January saw the return of the AAFCO Mid-Year Meeting which I recently returned from. During the business meeting, there were numerous votes which are of interest to the pet food industry. Additionally, there was some movement on the Pet Food Label Modernization project with a few new projects looming on the horizon.
There are some ingredient name changes that were entered into the AAFCO Official Publication (OP) as tentative definitions. The previous names will be removed from the OP in 2025 and will no longer be acceptable names at that time. However, not all states except tentative definitions so label changes will need to be made once the definitions move from tentative to official, likely at the 2024 Mid-Year Meeting.
Grain sorghum protein feed is replacing grain sorghum gluten feed
Grain sorghum protein meal is replacing grain sorghum gluten meal
Corn protein feed is replacing corn gluten feed
Corn protein meal is replacing corn gluten meal
There was a proposed new feed term defining “freeze dried” as a process. This will be presented to the membership at the Annual Meeting for a vote to include in the 2024 OP. The feed term work group will be focusing on revising the “raw” and “fresh” feed terms and creating a new feed term for “pasteurization”. Also at the next association meeting, black soldier fly larvae will be presented to move from tentative to official, allowing for its use in adult dog foods.
There have been some interesting discussions surrounding “fish” and creating a definition for the OP, different from how it is defined in the FDA CFR (Code of Federal Regulations). The CFR definition currently includes such things as turtles, frogs and alligators, which obviously are not fish. There are clear definitions in the OP for poultry and meat, but not for fish, only for fish products. It will be interesting to see where this one goes…
There was a submission for faba beans to be defined as a pulse ingredient some time ago. However, as there has not been any further communication between the submitter and the AAFCO investigator, this ingredient is no longer being considered for a definition. It will be interesting to see if regulators start flagging this ingredient as not being defined, or if they will continue to allow it as it could fall under the “dried beans” definition.
There was a lively discussion in the Model Bill & Regulations committee meeting regarding a change to the term “labeling”. The term was updated to state that “labeling” means all labels or other written or graphic materials in print or electronic format that are published or disseminated by a guarantor or distributor (1) upon a commercial feed or any of its containers or wrappers, or (2) accompanying or promoting such commercial feed. There was a lot of concern expressed by AFIA, representing industry, that this could inadvertently extend to materials that retailers or consumers of the commercial feed product either printed or posted in stores or online. The FDA and state regulators have, for many years, regulated based on content posted on websites or social media as extensions of the actual physical label on the product. This extends even to testimonials posted by consumers. The new language itself does not really represent a change to how things have been done, and does clearly state that the material that this extends to would be that published or disseminated by a guarantor or distributor and not a consumer. I suspect that there may be more state regulators reviewing websites and social media content to try and identify claims that would not be allowed on pet food labeling passed on the passage of this update.
Now for the big one…let’s talk about PFLM! The Pet Food Label Modernization workgroup was formed back in 2015. Finally, there is a proposal to update the model bill and regulations to incorporate the changes that this workgroup has landed on. There was a lot of work that went into the final draft and it is expected that this draft will go to the board and be presented to the full membership for a vote at the Annual Meeting this summer. As you may know, there will be significant changes to the labeling for every single pet food product sold in the United States. At this time, there has not been a determination as to the implementation deadline. There will be SIGNIFICANT costs to firms for increased testing (total dietary fiber will be required on every label), as well as redesign and printing of every single label. There are certainly concerns, in addition to the cost, about how it will be handled from a regulatory perspective when there are “old” labels and “new” labels in the market. And there are concerns about whether there is adequate laboratory capacity to handle the required testing within whatever the implementation timeline might be (my money is on 3 years). In my opinion, testing formulas NOW for total dietary fiber and getting ahead of the curve for when the time comes to update labels is in the best interest of every pet food guarantor out there. If you have more questions on this process, or want to learn more about how we can help you navigate these upcoming changes, please feel free to contact us
That about sums it up for the main issues that will be impacting pet food regulation in the near future. As always, feel free to leave a comment with any questions, or contact us! We would love to hear from you!