The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Inspector General requesting an investigation into the use of pork checkoff funds. HSUS contends that “federal pork checkoff program monies are being used to fund the NPPC’s [National Pork Producers Council’s] Pork Alliance program, which is the council’s state and federal lobbying operation. Further, the NPPC publicly lists the [National] Pork Board on its website among the high donor ‘partners’ of its Alliance program, a public endorsement that would also violate the Pork Board’s prohibition against involvement in lobbying activity.” The federal pork checkoff program apparently requires pork producers to pay into a fund overseen by the National Pork Board, which HSUS claims “is to use the funds for ‘promotion, research, and consumer information plans and projects’ or for the Board’s own administrative expenses. However, both federal law and USDA regulations…
Category Archives Department of Agriculture
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has issued instructions for inspection program personnel (IPP) to follow “when verifying that large official establishments (with 500 or more employees) that produce meat and poultry products have prepared and are maintaining required written recall procedures.” According to FSIS, the notice complies with a May 8, 2012, final rule outlining requirements for notifying the agency of adulterated or misbranded products and maintaining written recall procedures. It also calls on IPP to remind large establishments “of the availability of food defense plan guidance because food defense plans also facilitate the removal of adulterated products from commerce.” Although food defense plans are currently voluntary, FSIS has stressed that their purpose is to help meat and poultry companies “respond to intentional contamination of products” and may be used with other recall systems. Written recall procedures, however, must “specify how the official establishment…
The Agricultural Marketing Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has issued a final rule clarifying that the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 and its implementing regulations require “periodic residue testing of organically produced agricultural products by accredited certifying agents.” Effective January 1, 2013, the rule also “expands the amount of residue testing of organically produced agricultural products by clarifying that sampling and testing are required on a regular basis [and] requires that certifying agents, on an annual basis, sample and conduct residue testing from a minimum of five percent of the operations that they certify.” See Federal Register, November 9, 2012.
Nutritionists and consumer groups have reportedly criticized the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for reducing its per capita sugar consumption estimate from approximately 100 pounds per year to 76.7 pounds per year. According to an October 26, 2012, New York Times article, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CPSI) Executive Director Michael Jacobson “stumbled across” the agency’s latest assessment “while working on a project on sugar consumption.” Lowering the previous benchmark by 20 percent, the revised numbers apparently raised red flags with Jacobson, who suggested that the methodology used by USDA researchers was “built on a foundation of sand.” “The new estimate is still relying heavily on experts making what seem to me to be largely guesses,” he told Times reporter Stephanie Strom. “Other than the 4 percent they’re getting [from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey], what do they really know for certain?” In particular, Strom questioned…
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) has sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) seeking to end payments made to the National Pork Producers Council (Pork Council) for the purchase of the registered mark “Pork, The Other White Meat.” HSUS v. Vilsack, No. 12-01582 (D.D.C., filed September 24, 2012). According to the complaint, which details the circumstances leading to the mark’s creation, development and use, the Pork Council should not have retained ownership of the mark, and the $60-million, 20-year contract for its purchase should have been terminated when USDA decided to retire the mark and create a new one. HSUS contends that the contract is funded with pork-producer checkoff program dollars, which cannot be used for lobbying. Because the Pork Council is a lobbying organization, HSUS claims that the ongoing payments under the purchase agreement violate federal law. HSUS seeks a declaration that these expenditures of checkoff…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program (NOP) has issued an interim rule extending the use of nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic handling while the agency considers a proposal to renew their exemption (use) on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National List) for another five years. According to a September 27, 2012, Federal Register notice, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) previously published a proposed rule during its 2012 sunset review that recommended continuing the use of nutrient vitamins and minerals “as ingredients in or on processed products labeled as ‘organic’ or ‘made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))’” after their National List exemption expired on October 21, 2012. The proposed rule also sought to correct “an inaccurate cross-reference to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations in the listing for vitamins and minerals on the National List.” The interim rule will allow handlers and…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program (NOP) has issued a final rule permitting the use of synthetic methionine in organic poultry production. Effective October 1, 2012, the final rule reduces the maximum levels of methionine per ton of feed as follows: (i) 2 pounds for laying and broiler chickens, and (ii) 3 pounds for turkeys and all other poultry. The final rule also amends the Chemicals Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers “for the allowable forms of synthetic methionine.” According to NOP, “[m]ethionine is classified as an essential amino acid for poultry because it is needed to maintain viability and must be acquired through the diet… Natural feed sources with a high percentage of methionine include blood meal, fish meal, crab meal, corn gluten meal, alfalfa meal, and sunflower seed meal.” In reviewing the rules governing the use of synthetic methionine, a water-soluble crystalline powder, in organic poultry production, the National…
The Center for Food Safety has issued a paper critical of the draft report prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture (AC21), which was scheduled to meet August 27-28, 2012, to discuss the draft. According to the advocacy organization, USDA “has increasingly strayed from its role as ‘enhanc[er of] economic opportunities for US farmers and ranchers,’ by continuing to allow genetically engineered (GE) seeds, pollen, and plants to contaminate our nation’s farms without restraint.” In particular, the center calls AC21’s “co-existence” approach to organic, conventional and GE farming “a thinly veiled attempt to sanction allowable amounts of GE contamination in food by establishing a universal GE contamination threshold.” The paper contends that compensating conventional and organic farmers whose crops are contaminated by drifting GE pollen will not address the losses sustained when other countries ban all U.S. seed and crop imports. “Even…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced an August 27-28, 2012, meeting of its Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture (AC21) in Washington, D.C. USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack has specifically asked the committee to report on the types of compensation mechanisms that could be used “to address economic losses by farmers in which the value of their crop is reduced by the presence of GE [genetically engineered] material(s).” The committee will also discuss eligibility standards for triggering these mechanisms as well as other actions that may be appropriate “to bolster or facilitate coexistence among different agricultural systems in the United States.” According to USDA, “AC21 consists of members representing the biotechnology industry, the organic food industry, farming communities, the seed industry, consumer and community development groups, as well as academic researchers and a medical doctor.” Members of the public who wish to the attend the meeting must register…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have announced the availability of a guideline “for conducting microbial risk assessment (MRA).” Intended for government risk assessors and other public stakeholders, the guidance seeks to promote transparency and consistency between the two agencies as they conduct risks assessments of food- and water-borne disease. According to a July 31, 2012, EPA press release, the MRA guideline for the first time “lays out an overarching approach to conducting meaningful assessments of the risks to Americans posed by pathogens in food and water.” The agency has also touted the measure as a way to improve the quality of data “collected by public health scientists charged with protecting Americans from pathogen-related risks in food and water.” “This guidance contributes significantly to improving the quality and consistency of microbial risk assessments, and provides greater transparency to stakeholders…
