After the food contamination incidents over the past couple of years, the Congress has put forth a revamp of food safety law in the United States. This bill bass the House back in 2009 and was tied up in the Senate until last week. The Senate passed its version (with amendments) and so it has gone back to the House for either passage of the Senate version or to head for a conference committee for resolution.
This act (S. 510) has created an outcry from both the extreme right and some “back to nature” types on the left. Herein we shall examine some of the key provisions of the proposed law and make some judgments. My personal feeling is that it will die before the Congress completes action on other, critical legislation like the tax issue, unemployment benefits, the federal debt ceiling, and funding the government, but who knows?
I have done quite a bit of research on this legislation and find it, for the most part, a pretty good thing. It is designed to be proactive in that it stresses prevention of the production and distribution of contaminated or adulterated food rather than just merely reacting to an event after it occurs. Certainly, there are reactive provisions as well, but prevention is the primary focus.
The legislation specifically applies to the following operations (from the summary posted http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill… (This is from Title I [Improving Capacity to Prevent Food Safety Problems] of the bill):
…each person (excluding farms and restaurants) who manufactures, processes, packs, distributes, receives, holds, or imports an article of food permit inspection of his or her records if the Secretary believes that there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to such food will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.
Note that farms and restaurants are specifically exempted. This becomes important later. There is also a part that delays implementation for small businesses until a later date, the specifics of which I have not been able to find. It is a long bill. Each operation specified above has to pay a $500 annual registration fee and comply with the recordkeeping requirements. The thrust of the bill is to require such establishments to conduct proper hazards analyses and implement controls to reduce the probability that contamination or adulteration will occur.
Recent Comments