Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - [Livingontheland] Fwd: Comment NOW! Washington State Food Rule Being Revised- Affects Farmers

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@gilanet.com>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Livingontheland] Fwd: Comment NOW! Washington State Food Rule Being Revised- Affects Farmers
  • Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:34:36 -0600


*********** BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE ***********

On 8/25/2004 at 9:36 AM chrys@thefutureisorganic.net
<chrys@thefutureisorganic.net wrote:


Dear Folks,

The Washington Sustainable Food and Farming Network has been providing
input to the Food Code Revision process for over two years. The proposed
rule is open to public comment NOW. It will affect Washington farmers.
There are still some problems with the proposal.

Below is the Network’s comment. Please look it over and provide your own
comment based on rhe Network comment if you wish. Your input will help
assure a rule we can live with.

HOW TO SUBMIT COMMENTS:

Comments may be provided in person and/or in writing at the public hearing
on Sept. 8, 2004 at 10:30 am at the Marcus Whitman Hotel & Conference
Center, Six West Rose, Walla Walla, Washington. If you can attend this
hearing, please do! Comments may also be provided before the hearing.
Comments sent via postal mail, email or fax but must be received in
writing by September 3, 2004 to be considered at the hearing.

Advance comments can be submitted through the Department of Health's rule
revision web site until Sept. 3. Go to:

http://www3.doh.wa.gov/policyreview/.

When you get to the web page above, scroll down to where it says "WAC
246-215, etc. Food Service Revisions" and click where it says "Comment".

Send comments by postal mail, email or fax (By Sept. 1):

Ned Therien
Office of Food Safety and Shellfish Programs
Washington State Department of Health
PO Box 47824
Olympia, WA 98504-7824
fax (360) 236-2257
ned.therien@doh.wa.gov

The entire Food Code proposal can be accessed at:
http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/sf/FoodRuleMain.htm

Please circulate this message to any and all farms, farmers and
farm-advocacy groups on your contact list.

===============
The following constitutes the formal comment by the Washington Sustainable
Food and Farming Network on the revision of the Washington State Food Code
proposed by the Washington State Board of Health (Chapter 246-215 WAC,
Food Service, revision).

The Washington Sustainable Food & Farming Network is a statewide advocacy
organization for sustainable agriculture and family farms in Washington
State. Network members include farmers, environmental organizations,
farmers' markets, faith-based groups, the natural foods industry,
community organizations, anti-hunger and nutrition advocates and educators
who are investing in a healthy future by supporting sustainable
agriculture. More information about the Network is on the web at
www.wsffn.org.

The Washington Sustainable Food & Farming Network sent representatives
(including staff and volunteers from the family farming sector and
farmers' markets) to many of the stakeholder meetings that were
facilitated by the Dept. of Health to craft the wording of this proposal.

Our main interest in this process is to assure that the voices of small,
family and sustainable farms are heard during the process of Food Code
revision in order to protect the economic viability of those farms from
unnecessary and burdensome regulation. The removal of the "Farmer
Exemption" (RCW 36.71.090) from inclusion in the revised Food Code was one
source of concern. That exemption made it "lawful for any farmer,
gardener, or other person, without license, to sell, deliver, or peddle
any fruits, vegetables, berries, eggs, or any farm produce or edibles
raised, gathered, produced, or manufactured by such person [excepting
dairy products, meat, poultry, eel, fish, mollusk, or shellfish]" and
exempted these farmers from regulation under the Food Code. Our concern
about the impact on farmers who would be now regulated by the Food Code
brought us to the table and we became actively involved in crafting many
of the proposed provisions in the proposed rule.

In general, the Network is supportive of the proposed rule before us today
and we understand that there is a balancing act between allowing farmers
to farm and the legitimate protection of the public health. There remain,
however, areas of concern and areas where we would like to suggest
improvements on the proposed rule and obtain clarification of the
interpretation of some of the provisions.

In addition, the Network urges the Board of Health to carefully consider
each and every comment that comes before you today on this fundamentally
important issue of the regulation of food. We urge you to take your time
to review the comments. We feel that it would not be appropriate for the
Board of Health to vote on adoption of this proposal today as we can't
fathom how it would be possible for you to give each comment its due
consideration between now and the close of this hearing.

Here are some issues we have with the proposal:

* In the absence of the "Farmer Exemption" that's in the current Food
Code, we support the provision in the proposal (246-215-011 12(b)) that
exempts from all regulation and licensing under the proposed food code
establishments that offer "only nonpotentially hazardous, nonready-to-eat,
minimally cut, unprocessed fruits and vegetables", as well as the list of
foods exempt from regulation (246-215-011 12(e) & (f)) "hot tea, or hot
apple cider ... served directly into sanitary single-service articles ...
dry beans, dry grains, in-shell nuts, tea leaves, or herbs for tea."

* Since it is always difficult for farmers to attend meetings despite our
best attempts to bring them to the table during the stakeholder process,
we have encouraged farmers who may produce other food items that could be
included in the list of exempt foods to contact the Board of Health during
this comment period and ask to get those foods added to this list
(246-215-011 12(e) & (f)). We urge the Board of Health to fully consider
any such request you may have received during this comment period.

* Our understanding from lengthy discussions with DOH staff during the
stakeholder meetings while the proposal was being crafted is that fresh
salad mix made from whole leaves, when sold "not ready-to-eat" will be
exempt. We have fielded more questions from farmers about the fate of
salad mix under the proposed rule than any other part of the proposal. We
need to confirm with you that farmers shall be free to sell such salad mix
to stores and restaurants as well as at farmers' markets without
regulation and licensing.

The words "minimally cut" were included to cover whole leaf salad mix (and
broccoli, and celery etc.). If a farmer takes a head of lettuce or other
fruit or vegetable and cuts or tears it up into bite-sized pieces, we
understand that that's considered processing and the farmer would need a
permit.

We further understand that unless a farmer gets a permit and washes the
salad mix in a licensed facility, it cannot be sold as "Ready-to-Eat".
Language in the final rule should clarify this issue by specifying that
the farmer is free to sell salad mix without a permit just as any other
raw fruit or vegetable that requires a final rinse by the consumer before
consumption.

The last part of this is the packaging issue. The proposal seeks to adopt
a federal Food and Drug Administration model Food Code for Washington
State. In this FDA code, packaging is defined thus: "'Packaged' means
bottled, canned, cartoned, securely bagged, or securely wrapped, whether
packaged in a food establishment or a food processing plant. 'Packaged'
does not include a wrapper, carry-out box, or other nondurable container
used to containerize food with the purpose of facilitating food protection
during service and receipt of the food by the consumer.” The FDA model
Food Code specifically states that the "secure bagging" must take place in
a "Food Establishment" or "Processing Plant". This provision must be
clarified so as to be interpreted this way: A farmer selling her or his
product under the exemption from permit (246-215-011(b)) would not be a
"Food Establishment" or "Processing Plant". Thus, the packaging, if any,
even if "securely bagged" would be ONLY to "facilitate food protection
during service and receipt of the food by the consumer.”

If the above is clarified as we urge it to be, only foods "packaged" in a
"Food Establishment" or "Processing Plant" would require legal labeling. A
farmer selling product (be it salad mix or anything else) under the
exemption would be under no requirement to put any label on their
packaging or if they did, the information would NOT need to conform with
the following proposed regulation (246-215-051(3)): "Packaged food shall
be labeled as specified under law, including chapter 69.04 RCW; 21 CFR 101
Food Labeling; 9 CFR 317 Labeling, Marking Devices, and Containers; 9 CFR
381 Subpart N Labeling and Containers; and as specified under §§ 3-202.17
and 3-202.18" (understanding that a farmer should not put misleading
information on a label or label a product "organic" if it's not organic,
etc.).

* We support the addition of the "recurring event" definition of
"Temporary Food Service Establishment" so that there is a category that
fits most farmers' markets, should a farmers' market or a vendor at a
farmers' market choose to sell foods for which such a permit would be
required. Hopefully this will result in savings on permit fees for both
farmers and farmers' markets.

* The term "Equipment" needs to be further specified to include
non-mechanical cold-holding equipment that is capable of keeping fresh or
frozen meat and raw shell eggs within the required temperature ranges so
that farmers may sell such foods at farmers' markets where mechanical
refrigeration is not feasible. In addition, we need the final rule to
specify that equipment used in a licensed facility need not be NSF
certified if the health authority deems the non-NSF equipment to be
capable of performing its job adequately.

* "Approved Source": The FDA Model Food Code states "Food shall be
obtained from sources that comply with law (law being defined as
'applicable local, state, and federal statutes, regulations, and
ordinances')" and the proposal states that temporary food service
establishments must use food from an "approved source". The final rule
must specify that “Approved Source” include any farm that abides by the
law so that a farmer may obtain a temporary food service permit and
prepare food from her or his farm in that facility and so that restaurants
and other food service establishments may obtain ingredients directly from
farms.

* The proposal calls for a warning sign where raw milk and raw milk
products are sold (WAC 246-215-051) that says "warning: raw milk or foods
prepared from raw milk may be contaminated with dangerous bacteria capable
of causing severe illness. Contact your local health agency for advice or
to report a suspected illness". We see no reason to stigmatize raw milk in
this way. The FDA model Food Code has wording that covers this without
singling raw milk out in such a stigmatizing way. The wording we'd like to
see instead, lifted from the FDA model Food Code is: "WARNING: This
product has not been pasteurized and, therefore, may contain harmful
bacteria that can cause serious illness in children, the elderly, and
persons with weakened immune systems."

* We support the concept of exempting from permit under the proposed rule
"a food processing plant or other establishment for activities regulated
by the Washington state department of agriculture or the U.S. Department
of Agriculture" (246-215-011 12(c)). However, there are two major areas
of concern that we the Board of Health to address or we cannot support the
proposed section:
1. We urge the Board of Health to delete "and does not provide food
directly to a consumer" from the relevant section (1-201.10(37) of the FDA
model Food Code that defines "Food Processing Plant". Farmers need the
option to be able to sell their products whether fresh or processed,
direct to the consumer to retain the greatest portion of the food dollar
and maintain their economic viability. We maintain that a permit issued to
a farmer to process farm product can adequately address any issues
pertaining to the direct sale of that product to the end consumer. WSDA
currently licenses some farmer-processors as “wholesale to the public”.
The final rule must not require processors to be double-licensed to sell
direct to the public.
2. Washingtion State honey producers are currently licensed by the
Washington State Department of Agriculture under provisions of the State
Honey Act, (RCW 69.28). For decades, Washington honey producers so
licensed have produced safe honey of the highest quality while
contributing significantly to the state’s economy, rural quality of life
and its important orchard sector (through pollination services). In order
to be able to support the proposed rule, we require specific, written
assurance from the Board of Health that Washington honey producers
licensed by WSDA will be exempt in the final rule from regulation as a
"Food Establishment" as specified in section 246-215-011(12)(c). If such
written assurance cannot be provided, then we cannot support the current
proposed rule unless the words "including honey producers licensed by WSDA
under RCW 69.28" is inserted in section 246-215-011(12)(c) of the proposed
rule after the phrase "Washington State Department of Agriculture".

* We support the provisions of proposed section WAC 246-215-191 pertaining
to foods and activities "exempt from permit", especially the inclusion of
the following foods:

"(a) Popcorn and flavored popcorn;
(c) Dried herbs and spices processed in an approved facility;
(e) Corn on the cob;
(f) Whole peppers roasted for immediate service;
(g) Roasted nuts and roasted candy-coated nuts;
(h) Deep-fried pork skins prepared from pork skins rendered at a food
processing plant;
(i) Caramel apples"

We also support the inclusion of "Individual samples of nonpotentially
hazardous sliced fruits and vegetables" in this category to ease the
potential burden on farmers who rely on giving out samples to maximize
their sales at farmers' markets, roadside stands and U-pick operations.

* We strongly urge the Board of Health to delete "and where food is
provided without compensation" from the definition of "Private Event" (WAC
246-215-011 (22)) as this would negatively impact some forms of farm
families, organizations and clubs that are membership only and where foods
are provided to the end consumer and are not sold to the general public
(such as farms operating using the “community supported agriculture”
model). If an “event” is a "private event" then the government cannot make
a prohibition against compensation for food at the event, as this should
be a private determination among the people involved.

Thank you for your consideration of these comments. We look forward to a
final rule that addresses these concerns. If you have questions about any
of
these comments, please contact:

Chrys Ostrander, Chair
Developing New Markets Committee of the
Washington Sustainable Food and Farming Network
509-725-0610
chrys@thefutureisorganic.net
33495 Mill Canyon Rd.
Davenport, WA 99122

Network Contact Info:
WSFFN
Bonnie Rice, Director
Washington Sustainable Food & Farming Network
P.O. Box 6054
Bellingham, WA 98227-6054
phone: (360) 527-9426
fax: (360) 527-2615
email: brice@wsffn.org


=====================
>From or Forwarded by: Chrys Ostrander
Chrysalis Farm at Tolstoy
Grower of Organic Produce and Botanicals
33495 Mill Canyon Rd.
Davenport, WA 99122
Phone: (509) 725-0610
"The purpose of agriculture is not the production of food, but the
perfection of human beings" Masanobu Fukuoka - "One Straw Revolution"

Email: <mailto:chrys@thefutureisorganic.net
URL: http://www.thefutureisorganic.net

This message is a service to the sustainable agriculture community of the
Pacific Northwest. If you did not receive this message directly from me
and you would like to receive them directly (about 15 - 20 messages per
week), just visit the website and sign up. It's easy. Just email me if you
want to be removed from the list.



*********** END FORWARDED MESSAGE ***********




  • [Livingontheland] Fwd: Comment NOW! Washington State Food Rule Being Revised- Affects Farmers, Tradingpost, 08/25/2004

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page