FDA has finalized guidance to help facilities determine their business size under the Preventive Controls for Human Food and Preventive Controls for Animal Food rules issued in response to the FSMA.
Michael Taylor, former deputy commissioner for food for FDA and present co-chair of the Stop Foodborne Illness Board, suggested that in spite of all the technology, collaboration and education to improve food safety, crisis management still drives changes.
Many processors have grown more sophisticated at compiling information and presenting it when inspectors ask for proof that a facility's food safety management system is working. But no matter the companies’ size or record management methods, they likely experience some of the common deficiencies that experts see.
Unless your facility is a USDA shop, then it most likely falls under FSMA regulations, which for the vast majority of processors is the law of the land. If you haven’t yet been visited by FDA for an audit, it is past time to get ready for that inevitable moment. I asked Ib Elandaloussi (CAL), Food and Consumer Products Group with Burns and McDonnell to talk briefly about designing facility solutions to meet FSMA rules.
Under the Intentional Adulteration rule, domestic and foreign food facilities are required to complete and maintain a written food defense plan that assesses their potential vulnerabilities to deliberate contamination where the intent is to cause wide-scale public health harm.
While time is running out for small farms to comply with the FSMA Produce Rule, the FDA released a 172-page draft guidance for the Produce Safety Rule at the end of October, with a six month comment period.
The enactment of the Preventive Controls for Human Food regulation has profoundly affected the food processing industry in the United States and throughout the world.
New regulations, blockchain buzz and consumer demand have new ideas swirling about how connected partners should be when tracking food and keeping it safe