Sample Letter to USDA Officials- with e-mail to send it

Action Alert
Sample Letter to USDA Officials

Please copy the following sample letter (below the dotted line) and either paste into an e-mail or print/mail separately to USDA Secretary Mike Johanns.

IMPORTANT: Individualized letters are much more effective than copied template letters. If you have the time and motivation, we would encourage you to customize this letter. You can insert one or two lines as to why you feel this rule should not go into effect.

A very short handwritten note might even carry more weight!

Examples: I believe that uncooked foods, or “living foods,” offer substantial health benefits. I am outraged/saddened/disturbed by the fact that I will not be able to purchase truly raw almonds after September 1.

I am very concerned that I will no longer be able to know how my food was processed, and that “raw” will no longer mean “raw.”

If you are an industry professional (farmer, retailer, distributor, or manufacturer), it is important that you state this in your letter. You can do this below your typed name/signature and address.

Thank you for taking action in the interest of authentic and healthy food!

Mail to:
Secretary Mike Johanns
United States Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave SW
Whitten Building – Suite 200A
Washington, D.C. 20250

Email:
TO: agsec@usda.gov
CC: kurt.kimmel@usda.gov
Michael.durando@usda.gov

……………………………………………………………………………

Dear Secretary Johanns,

As a consumer of raw almonds, I am very concerned regarding the final rule (7 CFR Part 981, Docket No. FV06-981-1 FR) amending the almond marketing order to require that all almonds be "pasteurized." As a citizen, I was not aware of the rule when it was proposed, and feel that my concerns, and those of others with a similar interest, were not considered.

The availability of raw almonds is important to me, and I regret the loss of freedom to purchase truly raw almonds.

I am also disturbed by the required misleading labeling that will allow pasteurized (processed) almonds to be labeled as “raw,” when they have undergone a chemical and/or heat treatment.

There are several concerns that I feel were not fully evaluated during the initial public comment period:

1. This rule will impose financial burdens on small-scale and organic farmers. The costs of the chemicals and heat treatments, in addition to the costs of extra transportation and reporting, will be disproportionally taxing on smaller producers. This is unfair since none of the reported salmonella cases in 2001 or 2004 were traced to small-scale or organic farms.

2. This rule does not address the dangerous and unsustainable methods of industrial-scale farms that lead to food contamination, nor does it adequately take into account the effect of pasteurization on almonds.

3. More research, conducted independently of the Almond Board, might show the direct link between industrial-scale farming and the contamination of the food supply, justifying an exemption based on scale for smaller producers.

4. One of the options for "pasteurization" is treatment with propylene oxide. This substance is classified as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Propylene oxide treatment of foods is banned in Canada, Mexico, and the European Union. And even organic almonds will undergo heat treatments. Only the Almond Board and its constituents have researched the pasteurization of almonds, reporting that there is no significant reduction in their quality or nutrition. Independent research in this area is necessary before universal implementation of this rule.

5. Considering the chemical and heat treatments, it is misleading to label pasteurized almonds as “raw.” Many consumers wish to purchase truly raw, unprocessed almonds. A reasonable alternative to the new rule might be to allow for and clearly label unpasteurized almonds, as is allowed with certain fresh fruit and vegetable juices.

I am aware that there was a formal 45-day comment period prior to the publication of the final rule; however, concerned consumers and other stakeholders, with the exception of almond handlers, were not aware of this proposed rule. Of the very few comments received on the proposed rule, none were submitted by consumers or retailers. This is a reflection not of our apathy, but our lack of awareness and the lack of transparency of the process.

I, as well as many other concerned citizens, feel that we were deprived of an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process regarding an issue that is truly important to us. I am writing to request that the USDA postpone implementation of the almond pasteurization requirement and reopen the formal public comment period.

Sincerely,



P.S. Secretary Johanns, please forward this correspondence to:

Michael Durando
Chief of Marketing Order Administration Branch,
Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA
1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 0237
Washington, DC 20250–0237

Kurt J. Kimmel
Regional Manager, Marketing Order Administration Branch,
Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA
2202 Monterey Street, Suite 102B
Fresno, CA 93721
Tweet