March 22, 2002
Honorable Larry Combest, Chairman
House Agriculture Committee
1300 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am writing on behalf of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) regarding provisions on interstate meat shipment that are under consideration by the House/Senate farm bill conference committee.
As you are aware, the Senate farm bill (S. 1731) includes language requiring USDA to conduct a comprehensive review of state meat and poultry inspection programs. Specifically, the review would include: (1) an analysis of the effectiveness of the state program, and (2) identification of changes that are necessary to enable the possible future transformation of the state program to a new system where state-inspected products would be eligible for interstate shipment.
This provision is the same as contained in Senate legislation (S. 1988) that would permit interstate meat shipment. Furthermore, S. 1988 was written from concept paper which was developed after extensive public hearings and which was endorsed by the National Advisory Committee for Meat and Poultry Inspection. The Senate Agriculture Committee held a hearing on S. 1988 in April, 2000. We believe the reasons for maintaining these legislative provisions in the final farm bill are clear and simple.
First, USDA has required annual reviews of state inspection programs for the past 30 years. The annual State Performance Plan (SPP) review includes a review of state laws, regulations, funding and financial accountability, resource management (staffing, training, program operations), and results of comprehensive reviews. USDA is required by law to monitor state programs and to assume direct responsibility at state plants when a state fails to develop or effectively enforce inspection requirements that are "at least equal to" federal requirements. Since the late 1960's, USDA has never unilaterally found that a state inspection program should be discontinued because of inadequacies in its inspection program. In fact, many states impose inspection requirements more stringent than USDA.
Second, USDA is already conducting comprehensive reviews of state meat and poultry inspection programs. The frequency of these comprehensive reviews are determined by the category rating from the previous review. For example, a category 1 rating provides for a comprehensive review at least every five years; a category 2 rating, every four years; a category 3 rating, every three years; and for category 4, the frequency is based on the nature of the unacceptable rating. To our knowledge, no state program has been rated a category 4. Furthermore, there has never been a documented food illness from state-inspected meat and poultry products. We are confident that the proposed analysis and comprehensive review data will continue to demonstrate that state inspection programs are effective and provide consumers with a wholesome, unadulterated food product that is properly labeled and safe..
While it is our view that additional reviews and federal oversight are unnecessary and a duplication of efforts, the legislation that would actually allow interstate shipment requires USDA to complete a comprehensive review of state inspection programs before interstate shipment can begin. In addition, USDA has repeatedly informed us that completing comprehensive reviews is a condition which must be met before USDA enters into new cooperative agreements with the states. Under these circumstances, we believe it is critical that USDA begin this "transition" work now, so that states can meet any new terms and requirements and to receive approval from USDA. The review data will serve as guidance to states on what changes will be necessary to make this transformation. At a minimum, it adds a margin of safety to the state inspection process, which can be nothing but a positive result. We believe this analysis will increase consumer confidence and improve food safety by creating a more uniform system.
NASDA has been a strong and vocal advocate of interstate meat shipment for many years. Yet, many obstacles still remain before this can be achieved. The 1996 Farm Bill required USDA to submit a report to Congress on the steps necessary to achieve interstate meat shipment. The resulting reports, recommendations and legislative proposals have always included comprehensive reviews of state programs, and have brought us to the point we are today – SIX YEARS later. Meanwhile, small meat processing companies continue to be placed at an unfair competitive disadvantage compared to plants in foreign countries. When will Congress end this injustice? We believe it is time to move forward to permit interstate shipment of state-inspected meat and poultry products and these recommendations will start that process. We ask you to maintain the legislative language contained in the Senate bill.
Sincerely,
<signed>
Richard W. Kirchhoff
Executive Vice President and CEO