November, 1998
While cider producers are complying with regulations to label their products as "pasteurized" or "unpasteurized," the citrus industry has secured a temporary exemption for its juices.
Under the original Food and Drug Administration rule, the labels were required on fresh fruit and vegetable juices that are not treated to achieve at least a five-log reduction in certain pathogens, particularly E. coli O157:H7.
The final rule became effective for apple juice and cider on Sept. 8 and for all other juices Nov. 5. However, FDA has granted fresh citrus juice manufacturers up to eight months to comply with the rule.
With the exemption, the citrus industry believes it will be able to develop an industrywide system to ensure that unpasteurized juices meet the five-log standard and thus avoid the warning label.
The citrus industry has been consulting with scientists with the goal of finding a way to ensure a safe product and plans to extend this effort to growers and the FDA.
That's a scenario the cider industry could follow, said Julia Daly, director of communications for the U.S. Apple Association.
"The citrus industry has been allowed time to develop a coherent science-based response to the FDA that the cider industry was not given. We can only applaud them for their efforts," she said. "We're hoping down the road that the cider industry will be able to come back and do a similar thing."
Daly said a project is being launched under FDA guidance to help obtain some of this information. This project involves the purchase of a cider mill in California.
"They will be conducting research that will provide some more pieces to the puzzle and much-needed answers to questions," she said. "We're hoping that in the near future, the cider industry will be able to in a way similar to citrus say to FDA 'you over-reacted.'"
Another part of the juice regulations is coming under challenge from a bipartisan group of United States senators.
FDA has proposed that implementation of Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points (HACCP) procedures be implemented by cider makers, even if they pasteurize their product.
Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Jim Jeffords (R-Vt.), Slade Gorton (R-Wash) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) have joined USApple in fighting the proposal. They have sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala that questions the FDA proposal.
The letter cites the flawless food safety record of pasteurized apple cider and juice.
"According to reputable statistics, an estimated 98% of apple juice is presently pasteurized. Pasteurization provides a highly effective means of eliminating any potential foodborne pathogens in fruit juice. Where pasteurization does occur, a mandatory HACCP plan does not seem necessary to protect the public from microbiological illness.
"While we support FDA's efforts to establish proper food safety goals, the agency should take care to ensure its mandates are based on sound scientific justification. Given the absence of meaningful and significant food safety risk from pathogens or other hazards, we question FDA's proposed insistence on the use of HACCP plans by all juice producers.
"Therefore, we would appreciate receiving a detailed explanation of FDA's justification for proposing that all juice processors be required to implement a potentially very costly and overly burdensome HACCP plan," the senators wrote.
Apple industry members may contact their senators and ask them to join
with their four colleagues in communicating displeasure to FDA on this issue.
For information on how to contact senators, or to review their letter to
Shalala, see the government affairs section of USApple's new website at
http://www.usapple.org.
The Great Lakes
Fruit Growers News