DeLauro opening statement: hearing on traceability

Just sliding across the inbox this morning:

Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (CT-3), chairwoman of the House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Subcommittee, delivered the following opening statement during a subcommittee food safety oversight hearing examining traceability – additional authorities the agency needs and what existing authorities already in place the FDA may have to facilitate or better enforce trace-back capabilities. (Inspector General report attached).

Below is the text of DeLauro’s opening statement (as prepared for delivery).

The committee is called to order. Thank you and let me welcome everyone this afternoon, especially our witnesses:
Daniel Levinson, the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services

Tom Stenzel, President of the United Fresh Produce Association, someone who is very familiar with many of us on the subcommittee. Welcome Tom, great to see you.

Craig Henry, Senior Vice President for Science and Regulatory Affairs for the Grocery Manufacturers Association

Thank you all for taking the time to join us this afternoon to share your insight and experience. A special thanks to Tom and Craig for joining us on such short notice.

My colleagues know that I believe we have a responsibility on this subcommittee to confront issues of public health and public safety. When families can no longer trust that the food they eat is safe, the government must respond. For many years, we have fought to reform a dysfunctional federal agency in the FDA unable to meet its most basic regulatory responsibilities. And our work continues as we strive to provide the resources and tools to effect change.

Today’s hearing will focus on a very important tool for combating food borne illness outbreaks. That is traceability in the food supply chain -- the ability to follow a food product’s path, back from the store where it was purchased to the place at which the contamination occurred. It is critical to indentifying both the source of a potentially dangerous outbreak and the location where contaminated products have been sold and may even still be available.

We were reminded just how important traceability is during last year’s salmonella outbreak originally linked to tomatoes. As we all know, the FDA later turned its attention away from tomatoes, ultimately determining that peppers from Mexico may have been the source of the outbreak -- but not before the market for tomatoes shrank dramatically and tomato growers suffered.

And so this outbreak raised some important questions:
What if an effective traceability system had been in place?
Would the FDA have been able to:
Find peppers as the original source sooner in its investigation?
Minimize the impact on the tomato industry?
Prevent needless additional illnesses?

We will attempt to address these questions and review the report on traceability released today by the Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services. The report assesses the traceability of selected food products.

In its examination, the Inspector General’s Office was able to trace only five out of the 40 products through each stage of the food supply chain. What is more, the Inspector General found 59 percent of food facilities failed to meet FDA’s requirement to maintain records about their sources, recipients and transporters.

These tools were put in place by the 2002 bioterrorism law, yet neither the law nor the implementing regulations gave FDA authority to put a system in place ensuring companies comply with the requirements under the law.

There are other gaps, too. The law exempted farms and restaurants from the recordkeeping requirements. And in moving from the draft rule to the final rule, the Office of Management and Budget exempted foreign facilities completely and significantly limited the kinds of companies required to maintain lot-specific information.

So, traceability today simply is not good enough. It is inconsistent, unreliable and these findings confirm what many in Congress already believe: that we need can do better – that we have a responsibility, in the event of a food borne illness outbreak, to effectively find the source of contamination as quickly as possible to prevent further illness and even death.

To be sure, the Inspector General’s study involved only 220 facilities. OMB has estimated that more than 700,000 facilities are subject to the traceability requirements we are discussing today. Yet, while the study is not a valid statistical sample of the entire industry, it does provide a glimpse into how these requirements are actually being carried out.

In its report, the Inspector General recommends that the FDA seek additional authority. And in fact, the FDA has formally requested some authority related to traceability in its Food Protection Plan. At the same time, traceability has considerable support in Congress and will likely be included in food safety legislation that moves forward this year.

But also, as we study the Inspector General’s findings, I think we also have an obligation to ask whether the FDA could have done a better job with the authority it had. When tomatoes were first suspected as the potential source of last year’s salmonella outbreak, I know some growers were frustrated by the agency’s inability to act on what it knew. I think it is fair to say that the United Fresh Produce Association has been out front on the issue of traceability. And I hope Mr. Stenzel can speak to this issue.

And we also look forward to hearing Mr. Henry discuss the Grocery Manufacturers Association’s views on traceability.

Mr. Stenzel and Mr. Henry, we value your perspective and experience as Congress works to craft legislation that it does not interfere with the traceability technologies already working in the marketplace. Your testimony will help the subcommittee determine where FDA can best leverage its resources to strengthen traceability systems.

From farm to fork, our food system is vast and complicated. Building an effective traceability system is not easy, but with our public health at stake – it is essential.

I want to thank our witnesses again for participating this morning. I look forward to your testimony. With that, I will ask Ranking Member Mr. Kingston if he would like to make an opening statement.