RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a...

100
2777 111 - ZZZ Shomper, Kris From: Sent: To: Subject: Miller, Sarah E. Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:00 AM IRRC Fw: IRRC Website - New Message ocr s 20l0 From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:43 AM To: Help Subject: IRRC Website - New Message RRC Independent Regulatory Review Commission A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website First Name: David Last Name: Moorefield Company: n/a Email: [email protected] Subject: raw milk regulation Message: My name is David Moorefield, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations. Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Transcript of RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a...

Page 1: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777111 - ZZZ

Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:00 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

ocr s20l0

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:43 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: David

Last Name: Moorefield

Company: n/a

Email: [email protected]

Subject: raw milk regulation

Message:My name is David Moorefield, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Page 2: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:00 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

LJCT 5 2 0 1 0

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:41 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

IRRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commissiori

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Britt

Last Name: Wagner

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: Please reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

Message:My name is Britt Wagner, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Thank you for considering this carefully! Respectfully, Britt Wagner

Page 3: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

:D¥EE)From:Sent:To:Subject:

[email protected], October 05, 2010 9:59 AMIRRCProposed Regulation #2777 Department of Agricultui

OCJ 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORY

My name is Kay Hackl, I am a raw milk consumer and activist from the State of Illinois and Irespectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: MilkSanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transactionand has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliersor markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs tofocus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itselfin micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Signed,

Kay Hackl

Page 4: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris ?lf*f

From:Sent:To:Subject:

[email protected], October 05, 2010 9:56 AMIRRCreject reg #277: Milk Sanitation

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Dave Vickery. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's.That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that couldeasily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Dave VickeryHorsemen Trail Farm

Page 5: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris :<f*.P!M[gQFrom: Brian Roesler [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:56 AMTo: IRRCSubject: CHANGES TO PENNSYLVANIA RAW MILK REGULATIONS

Dear Sir or Madam:

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Brian D. Roesler, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Brian D. Roesler

Page 6: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

T 5 UFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

ULMiller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:28 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:25 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Ccmrnissiori

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Douglas

Last Name: Rasmussen

Company: SELF

Email: [email protected]

Subject: regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

Message:My name is Douglas Rasmussen. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Thank You, Doug Rasmussen

Page 7: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:34 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:32 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Kim

Last Name: Olenderski

Company:

Email: gabby244(g)deiazzd.com

Subject: proposed dairy regulations

Message:My name is Kim Olenderski. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Thank you for taking the time to read and consider my opinions in thisemail. Kim Olenderski Lancaster County, PA

Page 8: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris [R}[p(^F[MEDFrom: Mary Langeron [[email protected]] OCT 5 2010Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 11:28 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Request to reject proposed regulation #2777 Dept of Agriculture ^^vScoMM?ss foN RY

Dear IRRu,I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department ofAgriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Mary Langeron

Page 9: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

TUTMarian Davis [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:27 PMIRRC

oTunrINDEPENDENT REGULATORY

REVIEW COMMISSIONREJECT PROPOSED REGULATION #2777 Dept of Ag 2-160:llirSanIfa!Wrr J

October, 4,2010

My name is David J Egge and I am 63 years old. I am a former dairyman and have consumed raw milk for allof my life and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discerning and discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food saftey is not size neutral. Largercorporations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse it there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnnecessary. these flawswarrant that the proposed regulation br rejected.

Sincerely,David J. Egge

Page 10: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

Mia Painter [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:17 PMIRRCreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Mia Painter,I am a raw milk consumer in PA and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department ofAgriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation.

I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer. If they provide an unsatisfactoryproduct or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. Where we need governmentinvolvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State.Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts andwe have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Respectfully,Mia Painter499 Vernon StMedia, PA 19063

Page 11: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris 2777 ClEfiWPfn)From:Sent:To:Subject:

Grade [[email protected]] OCT 5 2010Monday, October 04, 2010 11:16 PM

proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2rt16ft;AMifk]Sariita1Jon

My name is Susan LoVette, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Signed

Susan LoVette

Page 12: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777OPT «

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Jeanne Robinson [email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:14 PMIRRCPlease reject proposed regulation #2777 Dept of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Jeanne Robinson, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. Ifthey provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out ofbusiness quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; everyconsumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rathercorporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex,problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if theywere performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result isachieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to testfor compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself inmicromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. Theseflaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you for your time,

Jeanne RobinsonSunnyvale, CA

Page 13: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

INDEPENDEIMT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

elaine kocur [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:08 PMIRRCproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Elaine Kocur, I am a raw milk consumer and Irespectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection frommy farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem theywill be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer policesthat supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliersor markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations createdby the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations aremore complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we haveno direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, theregulation could be much simpler if they were performance standards,requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's.That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than insertingitself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some casesonerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposedregulation be rejected.

signedElaine Kocur

Page 14: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Lisa Olauson [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:01 PMIRRCplease reject proposed #2777

OCT 5 2010

Hello,

My name is Lisa Olauson. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation.

I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or localmarket or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; everyconsumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options.

Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighborsbut rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are morecomplex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse ifthere is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Lisa Olauson

Page 15: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

2777

Nathan J. Rathmell [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:01 PMIRRCProposed Regulation #2777

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Nathan Rathmell., I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out ofbusiness quickly. At that level. State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has directenforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers ormarkets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Foodsafety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much morefar-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. Theregulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves adesired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not theState's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a functionthat could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging theoperation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.Signed,

Nathan Rathmell

Page 16: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Marian Davis [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 11:00 PMIRRC

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

REJECT PORPOSED REGULATION #2777 Dept of Ag 2-160: Milk Sanitation

October, 4,2010My name is Marian Davis-Egge,

I have been a raw milk consumer all my life and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discerning and discriminatong consumerand do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactoryproduct or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, Stateregulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with everytransaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliersor markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not sizeneutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have nodirect meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producer's responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Marian Davis-Egge

Page 17: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

JOSEPH BUCARA [email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:56 PMIRRCProposed Regulation 2777-Rejection

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Joseph Bucara, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedJoseph C Bucara1715 Morgan LaneCollegeville, PA 19426

Page 18: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris 5)E^rgnM[g[r^

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Tom Petrie [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:54 PMIRRCFw: Proposed regulations

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Tom Petrie, and I am a raw milk consumer.

I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: MilkSanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or marketsare no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral.Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have nodirect meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself inmicromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. Theseflaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Cordially,

Tom Petrie

Page 19: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Not form letter

Miller, Sarah E.Monday, October 04, 2010 9:58 PMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 09:42 PMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

IRRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Jessica

Last Name: Zwilling

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: Reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

Message:My name is Jessica Zwillg. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I have done my homework regarding thesafety of raw milk and have a close relationship to the farmer and cows who provide the raw milk. I do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex. Their problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations. Dirty livingquarters of the animals produces dirty milk. Local, small farmers that keep clean, healthy animals produceclean, healthy milk. Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being totest for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanagingthe operation. Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected. Thank you for your time.

Page 20: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Miller, Sarah E.Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:59 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Fw: IRRC Website - New Message

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 09:48 PMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

OCT 5 2010

"REVIEW <-sassss^

IRRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Alison

Last Name: Horowitz

Company:

Email: hwitz(g)verizon.net

Subject: proposed reg. 2777, dept. ag. 2-160

Message:My name is Alison Horowitz, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State, Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Page 21: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, KrisFrom: Miller, Sarah E. / u ^ I^IUJSent: Monday, October 04,201010:00 PM j OCT R ?nfnTo: IRRC / UIU

Subject: Fw: IRRC Website - New Message / INDEPENDENT O

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 09:48 PMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

IRRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Aaron

Last Name: Fraser

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: Raw Milk

Message:My name is Aaron Fraser, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Sincerely, Aaron Fraser

Page 22: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Monday, October 04, 2010 10:00 PMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

IFSBSEDWEDOCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 09:55 PMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Liz

Last Name: Parsekian

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: Raw Milk Vote

Message:My name is Liz Parsekian, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Thank you sincerely, Liz Parsekian

Page 23: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Monday, October 04, 2010 10:11 PMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:09 PMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Jane

Last Name: Sleutaris

Company:

Email: rickj ane99(Sjhotmail.com

Subject: Milk Regulation Hearing

Message:My name is Jane Sleutaris. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Respectfully, Jane Sleutaris

Page 24: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

, 1NUR^EW"COMMISSWCarolee Bol [[email protected]] ]_ ~-——— ~~Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:29 AMIRRCVote to DISAPPROVE proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

Dear IRRC,

I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department ofAgriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection frommy farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide ahigher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighborsbut rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex,problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem.The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you,

Carolee Bol & Scott Rosenberg, parents of Cyrus and Elias

Page 25: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Cochran, Jim [email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:31 AMTo: IRRCSubject: Raw Milk Consumer

My name is Jim Cochran, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does notand cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with everytransaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations createdby the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there isa problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves adesired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily becontracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedJim Cochran1302 River RoadUpper Black Eddy, PA 18972

This email and any attachments may contain information that is proprietary, personal, and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, retention, ordisclosure of its contents is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error, please notify A D Computer immediately at 610-797-9500 and delete all copies.

Page 26: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Hunter, Lisa [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:36 AMIRRCI demand raw milk rights

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Lisa Hunter I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market orstore. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they willbe out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longerour neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have nodirect meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simplerif they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. Howthat result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in theState's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather thaninserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedLisa Hunter

Sent from my iPhone

Page 27: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

[email protected] [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:40 AMIRRCproposed revised dairy regulations

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Alan Greenberg, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation # 2 / / /Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from myfarmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices thatsupplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers ormarkets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations aremore complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. Theregulation needs to focus on those larger operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they were performancestandards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not theState's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather thaninserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive and misdirected, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you, Sincerely,

Alan Greenberg

Page 28: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

INDEPENDENT REGULAIUKYREVIEW COMMISSIONBruce Razey [[email protected]]

Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:42 AMIRRCProposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Bruce Razey, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I aman intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level,State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumerpolices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where weneed government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighborsbut rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have nodirect meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could bemuch simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achievesa desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not theState's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a functionthat could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging theoperation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedBruce Razey

Page 29: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:43 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT RgGUUTORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 08:17 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Jennifer

Last Name: Baron

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: milk sanitation

Message:My name is Jennifer Baron, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Jennifer Baron Dingmans Ferry, PA

Page 30: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

?n¥POFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:45 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 08:40 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

RRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Bennie

Last Name: Elrod

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: Raw milk consumption

Message:My name is Bennie Elrod. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Page 31: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Jen Reschke [email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:47 AMIRRCREJECT regulation #2777 2-160!

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Jennifer Reschke, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Jennifer Reschke

It is not death or dying that is tragic, but rather to have existed without fully participating in life - that is thedeepest personal tragedy.~ Edward Abbey

Page 32: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

OCT 5 2010

Page 33: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Cooper, Kathy

2777QCT 5 aoi(

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Cherl Robartes [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:51 AMIRRCproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Cheryl Robartes, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers1 responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedCheryl Robartes

Page 34: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Cooper, Kathy

2777nrr K 901(1

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Julie Sanford [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:55 AMIRRCDISAPPROVE "proposed regulation > #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Julie Sanford, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieve a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers1 responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedJulie Sanford

JULIE A. SANFORDRainbow Spectrum Kids, Inc.110 Waverley StreetPalo Alto, CA 94301C: 408.829.8717E: [email protected]

http; //www .rainbo wspectrumkids. com

Page 35: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Cooper, Kathy

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Nina De Santo [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:58 AMIRRCRegulation # 2777 Department or Agriculture 2-160

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Nina De Santo, ! am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation, I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly, At that level, State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers" responsibility, not the State's, That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected,

Health & Happiness........Nina :)

Director of Mentoring and Chapter DevelopmentNatural Living Conference Co-DirectorH o l i s t i c Moms Network National Team^ww.Mto

"Stress is a REACTION, change your reaction and stress will DISAPPEAR!!!

Page 36: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

[email protected], October 05, 2010 9:53 AMIRRCreject reg #277: Milk Sanitation

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Mary Ellen Finger. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's.That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that couldeasily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Mary Ellen Finger, DVMHorsemen Trail Farm

Page 37: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris 2777From:Sent:JoiSubject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:00 AMIRRCFw: Food safety

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Irene, Irene Showalter, Showalter [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:43 AMTo: Miller, Sarah E.Subject: Food safety

Fay , lama raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youMy name isreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or localmarket or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problemthey will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide ahigher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has directenforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets areno longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not sizeneutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts andwe have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would resultin the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out,rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Page 38: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

(RlElDEiiWEDnrr & ?nm

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: The Family Cow [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:01 AMTai LRRCSubject: vote to DISAPPROVE "proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160."

My name is Edwin Shank, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market orstore. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longerour neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than insertingitself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Edwin Shank

Chambersburg, Pa

Page 39: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris 2777 RISOPfiMPimFrom:Sent:ToiSubject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:01 AMIRRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:58 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

IRRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Pete

Last Name: Berry

Company: na

Email: pberryl [email protected]

Subject: Please eject proposed regulation #2777

Message:My name is Pete Berry, I have been a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Page 40: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Miller, Sarah E.Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:35 AM1RRCFw: IRRC Website - New Message OCT 5 2010

XNDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

From: Independent Regulatory Review Commission [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 09:32 AMTo: HelpSubject: IRRC Website - New Message

IRRCIndependent Regulatory Review Commission

A new message has arrived from the IRRC Website

First Name: Carol

Last Name: Murphy

Company:

Email: [email protected]

Subject: Milk Sanitation

Message:My name is Carol Murphy, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, Iview the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected. Respectfully yours, Carol Murphy

Page 41: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris CEWFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

Terry E. Greenberg [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:29 AMIRRCRaw milk Issue

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Terry Greenberg I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedTerry Greenberg

Terry Greenberg, 293 Evanston Drive, East Windsor NJ 08520

Page 42: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

Laura Cooper [[email protected]] ITuesday, October 05, 2010 9:27 A M / ̂ DEPENDENT RFn „ *IRRC L^wSiSSSf^Proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2^T

From:Sent:To:Subject:

My name is Laura Davis. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Laura DavisTovotaOkieC(5)vahoo. com

Page 43: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Keith and Veronica Worley [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:26 AMIRRCSay NO to the proposed regulation @#2777.M!

My name is Veronica Worley, I am a raw milk consumer and Irespectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent discriminating consumer and do not need protection frommy farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem theywill be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer policesthat supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliersor markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations createdby the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations aremore complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we haveno direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, theregulation could be much simpler if they were performance standards,requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's.That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than insertingitself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some casesonerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposedregulation be rejected.

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

SignedMrs. Veronica Worley

Page 44: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris 2777 ffiEflME^

From:Sent:To:Subject:

[email protected], October 05, 2010 9:23 AMIRRCRaw Milk

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYRSVIEW COMMISSION

My name is JOHN Foxton, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedYour NameJohn Foxton

Obama Urges Homeowners to RefinanceIf you owe under $729k you probably qualify for Obama's Refi ProgramSeeRefinanceRates.com

Page 45: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris277?

^C^^fTXRTFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

Johanna Antar [email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:23 AMIRRC .vote to reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160.

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: MilkSanitation. I am a raw milk activist in my state and I care about this issue because Pennsylvania is amodel raw milk state for the rest of the nation and what happens in Pennsylvania could eventuallyimpact other states.

Consumers do not need protection from farmer-neighbors or local markets or stores. If they providean unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of businessquickly. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itselfin micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Johanna Antar

Page 46: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Mary Serrllli [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:23 AMIRRCIRRC

UU aZUTU

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Mary Serrilli, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct aproblem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Mary Serrilli

Page 47: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shorn per, KrisFrom: Andrea Foxton [[email protected]] I OCT X intnSent: Tuesday, October 05,2010 9:21 AM / CUIU

T o : IRRC / JNOEPENDFM-r D c

Subject: RAW MILK L^J^MBSS?^

My name is Andrea Foxton, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request thatyou reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: MilkSanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactoryproduct or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly.At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing;every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has directenforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliersor markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State.Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there isa problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could bemuch simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end productachieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility,not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself inmicromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedYour NameAndrea Foxton

Page 48: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris 2777From:Sent:To:Subject:

Marika Du Rietz [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:21 AMIRRCI vote to DISAPPROVE "proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160."

My name is Marika Du Rietz, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. Iam an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer policesthat supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impactsand we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end productachieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Marika Du RietzLampe, Conway & Co. LLC680 Fifth Avenue - 12th FloorNew York, NY 10019

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

Page 49: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Pastor Tanner [email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:41 AMIRRCFW: raw milk regulation change

OCT 5 2010INDEPENDENT REGULATORY

REVIEW COMMISSION

From: Pastor Tanner [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:39 AMTo: '[email protected]

Subject: raw milk regulation change

Our names are Howard Tanner and Barbara Tanner, We are raw milk consumers and we respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. We are intelligent discriminatingconsumers and do not need protection from our farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactoryproduct or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has directenforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are morecomplex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieve a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducer's responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, we view the proposed legislation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Howard and Barbara Tanner

Page 50: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

Rosita N'Dlkwe [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:38 AMIRRCPlease reject proposed regulation #2777 Departmetn of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

To IRRC members:

I, Rosita N'Dikwe, am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2=160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct aproblem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Rosita N'Dikwe

i

"Don't ask yourself what the world needs; ask yourself what makes you come alive.And then go and do that. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive."

- Howard Thurman

Page 51: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris 2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Stephen Burglo [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:38 AMIRRC _ • • • - - — — _ _

vote to DISAPPROVE "proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160.

INDEPENDENT R6GU< ATQpv£ B IEVV COMMISSION

My name is Stephen Burgio, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedStephen Burgio

Page 52: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777 IWlOCJ urn

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Ell [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:35 AMIRRC _request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department oSanitation

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

160: Milk

My name is Elizabeth Coulter, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedElizabeth Coulter

Page 53: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Jennifer Voss [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:34 AMIRRCREJECT Proposed Regulation #2777 (DOA 2-160: Milk Sanitation)!

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Jennifer Voss, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

REJECT Proposed Regulation #

Signed,Jennifer Voss

Page 54: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

ITQUEOKDWPDFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

Eric Serrilh [[email protected]]Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:29 AMIRRCreject proposed regulation 2777

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Eric SerrilN, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct aproblem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers1 responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Eric [email protected]

Page 55: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Vera Pagano [[email protected]] / *"'OSent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:29 AM / iNDepeNhp*

To: IRRC L ^ ^ ^ W c o S U U T O R y

Subject: Proposed regulation #2777 Department of AgriculturBT:TBOrMfl^a£EraMi

Good morning,

My name is Vera Pagano and I live near Pittsburgh, PA. Our family consumes raw milk and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do notneed protection from my dairy farmer friend. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they willbe out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer policesthat supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliersor markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operationsare more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem.The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they were performancestandards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not theState's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather thaninserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in case of the particular dairy farm where we get our milk, it would be onerousand an unnecessary burden. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Respectfully,

Vera Pagano

Page 56: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777OCT 5 2010

From:Sent:To:Subject:

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

Eric Birch [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:46 PMIRRCVote to DISAPPROVE "proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160."

My name is Eric Birch, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation.

My dairy farmer provides me and my family with a high quality product, and I do not need protection from him. Our farmerhas been providing high quality raw milk for over ten years (ten years without a vacation, ten years without a single dayoff). Why would someone be willing to do that? Because he cares about his animals, his cows, and his consumers, just asI am sure the other small raw milk producers across the state do. Because of the quality that I know I can expect from hisraw milk, I see it as my duty to inform as many people as a I can about it. Every week I go to his farm and watch as he fillsup my gallons of milk. I can see the cows, the equipment and the buildings for myself. My kids get to see that milk comesfrom a farmer who lovingly cares for his cows and not a grocery store.

If our farmer provided a sub-standard gallon of milk or failed to fix any deficiency, he would be out of business quickly; hedepends on each individual consumer for his livelyhood. Our farmer cannot hide behind a grocery store refrigerator; he isinspected personally by his customers every week, not to mention the inspections already required by PA law. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level of oversight; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options.

Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have nodirect meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

These regulations would do nothing to improve the quality of the milk our farmer provides my family. However, they arelikely to push him and others like him out of business because of the costs of implementing regulations designed for milkproducers whose customer is a distributor whose customer is a grocery store whose customer is the unknowing public. Iknow my farmer and he knows me, and I pray thai the relationship can continue.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you for your time,

Eric Birch129 Temona Dr.Pleasant Hills, PA 15236(412)650-9491

Page 57: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, KrisFrom: [email protected] ~ 3

Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:45 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-1 $0

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

To the IRRC.,

My name is Helen Sohne, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation, I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations. Although some regulations onthis latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result inthe State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contractedout, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. Again, I view the proposedregulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrant thatthe proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Helen Sohne

Page 58: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris2777

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Jennifer Bedrick [email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:44 PMIRRCraw milk regulations

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Jennifer Bedrick,I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level.State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing;every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex,problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary,the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards,requiring that the end product achieve a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility,not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance^ function thatcould easily be contracted out,rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again,I view the proposed regulation as excessive,and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrant thatthe proposed regulation be rejected.

Signed,Jennifer S. Bedrick

Page 59: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

ocr smFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

T Kovscs [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:39 PMIRRCregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

""Sssgssr

My name is Tammy Taborda, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumerand do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactoryproduct or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulationdoes not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction andhas direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operationsare more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse ifthere is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a functionthat could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedTammy Taborda

Sent from my iPhone

Page 60: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Kimberly Christensen [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:40 PMIRRCRE: Proposed regulation #2777

W 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

Hello,My name is Kimberly Christensen, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If theyprovide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly.At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices thatsupplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Foodsafety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impactsand we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerly,Kimberly Christensen

Page 61: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

Shomper, Kris

2777

•DFrom:Sent:To:Subject:

Caroline Thomas [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:38 PMIRRCProposed Reulation #2777

OCT 5 2010

INDEPENDENT REGULATORYREVIEW COMMISSION

My name is Caroline Thomas. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Caroline Thomas

Page 62: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Sandra Larson [[email protected]]Monday, October 04, 2010 10:35 PMIRRCPlease Reject proposed Regualtion #2777

To Whom it may Concern,My name is Sandra Larson, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed

regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Sandra Larson

Page 63: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Matt Dunn [[email protected]] PppciurnSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:31 PM iM/*To: IRRC IRRGSubject: reject #2777 - _ ^

2UQCT-5 A %58My name is Matthew Dunn, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer with a Ph.D. in biology and do not need protection frommy farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product orfail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level.State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer policesthat supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operationsare more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers'responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test forcompliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself inmicromanaging the operation.Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Matt Dunn - mdunn(fi)stwing.upenn.edu - http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~mdunn/"Transvestites are a lot like superheroes in that we both have to change before we helppeople, except that we don't help people." - Eddie Izzard

Page 64: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, KrisFrom: Kate Brown [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:31 PMTo: IRRCSubject: proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Kate Brown, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correcta problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations createdby the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you,Kate

8 »

« i|o

en€30

Page 65: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Michaelanne Boyd [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:30 PMTo: IRRCSubject: DISAPPROVE proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

My name is Michaelanne Boyd, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market orstore. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itselfin micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedMichaelanne Boyd

ts»

S3 =*,—• mc/i IS

> 8en

Page 66: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected] RFPflVrnSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:30 PM IDbf*To: IRRC m t t ^Subject: REJECT Proposed Regulation #2777 **.* nf>r ^

Hello.

I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department ofAgriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you,Angela Meli

Page 67: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected]: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:26 PMTo: IRRCSubject: reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Mil k Sanitation.

My name is Robert Zellers,I am a raw milk consumer and presently enjoy getting milk from a small dairy that is providingfresh raw milk without the addition cost of automation of operation. That is why I respectfullyrequest that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: MilkSanitation.I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from myfarmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product orfail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing.Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex,problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningfol recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could bemuch simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. Howthat result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role beingto test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself inmicromanaging the operation.Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely Yours,Robet Zellers H

—I |T|

Get Free Email with Video Mail & Video Chat! I Z&m

> ^

en

Page 68: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Dianella Howarth [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:29 PMTo: IRRCSubject: reject #2777

My name is Dianella Howarth., I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and professor of biology and do not need protection frommy farmer-neighbor. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers1 responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Dianella G* Howarth, Ph.D.

St. Alberts Hall, Rm 272Dept of Biological SciencesSt. John's University8000 Utopia ParkwayQueens, NY 11439 £4

1

>

<*1

CD

Page 69: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: saskia roskam [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:25 PMTo: IRRCSubject: regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Saskia Roskam, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Saskia Roskam

—• rn

ck Hi?> " . 5

Page 70: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: Catherine Krtil [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:22 PM RFPfTft/rnTo: IRRC | J » n t D

Subject: Proposed regulation #2777 m i * i>

« O C T - 5 A , S 1To the members of the IRRC:

My name is Catherine Krtil. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market orstore. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers1 responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itselfin micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Catherine Krtilckrtil(5)vahoo.com

Page 71: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Alexander H. Jordan [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:21 PMTo: IRRCSubject: DISAPPROVE Regulation #2777

My name is Alex Jordan, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct aproblem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Regards,Alex

£5a?CD

I

>

20TO

i|o

Page 72: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: anne Jordan [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:19 PMTo: IRRCSubject: DISAPPROVE Regulation #2777

My name is Anne Jordan, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct aproblem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Regards,Anne

IN)

> mocm

Page 73: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Chris Jordan [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:18 PMTo: IRRCSubject: PLEASE DISAPPROVE Regulation #2777

My name is Chris Jordan, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct aproblem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on thoseoperations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers1 responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Regards,Chris

8 *-—i m

** Us> °5mor

Page 74: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: Philip Robert [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:18 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

My name is Philip Robert, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SincerelyPhilip Robert

> m

en

Page 75: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected]: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:18 PM

To: IRRC RECEIVEDCc: Florence Forman; Ed Forman IR|\CSubject: Raw milk issue

2OI0OCT-5 A * 5 bTo whom it may concern:

My name is Kurt Forman; I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation, I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that levei, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumerpolices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvementis where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have nodirect meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Respectfully,

Kurt Forman

Page 76: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Dlna [[email protected]] RECEIVEDSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:16 PM IRRCTo: IRRCSubject: Proposed Regulation #2777 20I0 OCT ~ 5 A % 5 5

My name is Dina Bartus, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected. Please do not take away my right and ability to consume rawmilk.

Many Thanks,

Dina Bartus

Page 77: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: Elizabeth-Anne Ridder Jordan [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:17 PMTo: IRRCSubject: DISAPPROVE Regulation #2777

My name is Elizabeth Jordan, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Regards,

Elizabeth

01 5§f!2> rn

o

Page 78: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

.2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected] RECEIVEDSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 5:03 PM impTo: LRRC l i m U

Subject: #2777 * » QCT-5 A % 55

My name is Karen Smith,! am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent,discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market orstore. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will beout of business quickly. At that level, Stae regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers1 responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itselfin micromanaging the operation.Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary.These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Page 79: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Neil Martin [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:53 AMTxu 1RRCSubject: vote to DISAPPROVE "proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160."

My name is Neil Martin, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Neil MartinChambersburg, PA

a so

^ i|> 3enXT

Page 80: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected]: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:12 PMTo: IRRCSubject: regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Lorna Creveling, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Lorna Creveling

Samsung 46&#34; 3D TV for $85ALERT: Auctions are selling TV&#39;s for 95% off retail!http://thirdpartyoffers.i uno.com/TGL3141/4caa89e0ccde5babd2st03vuc

en

>

<mXT

mI |

fTf

o

Page 81: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, KrisFrom: Elaine Brown [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:10 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Proposed Regulation #2777

My name is Elaine Brown,- I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation.As an intelligent, discriminating consumer, I do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or failto appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; everyconsumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets areno longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. Theregulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could bemuch simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end productachieve a desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers'responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to testfor compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than insertingitself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Elaine Brown

CD

an

>

m

7®m

I§mo

Page 82: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Corky Sinclair [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:10 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Proposed reg #2777

My name is Wilma Sinclair. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation.I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level,State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level of policing. Every consumerpolicesa supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we needgovernment involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighborsbut rather corporations. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are morecomplex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts, and we have no direct meaningfulrecourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could bemuch simpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achievesa desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not thegovernment's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself by micromanaging theoperation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you for your consideration.

Wilma Sinclair

»

>

enU i

rnli

mo

Page 83: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: Jeannie Lopez [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:06 PMTo: IRRCSubject: RE: proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

My name is Jeannie Lopez, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedJeannie

> §m

Page 84: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected] ncr*nx$Ct\Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:04 PM KECtl¥tUTo: IRRC IRRCSubject: raw milk regulations.

2BB0CT-S A <*51

My name is Annmarie Cantrell.I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of

Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Thank you for your time.Annmarie Cantrell

Page 85: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, KrisFrom: Melinda Kohn [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:04 PMTo: IRRCSubject: reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation

My name is Melinda Kohn,, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer- neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level., State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State.Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much morefar-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. Theregulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's.That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that couldeasily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedMelinda and Donald Kohn4220 Mountain RoadMacungie PA 18062

610 967 5219

aH

ien

>

3Dm

iso<m

o

Page 86: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: Talia Palant [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:59 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Keep raw milk!!!!!!!

My name is Talia Palant, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they providean unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly.At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer policesthat supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need governmentinvolvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporationscreated by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. Theregulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler ifthey were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How thatresult is achieved is the producers1 responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's rolebeing to test for compliance, a function that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself inmicromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. Theseflaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Talia Palant ^

CDO• H1

en

>

3 0m

mO

Page 87: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected] RFPPi\/rnSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:56 PM IOD)>To: IRRC miil.Subject: Proposed Regulation #2777

20K0CT-5 A * SI

Our names are Dean & Sheri Patrick. We and our five children are raw milk consumers andwe respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture2-160: Milk Sanitation. We are intelligent, discriminating consumers and do not need

protection from our farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out ofbusiness quickly. At that level. State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has directenforcement options.Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer ourneighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral.Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we haveno direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus onl onthose operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, we view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Signed,

Dean & Sheri PatrickDanielNathanMichaelaBenjaminDonovan

46&#34; LED TV&#39;s for $98.76?Breaking News: Is this a Scam? You W0N&#39;T believe what we found!http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4caa8610da2b6cl53bst06vuc

Page 88: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Katherine Meyer [kmvt81 @gmail.com]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:59 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Please vote to DISAPPROVE "proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160."

To the Independent Regulatory Review Commission,

My name is Katherine Meyer, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation, I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor,local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices those suppliers withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. We need government involvement wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by theState. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems havemuch more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is aproblem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers1 responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Katherine MeyerWarren, VT 05674

I8 so—• ___m

> s•0

Page 89: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Hari Hart [harihart@comcastnet]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:02 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Please reject regulation #2777

My name is Harriet Hart, and I am a PA resident and raw milk consumer. I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level,State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with everytransaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers ormarkets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral.Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a functionthat could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Signed,Harriet Hart

i— rnen zgm

> °£eno

Page 90: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris 4 ' ' *From: Jan K [[email protected]] RECFIVFnSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:01 PM lOCH*To: IRRC m m

Subject: CHANGES TO PENNSYLVANIA RAW MILK REGUUVHflNSU- ,.

Hello,

My name is Dan Kurposka, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by jthe State. \

Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more jfar-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The jregulation needs to focus on those operations. j

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much jsimpler if there were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a !desired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the |State's. |That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could jeasily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation. 1

jAgain, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and junnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected. }

Sincerely, ]Jan Kurposka j

Page 91: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: kyle fitzpatrick [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:00 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Regulation #2777

My name is Kyle FitzPatrick, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerly,Kyle FitzPatrick

©

rn£3 3D

o

Page 92: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Lynn [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:58 PMTo: IRRCSubject: proposed regulation #2777

My name is Lynn Cosmos, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you rejectproposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am anintelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer- neighbor orlocal market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriatelycorrect a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. State regulation doesnot and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier withevery transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement iswhere the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created bythe State.Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much morefar-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. Theregulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's.That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that couldeasily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Lynn Cosmos

> «s* °eno

Page 93: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: [email protected]: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:53 PMTo: IRRCSubject: VOTE TO DISAPPROVE PROSPOSED REGULATION #2777!

My name is Mary O'Donohue. I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if there wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather then inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Mary G O'Donohue

S gen i Hj> mo

Page 94: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Amanda Truelove [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:43 PMTo: IRRCSubject: DISAPPROVE proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160

Hello.

My name is Amanda Truelove, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation#2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannotprovide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcementoptions. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors butrather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problemshave much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Amanda Truelove

€£5 50

en y&r&

> €3

4T

m

Page 95: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Anne Stewart [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:48 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Proposed regulation #2777

My name is Anne Stewart. I am a physician and a raw milk consumer and I respectfully requestthat you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation.I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level. Stateregulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices thatsupplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need governmentinvolvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rathercorporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations aremore complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no direct meaningfulrecourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desiredresult. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not the State's. Thatwould result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function that could easilybe contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,Anne Stewart, MD

8 50—• rn

1> m

CO

Page 96: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: j [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:45 PM RECEIVED

I°L. • I R R C», * IffittSubject: raw milk vote

..2B0OCT-5 A %H8My name is Julisa Banbanaste, I am a raw milk activist and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedJulisa Banbanaste

Page 97: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777

Shomper, Kris

From: MAUREEN GOLDSTEIN [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:44 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Regulation No, 2777 Dept of Agr. 2-160

I adamantly oppose and I urge you to vote to disapprove the proposed regulation No. 2777 Dept. of Agriculture 2-160. Iam a raw milk customer and I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem theywill be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; everyconsumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need governmentinvolvement is where the suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the Sate.Food safety is not size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts andwe have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved is theproducers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the state's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flaws warrantthat the proposed regulation be rejected.

SignedMaureen Goldstein

r*a

> °S

m

Page 98: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Daniel Polanco [[email protected]] R F P F I v mSent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:43 PM VSDSTo: IRRC m ^Subject: Raw Milk regulations ^ f t m . . „

20I0 OCT ~5 A ^ 1 * 8

To whom it may concern:

My name is Daniel Polanco, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposedregulation #2777 Department of Agriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminatingconsumer and do not need protection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At thatlevel, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplierwith every transaction and has direct enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is wherethe suppliers or markets are no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety isnot size neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and wehave no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Sincerely,

Daniel Polanco

Page 99: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Lavinia Mosher [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:43 PMTo: IRRCSubject: Request to reject proposed reg #2777 DoA 2-160: Milk Sanitation

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that you reject proposed regulation #2777 Department ofAgriculture 2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not need protectionfrom my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide an unsatisfactory product or fail toappropriately correct a problem they will be out of business quickly. At that level, State regulation does not andcannot provide a higher level policing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and hasdirect enforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or markets are nolonger our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is not size neutral. Largeroperations are more complex, problems have much more far-reaching impacts and we have no directmeaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulation needs to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be much simpler if they wereperformance standards, requiring that the end product achieves a desired result. How that result is achieved isthe producers' responsibility, not the State's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, afunction that could easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous and unnecessary. These flawswarrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

Respectfully,Lavinia KMosher925 Circle Dr SEVienna VA 22180

oy ^

°0Or

Page 100: RRC 10-05-10 FO… · RRC Independent ... unsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out of ... [mailto:No-Reply@irrc.state.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday

2777Shomper, Kris

From: Sail-Ling Michael [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 9:42 PMTo: IRRCSubject: disaaprove of proposed reg. #2777

My name is Sai-Ling Michael, I am a raw milk consumer and I respectfully request that youreject proposed regulation #2777 Department of Agriculture2-160: Milk Sanitation. I am an intelligent, discriminating consumer and do not needprotection from my farmer-neighbor or local market or store. If they provide anunsatisfactory product or fail to appropriately correct a problem they will be out ofbusiness quickly. At that level, State regulation does not and cannot provide a higher levelpolicing; every consumer polices that supplier with every transaction and has directenforcement options. Where we need government involvement is where the suppliers or marketsare no longer our neighbors but rather corporations created by the State. Food safety is notsize neutral. Larger operations are more complex, problems have much more far-reachingimpacts and we have no direct meaningful recourse if there is a problem. The regulationneeds to focus on those operations.

Although some regulations on this latter group are necessary, the regulation could be muchsimpler if they were performance standards, requiring that the end product achieves adesired result. How that result is achieved is the producers' responsibility, not theState's. That would result in the State's role being to test for compliance, a function thatcould easily be contracted out, rather than inserting itself in micromanaging the operation.

Again, I view the proposed regulation as excessive, and in some cases onerous andunnecessary. These flaws warrant that the proposed regulation be rejected.

*r--iiF

&

CD

1

en

>

cr

.30m

ISroo