PACA moves

The PACA Working Group for the fruit and vegetable industry advisory committee made three motions that found approval of the committee today. One of the recommendations was to raise the PACA informal complaint filing fee from $60 to $100 and the formal complaint fee from $100 to $500. That recommendation was approved.

Another motion approved by the committee was the recommendation to raise PACA license fees in fiscal year 2010 so that the PACA Trust Fund will not fall below the threshold level of 25% of the program's budget obligations by 2012. The recommendation doesn't mention a specific dollar amount, but in discussions the fees were described as increasing from $550 to $1,150.

Finally, the working group recommended and the committee approved that the USDA create a fee structure for those who request PACA audits in connection with reparation complaints. The audit fee structure would be $1,000 for licensees and $3,000 for non-licensees.

Some in the working group said that foreign companies sometimes request PACA audits as a "fishing expedition" About half of he PACA's 400 audits last year were requested by non-U.S. firms.

The working group noted that the fee structure for audits would help recoup the $6,500 it takes on average to conduct an audit.

The working group considered why retailers don't pay license fees, and "whether this could be changed." The working group was informed by USDA that the present fee structure is a result of a compromise reached in 1995 after a debate about the merits of keeping the PACA in effect. Requiring retailers to pay would only be possible by opening up the PACA law itself to revision - not a wise move when some may want to derail it again.
From a working group memo:


"The consensus of the working group was that to try to change the law now was not an option."

Strong federal oversight

The produce industry is ready for strong federal oversight of produce safety. That's what United President Tom Stenzel told the fruit and vegetable advisory committee today. The United Fresh Produce Association board voted unanimously to adopt four principles for a food safety regulatory framework for fresh produce:
1. Produce safety standards must be consistent and applicable to all produce grown anywhere in the U.S or imported into the country
2. Produce safety standards must be mandatory, with sufficient federal oversight in order to be credible to consumers.
3. These standards cannot depend upon marketing programs or voluntary certification, although these programs can be helpful
4. Produce safety standards must allow for commodity specific food safety practices based on the best available science.

It's important to note that neither United or Western Growers feel this call for federal oversight runs counter to California's work to develop a voluntary marketing agreement for leafy greens..
PMA''s executive board meets this weekend, but Kathy Means - at the meeting today - said PMA will "side with what's necessary to bring confidence in produce safety on the part of consumers and buyers."

Even with recent foodborne illness outbreaks, this may not be an easy sell. At the grass roots level, growers will need a lot of education, not to mention wholesalers and retailers; Stenzel said the vision is for a farm to table type of oversight.

More coming...

First dibs

U.S. growers should have the first opportunity to use plant varieties developed with tax dollars. That's the view of Richard Kinney, with Florida Citrus Packers. Kinney was a guest speaker at the fruit and vegetable advisory committee this morning and asked the group to consider giving their input to the USDA on the issue of how plant varieties are released by the Agricultural Research Service.
Kinney noted that the University of Florida has in place a program called "invitation to negotiate," which opens up plant varieties developed there to anyone willing to bid on the varieties, even growers from other countries. He said the citrus industry has raised strong objections to that policy and has succeeding in at least bending that policy. However, he noted ARS-developed varieties are released in the public domain for no charge. Kinney suggested the committee may want to give Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns input on that policy, and perhaps change it to reflect a preference for U.S. growers.

Discussion following the presentation indicated no real consensus on this issue. John Shelford noted that privately funded variety development is critical to gain a competitive advantage. He suggested that public funding used for variety development could be used for other industry priorities, such as the fruit and vegetable snack program.

Leading off

Lorelei DiSogra led off this morning's fruit and vegetable advisory committee meeting in DC, highlighting United's - and the specialty crop alliance - goal for funding the fruit and vegetable snack program. Overall, United would like expand funding to all 50 states. Right now, the 14 states and three tribal organizations that are funded provide fruits and vegetables to 25 schools per states, but the push is to get 100 schools per state. Overall, the funding goal is $300 million, with $200 million to fund 50 states at equal levels and $100 million to fund schools in states with larger populations.

With that formula, about 10% of U.S. schools would have the program. "Ten percent is a starting point to build on," she said.

"It's incumbent for us to make the case why this nutrition program needs to be funded for the produce industry, for children and for public health."

Pounding away at obesity

Congress has already introduced seven obesity related bills, says this story The growing recognition about the health implications of obesity, though political pundits don't necessarily see success for some of these bills, which include nutrition labeling at restaurants and regulations to curb junk food marketing to kids.

Here is a treatment of the E. coli issue called "Defensive dining." Overall, this piece encourages consumption of fruits and veggies, but with a dose of caution and common sense. One expert was quoted about why Taco Bell had E. Coli. From the story:

Sandra Marin, a Los Angeles-based certified food safety and sanitation expert, believes there is a logical explanation as to how the produce became infected.
"My suspicion is that E.coli O157:H7 outbreaks are due to the cross-contamination of meats and vegetables in the factories," said Marin, who works as a registered dietician for the Pharmavite vitamin company.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there is cross contamination of "meats" and "vegetables" at fresh cut plants. Unfortunately, no industry spokesman quoted in this piece.


I was in a Dillons grocery store the other day and saw about six self-checkout lanes but just one cashier to check customers out. I kind of like the interaction of chatting with a cashier, and self-check stations seem like too much work. However, the flip side is that it might reduce wait time. Here is a link to research from NCR that highlights how much consumers hate to wait. The answer...automated check out stations, of course.