http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

So, please read the bill. then read my explanation, then read the bill again. There’s no excuse – the bill is short enough to be easy even for a slow reader like me.

“Food production facility” is the term the bill applies to facilities EXCLUDED from the bill’s registration regulation. It’s a bit odd, but the definitions section of the bill defines the facilities to be subject to the regulations as “food establishment”. What the bill then defines as “food production facilities” are the subjects of exclusions.

Again,
“Food Establishments”, registered under this bill.
“Food Production Facilities”, EXCLUDED from registration under this bill.

From the exclusions section:

“For the purposes of registration, the term ‘food establishment’ does not include a ‘food production facility’, as defined in paragraph 14, restaurant, other retail food establishment, nonprofit food establishment in which food is prepared for or served directly to the consumer, or fishing vessel …[not] engaged in processing”

Paragraph 14 defines as “food production facilities”, “any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation”.

All these are defined as “Food Production Facilities, and are thus EXCLUDED from registration requirements:

Farms
Ranches
Orchards
Vineyards
Aquaculture facilities
Confined animal-feeding operations
Restaurants
Retail food establishments
Nonprofit food establishments serving food directly to customers
Fishing vessels not engaged in processing

INCLUDED “food establishments” are businesses which process, store, hold, and transport food. From the text of the bill:

“The term ‘food establishment’ means a slaughterhouse (except those regulated under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act), factory, warehouse, or facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.”

These hardly sound like the roadside vegetable stand or organic farm. In fact, “farms” are specifically excluded from registration.

Further, I am encouraged by two other sections of the bill. First, comprehensive whistleblower protection for federal employees or their contractors’ employees, which includes the inspectors themselves, employees of any covered “food establishments” and even employees of the excluded facilities.

Second, comprehensive provisions providing for citizen civil actions against both the administrator of the agency created by the bill and any person who violates the regulations.

But don’t take it from me. From Food and Water Watch folks:
http://scrantonsbdc.blogspot.com/2009/03/hr-875-food-safety-modernization-act.html

Myths and Facts: HR 875 – The Food Safety Modernization Act

MYTH: H.R. 875 “makes it illegal to grow your own garden” and would result in the “criminalization of the backyard gardner.”
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would regulate, penalize, or shut down backyard gardens. This bill is focused on ensuring the safety of foods sold in supermarkets.

MYTH: H.R. 875 would mean a “goodbye to farmers markets” because the bill would “require such a burdensome complexity of rules, inspections, licensing, fees, and penalties for each farmer who wishes to sell locally – a fruit stand, at a farmers market.”
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would result in farmers markets being regulated, penalized any fines, or shut down. Farmers markets would be able to continue to flourish under the bill. In fact, the bill would insist that imported foods meet strict safety standards to ensure that unsafe imported foods are not competing with locally-grown foods.

MYTH: H.R. 875 would result in the “death of organic farming.”
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would stop organic farming. The National Organic Program (NOP) is under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Food Safety Modernization Act only addresses food safety issues under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

MYTH: The bill would implement a national animal ID system.
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would implement a national animal ID system. Animal identification issues are under the jurisdiction of the USDA. The Food Safety Modernization Act addresses issues under the jurisdiction of the FDA.

MYTH: The bill is supported by the large agribusiness industry.
FACT: No large agribusiness companies have expressed support for this bill. This bill is being supported by several Members of Congress who have strong progressive records on issues involving farmers markets, organic farming, and locally-grown foods. Also, H.R. 875 is the only food safety legislation that has been supported by all the major consumer and food safety groups, including:

* Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention
* Center for Science in the Public Interest
* Consumer Federation of America
* Consumers Union
* Food & Water Watch
* The Pew Charitable Trusts
* Safe Tables Our Priority
* Trust for America’s Health

MYTH: The bill will pass the Congress next week without amendments or debate.
FACT: Food safety legislation has yet to be considered by any Congressional committee.

My sense is that these bills were put forth in the interest of food safety, but they were poorly thought through, at least as far as small, local producers are concerned.

A member of Rep. DeLauro’s staff was nice enough to return by call regarding HR875. I asked if someone who had a few chickens and sold a dozen eggs now and then to a neighbor would need a bio hazard plan? Answer: yes, because eggs are regulated by the FDA.(I’ve read elsewhere that this bill only applies to interstate commerce, but I did not get that from reading the bill).

But, the bill would “fix” the paperwork requirements by providing small business support to all the small producers. Any guesses how much that will cost?

In reality if a bill passed such as HR875, the FDA probably would not be enforcing all of it against Grandma and her egg-money. If that is the case why not write a reasonable bill that clearly distinguishes between super small producers and large industry?

Rep. DeLauro co-sponsored HR814 which adds traceability requirements to livestock carcasses, including horses, for human consumption. She also co-sponsored HR503 which makes it a crime to transport horses or horse meat for human consumption. Regulate or criminalize? Which is it?

Is it really too much to ask of a member of Congress to put some thought into the bills that they churn out and co-sponsor?

A “Small Business” and “Farm” qualifies as a “food production facility” under that legislation. Do you know the details of fertilizer, storage, nutrients, etc. for your roadside stand? DO you make preserves for sale? Isn’t that “food processing”? There are no limitations on size, so do you have quarterly random inspections as befits a Category 4 Food Establishment?

Or is that not a “business”? Is it not a “farm” or not “food processing”? If its both, you’ll need to be regulated and have the proper paperwork.

But don’t worry, if you mess up the fines only range up to $1,000,000 per violation per day. I’m sure they’ll charge less as all funding will be kept to fund their operations…

Oh, sorry; I was reading the text of the bill; my comments are quotes from the terminilogy of the bill:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

Your “myths and facts” seemed to gloss over most of these. Nothing in the bill limits it to farms of a certain size, or any limitations on where or how the food is sold. You have a farm, you sell produce, you’re a “food production facility” as this bill is written. I suspect if you don’t sell your farm’s produce you might be exempt, the bill doesn’t say either way.

If you actually read the bill you’ll find the descriptions so vague as to potentially cover any farm in the U.S.; with no limitations or exemptions listed.