2600 RIVER PLAZA DRIVE I SUITE 200 

SACRAMENTO, CA 95833 

TELEPHONE: 916 I 925-9131 

FAX: 916 I 925-9030 

Peach Association 

January 5, 2022 

Darrell Hughes 

Designated Federal Officer 

Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee 

USDA-AMS-Specialty Crops Program 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW 

Suite 1575, STOP 0235 

Washington, DC 20250-0235 

Re: Public Comment for February 1, 2022 Meeting 

Dear Mr. Hughes: 

The California Canning Peach Association (CCP A) respectfully submits the following comments 

in advance of the Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for 

February 1, 2022. 

CCP A is the nation's oldest farm bargaining cooperative representing our grower-members who 

produce 75% ofthe cling peaches sold to California processors who account for the nation's entire 

domestic canned/plastic peach supply. 

We understand that the Committee intends to review and discuss industry recommendations 

provided by the Produce Marketing Association (PMA) and the United Fresh Produce Association 

(United Fresh) on October 22, 2021. (As of January 1, 2022, PMA and United Fresh have 

completed a merger and now operate as the International Fresh Produce Association.) Although 

the CCP A is supportive of many of the PMA/United Fresh recommendations to the Committee, 

we would strongly oppose any attempt to weaken the language contained in the Committee's 2019 

recommendation to the Secretary regarding the Buy American provision for school food purchases 

(see attachment). The PMA/United Fresh recommendations refer to potential uncertainty around 

how USDA may interpret and define exceptions and documentation requirements for schools and 

express their concerns that "many well-intentioned members of Congress are pushing for even 

stricter interpretation of Buy American without fully appreciating the consequences of providing 

students with year-round access to a wide variety offresh fruits and vegetables." CCP A notes that 

the renewed focus on Buy American provisions is not confined to well-intentioned members of 

Congress, one ofPresident Biden' s initial actions was to issue his Ensuring the Future is Made in 

All ofAmerica byAll ofAmerican Workers Executive Order on January 25th, 2021 which included 

a call for review of all agency waivers to Buy American requirements. 

1 
Subsequent to President Biden's Executive Order, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service issued a 

Request for Information regarding Buy American Provisions in the National School Lunch and 

School Breakfast Program in early August. The Department has received nearly 160 comments in 

response to this Request for Information. In reviewing all the comments submitted, CCP A 

representatives observed that comments submitted by United Fresh indicated their support for the 

purchase of counter-seasonal fresh produce items that are imported by U.S. based companies. 

United Fresh also states that there are far more U.S. employees working in the fresh produce import 

business than in domestic adding that exceptions to the Buy American provisions have been an 

important tool in providing students with a wide variety of fresh fruits and vegetables. 

However, the trend toward more foreign sourcing offruits and vegetables is impacting many U.S. 

growers. Clearly the Florida fresh tomato industry and the Southeast blueberry industry has faced 

devasting impacts due to low priced imports of seasonal and perishable fruit. In 1993, the U.S. 

imported approximately $1.2 billion offresh fruits and vegetables from Mexico. By 2019, imports 

had increased by 1,025 percent to $13.5 billion. While we acknowledge that any U.S. based 

company can choose to outsource their farming and packing operations to foreign countries with 

lower labor costs and less stringent environmental regulations, we do not believe that these 

outsourcing decisions should be rewarded with taxpayer funded purchases of imported fruits and 

vegetables that are also grown in the U.S. We believe that any USDA action which results in 

schools spending additional taxpayer money to purchase foreign sourced food products directly 

contradicts both the letter and spirit ofPresident Biden's Executive Order. 

We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments in advance of the Committee's 

upcoming meeting. Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

~ > 

President & CEO 

cc: Celeste Drake, Office ofManagement and Budget 

2 
USDA Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee (FVIAC) 

2018-2020 Recommendations 

Explanatory Notes 

for Labor, Production, and Trade recommendations 
TRADE REC QMMEND AT ION5 with Explanatory Notes (pgs. 9-101 

Industry information presented to the Committee provides insight 

suggesting that significant quantities of imported products are being 

purchased by schools and being served to our students. It is believed that 

over 80% of the apple juice served in schools in 2014 and 26 states, 

including California and Georgia served Chinese canned peaches to their 

students in some districts. In 2016, a number of schools purchased 

Egyptian strawberries, which later were subject to a recal l due to potential 

Hepatitis A contamination. Whether it is a problem of enforcement or of 

education it seems clear that many in charge of school lunch procurement 

do not have readily available guidance, regulations or information 

regarding the Buy America requirement (National School Lunch Act) and 

some schools are not even aware of the requirement. Imported product is 

exhibited for purchase at School Nutrition Association conferences 

implying that its use is not only accepted but routine. 

The 2018 Farm Bill seems to acknowledge the issue and begins a 

process to address in Sec. 4207 "Buy America Requirements". The 

language calls for the Department to fully comply with enforcement of the 

Buy America Act for all school purchases (not just fruits and vegetables) 

and calls for a report back to Congress. 

American grown food is produced under the strictest regulations to ensure 

food safety, reduce environmental impacts, carefully manage pesticide 

use and conserve our resources. Spending taxpayer dollars to source 

cheaper food products for our students that are grown and processed 

under very different standards does not reflect our nation's policy priorities 

and is extraordinarily discouraging to all of us in the agricultural 

community who work so hard to comply with our rigorous standards. 

Schools should not risk the health and safety of our children for the sake 

of saving a few dollars on their food expenditures. It seems obvious that 

President Truman had it right over 70 years ago - "In the long view, no 

nation is healthier than its children, nor more prosperous than its farmers". 

The best way to ensure that our kids have safe, nutritious food at school 

is to support U.S. farmers and ranchers. 

The alarming trade imbalance between U.S. fruits and vegetables and 

foreign competition due to myriad challenges is complex and requires 

multiple approaches to achieving long-term solutions. Erosion of market 

share, whether in the U.S. or abroad, driven by unfair trading rules and 

practices, can most effectively be reversed through meaningful reforms 

that balance trade requirements that foster an equal playing field in 

combination with robust market promotion that drives sales. 

We recommend the Agriculture Secretary consider meaningful improvements in 

the guidance for and enforcement of Buy American requirements for school food 

purchases enhanced by Sec. 4207 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 -

and request the Secretary to keep the Committee advised of his actions on the 

following: 

1. Strike the "Significant Cost Differential" language from the Buy American 

exceptions provided to schools. This exemption is significantly too 

ambiguous and does not recognize the myriad of fruits and vegetable 

options that are available should the desired first choice be cost 

prohibitive. 

2. Require public notice whe_n schools elect to purchase foreign sourced 

food products instead of domestically produced including and require that 

schools maintain documentation to justify foreign purchase of fruits and 

vegetables over domestic. For instance; whether alternate supply sources 

were considered, whether bids were sought at the best time of the year to 

allow domestic participation, whether substitutions were considered 

(applesauce instead of peaches, pears instead of mixed fruit cocktail, 

etcetera. 

3. Establish financial or commercial (restrict from supplying schools) 

penalties for food distributors that misrepresent their food products or who 

switch foreign sourced products for contracted domestic food products. 

4. We recommend the Agriculture Secretary make the following Comm ittee 

position known to the President and Congress: The critical importance of 

ensuring that Export Market Promotion programs continue to be made 

available to U.S. agriculture to successfully compete against foreign 

competition in export markets and that the available funding for these 

programs be increased to offset the imbalance of trade restrictions and 

impacts of trade disputes. 

@ 2 1Page of 10 .'