Targeted Enforcement Surveillance of Imported Foods in New York State

Angela Montalbano

New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets

Bio-Terrorism Food Inspector

International Food Protection Training Institute

2010 Fellow in Applied Science, Law and Policy:  Fellowship in Food Protection




Abstract

Due to the forces of the global economy and increased demand for traditional ethnic foods, the rate of foods imported into the United States is on the rise (Brooks, Buzby, & Regmi, 2009). As noted by the many nationwide imported food recalls and import alerts, evidence exists of a heightened safety concern for the US consumer. Based on increased imports, New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (NYSDAM) Bio-Terrorism Food Inspectors conduct joint targeted enforcement surveillance with federal partners during specific times of the year. This research was designed to investigate if joint targeted enforcement surveillance results in a higher rate of imported food recalls in comparison with routine NYSDAM food safety surveillance recalls. Secondary qualitative analysis of NYSDAM data was used for this research project as a method to incorporate existing information and data from public reports and literature. The data revealed a consistently higher rate of annual imported food recalls in relation to annual domestic food recalls. NYSDAM and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) joint targeted surveillance created a large number of food safety enforcement actions including food seizures, samples, and recalls. The recall numbers extrapolated from the NYSDAM joint targeted enforcement surveillance data revealed a high rate of imported food recalls in comparison with non-targeted enforcement surveillance, especially considering the numbers of inspectors and days of surveillance involved. Based on the analysis of the data, evidence exists that with a higher frequency of targeted enforcement surveillance and additional inspectors, the imported food recall numbers may vastly increase. This research indicates that joint agency targeted surveillance investigations are productive. Documentation of the NYSDAM Imported Food Surveillance Targeted Enforcement is recommended and could possibly serve as a model for other areas with high levels of imported foods.

Background

Since the federal Bio-Terrorism Act of 2002, NYSDAM took a proactive initiative and responded to the influx of violative imported foods in commerce. The department hired and trained “Bio-Terrorism Food Inspectors” to conduct imported food surveillance and investigations. Inspectors were trained with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Consumer Safety Officers in the Imported Food Division to fully understand the FDA’s imported food procedures. New York State inspectors learned to survey and monitor imported foods including a myriad of unapproved foods and ingredients that commonly enter the US food supply. Once these FDA-regulated products enter the United States and are considered domestic, the products become the primary responsibility of state and local agencies to ensure the products’ safety (Corby, n.d.).  

With the increasing demand for traditional ethnic food products, the number of imported foods entering into the United States is on the rise (Brooks, Buzby, & Regmi, 2009).  More than 200,000 foreign food-manufacturing establishments ship food into the United States each year (FDA, 2011).

The growing volumes of imported food products will approach 10 million import line entries in FY 2011 (Table 1). The quantity of food imported into the United States has increased exponentially over the past decade (Hamburg, 2010). The FDA, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and Customs and Border Patrol all utilize targeted inspections when reviewing, sampling, or investigating imported regulated foods. However, the current imported food inspection process allows for less than 1% of imported foods to be physically examined (Elder, 2010). The FDA monitors 100% of the imported food entry through an electronic computer program, which is a risk-based targeted approach (Elder, 2010). In response, the FDA is developing the PREDICT (Predictive Risk-Based Evaluation for Dynamic Import Compliance Targeting) computer system to improve targeting screening efforts (Hamburg, 2010).

Historically, state and federal agencies conduct independent surveillance of domestic and imported food products throughout the year. However, New York State Bio-Terrorism Food Inspectors now conduct joint targeted enforcement surveillance with federal partners during specific times of the year. Holidays and special events help determine the time frame for these operations. Joint targeted enforcement surveillance data has been recorded and reviewed after such joint operations. Through intelligence, product sampling, and lab results, solid evidence exists that many imported foods are of safety concern for the US consumer, with the result that these imported foods are recalled.

A recall is initiated to remove the product from commerce when a reason exists to believe the product may be adulterated or misbranded. The recall classification assigned to a product, such as Class I, II, or III, indicates the degree of health hazard presented by the recalled product. Recalled product disposition may result in relabeling, destruction, or placement on an FDA Import Alert. Rationales for food product recalls include microbiological contaminants (Salmonella, Listeria, E. coli, etc.), undeclared allergens, banned antibiotics, uneviscerated processed fish, lead-contaminated products and packaging, unapproved colors (non-FD&C certified colors), unapproved sweetener sodium cyclamate, undeclared preservatives, mycotoxins, shelf stability, pesticide residues, economic adulteration, and the lack of English labeling (NYSDAM & Cornell, 2007).

Problem Statement

Due to the forces of the global economy and the increased demand for traditional ethnic foods, the rate of foods imported into the United States is on the rise (Brooks, Buzby, & Regmi, 2009). As noted by the many nationwide imported food recalls and import alerts, evidence exists of a heightened safety concern for the US consumer. Based on increasing imports, NYSDAM Bio-Terrorism Food Inspectors conduct joint targeted enforcement surveillance with federal partners during specific times of the year. This research project was designed to investigate the rate of imported food recalls resulting from joint targeted enforcement surveillance in comparison with routine NYSDAM food safety surveillance recalls.

Methodology

Secondary qualitative analysis of data was used for this research project as a method to incorporate existing information and data from public NYSDAM reports and literature. Two data sets from NYSDAM were analyzed utilizing recall data from 2000-2010 and the NYSDAM joint USDA targeted enforcement surveillance data for the years 2008, 2009, and 2010. Recall percentages were extrapolated from the joint targeted surveillance as a means of comparing joint targeted enforcement surveillance recalls to other state recalls.

Results

The results of this investigation revealed a consistently higher percentage (71%), on average, of annual imported food recalls in relation to annual domestic food recalled products (Stich, Luker, & Davis, 2008). Over the ten-year period, the imported food recalls have been consistently higher with a low of 63% and a high of 80% (Figure 2).

The New York State Bio-Terrorism Food Inspectors have a committed working relationship with and have worked closely with the FDA, US Customs, and USDA’s Smuggling Interdiction Trade and Compliance (SITC) and Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) divisions. New York State Bio-Terrorism Food Inspectors have joined forces with the USDA, SITC, and FSIS divisions for special targeted enforcement surveillance during specific times of the year. Joint targeted enforcement surveillance data has been recorded and reviewed after such joint operations. The recall numbers from the NYS/USDA Joint Targeted Enforcement Surveillance data provided for the years 2008, 2009, and 2010 were compared against the non-joint surveillance numbers of NY State recalls for the months of January and February when the joint targeted surveillance operations were conducted. The joint targeted enforcement surveillance takes place during the same time each year. Surveillance data for February 2009 is an average from January and February as the targeted enforcement surveillance spanned the end and beginning of these months (Figure 3).

Further results of this study indicated that the actual number of recalls, percentage of recalls, days of surveillance, and number of inspectors involved varied by year. The 2008 joint targeted surveillance recall percentage of 41% represents a little less than half of the recalls conducted by the entire state of New York for the month of January. The 2009 joint targeted surveillance recall percentage of 38% indicates an outcome similar to the outcome obtained in 2008. In 2010, the percentage of joint targeted surveillance recalls dropped. The joint targeted surveillance investigations were conducted for six, five, and four days respectively for the years 2008, 2009, and 2010, which would explain the reduction in recalls. Additionally, for the 2008 and 2009 investigations, the three NYSDAM Bio-Terrorism Inspectors worked independently with federal partners, while in 2010 the three inspectors worked together, thereby reducing the number of firms investigated (Table 4).

Additional analysis examined the recorded regulatory activity and numerical values for three consecutive years of NYSDAM joint targeted surveillance with USDA SITC, which began in 2008. The data reveals significant numbers of food safety enforcement actions. The total recorded values indicated great shifts from 2008 to 2010. The seizure pounds shifted 99.3% from 2008 to 2009 and 97% from 2008 to 2010 (Table 5). Numerous factors could create such variations in the surveillance findings, aside from the total number of days and inspector participation. Factors may include the consistency of the targeted enforcement surveillance or continued educational outreach. Regardless of the fluctuating results, substantial regulatory actions were taken.

Conclusion

Due to the influx of imported foods entering into the United States, the number of recalled imported foods has also increased. This research project determined that numerous agencies (USDA, FDA, CBP, NYSDAM, state agencies, and local agencies) conduct targeted enforcement on a routine basis. Analysis of New York State recall data and New York State targeted enforcement recall data revealed targeted enforcement has resulted in an increase of food safety actions. NYSDAM/USDA-SITC joint targeted enforcement surveillance is a prime example of the benefit of joint efforts between jurisdictions to address imported food surveillance and imported food safety.

Based on these results, the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets should continue to conduct targeted enforcement surveillance as a routine protocol, or at minimum, during specific times of the year to maximize resources. A guidance document of Imported Food Surveillance could be compiled and serve as a model for other states with a high frequency of imported foods. An imported food division unit should be considered for specific regions at the state level. Research and analysis of similar imported food recall data at the national level is suggested.

This project examined joint efforts between agency jurisdictions to address imported food surveillance and safety. Joining forces and sharing intelligence with federal partners will increase the volume of recalled imported foods. Food safety regulatory agencies’ overall objectives are to reduce the prevalence of violative imported food products in commerce and to help safeguard the United States agriculture and economy. Agencies should strive to be more transparent and to share data for usable measures. This project revealed the efficacy of agency interaction, which provides a broad field of knowledge, jurisdiction, and action level, which is a strong component of an integrated food safety system.

Acknowledgments

I would like to extend my thanks to my mentor, Cameron Smoak, for the support, guidance and understanding throughout the fellowship program; to the International Food Protection Training Institute (IFPTI) for providing an invaluable educational and professional experience that will last a lifetime; and to the directors of the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets for presenting me with the opportunity to participate in the IFPTI Fellowship in Food Protection program.  I must also thank the other fellows and my family for their support through the process.

Corresponding Author:

Angela Montalbano, New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets.  E-mail:  angela.montalbano@agmkt.state.ny.us

References

Brooks, N., Buzby, J.C., & Regmi, A. (2009). Globalization and Evolving Preferences

Drive U.S. Food-Import Growth. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 40(1), 39.

 

Corby, J. (n.d.).  A cooperative federal-state approach for monitoring imported foods: Reviewing the New York model.

 

Elder, D. (2010). Ensuring the safety of imported products. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/UCM229925.pdf

 

Hamburg, M. A.  (2010, February 4). FDA and the American public: The safety of foodsand medical products in the global age.  Retrieved from   http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/ImportProgram/ucm172743.htm

 

New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, & Cornell UniversityDepartment of Food Science.  (2007, October 10). Importing chinese foodproducts - Addressing the concerns.

 

Stich,  S., Luker,  J.,  & Davis,  C. N. (2008). Recalls of imported foods compared to total recalls of foods in NYS [PowerPoint slides].  New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets.

 

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2011). FDA transforming food safety FY 2011. Retrieved from        http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/Budget          Reports/UCM205611.pdf

Next
Next

The Potential of Social Media and Web 2.0 Applications for Food Safety Capacity Building