 |
From: TSS ()
Subject: Re: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Oversight of the Importation of Beef Products from Canada AUDIT REPORT Report No. 33601-01-Hy
Date: February 18, 2005 at 2:47 pm PST
In Reply to: Re: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Oversight of the Importation of Beef Products from Canada AUDIT REPORT Report No. 33601-01-Hy posted by TSS on February 18, 2005 at 7:01 am:
Statement
By
Dr. Ron DeHaven Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service and
Barbara Masters, Acting Administrator, Food Safety and Inspection Service
“The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service along with its sister
agency the
Food Safety Inspection Service carefully reviewed the new report from
the Office of the
Inspector General regarding the importation of certain beef products
from Canadian cattle
under 30 months of age that occurred from August 2003 to April 2004.
“Both APHIS and FSIS agree with the report and are currently enacting the
recommendations made by OIG. The report identifies weaknesses in the
processes for
issuing permits and communications within and between APHIS and FSIS. It
does not
question the safety of the products that were imported, as at no time
was any product
allowed in under permit without meeting the proper food safety safeguards.
“While APHIS intends to take additional steps to ensure that all import
policy
changes are immediately posted on the APHIS website and efficiently
distributed. APHIS
already employs several mechanisms for communicating policy changes to
interested
parties, including importers, Congress, and the public. These include:
? Posting “Dear Importer” letters on its web page to notify interested
parties of
changes to import policy;
? Issuing alerts to agency port personnel and Department of Homeland
Security
Customs and Border Protection personnel, which is then provided to all
interested parties;
? Notifying personnel internally, in the field and on the border of any
and all
changes;
? Providing frequent policy updates to Food Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS) colleagues through e-mail and facsimile transmissions; and
? Working with Congress to ensure that legislators are aware of import
policy
changes.
“In response to the OIG report and the overwhelming number of permits
submitted to APHIS during the Canada BSE crisis, APHIS intends to revise its
import/export tracking system, including adding a new mail-in database
to document
policy changes, product certifications, and permit guidelines, to ensure
that permit
issuance and consistency is properly monitored by the end of February
2005 (the
database will be online in March).
“APHIS is in the process of developing new procedures for notifying
applicants
of APHIS permits to remove or revise material and explaining the reasons
for this
decision more expeditiously. This process should be completed by
mid-March. In
addition, APHIS is also developing an online system to ensure that APHIS
permits are
cancelled or amended, as necessary in a timely manner. This new system
will be up and
running in January 2006.
“In regards to APHIS ensuring that risk mitigation measures are attached to
permits, APHIS intends to strengthen its current system to allow for a
larger number of
permits to be handled within a limited time frame. To do this, APHIS will:
? Hire additional staff as funding allows to handle in any future
situations where
a large number of permits are received in a limited amount of time (such
as during the
Canada ruminant ban);
? Review protocols and refine quality control measures to improve
handling of
large volume permit application by March 2005.
“In order to ensure that mitigation measures are being applied at
facilities that
request permits, APHIS agrees with the OIG that a monitoring process
which includes
onsite reviews of permit holders, foreign facilities and inspection
personnel at U.S. ports
of entry is necessary. However, it is important to note that nearly all
permits issued
indicate that exporting facilities are always subject to APHIS
inspection. APHIS reserves
the option for on-site monitoring – in any country or regions – if it
becomes necessary.
It is not necessary, nor feasible, to conduct inspections of all permit
holders or foreign
facilities. The process should focus on permit holders and foreign
facilities, which do not
have an established record of compliance.
“In order to better oversee these permit applications, APHIS and FSIS are
developing procedures that will require consistent terminology when
identifying products
and better communication between the Agencies in this regard. This will
help prevent any
misunderstandings that could lead to improper importation of animals or
animal products.
“In addition to communications between the agencies, FSIS will develop a
process to ensure that a clear message on the specific eligibility of
products is presented
to interested parties. APHIS has already begun this process by notifying
permit holders
that cheek meat will not be allowed under the current permit structure.
It will be allowed
in when the final rule goes into effect on March 7.
“We are pleased with the swiftness of OIG’s audit and will implement their
recommendations as quickly as possible to further augment USDA’s
existing BSE
regulatory regimen that has safely protected the U.S. livestock
population from BSE for
more than 15 years.”
# http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/issues/bse/OIG_Audit_Statement.pdf Greetings, > “We are pleased with the swiftness of OIG’s audit and will implement their
> recommendations as quickly as possible to further augment USDA’s
> existing BSE
> regulatory regimen that has safely protected the U.S. livestock
> population from BSE for
> more than 15 years.”
NO, this is not true. What they did was lied to the public, lied to the
ranchers
and lied to themselves. They put the ruminant to ruminant feed ban on paper
and then never enforced it. They rendered TSEs and fed it to cattle, deer,
elk, sheep and goats for decades to 2005, then fed all that to humans and
animals, plus made all kind of other products for humans and animals,
then sit here and tell us lies like the statement above. appalling. IF i
had a dollar for everytime i heard the same BSeee above i would be rich.
I can say this with great confidence now, everything has been documented
right here on this list... thank you very much. i remember hearing the same
lame excuses everytime the GAO wrote up reports telling them that changes
must be made, or when International experts tried to warn them, time
and time again. but no, now we have GWs Minimal Risk Regions shoved
down our throats, AFTER a BSE case was detected here. IF i were any
other country, i would let GW choke on his beef and his MRR that is
nothing more than a policy that will legalize the trading of all phenotypes
of TSEs Internationally...
TSS
Terry S. Singeltary Sr. wrote:
> ##################### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
> #####################
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
|
