Given the amount of fresh produce trade between the U.S. and Mexico (more than 13 billion pounds of fresh fruit and vegetables cross the U.S.-Mexican border each year) I thought I’d share something I recently read from the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service: an expanded capacity to track food being imported across this border.

USDA’s Market News recently expanded its collection of data at crossing points along the border in the state of Texas. Market News originally tracked all Mexico crossings through Texas as one single crossing, but after hearing requests from the produce industry and transportation firms, the branch changed its collection methods to track 10 unique crossing points all along the Texas border. The produce movement reports now show the produce coming in at Brownsville, Los Indios, Progreso, Rio Grande City, Roma, Pharr, Laredo, Presidio, El Paso, Del Rio, and Eagle Pass.

In a USDA blog post, Market News Directory Terry Long noted that “the expanded crossings report paints a more complete market picture, reflecting not only the quantity, but FOB pricing as well. Knowing these factors for several different crossing points will help the U.S. produce industry as a whole make informed decisions about the pricing and marketing of their produce.”

To learn more, visit USDA Market News’ website to view hundreds of pre-made reports (including the expanded crossing points report) or to create customized reports.

You can also learn more about USDA (and other agency) programs through our ongoing efforts to help members navigate regulatory agencies. And you can discuss issues like this in the Global Trade Community on PMA Xchange.

It’s been a few weeks since the last Produce Traceability Initiative (PTI) update here on Field to Fork, and I’d like to share a couple of new resources that the PTI leadership has developed to help industry move toward traceability implementation. These are:

• PTI Best Practices for Direct Print: This document provides technical assistance and information for suppliers (i.e. grower/shipper/manufacturer) in becoming PTI compliant with regard to barcode print quality/grading.
• PTI Best Practices for Product Substitutions: Since there are occasions in order fulfillment when product substitutions are necessary, this document provides a best practice for communication of these substitutions between trading partners to expedite receiving and invoicing processes.

There have also been updates made to existing PTI resources. For example, the PTI Master Data Working Group worksheet is now available in two formats. A new horizontal view includes example data sets and shows how it aligns with the Global Data Synchronization Network or GDSN. The traditional worksheet format, designed to facilitate synchronizing data with trading partners, has been expanded to include the three new attributes. Industry members who have been using PTI’s original data synchronization worksheet will find it easy to adopt the enhanced worksheet.

For more information, visit the PTI website. There you’ll find a number of resources on traceability implementation – from on-demand Webinars for various links in the supply chain to technical best practices documents.

Or you can visit the Food Safety Community on PMA Xchange, where we’ve posted video from last October’s Fresh Summit traceability workshop which focused on key learnings from the PTI pilot programs.

Several weeks ago in a blog post concerning the Center for Produce Safety industry meeting on cantaloupe safety, I mentioned that industry trade associations will be working to develop cantaloupe-specific food safety guidance. To meet this goal, four regional meetings throughout the U.S. have been scheduled to develop guidelines designed to improve the safety of cantaloupe. The guidance will address all operations within the supply chain and the diverse regions and processes in which netted melons are produced and handled.

The first meeting will be held in Phoenix, Arizona on March 29-30, with the second at Western Growers’ headquarters in Irvine, California on April 26-27. Additional meetings will be held in the Southeast U.S. on May 30-31 and in Denver, Colorado on June 20-21. The meetings are open to growers, buyers, auditors, academic experts as well as regulators from state agencies, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Meetings are restricted to industry stakeholders; however, each event will be followed up with a conference call with news media and those unable to attend to ensure additional questions are answered. We’ll share additional information on meeting registration, locations, hotels, and meeting agendas in the coming weeks here on Field to Fork.

If you’d like to know more about these meetings or if you have questions, please contact PMA’s Chief Science and Technology Officer Dr. Bob Whitaker via e-mail or call +1 (302) 738-7100 ext. 3094.

In today’s Federal Register, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service issued a proposed rule establishing the basic requirements for the operation of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) in conformance with National School Lunch Act.

You’ll recall that in the 2008 farm bill, the FFVP was permanently authorized as a nationwide program. The farm bill also provided a significant funding increase, established a funding formula, and, for the first time, provided funds for States to administer the FFVP. It also limited program participation to elementary schools beginning in school year 2010-2011.

An interim evaluation of the FFVP found that students consumed an additional one-quarter cup of fruits and vegetables, on average, on days when the program is operating, a figure that is nearly 15 percent higher than average fruit and vegetable consumption of children in non-FFVP schools. In addition, the report found no statistically significant increase in total calorie consumption by program participants, which suggested that fruits and vegetables are replacing other foods in the diets of participating children, rather than adding excess calories.

Participation requirements in the FFVP are restricted to only elementary schools that offer the National School Lunch Program, with eligible schools having at least 50 percent or more of their students certified as eligible for free and reduced-price school meals, except for other provided-for situations. Also, priority must be given to elementary schools with the highest need based upon the percentage of free and reduced-meal price children. To participate, schools must submit an application and not have been documented as being deficient in managing any FNS program or have no outstanding administrative findings documenting FNS program violations.

In terms of letting students and families know about the FFVP, the proposal states that schools are responsible for publicizing the program’s availability. When publicizing the program, schools must make it clear that the FFVP is not intended to serve teachers, parents or other adults who are in the school. However, USDA proposes that it be acceptable for teachers who are in the classroom with the children during the FFVP service to partake of the fruit or vegetable being served to the children in order to reinforce the nutrition education message of the FFVP.

As a parent whose child will be entering elementary school in a few years, programs like this are encouraging to me because of the potential for my daughter to have more healthful snack options available during school hours. And as we’ve seen, expanding kids’ access to fresh fruits and vegetables is an effort many in our industry are contributing to through a variety of ways, whether it is through the Salad Bars to Schools program or other efforts.

If you do business with schools, what do you think of this proposal? Tell us about it in the Increasing Consumption Community on PMA Xchange.

In today’s Federal Register, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced the availability of two guidance documents: one focused on FDA’s authority to access and copy records for the human and animal food industries and another intended for persons who manufacture, process, pack, transport, distribute, hold, or import human or animal foods intended for distribution to consumers, institutions, or food processors. Both guidance documents reflect changes made to the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act by the Food Safety Modernization Act.

The records access authority guidance answers common questions that cover a range of topics, including when FDA has the authority to access and copy records, the circumstances under which FDA is likely to request records, the types of records FDA may request and copy, and the consequences of refusing to provide records access. Industry feedback on this guidance is due May 23.

The records maintenance guidance answers common questions that cover a range of topics, including who is subject to records requirements, the scope of records retention and availability requirements, and the consequences of failing to establish and maintain required records or failing to make required records available to FDA. While FDA will accept comments on this guidance, it is implementing the guidance immediately because the guidance simply reflects the statutory changes and seeks to remove any confusion that might arise due to the existence of a guidance document that is inconsistent with the FD&C Act and its implementing regulations.

Speaking of the Food Safety Modernization Act, we’re still watching the progress of three proposed rules (produce safety, preventive controls, and foreign supplier verification) as they remain in the review stage at the Office of Management and Budget. We will let you know any updates of these proposals as we learn them.

In the meantime, visit our FSMA resource page for a summary of our activities to date on these important regulations. If you’ve got thoughts about the FSMA, share them with other members and us in the Food Safety Community on PMA Xchange.

According to a new global study from Underwriters Laboratories, food manufacturers identified product safety as a top business priority, but the majority of consumers believe food manufacturers can do even better to earn their confidence. For the study, global perceptions were collected from consumers and manufacturers in China, India, Germany, and the U.S. Some key insights from the study included:

• Though food manufacturers expressed confidence in their performance related to product safety, innovation, sustainability and reliability, consumers feel food manufacturers can do a better job testing food products and fresh foods especially.
• Consumers’ primary safety concerns for food products relate to contracting foodborne illness, exposure to unsafe chemical additives and unsanitary conditions.
• Food manufacturers agree that consumers are becoming more empowered. They value positive consumer claims on product quality and safety more than government endorsements.
• Seventy percent of consumers do not think fresh food manufacturers conduct thorough testing before introducing new products to the market.
• Even with manufacturers’ focus on product safety, 76 percent of consumers find it difficult to locate product safety information about fresh food products.
• Fifty percent of food manufacturers agree that a direct relationship exists between product quality and country of origin, and 50 percent of consumers across all geographies surveyed said they are always or usually aware of the country of origin for food products.

Given our industry’s keen focus on food safety, I always find it interesting to see how consumers view food safety. Though the report did not mention fresh produce specifically, there may be some lessons for us into how consumers view the safety of fresh food products.

What do you think of this study? How might our industry better tell its food safety stories? Join the conversation in the Food Safety Community on PMA Xchange.

Last Friday we shared with you the news of the U.S.-European equivalency agreement for organic regulations. I recently read about a survey that found a significant increase in American consumers reporting they purchased organic products and a jump in overall sales. According to the Annual Organic Product Survey by the TABS Group, the percentage of all consumers stating they purchased organics rose from 39.8 percent in January 2011 to 41.8 percent in January 2012.

The survey found that total organic product sales rose approximately 15 to 20 percent as well as an 11 percent increase in the number of product types purchased by a typical organic shopper. Findings included increases in sales of organic products such as beef (+48 percent), ice cream (+44 percent), hair care products (+28 percent), vegetables (+26 percent), milk (+25 percent), eggs (+21 percent) and chicken (+17 percent).

Younger consumers expressed greater preference for organic products, with 48 percent of respondents under 40 years reporting usage in the last six months compared with only 34 percent of consumers above 60. Those under 30 bought on average 4.6 different organic products compared with 2.9 different products purchased by people 60 and older. It also showed consumers overwhelmingly (62 to 38 percent) bought organic at mainstream retail stores over natural food or specialty stores.

A study conducted last year for PMA by The Hartman Group looked at organic produce as part of an overall quality distinction (which also included local and locality) by consumers. We found that 69 percent of consumers view the distinction of “local” produce as important - compared to 42 percent for locality (meaning produce grown in well-known production regions) and 29 percent for organic produce.

Also, in terms of consumer recognition of the USDA Organic seal, our study noted that while the seal remains a very powerful symbol, it no longer brings to consumers a sense of uniqueness to a particular fruit or vegetable – due in part to the presence of other symbols in the marketplace that confer quality in the minds of consumers.

To access our study (available to members only), visit our Consumer Trends Research Center.

We all hear it all the time: Can’t everyone figure out how to play by the same rules? It’s driving us crazy complying with a basketful of regulations. We hear it about food safety, organics, nutrition labeling, sustainability, and more. In late February came the most recent step to equivalency or harmonization (there are big fights over those two words as well – in this case, we use equivalency).

The European Union and the United States announced an important new arrangement to expanded market access, reduce duplicative requirements, and lower certification costs for the trade in organic products. According to USDA: “Growing demand in the EU, supported by the arrangement, is creating new export opportunities for U.S. companies in the following market segments: tree nuts, fresh fruit, specialty grains, dried fruit, vegetables and processed food products. USDA/FAS estimates the EU demand for organic food and drink products in 2010 at 24.5 billion USD an increase of 7.8 percent compared to the previous year.”

So, how to capitalize? You can find information on equivalency, how access the EU market, the U.S. organics standards, and the European organics standards. At the main page you’ll also find information on exclusions, labeling, documentation and more.

It is a global marketplace. It makes sense for everyone to get along – whether it’s equivalence or harmony doesn’t matter. This is a landmark step in the right direction. What do you think? Let us know in the Global Trade Community on PMA Xchange.

Yesterday I participated in a Webinar hosted by the School Nutrition Foundation in partnership with the United States Department of Agriculture. In it, USDA experts and a school food service director discussed quality, condition and grade standards. While the session was targeted to school foodservice professionals, I gleaned a few insights that might be of interest to PMA members. These included:

• The importance of clear specifications. Participants learned from USDA the differences between quality defects (cosmetic blemishes) and condition defects (which are progressive in nature and tend to worsen). With the increasing use of fresh produce in school meals, PMA members who sell to schools may want to help directors develop specs that take these variations under consideration.
• The importance of product use in specification development. Again, depending on how a school plans to use a fruit or vegetable on the menu, PMA members could provide insight into what grade standard may be used. If the product is cut up for meals, then there might be more allowance given for cosmetic defects.
• The importance of student preferences. While these are very likely to vary, one foodservice director shared a story about her granddaughter’s class taking a poll of their favorite apple variety. The winner was Granny Smith, due to its tartness. This took her grandmother by surprise because she’d always specified and ordered other varieties of apples other than Granny Smith.

It was an interesting Webinar to listen in on, and it reinforced the important role fresh produce plays – and will continue to play – in school meals. We’re all trying to increase produce consumption and through strong partnerships and clear specifications with school foodservice professionals, we can help ensure students have great sensory experiences with the produce that they are served.

For more discussions on produce consumption, visit the Increasing Consumption Community on PMA Xchange.

On February 29 in Fairfax, Virginia, PMA is bringing its one-day food safety program to help small growers in the region explore the challenges of developing a food safety program - from navigating the changing food safety environment to understanding the basics of third-party audits. This program is co-sponsored by Wegmans and Sysco.

The day will open with PMA’s Chief Science and Technology Office Dr. Bob Whitaker providing an overview of food safety history, where the industry is are currently, as well as the challenges faced and responsibilities involved in developing a food safety culture. This will be followed with food safety perspectives from a local grower, as well as food safety perspectives from both retail and foodservice buyers in a panel discussion. There will also be networking breaks and vendor solutions’ presentations.

If you’re planning to attend this program, contact Johnna Hepner at PMA.

If you’re interested in food safety, check out the Ask Dr. Bob Whitaker blog (posts include risk assessment, microbial testing, and more) as well as our Food Safety Resource Center – where new resources are frequently added. Note: the Food Safety Resource Center is only accessible to PMA members; you’ll need to be logged in to the website in order to view documents and other items.