More ports subject to e-manifests

The trials and travails of Mexican trucks making it into Arizona was documented in this blog earlier that detailed problems with the a new CBP requirement for electronic manifests. Now the Customs and Border Patrol is giving notice that trucks entering into New York and Michigan, effective May 24, will be required to provide advance cargo information through the Automated Commercial Environment Truck Manifest System.
From the CBP release:

This is the third group of ports to be required to use ACE for the filing of e-manifest. “The more information we have in advance, the more we can protect the homeland and facilitate commerce,” said Lou Samenfink, executive director for CBP’s Cargo Systems Program Office. “With e-manifests, CBP officers are able to pre-screen trucks and shipments, and dedicate more time to inspecting suspicious cargo without delaying the border crossings of legitimate carriers.”
The use of ACE for filing e-manifest became mandatory on January 25 at land border ports of entry in Arizona and Washington and the ports of Pembina, Neche, Walhalla, Maida, Hannah, Sarles and Hansboro in North Dakota. On April 19, ACE will become mandatory at land border ports of entry in California, New Mexico and Texas. CBP will provide 90 days’ notice through publication in the Federal Register before requiring the use of ACE.

TK: The "facilitating commerce" piece of the ACE system seemed to be missing from the early experience in Arizona, but the industry can only hope the CPB and suppliers are learning to adjust with this rolling phase-in.

FDA: More questions than answers

The FDA has set the dates for the widely anticipated food safety hearings, and that info and more is found in this link. The first meeting is in Oakland on March 20 and the second in Maryland on April 13. The industry's call for strong federal oversight will be explained in these hearings.

Bring your three ring binder. The FDA wants a lot of input. Here are their questions:

For each stage in the supply chain, and for each industry sector, what are the risks or practices that could lead to microbial contamination of fresh produce?

How can or should current practices be changed to reduce the risk of contamination?

For each stage in the supply chain, and for each industry sector, what current practices (including, for example, following the GAPs/GMPs Guide) reduce the risk of microbial contamination of fresh produce? What data are available to support a conclusion that the risk of such contamination is lower than it would be without the practice in place?

Is fresh produce, or inputs such as agricultural water, sampled and tested for pathogens or indicator organisms at any stage of the supply chain? If yes, please describe the sampling and testing done.
Beyond the Federal actions described in sections I.B. through I.E, what new Federal actions, if any, are needed to enhance the safety of fresh produce? On what aspects of the produce supply chain should the measures focus?

In identifying possible Federal interventions or actions, to what extent can or should we take into account the wide variation within the fresh produce industry with respect to, e.g., the size and type of establishments, the nature of the commodity produced, the practices used in production, and the vulnerability of particular commodities to contamination?

To what extent should such measures apply to specific products, sectors of the industry, regions, or businesses?

For example, is there a need for special treatment for different commodity groups?

What types of records and other information, from what types of facilities, are or would be most useful in facilitating traceback efforts?


Are written food safety plans, written SSOPs, periodic assessments, training, and/or the establishment and maintenance of records useful for risk identification and risk mitigation or management purposes?
If yes, to what extent are these practices in place, and in what sectors of the industry?

How should adherence to the GAPs/GMPs Guide or new produce safety guidance(s) be measured and verified by the grower or operator, government regulators, or third-party auditors, in the event of any new recommended Federal action or in the event you are not recommending any new Federal action?

If you are recommending any new Federal measures, please describe how they might affect certain small businesses, such as roadside stands, farm gate operations, farmers’ markets, or other small businesses involved in direct sales.



TK: As we anticipate these important meetings, is it too much to ask the FDA to provide more answers to the industry and the public about what farming practices led to E. coli contamination of spinach and lettuce in recent foodborne illness outbreaks?

Sunkist's next steps

Here is coverage from The Packer's Don Schrack about the Sunkist annual meeting in Visalia. .
From Don's story:

Sunkist president and chief executive officer Tim Lindgren on Feb. 21 said total revenues for 2006 were $1.1 billion, an all-time high. He said growers of valencia oranges, grapefruit and lemons enjoyed record or near-record returns. Because of the January freeze, however, Lindgren said Sunkist in 2007 would focus on downsizing operations and reducing expenses. But he expressed guarded optimism.“Sunkist does not expect the freeze to have a materially adverse impact on its financial position,” Lindgren said in a company news release


Here is more coverage from the Tulare Advance Register about how crop expectations are slightly improved.

County crop losses, thought initially to be as high as 80 percent, now are being estimated at about 50 percent, officials at the Visalia Convention Center gathering said. Losses varied wildly depending on location and elevation, growers said
Damage to navel oranges is of greatest concern, Chrisman said. Navels are the major hand-fruit oranges, Chrisman said, while Valencias — which tend to be more thin-skinned and ripen later — are more suited for juice production.

TK: I was visiting recently with Bill Washburn, president of Foodpro International Inc., San Jose, Calif. Washburn has a long association with Lindgren and obviously is a big believer in what he can do for Sunkist. Washburn observes Lindgren, who was president of Sunkist's affiliated cooperative Fruit Growers Supply Company for 26 years, brings a strong operational focus to Sunkist. Washburn said Lindgren will look at cost-savings in the organization from top to bottom, considering everything from Sunkist's pricey headquarters to the number of processing plants to the company's number of sales offices throughout the U.S. Washburn said
This reading of Lindgren comes through in a Sunkist press release about the meeting as well.
"We will challenge every aspect of Sunkist’s operation in order to implement the most effective and cost efficient support for bringing our growers fruit to market…increasing utilization, reducing assessments and increasing returns," Lindgren said in the release Though Lindgren's window as leader of Sunkist is thought to be two years or so, he apparently is not in caretaker mode. Aside from the domestic initiatives, Washburn also notes that Lindgren was busy at Fruit Logistica networking with other global citrus suppliers and identifying opportunities for Sunkist.

Marler on liability

If you haven't checked out http://www.marlerblog.com/, you may want to. The Seattle lawyer is in the news a ton, first for representing victims of E. coli on spinach, and now for salmonella on peanut butter. In this story about Marler, reprinted on his blog, he seems to say it doesn't matter to him where the fault lies in foodborne illness outbreaks, he and his clients will get paid.
From the Verdictsearch story:

Once the food companies and their insurers understand the concept that they are liable if they are in the chain of distribution, no matter where in the chain the contamination occurred, the focus shifts to damages and what a jury would be likely to award, Marler said.

Later in the piece..

Marler gave an example of his approach to settlement in another set of cases involving contaminated lettuce. "I went into mediation and all the defense attorneys were pointing fingers at each other, so I put my head down on the table," Marler said. When the mediator asked him if he was okay, Marler said to the distributor in the lettuce case, "In a few months your insurance company is going to settle and then the rest of you are going to settle and until then you're going to keep fighting me." Marler then stood up and announced, "But I'm in Seattle, it's a beautiful day and I'm going to the beach."


TK: If there are any growers and processors who don't feel motivated to go to the nth degree to meet rigorous food safety standards, they may well be reminded by their insurance premiums.

More mojo

Another research study has been done to contribute to the growing body of work that reveal the benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption. This time, a study conducted in China showed a remarkable preventive effect of fruit and vegetable consumption on the incidence of lung cancer.
From the report:

The reduced risk is particularly evident in smokers but is also apparent in non-smokers. The details of this study appeared in the February 2007 issue of the Annals of Oncology
Many studies have suggested that a high intake of vegetables and fruits reduces the incidence of several types of cancer. The relatively high concentration of anti-oxidants is the most common explanation for this effect. Attempts to decrease the incidence of certain cancers by providing anti-oxidants in the form of vitamins has, in general, not been as successful as consuming natural food.


TK: This reminds me of a discussion I had with Lorelei DiSogra about the early days of research on the link between reduced cancer risk and fruit and vegetable consumption. It was that research, which DiSogra helped organize and present, that was the spring board to 5 a Day, first in California and then at the national level. The world needs less cigarettes and more fruits and vegetables, and slowly but surely it may happen.