The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released the first of three installments of its long awaited Draft Guidance to support compliance with the Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration (IA) rule. Under the IA rule, the last of the major FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) rules to be released, food facilities must develop and implement a food defense plan that identifies their significant vulnerabilities and mitigation strategies to address those vulnerabilities, and they must take steps to ensure those mitigation strategies are working. This first installment includes the first four chapters of the Draft Guidance, which provide FDA’s recommendations on how to develop a food defense plan, including one particular method for conducting a vulnerability assessment to identify significant vulnerabilities and actionable process steps, developing mitigation strategies for actionable process steps, and monitoring mitigation strategies. It also contains templates for various components of a food defense plan.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently made two notable announcements regarding implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). First, FDA released a tool to assist companies with meeting supplier verification requirements under FSMA. A new section of the FDA’s Data Dashboard will help companies that perform supplier verification under FSMA by functioning as a “one stop shop” for identifying compliance and enforcement information related to specific suppliers. Second, FDA announced that the Voluntary Qualified Importer Program (VQIP) will not launch until the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 benefit year—i.e., October 1, 2019. VQIP is a voluntary, fee-based program that offers expedited review and entry of food into the United States.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recently released the Spring 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory Actions for federal agencies, which outlines the rulemaking actions currently under development in each federal agency. This post summarizes the major actions that may be of particular interest to the food industry that are being planned by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). After highlighting the most significant priorities, we provide charts for each agency that provide additional details on their plans.
There have been several recent developments regarding implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The below post summarizes the following topics:
- Guidance on application of the Foreign Supplier Verification Programs (FSVP) regulation to the importation of certain live animals;
- Draft Guidance on the definition of “small business” for purposes of the Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF) and Preventive Controls for Animal Food (PCAF) regulations;
- A letter to the winegrape and hops growing industries regarding possible modifications to written assurances in the Produce Safety Rule; and
- A report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) scrutinizing FDA’s progress and implementation of key food safety-related activities.
Also, as a reminder, March 19, 2018 was the compliance date for supplier verification under the PCHF (Subpart G) and FSVP regulations when a supplier is a “small business” required to comply with the PCHF regulation. Additionally, April 6, 2018 is the compliance date for small businesses for the Sanitary Food Transportation regulation.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently posted a document on its website that lists all importers that have been identified at entry in connection with the Foreign Supplier Verification Programs (FSVP) regulation. As discussed in the link below, this posting is a statutory requirement under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The list simply provides all of the FSVP importer names that have been declared at entry, which means that some companies are listed multiple times with slight variations in their name. We expect the list is too general to help most companies determine whether there are any entries for which they have been declared as the FSVP importer without permission. However, the list could be helpful to companies that have never knowingly been declared as an FSVP importer so they can become aware they were declared and therefore may be subject to an FSVP inspection.
Join us in London for a food seminar, “New U.S. food manufacturing, labeling, and inspection requirements – What you need to know to export foods ”
On 19 April, Hogan Lovells will offer a seminar on recent developments in U.S. food law that affect all food companies exporting food to the U.S.
U.S. partners Maile Hermida and Elizabeth Fawell will be visiting London from Washington, DC to discuss the latest U.S. food law developments that affect foreign companies that sell food in the U.S. This session will address recent changes for food safety, nutrition labeling, import filings, and facility inspections, addressing what these developments mean for exporters and how they are affected by the political climate in the United States. Both Maile and Elizabeth have extensive experience helping companies navigate these new requirements and developing effective business solutions for managing compliance.
Topics for this two hour seminar include:
— New U.S. Food Safety Requirements (FSMA)
— New Nutrition Labeling Rules
— Impacts from and Forecast for Trump Administration
— Inspections and Enforcement
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken two important steps to launch the Voluntary Qualified Importer Program (VQIP) under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). First, FDA has started accepting applications for participation in VQIP, a voluntary, fee-based program which offers expedited review and entry of human and animal food into the United States. Second, FDA has recognized the first accreditation body under the voluntary Accredited Third-Party Certification Program created by FSMA, a step needed to implement VQIP. This post discusses both developments.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Sonny Perdue announced a formal agreement on January 30, 2018, intended to increase coordination and collaboration between the two agencies. The high-level agreement is limited on details, but includes commitments to developing interagency working groups for the following three “issues of shared concern.”
- Dual-Jurisdiction Food Facilities: The agreement states that FDA and USDA share the goal of streamlining oversight of dual-jurisdiction facilities by identifying and potentially reducing the number dual-jurisdiction facilities. The agencies also aim to bring greater clarity and consistency to jurisdictional decisions under USDA and FDA’s respective authorities and decrease unnecessary regulatory burdens.
- Produce Safety: FDA and USDA express their commitment to enhancing their collaboration and cooperation on produce safety activities, including the implementation of FDA’s Produce Safety regulation under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA).
- Federal Regulation of Biotechnology Products: The agreement states that the agencies are committed to modernizing the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology, as well as the U.S. agricultural biotechnology regulatory system to develop efficient, science-based regulatory practice by working in partnership with other federal agencies. Both agencies have commitments for improving the regulation of biotechnology that are outlined in the September 2016 National Strategy for Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products and a recent Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Report.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued five FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) final and draft guidance documents relating to supplier verification under both the Foreign Supplier Verification Program (FSVP) and the Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF) rules, as well as draft guidance regarding the Preventive Controls for Animal Food (PCAF) rule.
We briefly summarize the issues addressed in each of the following documents:
- FSVP Draft Guidance;
- Chapter 15 (Supply-Chain Program) of the Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food Draft Guidance;
- Guidance on the Application of FSVP Regulation to Importers of Grain Raw Agricultural Commodities;
- Considerations for Determining Whether a Measure Provides the Same Level of Public Health Protection as the Corresponding Requirement in 21 CFR part 112 or the Preventive Controls Requirements in part 117 or 507 Draft Guidance;
- FSVP Small Entity Compliance Guide (SECG); and,
- Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Animal Food Draft Guidance.
We encourage a close review of each of the documents, as they address important issues affecting compliance with the major FSMA regulations. Note that comments can be submitted at any time on guidance documents. FDA has established dates by when comments are requested to be submitted on the draft guidance document
On January 4, 2018, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced through Guidance that it does not intend to enforce particular provisions of the Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF), Preventive Controls for Animal Food (PCAF), Produce Safety, and Foreign Supplier Verification Programs (FSVP) regulations issued under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). This post provides an overview of the situations in which FDA will exercise enforcement discretion, specifically:
- Written assurance provisions in all four rules related to the downstream control of identified hazards or microorganisms that are a potential risk to public health;
- FSVP requirements for importers of food contact substances (FCS);
- PCAF requirements for certain manufacturing/processing activities performed on human food by-products for use as animal food; and
- Certain facilities that are similar to farms, but that do not meet the “farm” definition.