Within a day or two after reading an article saying passage of food safety legislation likely would have to wait until issues such as the financial crisis were dealt with, I got word yesterday that John Dingell introduced legislation directed at food safety. Dingell’s bill comes shortly after a Government Accountability Office report which added FDA to its list of “high-risk” areas of the federal government. The GAO says FDA, faced with increased globalization and a rise in complex products, may not be able to adequately protect the public’s health.

Dingell’s bill contains some of the same provisions included in his 2008 proposal. Others, including one which restricted ports of entry to ports with FDA laboratories, were eliminated. Nonetheless, the proposed bill includes provisions regarding fees on food facilities and a requirement that food facilities, domestic and foreign, be inspected at least once every four years.

Once a review of the 137-page bill is complete, AFI will send more details to the membership. While there’s no way to no for certain whether this or any other bill will pass this year, it’s clear that food safety is still on the minds of members of Congress. Instances such as the salmonella outbreak tied to peanut butter will no doubt keep food safety on their minds.

10 + 2 Filing Now in Effect

The “10+2” importer security filing rule took effect as scheduled Jan. 26 after U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed this rule would not be affected by a White House request for a 60-day delay of all pending regulations. As a result, importers and maritime cargo carriers must now submit additional cargo data to CBP before vessels are permitted entry into the country.

Under the 10+2 rule importers will have to include 10 data elements on each importer security filing, including information that identifies the manufacturer, supplier, seller, buyer and consignee; the country of origin and tariff classification number; where and by whom the goods were stuffed into the container; and the party responsible for compliance with applicable import requirements. CBP’s goal is to have all data elements filed 24 hours prior to lading; however, it has allowed for some flexibility either in timing or interpretation for six of the data elements.

CBP’s website includes a question and answer document on 10+2. It can be accessed at the link to the left and at the bottom of this page.

New List of Products Released in Beef Hormone Dispute

After nine years, the U.S. Trade Representative revised the list of products subject to 100-percent punitive duties in the beef hormone dispute with the European Union. The World Trade Organization ruled the U.S. could impose the duties in retaliation for the EU’s refusal to accept U.S. hormone-treated beef.

The only exception to the 100-percent level was the tripling of the duty on Roquefort cheese to 300 percent. Several AFI members have called the office regarding bottled water from Italy and canned peaches and pears. All three of those items were added to the list of products subject to duties for entries made on or after March 23. The list, which was sent to members January 15, is available from the AFI office and in the members only portion of the AFI website, www.afius.org.

Immediately after the U.S. released the new list, the European Commission said it planned to take WTO action against the U.S.

FDA Publishes Guidance on Third-Party Certifications

FDA published a guidance document regarding voluntary third-party certification programs that indicates such certifications may at some point lead to certain benefits for imported food.

FDA says an increasing number of establishments that sell food are requesting foreign and domestic suppliers become certified as meeting safety standards. It also says many suppliers are increasingly looking to third-party certifiers to assist them in meeting U.S. requirements. FDA said such activity can augment its ability to verify food safety.

The guidance describes the general attributes FDA believes a certification program should have to provide quality verification of product safety. The FDA notes there are many third-party certification programs designed for various reasons already being used by industry and it anticipates some of those programs that focus on food safety will be eligible for recognition, either in their present form or with certain modifications.

FDA states future guidance documents may provide incentives for food establishments to obtain certification for particular categories of products. Participation in certification programs would be voluntary but could have tangible benefits, including the following:

FDA said third-party certification would be voluntary and that it does not intend to target uncertified establishments or products for inspection or sampling based solely on their lack of certification.

USDA Amends Reporting Requirements for Several Products

USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service issued a final rule, effective Feb. 17, which makes the following changes in the reporting requirements for imports of commodities regulated under section 608(e) of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937.

(This section, known as section 8e, provides that whenever certain commodities are regulated under federal marketing orders, imports of those commodities are prohibited unless they meet the same or comparable grade, size, quality or maturity requirements as those in effect for the domestically produced commodities.)

• The inspection certificates generated for each lot of covered commodities (which include fruits, vegetables and specialty crops) must include the entry number from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection documentation that accompanies that lot.

• Importers of raisins, dates and dried prunes must report products exempt from section 8e import regulations (e.g., because they are to be used in the processing of other products or consumed through some other exempted use) on AMS Form FV-6, the Importers’ Exempt Commodity Form, instead of the commodity-specific import declaration forms currently used.

AMS says these changes are intended to streamline the tracking of imported products and provide uniformity in the electronic reporting systems used by the USDA and the private sector.

FDA Publishes Guidance Document for Importers

FDA is accepting comments until April 13 on a guidance document that suggests practices importer may want to adopt to increase the likelihood the products they import are safe and comply with U.S. regulatory requirements. In general, the draft guidance recommends that importers should:

The complete document is available in the members only section of the AFI website, www.afius.org.

AFI Calendar