Source:  Lisa M. Keefe, MEATINGPLACE.COM, 12/24/09

The National Meat Association and the American Meat Institute are the winners in a court case involving labeling requirements in the state of California.

California's Fourth Appellate Court this week ruled in favor of the NMA and AMI, who had argued that the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) expressly "and entirely" preempts the state's Proposition 65, according to releases posted by both organizations on their Web sites.

Proposition 65 was passed in 1986, and among its regulatory requirements is one that requires food to be labeled with notices of specific contents. Those substances then can be checked against an official list of substances implicated in incidents of cancer and birth defects.

"In fact, the state law allows California citizens to sue companies that do not place a warning label on certain products," NMA noted in its release.

The court acknowledged that meat processors are "caught between the choice of risking sanctions for failing to comply with Proposition 65, on the one hand, and the strong likelihood of USDA disapproval if they attempt to provide Proposition 65 warnings, on the other," court papers say.

The FMIA provides for federal jurisdiction over all links in the meat production chain, including labeling. It expressly prohibits "additional or different requirements for establishments with inspection services and as to marking, labeling, packaging, and ingredients," according to the Food Safety and Inspection Service Web site.

The decision does not withhold information on what substances are in a product's substances from consumer, but does require that those who would like to Prop 65–type labeling on meats to file a petition with the USDA "for the issuance, amendment or repeal of a rule," the NMA notes.

For more stories, go to www.meatingplace.com.