COOL Six Month Industry Educational “Grace Period” Concludes

On November 23, 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture/Agricultural Marketing Service Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) six month industry education and outreach program established within the 2013 Final Rule has concluded. The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) conducted the program, as well as similar programs after the release of the 2008 Interim Final Rule and the 2009 Final Rule. The program was a constructive grace period to allow industries to assimilate to the new rule without penalty. AMS determined that this program would ensure that the industries effectively and rationally implement the final rule. Additionally, AMS is allowing the existing stock of muscle cut covered commodities processed and labeled before May 23, 2013 to clear the system as long as they are already in the market and in compliance with the 2009 COOL rule. AMS hopes that these provisions will “prevent retailer and supplier confusion and help alleviate some of the economic burden on regulated entities.” Lastly, AMS will allow products to be sold with less specific origin information as long as retail establishments provide the more specific information via other means such as signs. This method of informing consumers will be allowed until existing labeling and packaging materials have been completely used. For more information about COOL and the grace periods and exceptions that are in place, please see the Federal Register.

The COOL rule became mandatory on May 23, 2013, and requires retailers to label muscle cut covered commodities, some seafood, fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables, some nuts, and ginseng with information regarding the source of the product.

For more information about COOL, please see our previous blog post
Written by Sarah L. Doyle - Research Assistant
The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center
@PSUAgLawCenter
November 25, 2013

Illinois Appellate Court Finds Livestock Odors Are Not Traditional Environmental Pollution for Purposes of Insurance Coverage

On November 13, 2013, the Appellate Court of Illinois for the Fourth District held that odor allegedly generated by Hilltop View LLC’s swine facility did not constitute “traditional environmental pollution” as defined by Country Mutual Life Insurance in its policies at issue in the lawsuit.  Traditional environmental pollution is excluded from Country Mutual’s coverage because Country Mutual has an “absolute pollution exclusion” policy. Since livestock odors are not traditional environmental pollution, Country Mutual will not be able to deny coverage to its policy holders for lawsuits involving this type of odor nuisance. The court also held, however, that Country Mutual does not have to defend Hilltop in an odor nuisance claim because Country Mutual still has other potential coverage defenses that are pending in a declaratory judgment.

For the court’s opinion please see the Illinois Court’s website.

Written by Sarah L. Doyle - Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 21, 2013

Pennsylvania Livery Providers Lien Bill Passes Senate, Referred to House Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee

On November 19, the Pennsylvania Senate approved SB 995 in an unanimous vote of 49-0.  The bill was then moved on to the House Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee.

SB 995, the “Pennsylvania Livery Providers Fair Lien Act” establishes the requirements for livery provider liens which allows for an owner of a boarding stable to attach a lien to a horse which is left for the stable owner to perform labor upon, board, furnish services, supplies or provide materials for, at the request or consent of the owner of the horse.  The lien gives the stable owner the right to detain the horse to secure payment.  The lien attaches to a horse the day it is placed in the stable owner’s care for boarding or other labor in a statement of the amount due to the stable owner for the care of the horse and a description of the horse to which the lien is attached.  Liens arising under the Pennsylvania Livery Providers Fair Lien Act would be deemed an agricultural lien subject to 13 P.A.C.S. Div. 9.

The text of the bill, accompanying memo, and status can be found on the Pennsylvania legislature’s website.

Written by Alyssa Looney – Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 20, 2013

EPA Proposes a Reduction in the Advanced Biofuel Standards for 2014 and a Extension of the 2013 Biomass Diesel Standards for 2014 and 2015.

On November 15^th, The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a proposed rule that sets the standards for the Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS) program for the 2014 renewable fuel standard and the 2015 biomass diesel volume.  Under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) EPA must establish the annual standards for the RFS each year. 

The reduction in biofuel standards is a result of overall gasoline consumption in the United States being less than anticipated when Congress established the program in 2007 and the EPA’s updated production projections, which are informed by engagement with industry and assessment of the biofuels market. 

The EPA plans on submitting the proposed rule for publication in the Federal Register (FR) soon.   Once the proposal is published in the Federal Register, it will be open to a 60 day public comment period.

Click here to read a copy of the proposed rule.

Click here to read the fact sheet explaining the proposed rule. 

Written by Joseph Negaard - Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 19, 2013

New Hampshire GMO Labeling Bill Rejected by House Committee but Will Still be Voted on by House

On November 6, the New Hampshire House Environment and Agriculture Committee in a 12-8 vote recommended that the full House reject HB 0660 which would require the labeling of food products containing genetically modified organisms.  The bill was primarily opposed by Republican committee members.  The bill will go to the full House in January for a floor vote.

Under HB 0660, products produced with genetic engineering will be deemed misbranded if not labeled as such.  The bill would also require the attorney general to publish on the AG website a list of raw agricultural commodities known to be genetically engineered.  HB 0660 would require the commissioner of agriculture, markets and foods to adopt rules establishing best practices for farmers who raise GM crops.

Media sources report that passing the bill is instrumental in the enactment of Maine’s GMO labeling law which requires five other contiguous state pass similar labeling laws before it can go into effect.

For more information on the bill, visit the New Hampshire House of Representatives website for the full text of the bill, status, and docket.

Written by Alyssa Looney – Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 18, 2013

PA Senate Approves Bill Removing Certain Restrictions on Potato Packaging Requirements

On November 12, 2013, the PA Senate passed SB 1131 to remove restrictions on potato packaging in Pennsylvania. The bill eliminates the restriction requiring a certain weight per container on potato packages under three pounds. For containers over three pounds, packages must meet the required net avoirdupois weights listed in the bill.

The bill has been sent to the House Agriculture Committee for review.

For the history of the bill, please see the PA General Assembly’s website.

Written by Sarah L. Doyle - Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 18, 2013

PA House Passes Agri-Tourism Protection Bill

On November 12, 2013, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed HB 397, a bill providing limited immunity for persons that sponsor farm-related tourism activities. The final passage of the bill stipulates that, where no fee is charged for the farm-related tourism activity, the operator has protection from liability in a negligence action for personal injury or death of a participant, as long as the participant knowingly, voluntarily, intelligently and unreasonably partakes in the activity and the personal injury or death results from the inherent risks of the agri-tourism activity.

The bill has been amended twice, with the latest amendment adding the language precluding the application of limited immunity to agri-tourism activities for which there is a fee.

The bill will now be sent to the Senate for consideration.

For the full text and history of the bill, please see the PA General Assembly’s website.

Written by Sarah L. Doyle - Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 14, 2013

USDA Asks Public How to Foster Agricultural Coexistence

On November 4^th, the USDA published a request in the Federal Register for comments on how to strengthen communication and collaboration between different agricultural systems, including traditionally produced, organic, identity preserved, and genetically engineered crops.

The request comes following the November 19, 2012, report presented to Secretary Vilsack by the USDA Advisory Committee on Biotechnology & 21^st Century Agriculture (AC21) entitled, “Enhancing Coexistence: A Report of the AC21 to the Secretary of Agriculture.”  The report made recommendations regarding agricultural coexistence in 5 major areas: (1) potential compensation mechanisms, (2) stewardship, (3) education and outreach, (4) research, and (5) seed quality.

Public input is specifically sought on the area of education and outreach on how to implement the recommendation that USDA foster communication and collaboration between the diverse agricultural systems as well as between USDA and those entities in order to foster coexistence.  USDA posed four specific topics for input which can be found in the Federal Register notice.

Comments received on or before January 3, 2014 will be considered.  Comments can be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or through mail sent to Docket No. APHIS-2013-0047, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.  Following the comment period, USDA intendes to hold a public forum to discuss the public input and further explore ways to implement the AC21 report recommendations.  The time and place of the public forum will be announced in the Federal Register.

For more information on the comment request, see the Federal Register notice.  Click here to learn more about AC21 and view the report.

Written by Alyssa Looney – Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 13, 2013

New Mexico District Court Dismisses Horse Slaughter Lawsuit, 10th Circuit Issues Emergency Injunction on Appeal

On November 1, 2013, the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Humane Society of the United States seeking to prevent horse slaughter inspections. HSUS alleged that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) failed to conduct proper environmental studies when it issued grants of inspection for federal meat inspection services to Valley Meat Co., Rains Natural Meat, and Responsible Transportation.  The court stated that the Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) Directive 6130.1 and drug residue program did not require the agency to prepare an environmental impact statement, an environmental assessment, or a categorical exclusion under NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act). The court further concluded that the issuing of a grant of inspection is a mandatory act not subject to NEPA review.

HSUS filed an immediate appeal with the Tenth Circuit. The Tenth Circuit issued an emergency injunction to prevent the USDA from performing inspections and halted the slaughter facilities from operating once more.

For more information, please see the full opinion issued by Judge Christina Armijo in the District Court of New Mexico.

Written by Sarah L. Doyle - Research Assistant 

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 11, 2013

FDA Seeks to Remove GRAS Status of Trans Fats

On November 7, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Federal Register notice with a preliminary determination that partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs), the major dietary source of trans fat in processed food, are no longer “generally recognized as safe,” or GRAS.  If the preliminary determination becomes permanent, then PHOs will be treated as a food additive required to undergo premarket approval by the FDA.  Foods containing unapproved additives are considered adulterated, and, thus, are illegal to sell.  In 2006, FDA began requiring food product labels to list the amount of artificial trans fats; however, the use of trans fats was not banned.

Dennis M. Keefe, Ph.D., director of FDA’s Office of Food Additive Safety, said that if FDA determines that PHOs are not GRAS, it could mean the end of artificial, industrially-produced trans fat in foods.  Although, trans fat would not be completely gone, as it also is naturally occurring in small amounts in meat and dairy products, as well as in other edible oils.

A 60-day public comment period opened on November 7.  FDA is seeking comments on how long it would take the food industry to phase out the use of PHOs, how revoking PHOs’ GRAS status would impact small businesses, and how to ensure a smooth transaction if a final determination is issued.  Comments can be submitted to FDA docket number FDA-2013-N-1317 at www.regulations.gov.

For more information on FDA’s preliminary determination, trans fats and PHOs, and GRAS, see FDA’s consumer update article on the issue and the Federal Register notice.

Written by Alyssa Looney – Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 8, 2013

Washington State GMO Labeling Bill Fails at Polls

On Tuesday November 5, Washington state voters rejected an initiative that would have required labeling of foods that contain genetically modified ingredients.  Ballot Initiative 522, also known as known as the “Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Food Measure,” would have required the labeling of raw agricultural commodities, processed foods, seeds, and seed stocks that are produced through genetic engineering when offered for retail sale.  The bill failed with a a 54.81% “no” vote and 45.19% “yes” vote.  978,399 votes were counted.

For further details on the voting results for Initiative 522, see the Washington Office of the Secretary of State.  The full text of Ballot Initiative Measure No. 522 is available on the Washington State website.  See our October 18^th and October 10^th blog posts for further information surrounding the vote.

Written by Alyssa Looney – Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 6, 2013

USDA Finalizes the Rule of BSE Import Regulation

On November 1st,  the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced a final rule that will modernize the Agency’s import regulations for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).  Once this rule has taken effect, APHIS will use the same criteria and categories that the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) uses to identify a country’s BSE risk status. 

This action will be published in the Federal Register very soon and the rule will become effective 90 days after publication.

Click here to read the USDA press release. 

Written by Joseph Negaard - Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 5, 2013

FDA Publishes New Proposed Rule on Animal Food Safety Under FSMA

On October 29, 2013, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration published a proposed rule under the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in the Federal Register. The rule, titled “Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Preventive Controls for Food for Animals,” deals with the regulation of domestic and foreign facilities that are required to register under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. It requires them to establish current good manufacturing practices in the manufacturing, packing, and holding of animal food. The proposed rule also requires certain facilities to establish and implement hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls for food and animals. These preventive controls include requirements for covered facilities to maintain a food safety plan, perform a hazard analysis, and institute preventive controls for the mitigation of those hazards.

For the full text of the proposed rule, please see the Federal Register.

Written by Sarah L. Doyle - Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

@PSUAgLawCenter

November 4, 2013