The FDA’s proposal comes in response to concern expressed by companies and trade associations about the time needed to implement the final rule.
“These stakeholders expressed concerns about their ability to update all products by the original compliance dates and the importance of obtaining clarification from the FDA on a number of technical issues relating to the final rules,” the FDA said when announcing its proposal Sept. 29.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), Washington, welcomed the extension.
|Pamela Bailey, president and CEO of the GMA|
“FDA’s new compliance date will provide companies with the necessary time to execute these updates to the Nutrition Facts Panel in a manner that will reduce consumer confusion and costs in the marketplace,” said Pamela G. Bailey, president and CEO of the GMA. “This common-sense extension to Jan. 1, 2020, will allow FDA to complete the necessary final guidance documents for added sugars and dietary fibers and gives companies adequate time to make the Nutrition Facts Panel revisions.”
The American Bakers Association (ABA), Washington, said bakers applaud the FDA and the Donald Trump administration for granting bakers and suppliers more time for implementation.
|Robb MacKie, president and CEO of the ABA|
“FDA’s decision recognizes the practical consequences of a complete changeover of our food labels,” said Robb MacKie, president and CEO of the ABA. “This additional time will help suppliers and bakers provide consumers with needed nutrition information to make healthy, informed decisions about their diets. We also hope this additional time will enable harmonized label changes for both FDA’s Nutrition Facts label rule and USDA’s bioengineered food disclosure. One label change would be beneficial for consumers and industry alike.”
Bakers still are awaiting necessary final guidance on both dietary fiber and added sugars labeling requirements so they can make changes as needed, according to the ABA.
|Lee Sanders, senior vice president, goverment relations and public affairs for the ABA|
“Bakers are eager to receive complete information and guidance from FDA so that we are able to get started with nutrition labeling revisions to provide clear, concise information for American consumers,” said Lee Sanders, senior vice president, government relations and public affairs for the ABA. “Clarity on these technical issues is critical to avoid further consumer confusion around their food.”
The Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, disagreed with the FDA’s proposed extension.
|Peter Lurie, M.D., president of the CSPI|
“The Food and Drug Administration’s decision to cave in to food industry demands and delay the deadline for companies to update their Nutrition Facts labels harms the public’s health, denies consumers vital information and creates an unfair and confusing marketplace as many companies have gone ahead with the labels anyway,” said Peter G. Lurie, M.D., president of the CSPI.
Beginning Oct. 2, the FDA will accept written or electronic comments on the proposed compliance dates for 30 days. The FDA will accept only comments on the extension of the compliance dates. The FDA is not proposing any other changes to the Nutrition Facts label and serving size final rule. Written comments may be sent to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, Maryland. Electronic comments should be submitted to www.regulations.gov.
All comments should be identified with Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1210 for “Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels; Extension of Compliance Date” or Docket No. FDA-2004-N-0258 for “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling; Updating, Modifying, and Establishing Certain Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed; Serving Size for Breath Mints; and Technical Amendments; Extension of Compliance Dates.”