By DANNY ROBBINS
Associated Press Writer

DALLAS (AP) — A Texas agriculture inspector failed to note that a peanut plant at the center of a national salmonella outbreak was operating without a state health department license despite at least three visits in the years before hundreds of people got sick, according to interviews and documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The inspector responsible for certifying the plant to process organic products noted after each visit that the plant had such a license when it didn’t. Health officials said problems at the plant operated by Peanut Corp. of America might have been flagged years ago had the inspector, who has since been fired, reported the plant’s failure to obtain the required license.

When the plant was finally inspected earlier this year, Texas health officials found dead rodents, rodent excrement and bird feathers in a crawl space above a production area, leading them to order a recall of all products the plant had shipped since 2005.

Tests have since shown that ground peanuts at the Plainview plant were contaminated with the same strain of salmonella that sickened more than 650 people, is suspected of causing at least nine deaths, and led to one of the largest product recalls in U.S. history. Salmonella has also been detected in peanut samples from a Georgia plant operated by Peanut Corp., which has filed for bankruptcy amid fallout from the outbreak.

Texas Department of Agriculture spokesman Bryan Black said if the lack of a license had been properly noted, the department would have denied it organic certification and notified the Department of State Health Services. The inspector, Gaylon Amonett, was fired on Feb. 13, the day after state health officials ordered the recall.

“We trust our inspectors to do their jobs,” Black said. “Any time they do not follow the protocol, it is inexcusable.”

Because the Plainview plant was not licensed, state health officials have said they had no record it existed and never sent their own inspectors to the facility to check for possible food safety problems. All food manufacturers in the state are required to obtain a license from the state health department.

Amonett, a 22-year TDA employee who worked out of the agency’s Lubbock office, acknowledged that he checked “yes” to the question of whether the Plainview plant had records showing it was in compliance with health codes on worksheets he completed for inspections in 2005, 2006 and 2008.

The reason he checked “yes” the first time, he said, was because a plant manager told him an application for state health department licensing had been completed and was in the hands of Peanut Corp. officials at the company’s headquarters. He said he continued to check “yes” in succeeding years because he assumed that the license was granted.

Amonett said the matter was his “only mistake” in his years as an inspector. Agriculture department records show that he received a merit raise on Jan. 1.

“It’s an inadvertent mistake, and I’m sorry for it,” he said.

Jack McCasland, environmental inspector for the Plainview-Hale County Health Department, said plant officials led him to believe the licensing process was under way when he visited the facility before it opened.

“To be honest, I never really thought to follow up on it,” McCasland said. “It just never occurred to me that they wouldn’t be (licensed).”

Organic certification allows companies to market products as organically grown or produced. Processors must meet standards set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and are monitored by a USDA-accredited entity. The Texas Department of Agriculture has served as a certifying agency since 2002.

In a memo about the Plainview matter, TDA assistant general counsel Jim Pollard wrote that Amonett was trained as an organic inspector in 2004. Under agency rules, inspectors are required to make sure a company’s licenses and other records are complete and current. The memo, obtained by the AP through a request under the Texas Public Information Act, cited the three inspections by Amonett.

TDA declined to release the inspection reports, contending that they are exempt from disclosure under the information act.

Although food safety is technically not part of the organic certification process, the salmonella outbreak has prompted the USDA to direct organic certifying entities to report any health or safety violations to the appropriate government officials.

“While we do not expect organic inspectors to be able to detect salmonella or other pathogens, their potential sources should be obvious from such evidence as bird, rodent and other animal feces or other pest infestations,” the directive stated.

___

Associated Press writer Betsy Blaney contributed to this report from Lubbock, Texas.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Six salmonella cases in Colorado have been linked to tainted products from a shuttered Texas plant owned by the peanut processing company at the focal point of a national outbreak of the disease.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment linked the cases to the Plainview Peanut Co. in the Texas Panhandle, The Oregonian newspaper in Portland reported Saturday. The Colorado victims were between the ages of 2 and 60. One had to be hospitalized, the newspaper reported.

The Plainview plant, owned by Peanut Corp. of America, had operated since 2005 without an inspection, authorities have said.

On Thursday, Texas health officials ordered the recall of all peanut-related ingredients ever shipped from the Plainview plant. Inspectors found dead rodents and feces, and preliminary tests by a private lab indicated salmonella was present.

A Texas health official confirmed Saturday that they knew come Colorado salmonella cases were possibly linked to the Plainview plant, which was shut down after the inspection.

“It’s certainly not a surprise to us,” said Doug McBride, spokesman for the Texas Department of State Health Services.

The salmonella cases in Colorado were traced to peanut butter from Lakewood-based Vitamin Cottage. The natural foods chain recalled its Vitamin Cottage Fresh-Ground Peanut butter last week.

Vitamin Cottage could not immediately be reached for comment Saturday evening.

In a statement last week, though, Vitamin Cottage officials said they’d been notified by Colorado authorities that three people had salmonella after eating the peanut butter in late December or early January. Vitamin Cottage has 25 stores in Colorado, plus stores in Texas, New Mexico and Utah.

The salmonella outbreak has sickened some 600 people in 43 states and is being linked to nine deaths. More than 1,900 products have been recalled, and Peanut Corp. of America is under FBI investigation and filed for bankruptcy Friday. Leading brands of jarred peanut butter are not affected.

Alicia Cronquist, epidemiologist at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, told The Oregonian that 16 people in the state have been sickened by tainted peanut butter, six of them linked to peanut butter from Vitamin Cottage and the Texas plant.

___

On the Net:

Vitamin Cottage: http://www.vitamincottage.com

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.

By GREG BLUESTEIN
Associated Press Writer

ATLANTA (AP) — First, federal investigators said Stewart Parnell knowingly shipped salmonella-tainted foods even after internal tests showed they were contaminated. Then they revealed the evidence: e-mails Parnell sent to his employees urging them to ship out the products that authorities say ultimately sickened hundreds and may have caused the deaths of nine.

Federal authorities, who started an investigation last month, have remained tightlipped about possible charges against Parnell. So has the FBI, which raided the company’s Georgia plant about a week ago.

But food safety attorneys say prosecutors have an array of options for what could be one of the Food and Drug Administration’s most high-profile tainted food cases in decades.

“Any time you’ve got interstate commerce, those are the buzz words for federal prosecution,” said Kent Alexander, a former U.S. attorney in Atlanta who is now general counsel at Emory University. “And prosecutors can be very creative in alleging schemes involving interstate commerce.”

One tool federal prosecutors could use is the 1938 Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, which carries a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a fine of $10,000 if prosecutors prove there’s an intent to “defraud or mislead.”

Prosecutors could also turn to a range of other laws if they are seeking a tougher punishment.

Fred Pritzker, a food safety lawyer in Minneapolis who filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Peanut Corp., said investigators could charge Parnell with federal anti-conspiracy charges.

Or authorities could charge Parnell and his company with mail fraud or wire fraud if prosecutors believe they can prove they were knowingly giving customers adulterated product, said Jim Frush, a former federal prosecutor who is now a criminal defense attorney.

And Alexander said the ongoing investigation could yield a separate, perhaps indirect, charge.

“In cases like this, sometimes the biggest vulnerability people have is lying under oath or lying to federal investigators,” he said.

Authorities say a Blakely, Ga., plant run by Parnell’s company, Peanut Corp. of America, is the sole source of a salmonella outbreak that has led to one of the nation’s biggest food recalls. The company filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection Friday.

Prosecutions in such cases are fairly rare, and they generally lead to fines against companies rather than jail time or other punishments for individuals. Recent convictions include the 1996 case against juice-maker Odwalla Inc., which was fined $1.5 million on charges of shipping unpasteurized apple juice that killed a baby. Five years later, Sara Lee Corp. was fined $200,000 after pleading guilty to misdemeanor charges of selling tainted meats in a listeria outbreak that killed 15 people.

Other, more high-profile outbreaks haven’t yielded criminal charges. Prosecutors decided not to press charges against two produce companies involved in a 2006 tainted spinach case that killed three people and sickened 200 others, saying the investigation found growers and processors did not deliberately skirt the law.

Parnell’s e-mails, released this week by House investigators, depict a man driven by profits who instructed his employees to ship out products despite reports that salmonella was detected. “Turn them loose,” he said in one e-mail.

Parnell, summoned by congressional subpoena, repeatedly invoked his right not to incriminate himself. Reached by telephone Friday, he said his attorneys had advised him not to talk. The company, in statements, has said it is cooperating with federal investigators.

Food safety watchdogs have long argued that the FDA doesn’t pursue criminal charges enough in tainted food cases, but they have little doubt that investigators are building a case as public outrage grows.

“I am no attorney,” said Mike Doyle, a University of Georgia food safety scientist. “But the evidence appears to be a smoking gun. It appears that Mr. Parnell knowingly ordered shipment of salmonella-contaminated product.”

Creighton Magid, a Washington-based products liability attorney often on the defense side, said prosecutors may not press charges in food safety cases because they don’t want to discourage responsible companies from coming forward with their mistakes.

Parnell’s case, he said, appears to be a sharp contrast.

“There’s a huge difference between a recall of a product because of a flaw in manufacturing and knowingly selling a product that is contaminated,” he said. “That’s a different ball game entirely.”

Either way, food safety attorneys say the revelations this week could be the opening act of one of the most high-profile tainted food prosecutions in recent history.

“The question is not whether there will be charges,” said Bill Marler, a food safety lawyer who has filed lawsuits against Parnell’s company. “But what they will charge him with.”

___

On the Net:

U.S. Food and Drug Administration, http://www.fda.gov/

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.

By BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE and SUE LINDSEY
Associated Press Writers

LYNCHBURG, Va. (AP) — A little over a month ago, Stewart Parnell was telling friends and clients just how good things were in his peanut business. He was spending time with his grandchild, looking forward to some more hunting and getting his boat out on the water.

Today, the man forever associated with the deadly salmonella outbreak is more the recluse, staying close to the house he bought here more than 14 years ago, when it was still surrounded by pastures. Parnell is telling those same friends and clients not to call, not to visit, not to do anything that might link them to the firestorm he’s facing.

In his hometown in central Virginia, Parnell is known as a respected businessman. But the image of a benevolent peanut tycoon contrasts markedly with what investigators said occurred inside the processing plants of Peanut Corp. of America. Worried about profits, they said, Parnell fired off jaw-dropping e-mails to employees amid reports that salmonella had been detected in his products: “Turn them loose.”

Reconciling the Jekyll-and-Hyde tale of Stewart Parnell, 54, and his contaminated peanuts carries important consequences for food protection reforms already being considered in Washington. Was Parnell a hapless businessman whose mistakes revealed seams in the government’s safety net? Or does the system require a more extensive overhaul to identify companies that might knowingly deliver tainted ingredients?

Those close to Parnell said he’s not a monster, just a person who has made mistakes.

“I haven’t condemned him yet,” said Eddie Marks, who runs a Virginia storage company and has known Parnell for 15 years.

For nearly five minutes before being dismissed, Parnell listened Wednesday as U.S. lawmakers described him as greedy and uncaring, indifferent to the impact his beleaguered business has had on the lives of so many. He repeatedly invoked his constitutional right not to say anything that could be used against him.

Parnell isn’t talking now, not to reporters or congressmen who pelted him with questions about whether his Georgia plant was responsible for 600 illnesses and nine deaths across the country. Nearly 200 food makers who used or sold Parnell’s products are listed on a recall of more than 1,900 items, making this one of the nation’s largest recalls.

His appearance before a House subcommittee was the first opportunity to put a face to the latest food contamination scare: a round, slightly swollen, seemingly sleepless face of a man fidgeting in his seat, or tapping his fingers on the desk before him, or folding his arms awkwardly, or jerking his head to the side as if he heard his name called.

“I’m assuming he will talk when the time is right,” said his brother Michael of Midlothian, Va.

Texas health officials this week told him to shut his plant there and ordered a recall Thursday of all its products after salmonella was discovered, along with “dead rodents, rodent excrement and bird feathers.”

This is not the man Charles Pond knew when he sold him his Suffolk, Va., peanut business in 2001. Parnell leases Pond’s building and makes monthly payments for equipment.

“He’s been slow to pay on some of it, but other than that, we’ve never seen any problems like this,” Pond said.

Parnell has had a long, successful run in the peanut business, starting with his father and two younger brothers in 1977. They took a struggling, $50,000-a-year peanut roasting operation and turned it into a $30 million business before selling in 1995. Parnell once boasted about the company on his Web site.

Parnell continued working as a consultant to the business after the family sold it, and in 2000 he left to buy his own peanut plant again in Texas. In 2001, he bought the Blakely, Ga., operation after teaming up with a financial backer, David Royster III of Shelby, N.C.

Pond said Royster supplied the money, Parnell supplied the experience for the Georgia and Virginia peanut businesses.

Royster did not returned repeated calls for comment over several days made to his office and home by The Associated Press.

Friends of Parnell said there is more to him than what the public has seen. He is a father to two grown daughters, a pilot of more than 30 years, an avid hunter, a reliable contributor to local charities, a man who has spent more than three decades in his business.

“He’s an amazing person,” said Nancy Weaver, a neighbor of Parnell’s. Weaver called a reporter to defend Parnell, to say he’s just being maligned and misunderstood. But she, like others close to him, declined to discuss him further when a reporter knocked on the door.

The public record portrays a different man, someone who repeatedly has faced problems in his business years before it became ground zero for the salmonella outbreak.

In 1990, federal inspectors found toxic mold in products produced in Parnell’s peanut company in Virginia that forced a recall of the food, according to a 1992 lawsuit filed in Virginia. Parnell settled the case with two companies that had products contaminated.

In 2001, inspectors found peanuts may have been exposed to pesticides, and in 2006 Parnell’s company hired a consultant to help resolve a salmonella problem at the Georgia plant.

Parnell is not a fly-by-night operator, said Eddie Marks, the Virginia businessman and Parnell client. Parnell’s client list includes some of the nation’s largest food companies — Kellogg, Frito-Lay, Jenny Craig, Sara Lee.

“I think you can look at his customer base and determine that he’s been well-recognized,” Marks said.

Michael Smith, purchasing manager for Stapleton-Spence Packing Co. in Gridley, Calif., has bought peanuts from Parnell for years and describes him as “one of the nicest guys in the world.”

Smith said he recently sent Parnell an e-mail expressing support, and in less than five minutes Parnell responded.

“He said, ‘I have one thing for you: Take care of yourself, your family and your business.”

___

Blackledge reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Greg Bluestein in Atlanta and Sharon Theimer in Washington contributed to this report.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.

By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS
Associated Press Writer

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The number of deaths linked to the nationwide salmonella outbreak rose to nine Wednesday when Ohio health officials announced that an elderly woman who died earlier this year had been infected with the strain involved.

The woman was from Medina County, south of Cleveland. Kristopher Weiss, a spokesman for the Ohio Department of Health, said he could not release any other details on her death, citing federal reporting rules.

Though the woman had the same strain of salmonella associated with the national outbreak, it was unclear if the contamination was directly linked to peanut butter.

A peanut plant in Georgia is accused of shipping salmonella-tainted goods.

The salmonella outbreak has sickened 600 people and has led to one of the largest recalls in history, with more than 1,900 products pulled. Ohio is reporting 92 cases linked to the outbreak, the most in the United States.

___

On the Net:

Ohio Department of Health: http://www.odh.ohio.gov

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE
Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON (AP) — A congressional committee issued a subpoena Tuesday for the top executive of a small company that allegedly shipped the tainted peanut products responsible for a national salmonella outbreak.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee voted to compel Peanut Corp. of America President Stewart Parnell to appear at a hearing Wednesday, as a wide-ranging investigation focuses on who was responsible for an outbreak that has sickened at least 600 people and may have contributed to eight deaths.

“Hopefully, people are going to be held accountable,” said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the committee’s investigations panel. The full committee approved the subpoena by voice vote, without opposition.

Stupak says he wants know how Peanut Corp. managed to sell allegedly tainted goods month after month without triggering action by state and federal health authorities.

The family-owned company, now under FBI investigation, makes only about 1 percent of U.S. peanut products. But its ingredients are used by dozens of other food companies, and the list of recalls now tops 1,840 foods.

Also on the witness list for the hearing is Sammy Lightsey, manager of Peanut Corp.’s facility in Blakely, Ga., which produced and shipped the peanut butter and peanut paste blamed for the outbreak.

Federal law forbids producing or shipping foods under conditions that could harm consumers’ health.

Peanut Corp.’s troubles mounted this week as the FBI raided corporate headquarters in Lynchburg, Va., as well as the Georgia plant. On Monday night, the company closed a second facility, in Plainview, Texas, after test results found earlier in the day indicated salmonella was present in samples taken at the Texas plant. None of the products had been distributed to consumers, but the finding raised the prospect of a broader recall.

Further testing is needed to confirm the results, said Doug McBride, spokesman for the Texas Department of State Health Services.

After the results came back Monday, the FDA sent inspectors back to the Texas plant to check more thoroughly for signs of problems similar to those found at the Georgia plant, which has been identified as the source of the salmonella outbreak.

The company has said it is still investigating what happened and has expressed regret and concern for people who became ill. It is not clear whether Parnell will testify on Wednesday or assert his constitutional right to not answer questions that may incriminate him.

A Food and Drug Administration inspection report found that the company shipped peanut products that tested positive for salmonella on 12 occasions from 2007-2008.

In some cases, Peanut Corp. got a second test before shipping that did not find salmonella. But in other cases, the company did not wait for the results of a second test before sending out its products, the FDA report said.

And, in one 2007 case, the company shipped chopped peanuts after getting a positive test result for salmonella, the FDA said.

“No matter what the tests are, they don’t care — they are shipping the product,” said Stupak.

Executives of two labs that tested products for Peanut Corp. also were expected to testify Wednesday.

One of them, Charles Deibel, president of Deibel Laboratories, said in a previous interview that his company advises its clients they “can’t retest away a positive result.”

Stupak said he thinks the labs had an ethical responsibility to report the problems to authorities.

“It’s not the written law, but there’s a responsibility there,” he said.

There’s plenty of blame to go around, he added. “Responsibility includes the FDA, it includes Parnell, it includes the plant managers, it includes Georgia officials,” Stupak said.

Peanuts started out as a family business for Parnell, 54. He, his brothers Hugh Jr. and Mike, and their father, Hugh Parnell Sr., founded the company in the mid-1970s.

Hugh Parnell Sr. said Tuesday his lawyers told him not to comment on the outbreak or his son’s company. The elder Parnell said he left the business nearly 20 years ago.

“Naturally, we’re all quite upset,” Parnell said Tuesday in a brief telephone interview.

The Parnells focused the company on the candy, ice cream and confection industries, according to material previously published on the Peanut Corp.’s Web site. The company at one point employed more than 95 workers in three states and had gross annual sales of more than $30 million.

“I have been in the peanut business since 1976 and providing a quality product at a fair cost has been the credence our business has grown up with for the past 28 years,” Stewart Parnell previously was quoted on the company’s Web site as saying.

Peanut Corp. is also under fire from an insurer. In a federal lawsuit filed in Virginia last week, the Hartford Casualty Insurance Co. argued that Peanut Corp.’s actions may have negated its insurance coverage.

___

Associated Press writers Ann Sanner and Sharon Theimer contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

FDA’s salmonella page: http://tinyurl.com/8srctw

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.