December 2, 2016
CapitalPress.com
7
California
Subscribe to our weekly California email
newsletter at CapitalPress.com/newsletters
Don’t wait to comply with FSMA
requirements, expert warns
By TIM HEARDEN
Capital Press
ORLAND, Calif. — Grow-
ers and other agricultural busi-
nesses shouldn’t wait until next
year’s deadlines to begin com-
plying with the Food Safety
Modernization Act’s require-
ments, an industry expert ad-
vises.
Federal officials are already
inspecting large processing fa-
cilities for preventive controls
for human food and animal
feed, whose deadlines were
in September, warned Roger
Isom, president and chief ex-
ecutive officer of the Western
Agricultural Processors Asso-
ciation.
Under those requirements,
facilities must implement a
written food safety plan that
includes an analysis of haz-
ards and risk-based preventive
controls, according to the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration.
The next compliance dates
are March 31 for sanitary trans-
portation measures and April
31 for a foreign supplier veri-
fication program. The big one
for most conventional farmers
— the produce safety rule —
must be implemented by Dec.
31, 2017.
“FSMA is here,” Isom told
growers, processors and educa-
tors Nov. 16 at the North State
Precision Ag Expo and Farm
Business Forum in Orland. “If
you thought this was something
you could plan for next year
... no. You need to be doing it
now.”
Isom said he knows of nine
facilities in California that have
been visited by FDA officials
since the human and animal
food regulations took effect,
signaling there will likely be lit-
tle wiggle room for compliance
once the other deadlines pass.
“Do not wait,” Isom said.
“You need to be doing this stuff
now.”
FDA spokeswoman Jen-
nifer Dooren said she isn’t
aware of any FSMA-related
inspections, although she cau-
tioned that doesn’t mean they
didn’t happen. She said FSMA
compliance may have been in-
Farm
Bureaus
recognized
nationally for
promoting
unity in ag
SACRAMENTO — Farm
Bureau offices in three Cali-
fornia counties are being rec-
ognized nationally for team-
ing to host an event to foster
unity in the agriculture com-
munity.
The Stanislaus, Tuolumne
and Butte County Farm Bu-
reaus were among 34 local
offices nationwide to win the
American Farm Bureau Fed-
eration’s County Activities of
Excellence Award.
They will display their
ideas at the AFBF Annual
Convention and IDEAg Trade
Show on Jan. 6-11 in Phoenix.
The three offices won
recognition for an Ag Unite
event held in Modesto in
May, which drew more than
800 people and stressed the
need for unity among farm-
ers, ranchers and agricultural
organizations in responding to
challenges they face.
The rally generated new
Farm Bureau memberships
and donations to the FARM
PAC political action commit-
tee and to the Ag Unite Legal
Defense Fund, which was
created after the original Ag
Unite event in Butte County
in 2013, according to a news
release.
Another national winner
was the Fresno County Farm
Bureau, which was selected
for its TV program “Valley
Gold.”
The PBS program has be-
gun its fourth season high-
lighting the crops, commodi-
ties and agricultural products
grown in the San Joaquin
Valley.
Tim Hearden/Capital Press
Tim Hearden/Capital Press
William Ludwig, left, of The Zenith Agribusiness Solutions talks with
Roger Isom of the Western Agricultural Processors Association at
a conference Nov. 16 in Orland, Calif. They warn that Food Safety
Modernization Act inspections are already underway and growers
should be following the rules.
cluded in previously planned
inspections of large mixed-use
facilities that were already sub-
ject to FDA regulation.
She said the preventive con-
trols rules merely codify “what
a lot of them have already been
doing,” such as hazard analy-
ses.
“Our main goal is to re-
ally work with the industries
and help them understand the
rules,” Dooren said, “and to
work with them to beef up their
food safety plans as needed.”
The push comes as the larg-
est farms and businesses are
ramping up their food-safety
measures in preparation for
FSMA, which the FDA calls
the most sweeping reform of
food safety laws in more than
70 years. Isom told producers
and processors the law “is go-
ing to change every aspect of
what you do,” from how bath-
room breaks are handled to vo-
luminous record-keeping and
analyzing supplied materials
such as boxes.
Employers will have to
show they’re verifying that em-
ployees are following require-
ments, such as keeping equip-
ment clean, he said.
The biggest impact on farms
will be from the wide-ranging
produce safety rule, which was
finalized in 2015. It establishes
minimum standards for safety
in growing, harvesting, packing
and holding fruits and vegeta-
bles for human consumption.
State agriculture depart-
ments will receive millions of
dollars in grants from FDA to
educate farmers about the rule.
The California Department of
Food and Agriculture, which
is receiving $11.7 million over
five years, will contract with
outside organizations to pro-
vide training next year, spokes-
man Steve Lyle said.
“The plan is to provide
growers the necessary tools to
comply with the rule prior to
beginning inspections,” Lyle
said in an email.
While the deadline for most
farms to comply is the end of
next year, businesses that sell
less than $500,000 in produce
annually will have until the end
of 2018 to follow the produce
rule, while the smallest busi-
nesses — those with annual
produce sales between $25,000
and $250,000 — will have until
the end of 2019.
State Sen. Jim Nielsen, left, discusses the Sites Reservoir proposal during a meeting in Maxwell,
Calif., in October as Colusa County Supervisor Kim Vann listens. Sites proponents will be applying for
Proposition 1 bond funds next year.
Panel taking comments on how
it will judge Prop 1 projects
By TIM HEARDEN
Capital Press
SACRAMENTO — A
state commission is tak-
ing another round of com-
ments on its plans for judg-
ing large water storage
projects that will apply next
year for Proposition 1 bond
funds.
The California Water
Commission has issued a
third draft of its regulations
related to the $2.7 billion for
reservoirs and other storage
projects set aside in the $7.5
billion ballot measure voters
passed in 2014.
People will have until Dec.
7 to comment on the latest
documents, which describe
what is required of project ap-
plicants and how the commis-
sion will compare the public
benefits of proposed projects.
A final draft will be pre-
sented to the commission at
its Dec. 14 meeting, spokes-
man Chris Orrock said.
“We’re looking mainly at
Online
To read and comment on the
draft regulation, visit http://bit.
ly/2fSpQFB .
what the public benefit ratio
is of the project,” Orrock said.
“Speaking in general terms, if
a project cost $100 and $50 of
that were to create new pub-
lic benefits ... that would be a
great public benefit ratio.”
Proposition 1 defines pub-
lic benefits as ecosystem im-
provements, water quality
improvements, flood control
benefits, emergency response
and recreational purposes.
“This program is very spe-
cific,” Orrock said. “Each of
the projects that are applying
will have to show a measur-
able improvement to the (Sac-
ramento-San Joaquin River)
Delta. You don’t see that a lot
out there.”
Projects can benefit the
Delta by providing more cold
water that would aid the salm-
on run while flushing out pol-
lutants and intruding saltwa-
ter, he said.
Proposition 1 would fund
no more than half the cost of
a project, and at least half of
that funding would need to go
toward ecosystem improve-
ments directly related to the
Delta, he said.
The comment period
comes as project proponents
are gearing up for their ap-
plications. Backers of the
proposed $3.6 billion Sites
Reservoir near Maxwell have
lined up 34 agency partici-
pants, and supporters of the
proposed $2.5 billion Tem-
perance Flat Reservoir near
Fresno have formed the San
Joaquin Valley Water Infra-
structure Authority to plan its
application.
Other suitors could include
sponsors of the planned ex-
pansion of the Los Vaqueros
Reservoir in Contra Costa
County as well as groundwa-
ter improvement projects near
Delta tributaries.
Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association
Policy Memorandum
November 21, 2016
TO:
Transition Team Leadership, President-Elect Donald J. Trump
FROM:
Ron Reimann, President, CSRIA
Darryll Olsen, Ph.D., Board Representative, CSRIA
CC:
Mr. David Ponganis, SES, Director Programs,
Federal Columbia River Operations EIS (info@crso.info)
Br. Gen. Scott Spellmon, Division Commander, USACE
Mr. Elliot Mainzer, BPA Administrator
Ms. Lorri Lee, Regional Director, USBR
U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, WA
U.S. Rep. Dan Newhouse
SUBJECT:
CSRIA Response to the Federal Agencies’ Columbia River System
Operations (CRSO), Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
The very justification for the current Federal Agencies’ Columbia River Operations
EIS is flawed natural resources policy, and it should be corrected by invoking an Action
Agencies’ (Biological Opinion) “re-consultation,” with the new Administration’s Secretary
of Interior convening the Endangered Species Act Committee (“God Squad” Committee).
This renewed EIS process emanates from Oregon Federal Judge Michael Simon’s
incomprehensible decision ignoring two decades of federal agency work to improve
Columbia-Snake River fish runs, about $15 billion of rate payer funding, actual fish run
survival through the hydro system, and factors outside the Columbia-Snake River System
that overshadow fish production. Further disregarded are extensive technical analyses,
and the tens-of-millions of dollars rate payers’ spent on them, that have already
evaluated the destructive measures outlined in Judge Simon’s BiOp Remand Order.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was not framed as an instrument for endless
public funding for a self-serving “salmon recovery industry” nor as a platform for
brandishing judicial bias. Actions under the ESA have limits—the ESA Committee can and
should set the responsible boundaries for hydro system operations. Those boundaries
should reflect competent resources management, not empty gesture environmentalism.
3030 W. Clearwater, Suite 205-A, Kennewick, WA, 99336
509-783-1623, FAX 509-735-3140 DOlsenEcon@AOL.com
49-4/#6