Health v. Vilsack, No. 15-1690 (N.D. Cal., filed April 14, 2015). The 2011 guidance at issue allows organic producers to use compost materials treated with pesticides. According to the complaint, “NOP regulations expressly prohibit fertilizers and compost from containing any synthetic substances not included on the National List” of approved exceptions, but the Contaminated Compost decision “contravened that legal requirement, purporting to establish that organic producers may in fact use these contaminated plant and animal materials in compost under certain circumstances.” The decision was never subject to public comment, the plaintiffs argue,…
Days after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a March 2015 letter warning Kind LLC against using the word “healthy” to describe several of its products, a consumer filed a class action against the company alleging negligent misrepresentation and violations of California consumer protection statutes. Kaufer v. Kind LLC, No. 15-2878 (C.D. Cal., filed April 17, 2015). The FDA Warning Letter listed the packaging of several products that an agency investigation apparently determined violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act because the products’ nutrient contents do not meet federal requirements to be described as “healthy.” The letter also warned Kind against the use of “+” or “plus” as well as “No Trans Fats.” The putative class action complaint cites the FDA letter, arguing that the “healthy,” “+” or “plus” and “no trans fats” claims mislead consumers into believing that they are purchasing a healthful product. The plaintiff…
The U.S. Supreme Court has heard arguments in a case brought by raisin farmers against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) alleging that a federal program requiring a portion of the yield to be set aside amounted to a taking of their property, thus requiring just compensation. Horne v. USDA, No. 14-275 (U.S., oral arguments heard April 22, 2015). According to news reports, the justices appeared to favor the raisin farmers’ arguments. “You come up with the truck, and you get the shovels, and you take their raisins—probably in the dark of the night,” Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly said. At another point in the proceedings, he called the program’s requirement “a classic, physical taking.” Justice Antonin Scalia reportedly called the program “ridiculous” and compared its structure to communism (“Central planning was thought to work very well in 1937. Russia tried it for a long time.”), and Justice Samuel Alito asked…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service has announced a June 17, 2015, public meeting in Washington, D.C. to provide information and receive comments about draft U.S. positions to be discussed during the 38th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in Geneva, Switzerland, July 6-11. Agenda items at the June 17 meeting include (i) proposed amendments to the procedural manual; (ii) amendments to Codex standards and related texts; (iii) implementation status of the Commission’s five-year strategic plan; and (v) relations between the Commission and other international organizations. See Federal Register, April 22, 2015. Issue 562
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and other organizations have filed a regulatory comment challenging the approval process for substances generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for use in food products, arguing that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has weakened the GRAS standards to the point that they violate the Food Additives Amendment of 1958. According to the comment, “[T]he American public would likely find it both disturbing and surprising that thousands of chemicals added to food today are not approved or even reviewed by FDA. Instead, of the roughly 10,000 additives currently used in food, more than 3,000 have never been substantively reviewed by FDA. For an estimated 1,000 of these substances, safety decisions were made by the food industry without any notice at all to FDA.” The comment further alleges that the agency has weakened food-safety laws with its 1997 proposal to change the GRAS…
Food & Water Watch (FWW) has released an April 2015 report alleging that the scientific research used by federal agencies to evaluate animal drug safety “is very heavily influenced by corporate drug companies.” In particular, the report alleges that there were “virtually no independent, peer-reviewed” safety studies on one drug used as a growth promoter that was eventually withdrawn from the marketplace. “Most of the available research examined commercial dimensions of Zilmax, such as the drug’s impact on beef qualify, and more than three-quarters of the studies were authored and/or funded by industry groups, almost all of which were published in scientific journals sponsored and edited by industry groups,” opines FWW in an April 8 press release. “Many academic journals have failed to establish or enforce rules requiring scientists to publicly disclose financial conflicts of interest, which has allowed deeply conflicted research to distort the scientific discourse.” Citing these issues,…
Attorneys in the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have filed a lawsuit against Wholesome Soy Products to permanently enjoin the company, its owner and manager from causing food to become adulterated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) after government agencies allegedly linked the company’s facilities to a 2014 outbreak of Listeria in Michigan and Illinois. United States v. Wholesome Soy Prods., Inc., No. 15-2974 (N.D. Ill., filed April 3, 2015). Wholesome Soy manufactured and sold mung bean and soybean sprouts until November 2014, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and state agencies allegedly traced incidents of Listeria infections observed in five people to the Wholesome Soy facility. An FDA laboratory allegedly found Listeria in 28 samples—including two from mung bean sprouts—taken during a September 2014 inspection of Wholesome Soy’s plant and…
Several policy groups, including Food & Water Watch and the Center for Food Safety, have filed a lawsuit challenging a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) procedural change in how ingredients are removed from the National List, a list of synthetics exempted from the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Ctr. for Food Safety v. Vilsack, No. 15-1590 (N.D. Cal., filed April 7, 2015). The National List catalogs synthetic and prohibited natural substances that may be used in organic farming despite not being inherently organic because the substances (i) have been determined by USDA not to harm human health or the environment, (ii) cannot be replaced with an organic alternative and (iii) are consistent with organic farming and handling. The groups challenge a 2013 revision to the process for removing an exempted substance from the National List. OFPA created a sunset provision that removed substances from the list—thereby prohibiting their use in…
