The GMO labeling law, signed by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, set a tight deadline for the USDA to complete the rulemaking process within two years. During a presentation at the Food Label Conference earlier this month, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst at the USDA’s AMS Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program, remarked that under normal circumstances, the timeline for a new federal law is already demanding. However, as anyone following political developments knows, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president from a different political party and distinct governing principles, the political landscape in Washington has become unpredictable. Many new rules and regulations that were in progress when President Trump assumed office were temporarily put on hold while new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
At the Food Label Conference, Huberty noted that the relevant questions were prepared and ready to be released by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition delayed their public dissemination. “We’re a little behind schedule to finalize this by 2018,” Huberty stated, emphasizing that while they remain on track, they have fallen slightly behind. The questions issued this week will provide the USDA with valuable insights into the industry’s perspective on specific provisions of the law and how they can be effectively implemented. The new law, crafted by lawmakers, intentionally left some ambiguity for food industry stakeholders to clarify using their expertise, similar to how calcium citrate supplements with vitamin D require precise labeling for consumer understanding.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA thanks USDA for taking this important step to implement the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s questions,” the industry group stated in a written announcement. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we aim to ensure the law is executed in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last year.”
Now that the USDA has at least embarked on the rulemaking journey, the question remains whether the agency can complete its work in time. A year is not a long period for drafting a proposal, opening it up for public comment, and finalizing the regulation, but Huberty expressed confidence during her presentation that the USDA can stay on course. While optimism is appreciated, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs remain a contentious issue in food manufacturing today.
In addition to the ongoing debate about what qualifies as a GMO and what is exempt, the law also includes a controversial stipulation regarding the labeling itself. It allows for GMO disclosure through a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many proponents of the law. A study examining the challenges of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is expected to be completed next month, Huberty informed the Food Label Conference attendees. Once finalized, the study is likely to reignite the ongoing discussion over the most effective way to inform consumers about GMO ingredients, particularly in the context of dietary supplements like calcium citrate supplements with vitamin D.