5 replies to this topic

[Chief Inspector]

I've written a few topics, but have read a few dozen, on the topic of the Egg Recall from Wright County Egg. As I sit and watch the Committee Hearing on CSPAN3, I'm still wondering why the county inspector, D.Scott Duden, could only make 15 minute “Courtesy Visits” of Wright County Egg? He notes that “Facility has a full-time USDAinspector on site. Courtesy visit only.” This occurred twice, on 4/15/2010 and4/30/2009, as noted (and can be found via direct links) in the below post:


http://fetideats.com...nty-egg-update/

Chief Inspector
Fetid Eats!


PASS S. 510 and get it passed into LAW !

[tsmith7858]

I've written a few topics, but have read a few dozen, on the topic of the Egg Recall from Wright County Egg. As I sit and watch the Committee Hearing on CSPAN3, I'm still wondering why the county inspector, D.Scott Duden, could only make 15 minute “Courtesy Visits” of Wright County Egg? He notes that “Facility has a full-time USDAinspector on site. Courtesy visit only.” This occurred twice, on 4/15/2010 and4/30/2009, as noted (and can be found via direct links) in the below post:

PASS S. 510 and get it passed into LAW !

The two major issues that happened in the last two years (PCA Peanuts and Eggs) both had previous violations, had been recently "inspected" and are "suspected" to have been negligent. The violations and inspections did not even raise suspicion, it took an actual incident to get someone to investigate.

Who is responsible for paying attention to the violations that were being racked up? It seems that the main interest was in collecting fines and not fixing the problem. Is the government's (local, state, federal) current job just to collect fines or are they also supposed to make sure the issue is corrected?

If a full time inspector was on-site, what were they doing? What is a fifteen minute "courtesy visit"? It seems like it is filling out a report with N/O (not observed) and stopping by for a cup of coffee. The inspector couldn't take 15 more minutes and walk through the plant? I guess it takes to much effort to get suited up and really see what is going on.

Creating more rules when no one is following the current rules does not seem to get to the root of the issue. If the government is not doing its job now how is a new law going to fix it?

[Chief Inspector]

It seems there's no true protocol of who does what. 27 states don't do their own inspections of beef, poultry or agriculture, so it falls on the feds. The states, relinquishing that control, take a complete 'hands-off' attitude of enforcement or inspection. The feds, in the case of WCE, only had a USDA inspector on site to grade the eggs. "AA, Large, X-Large".
I'm starting to scrutinize the house bill, and senate 510 bill to see if they actually address the disconnect between state and federal responsibility. I'm all for the bill passing through, as something's better than nothing, however, if the bill (and hopeful law) doesn't directly address the current flaws and loopholes, then the whole thing isn't worth the paper its written on and we'll still see the DeCosters, Fosters, Tysons, and hundreds of other mass-producers continue to operate status-quo.

[Chief Inspector]

In case anyone would like to review the full bill (interesting all the 'strike-out' 's) http://www.govtrack....d?bill=s111-510

[tsmith7858]

In case anyone would like to review the full bill (interesting all the 'strike-out' 's) http://www.govtrack....d?bill=s111-510

The last that I looked at it was a comparison of the House Bill and the Senate Bill at the beginning of the year. Nothing I saw at that point resolves the issues of responsibilities. It was mostly about giving more power to look at records, improving import/export issues, better traceabiltiy at farm levels and adding more people for "more control".

There was a lot of wording like this will be determined within X months of the bill being passed or in other words, we can't tell you what we are going to do for sure but we will pass a bill and figure it out later.

I was at a seminar last month and the the two biggest concerns about the bill were, who is going to pay for it all (facitlity upgrades, standard/certifications, process changes, etc) and the current statements on "full access" to records (how will it work?). It also seemed that somewhere over the last couple of months someone decided to throw a BPA ban into the mix which has led to arguements that have nothing to do with "Food Safety".

[Chief Inspector]

The last that I looked at it was a comparison of the House Bill and the Senate Bill at the beginning of the year. Nothing I saw at that point resolves the issues of responsibilities. It was mostly about giving more power to look at records, improving import/export issues, better traceabiltiy at farm levels and adding more people for "more control".

There was a lot of wording like this will be determined within X months of the bill being passed or in other words, we can't tell you what we are going to do for sure but we will pass a bill and figure it out later.

I was at a seminar last month and the the two biggest concerns about the bill were, who is going to pay for it all (facitlity upgrades, standard/certifications, process changes, etc) and the current statements on "full access" to records (how will it work?). It also seemed that somewhere over the last couple of months someone decided to throw a BPA ban into the mix which has led to arguements that have nothing to do with "Food Safety".

That's exactly what I took away from reading it, repeatedly. I ponder the impact of President Obama's stimulus package last year; had the stimulus been angled towards revamping the food industry versus the roads and infrastructure, would we have gained employment and economic stability quicker. Everyone eats...not everyone drives a car. Yes, its much deeper on both sides, but $1.4B is a far cheaper investment to gamble.