NCBFAA Says More Detail Needed on Imports in FDA's Food Traceability Proposal
FDA’s proposed rule on traceability requirements for high-risk foods needs some reworking to “reflect the unique characteristics of the import supply chain,” the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America said in Feb. 22 comments to the agency. As proposed, the requirements do not account for complex import supply chains, and changes are also necessary to account for the roles of parties within that supply chain to better reflect the import process, the NCBFAA said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The NCBFAA specifically identified as problematic the proposed rule’s requirement for “persons who ship a food on the Food Traceability List” to maintain records of the customs entry number for each lot code of imported food. For imported food, the shipper is generally not in a position to know the entry number because that shipper is a foreign farm, producer or distributor, and the entry number does not exist when the food leaves the shipper’s location. “Nor does the foreign shipper subsequently have access to the customs entry number (except in those instances when the foreign party is also the importer of record),” the NCBFAA said.
Likewise, the shipper does not have access to the date of entry or even the “deliver to address,” the NCBFAA said. “In the ocean environment, the shipper sells FOB port of export. They may know the port of discharge but the importer would decide which warehouse to move it to from the ocean terminal,” it said.
“Since the Importer of Record is the party that has the entry number, we urge FDA to provide specific rules for imported foods that reflect the unique characteristics of the import supply chain,” the NCBFAA said. “It should also account for the differences between ocean, truck and air shipments. In its current form, the proposed rule creates confusion by its use of the general term ‘shipper’ for both domestic and imported shipments.”
The FDA also needs to address scenarios where a food’s supply chain does not conform to a basic “A to B” model. For example, foods may be purchased from the importer by an intermediate food broker that does not take possession of the food, which is then transported to a third-party warehouse. That warehouse would not be in a position to know import-related information like the entry number. “We encourage the FDA to review the variety of different supply chain relationships as you craft the final rule so that the various traceability information hand-offs are realistic and feasible,” the NCBFAA said.
The NCBFAA did praise the FDA for specifying that parties that coordinate importation of a food but do not take physical possession -- like customs brokers -- are not subject to the traceability requirements. But the trade group said the agency should be careful in the rule to avoid mentions of “brokers,” which may refer to either a food broker or a customs broker. “To avoid confusion, we urge the FDA in each instance to specify precisely which broker they are referring to,” the NCBFAA said.