Discrepancies between producers and the federal government continue in the beef origin labeling saga.
USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) recently responded to two petitions sent by industry groups regarding origin labeling of beef products.
A petition sent by the United States Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) requested amendments to the Food Standards and Labeling Policy Book to label beef as a product of the USA only if cattle have been born, raised, and slaughtered in the U.S.
An additional petition filed jointly by the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) and American Grassfed Association (AGA) asked for the same, stating the current policy allows “foreign profiteers to mislabel meat products and plunder the profits of U.S. farmers and ranchers at the expense of U.S. consumers.”
FSIS responded to the two petitions on March 26. The agency concluded that the current labeling policy, “which permits meat and poultry products that were derived from animals that may have been born, raised and slaughtered in another country but processed in the U.S. to be labeled as ‘Product of USA,’” may be causing confusion.
Therefore, FSIS decided to initiate a rulemaking to define the conditions required for beef to be labeled a product of the U.S. The agency noted that it intended to limit the labeling to meat products derived from livestock slaughtered and processed in the U.S.
Current standards
The Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) authorizes the FSIS to regulate labeling for meat products sold in the U.S. After a 1989 final rule clarified import regulations, FSIS made clear in its regulations that, “[o]nce product offered for entry has been re-inspected by FSIS inspectors and the official mark of inspection has been applied, FSIS considers that such product has been ‘entered’ into the U.S., and therefore, is the regulatory equivalent of domestic product.”
If imported meat products are repackaged or reprocessed in a federally-inspected facility, they are treated as a domestic product and may be labeled with “Product of USA.” In a 2001 notice of rulemaking, FSIS said the “Product of USA” label was never intended to be used as a label only for animals born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S.
The petitions
Many of the comments in the two petitions were submitted by consumers, farmers, ranchers, labor unions, and other trade associations. The petitions also reference studies which demonstrated U.S. consumers would pay a premium for animals born, raised, and slaughtered in the U.S.
The petition put forward by OCM and AGA says the current meat labeling regulations are misleading because they allow meat reprocessed in the U.S. to be labeled as “Product of USA.”
In addition to saying the current labeling policy is misleading to consumers, the petition asserts the policy is causing financial harm to U.S. family farmers and ranchers.
The USCA petition states FSIS should adopt the Federal Trade Commission’s “all or virtually
all” standard for “Made in the USA” claims.
However, FSIS notes that comments from other cattle producer trade associations, meat processor trade associations, Canadian and Mexican livestock producer trade associations, and the Canadian and Mexican governments did not support the petitions.
“The comments stated that the current policy accurately reflects congressional intent with respect to imported products as enacted in the FMIA and its implementing regulations,” FSIS’s response read.
Additionally, FSIS said comments from the Canadian and Mexican governments noted the high integration of the Canadian and U.S. livestock industries, and the Mexican and U.S. livestock industries. The two countries expressed concerns about measures that could potentially disrupt the integrated livestock supply chains.
FSIS’s next move
After consideration of the two petitions, FSIS concluded that the “Product of USA” may be misleading to consumers and may not meet consumer expectations for what the label signifies. The agency also agreed that clear parameters needed to be established for which products may be voluntarily labeled with U.S. origin statements.
However, the agency noted that it also considered comments that did not support the petitions, and concluded the oppositional comments also had merit. Thus, the agency denied the petitions and instead decided to initiate rulemaking to limit “Product of USA” and other U.S. origin statements to meat products derived from livestock slaughtered and processed in the U.S.
“FSIS believes that the rulemaking process will allow the agency to develop a voluntary U.S. origin labeling policy that addresses the diverse issues raised by the public comments in a manner that is consistent with the FMIA,” the agency’s response read.
In response to the agency’s decision, USCA said, “The second round of rulemaking will effectively take producers out of the equation when it comes to the labeling of U.S. beef products as FSIS will look to redefine the term ‘origin’ to instead refer to the packing house or processing facility, rather than the ranch.”
OCM and AGA echoed USCA’s sentiments, but seemed more optimistic. AGA Executive Director Carrie Balkcom said, “The members and supporters of American Grassfed will aggressively participate in the comment period when this rulemaking process opens… For the USDA to continue to allow foreign products to be labeled ‘Product of U.S.A.’ continues to penalize American family farms and farmers.”
OCM Executive Director Angela Huffman said, “We are encouraged that FSIS agrees with our concerns that the current ‘Product of U.S.A.’ labeling system causes confusion for consumers and takes money out of the pockets of the farmer.” — Anna Miller, WLJ editor
