THE F OOD S AFETY M ODERNIZATION A CT P ROPOSED R ULES : M AIN I SSUES FOR F ARMERS OEFFA Webinar, September 2013 Ariane Lotti, National Sustainable Agriculture.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction of the new Canada Consumer Product Safety Act Technical Briefing January 29, 2009.
Advertisements

LGMA California Leafy Green Marketing Agreement
FDA’s Proposed Rule under FSMA for Preventive Controls
Overview of Significant Issues and Identified Alternatives for Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Produce Safety Rule Michael Mahovic, Ph.D. Produce.
Who Will Regulate my Food Business? John E. Rushing, Ph.D. Department of Food Science NCSU.
EUREPGAP The European Principles of Food Safety. Increasing awareness of food safety in consumers greater variety of foods available for the consumer.
Produce Safety Rule Supplemental Proposal 1
Helen Dombalis National League of Cities March 13, 2012 Turning the Food Desert into an Oasis: Prospects for Improving Food Access and Public Health through.
GAP/Food Safety for Fruit and Vegetable Growers
1 Proposed Rule to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration
China Stakeholder Session China September 24-27, 2013.
Food Safety Modernization Act Supplemental Proposed Rules (Commenting period, Round 2 closes December 15, 2014!!)
SAI K. RAMASWAMY DR. GRETCHEN A. MOSHER NC-213,KANSAS CITY HARPC: Preventive Controls & Food Safety Implications 1 NC-213The U.S. Quality Grains Research.
Proposed Rules under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act
Focus on Prevention FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.
Proposed Rules under the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Version 1/15/2013.
Roland McReynolds, Esq. Carolina Farm Stewardship Association.
Proposed Rule to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration 1.
GAP and Its Impact on Us as Growers Rich Bonanno UMass Extension.
Proposed Rules to Help Ensure the Safety of Imported Food 1.
Natural Resource Concerns. In 2007 there were a number of food borne illness attributed to fresh produce People became sick Business’s lost market share.
Proposed Rule for Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food
1 The Bioterrorism Act and Food 2217 Steven C Seideman Extension Food Processing Specialist Cooperative Extension Service University of Arkansas.
Exporting Food to the United States: What You Need to Know Prepared for Panhellenic Exporters Association Conference December 9, 2014 Erik R. Lieberman.
Ashland Specialty Ingredients IFAC’s cGMP Audit Guide How the Food Ingredient Industry has Responded to FSMA and Food Safety Audits Priscilla Zawislak.
FSMA Produce Rule and the Produce Safety Alliance Elizabeth A. Bihn, Ph.D. Produce Safety Alliance Director CASA 99 th Annual Meeting April 23, 2015.
FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D says “Preventing problems before they cause harm is not only common sense, it is the key to food safety in the.
Food Safety Modernization Act The U.S. Food Safety Regulatory Revolution David Gombas, Ph.D. United Fresh Produce Association June 23, 2013.
Proposed Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food 1.
Maryland Farmers’ Market Conference: Food Safety Regulations February 28-29, 2012 Sherry Donovan-Morris, REHS/RS Section Head, Division of Facility &
Food Safety Modernization Act Proposed Rules Tim Slawinski Food and Dairy Division Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.
Understanding ISO 22000:2005 TCISys.com.
Technical Regulations – U.S. Procedures and Practices U.S.-Brazil Commercial Dialogue Digital Video Conference Series August 22, 2006 Mary Saunders Chief,
Farmer’s Markets: Approved Foods and Health Licensing
1 Overview of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)  Objective: Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated Rulemaking Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated.
Preparing for the Food Safety Modernization Act
Preventive Controls Rules: Coverage and Farm Definition 1 THE FUTURE IS NOW.
Edible Extended Food Safety & Licensing Pete Haase Director, Bureau of Food Safety and Inspection WDATCP August 2015.
FDA Regulatory Counseling Lake Bluff, Illinois, USA (847) Regulatory Update Richard O. Wood 2014 Mid-Year Meeting.
Proposed Regulations for Foreign Supplier Verification Programs (FSVPs)
Impact of FSMA on the Regulation of Domestic and Imported Animal Food by Daniel G. McChesney, Ph.D. at Wild Bird Feeding Industry 2011 Annual Meeting Naples,
Preventive Controls for Human Food S upplemental Proposal 1
Final Rule for Preventive Controls for Human Food September 16, THE FUTURE IS NOW 1.
Foreign Supplier Verification Programs Supplemental Proposal 1.
Proposed Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food.
Proposed Rule: 21 CFR 507 Proposed Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food 1.
Final Rule on Produce Safety 1.
By Michelle Hoang Period 2 APES April 30, 2012 The Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976.
Final Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food 1 THE FUTURE IS NOW.
Final Rule on Foreign Supplier Verification Programs 1.
& Food Safety Modernization Act Update North American Agricultural Marketing Officials July 15,
Final Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food to Wild Bird Feed Industry Annual Meeting 2015 by Daniel G. McChesney, Ph.D. Director, Office of Surveillance.
Awareness Training: ‘HARPC’ for Food Safety Complimentary Presentation by Quality Systems Enhancement 1790 Wood Stock Road Roswell GA E. mail:
FDA Preventive Control Regulation Ernest Julian, Ph.D., Chief Office of Food Protection RI Department of Health AFDO 2014.
FSMA: Preventative Controls for Human Food Final Rule In this presentation we discuss the Preventative Controls for Human Food rule and compliance dates.
Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) Overview Leah Wilkinson Vice President, Legislative, Regulatory & State Affairs American Feed Industry Association.
Food Safety Important? Aug 22-28, Food Safety recalls on FDA Website 25% for fresh produce – Salmonella, Listeria.
Final Rule for Sanitary Transportation. Background Proposed Rule: February 5, 2014 Public Comments: More than 200 Final Rule: On Display April 5, 2016.
Final Rule on Produce Safety
National Food Control Systems
FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA)
Validus Auditor Training
MAMTC (Mid-America Manufacturing Technology Center) helps Kansas manufacturers address challenges and achieve success. We do this by: Connecting manufacturing.
California Grocers Association and United Fresh Produce Association
INDIANA AGRICULTURE Grow With Us!.
Final Rule for Preventive Controls for Human Food
Our company takes pride in its membership in the National Fisheries Institute (NFI) and the Better Seafood Board (BSB).
Proposed Rule to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration
Who Will Regulate my Food Business?
Final Rule on Foreign Supplier Verification Programs
Presentation transcript:

THE F OOD S AFETY M ODERNIZATION A CT P ROPOSED R ULES : M AIN I SSUES FOR F ARMERS OEFFA Webinar, September 2013 Ariane Lotti, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

Who is NSAC? NSAC is an alliance of grassroots organizations that advocates for federal policy reform to advance the sustainability of agriculture, food systems, natural resources, and rural communities.  Started in 1988; currently have 100 member organizations from around the country – including OEFFA!  We bring farmers and grassroots advocates across the country to the policy table in DC  Our job is to make sure that federal policy helps farmers succeed while protecting the environment and keeping our food safe and accessible!

Webinar Agenda  Brief background and where we are now  Produce Rule Issues  Preventive Controls Rule Issues  Issues in both rules  Available resources

Approach to Food Safety  Everyone has a role in ensuring safe food  Focus on highest risk  One size does not fit all  Based on scientific evidence when possible

Overview of Food Safety Modernization Act  First major overhaul to food safety laws since the 1930s  Debated in Congress in  Signed into law January 4, 2011  Main pieces of the bill:  Title I: Preventing food safety problems Standards for Produce Safety Preventive Controls for Facilities  Title II: Detecting and responding to food safety problems  Title III: Improving safety of imported food  Title IV: Miscellaneous provisions

Sustainable Agriculture Provisions in FSMA  Scale appropriate regulations  Protection of on-farm conservation and wildlife practices  Complement – not contradict – National Organic Program regulations  Minimize extra regulations for low-risk processing that is part of value- added production  Streamline and reduce unnecessary paperwork for farmers and small processors  Allow farm identity preserved marketing as an option in place of government trace-back controls  Funding for training through new competitive grants program  Flexibility for small and very small businesses

Where We Are Now  PROPOSED regulations for produce safety and food facilities released for public comment on January 4, 2013  Comment period extended twice  Deadline for public comment is November 15!

Proposed Produce Rule  Standards for Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption  Personnel qualifications and training  Health and hygiene  Agricultural water  Biological soil amendments of animal origin  Domesticated and wild animals  Growing, harvesting, packing, and holding activities  Equipment, tools, buildings, and sanitation  Sprouts

Proposed Produce Rule  Exemptions  Produce rarely consumed raw  Produce for personal or on-farm consumption  Farms selling an annual average value of food during a 3- year period that is less than $25,000  Modified Requirements  Produce that will receive commercial processing  Farms that qualify under Tester-Hagan Amendment

Proposed Produce Rule  Tester-Hagan Requirements in Produce Standards  Average annual monetary value in previous 3-year period less than $500,000 AND  Sell 51% or more directly to a consumer or retail food establishment in the same state or within a 275-mile radius THEN  Provide information on label or sign at the point of sale

Proposed Produce Rule: Issues Manure and compost  9 month interval between application of manure and harvest; 45 day interval between application of compost and harvest Concerns:  Discourages the use of manure and compost made with animal material  Conflicts with National Organic Program regulations  Inconsistent with conservation practice standards  Based on very limited scientific evidence

Proposed Produce Rule: Issues On-farm natural resource conservation Concerns:  Does not explicitly protect or promote conservation practices  Does not incorporate co-management considerations  Lack of clarity on grazing standards  Recently started an Environmental Impact Statement process

Proposed Produce Rule: Issues  Water and water testing  Testing, treatment, regular maintenance and inspection of water system Concerns:  Weekly water testing for surface water; monthly for groundwater  Testing for generic e. coli (EPA recreational water standard)  Water treatment  Significant costs and not science-based

Proposed Produce Rule: Issues  Integrated approach  Tentative conclusion to adopt an “integrated” vs. “commodity- specific” approach Support:  Important for diversified farmers  Commodity organizations prefer commodity-by-commodity approach

Proposed Preventive Controls Rule  Focuses on facilities that manufacture and process food for human consumption  Two major requirements:  Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls (HARPC)  Updated Good Manufacturing Practices  Codifies “farm mix-type facility” – an operation subject to the Produce Rule AND the Preventive Controls Rule

Proposed Preventive Controls Rule  Exemptions from HARPC requirements  Certain on-farm low-risk processing activities (jams, maple syrup) by small and very small businesses  Seafood, juice, low acid canned foods, dietary supplements, alcoholic beverages  Activities within the ‘farm’ definition  Certain facilities that only store packaged foods or raw agricultural commodities (not F&V) for further processing

Proposed Preventive Controls Rule  Modified Requirements  Facilities that qualify under Tester-Hagan Amendment: “Very small business” OR Average annual monetary value in previous 3-year period less than $500,000 AND Sell 51% or more directly to a consumer or retail food establishment in the same state or within a 275-mile radius that sells food directly to consumers

Proposed Preventive Controls Rule  Modified Requirements  Submit documentation of status AND  Submit documentation of compliance with other non- Federal food safety law AND provide notification to consumers OR  Submit documentation identifying potential hazards and monitoring or preventive controls

Proposed Preventive Controls Rule: Issues Failure to clarify exemption for direct marketers  Under FSMA, CSAs, roadside stands, farmers markets, and other direct- to-consumer sale platforms are considered “retail food establishments” that do NOT have to register as a facility with FDA Concern: FDA has not clarified this exemption from the Preventive Controls Rule and certain CSAs and direct marketers will be subject to additional inappropriate regulation if they trigger the “facility” definition

Proposed Preventive Controls Rule: Issues Options for definition of “very small business”:  $250,000 in gross sales of all food  $500,000 in gross sales of all food  $1,000,000 in gross sales of all food Concerns:  “All food” not “covered product”  If not realistic, small facilities regulated like big facilities

Issues in Both Proposed Rules What is a “farm”? What is a “facility”? Concerns:  Confusion around foundational definitions like “farm” and “facility”  Assumption that farms only produce raw agricultural commodities and don’t prepare and sell food through markets and supply chains  When you pack or hold someone else’s agricultural products, you are a “facility”  Introduce new term, “farm mixed-type facilities,” subject to both rules

Issues in Both Proposed Rules Failure to adequately implement scale- and supply-chain appropriate options Concerns:  Failure to clarify key terms  Failure to require an evidentiary standard for withdrawal  Failure to establish a reasonable process around withdrawal and restitution of status

Issues in Both Proposed Rules Costs of compliance  High costs without adequate training and technical assistance  Produce rule: “Very small” farm: $4,697 annually “Small” farm: $12,972 annually “Large” farm: $30,566 annually  Preventive Controls: $13,000 per year to comply with HARPC Concerns:  Risk of farms going out of business  Increased barriers for beginning farmers  Further concentration in farming

Available Resources NSAC Website:  Background  Issue Pages  How to Comment  Additional Resources

Campaign Materials: FSMA website Website sections:

FSMA Website Produce Rule Overview

FSMA Website Preventive Controls Rule Overview

FSMA Website “Am I affected?” guidance (Including specific guidance for food hubs, CSAs, and direct marketers)

FSMA Website Issue overview pages

FSMA Website Issue overview pages contain:  Background  What the rules do and don’t require  Direct links to the relevant rule text  Questions to guide comments to FDA about the issue  Additional resources

FSMA Website Step by step instructions on how to comment

Get involved and more information: Join OEFFA for a webinar on October 28 at 6pm to learn about the commenting process and how to advocate for food safety regulations that support sustainable agriculture. for details on registration. Questions?