The Administration's Interagency Working Group on Import Safety delivered its report to the President yesterday: Protecting American Consumers Every Step of the Way.
The report is only 28 pages, and is written at a high level of abstraction. It's meant to provide an overall strategy. The Working Group is now looking for input from the public on how to implement the strategy. They plan a "follow up action plan" for mid-November.
The report doesn't really talk about funding constraints on the existing system. There are references to resources, but usually to "leverging," "targeting," "focusing," or "wise use" of resources. There's only one reference to "additional resources," indicating that requests for these have not necessarily been ruled out, I assume in the action plan.
The Chair, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt briefed the press yesterday: Press Briefing on Import Safety by Heath and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt and National Economic Director Al Hubbard .
Jane Zhang reported for the Wall Street Journal today: Risk-Based System Urged for Import Safety.
The report outlines six elements of a broad strategic plan to address import safety. The two most interesting elements are recommendations (1) to follow products through their life cycles, and (2) to improve information sharing among federal agencies, government and the public, and among governments.
Instead of focusing on inspection and rejection of imports as they cross the border, the Working Group proposes to address the entire life cycle of the product, to try to head off problems before they reach the border, and to create a situation where problems can be addressed if they're found after the product has crossed the border. Chairman Leavitt describes this as a "video" rather than a "snapshot" approach.
Rather than merely trying to identify unsafe products at the border, the new approach must focus on the most important safety considerations affecting imported goods throughout their import life cycle – from overseas production through U.S. ports-of-entry to final consumption or use in the U.S. A key element is developing the ability to identify and manage the greatest risk at critical points along the import life cycle. Rather than being the primary line of defense, intervention at the U.S. border must become one part of a network of interconnected measures that facilitate the entry of safe, lawful imports and protect the American public.
The federal government should move to a risk-based, cost-effective approach to identify and mitigate risks posed by imported products. Principles of hazard analysis and risk management have long been applied in manufacturing as a method of minimizing risks and maximizing quality in production processes. These principles enable the targeting of resources to areas of greatest risk.
Within America’s food processing industries for example, Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) principles are applied voluntarily by manufacturers and processors, and, in some areas, as a regulatory requirement to ensure that only safe products reach the marketplace. Identification of risks at the points they are most likely to occur, and the targeted application of controls at those critical points, helps to minimize the likelihood of producing an unsafe product. Controls are verified to ensure they are working as intended. Surveillance and detection are fully integrated into each step of the import life cycle.
These same principles of risk management should apply to the import supply chain – from the point of foreign origin to domestic consumption or use. All entities involved in the import life cycle – foreign growers and manufacturers, foreign governments, foreign exporters, U.S. importers, manufacturers and retailers, testing and certification bodies, and regulatory authorities at the federal, state, and local levels – should work together to support prevention with verification and mitigation of risk in products entering the U.S. marketplace. Determining the scientific methods and tools for identifying, characterizing, and mitigating risk will help improve decisions regarding the safety of imported products and the capacity to act on them.
In addition, the science-based measures that we put in place for both domestic- and foreign-made products must comply with our international trade obligations, including obligations related to product safety and intellectual property protection. In this manner, we hold ourselves accountable to the same expectations that we place upon our trading partners.
Here's how it might work in practice:
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the Department of Commerce operates the fee-based Seafood Inspection Program. One service under this program provides in-plant inspection of foreign seafood facilities. At the request of the U.S. seafood importer or the foreign seafood facility, NOAA audits the facility to ensure that it complies with the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) Quality Management Program. This service also includes the training of facility personnel in sanitation practices, hazard analysis and other procedures, and assisting the facility in writing and implementing a HACCP plan. Finally, the program includes training in product grading and quality evaluation to the standards set by the U.S. and the International Standards Organization for food safety and manufacture.
FDA has worked both with importers and exporters, as well as CBP, to streamline the prior notice submission process by allowing the use of one data stream via CBP’s automated system.
Domestic manufacturers of aeronautical products maintain a list with the Federal Aviation Administration of their foreign suppliers, and each manufacturer attests that their respective suppliers are capable of producing aeronautical products sufficient to satisfy technical and quality standards. The manufacturing facilities of foreign suppliers are inspected by the U.S. company purchasing their products and are subject to audit by the FAA. For some aircraft components, U.S. companies employ inspectors at the foreign supplier’s facility to ensure that parts for export conform to approved specifications. All parts and services purchased by U.S. aeronautical companies are traceable to their site of manufacture. FAA requires companies to maintain inspection records that document materials used in production, product sampling, and type of inspection performed to assure conformity with required specifications.
Through its personnel stationed overseas, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) works with foreign exporters to ensure that fruits and vegetables are free from agricultural pests and diseases prior to export to the United States. U.S. bound shipments that have passed these USDA pre-clearance inspections may receive expedited clearance at U.S. ports-of-entry and may qualify to enter otherwise restricted U.S. ports.
Leavitt's remarks at the press briefing also indicate that he sees the system functioning on this side of the border as well:
I mean, I was in a grocery store in the Midwest and they have a value card. You know, you go and they say, do you have your CVS card or you have -- and several weeks ago, we had a chili recall. And I asked them, how did that affect you? Well, they immediately went to their data system and found that they could identify everyone who bought that chili between X and You date.
And so what you see is a vision here where literally where it's picked to the point that it is placed in the mouth...
They also propose more information sharing between government agencies overseeing imports, and between the agencies and importers. They call it "building interoperable systems." This is actually an endorsement of an existing statutory mandate, imposed by the Security and Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 to establish an electronic interface between the different Federal agencies.
Interoperability is the ability of one system to communicate with another. Too often, we build sophisticated data systems without ensuring the systems’ ability to interface with one another. We need to finalize implementation of interoperable data systems, already under development, that facilitate the exchange of relevant product information among parties within the global supply chain to ensure import safety.
Government agencies should share the information they collect about activities occurring along the global supply chain to prevent, identify, mitigate, and respond to product safety hazards. Manufacturers test products to ensure that they comply with relevant performance and safety standards; government agencies inspect and test products to ensure that they meet regulatory requirements associated with public health, environmental safety, and consumer protection. Marketplace recalls are conducted to remove faulty or unsafe products from commerce. Information about these activities is often collected and recorded, and should be shared among individual actors in the import life cycle or aggregated and analyzed as a whole.
Information technology has improved the availability and exchange of information on imported products. The import entry process is one area where information technology is being used to improve the exchange of import supply chain information. Throughout most of U.S. history, a revenue-centric import system focused largely on the collection of customs duties on imported goods. In the post-9/11 environment, however, government and industry have recognized the need to expand the focus of the import system to encompass security and safety. This involves integrating additional information, including import inspection and clearance activities conducted by other government agencies, into the customs entry process.
The International Trade Data System (ITDS) is a key component to improve systems interoperability. The recently enacted Security and Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 established a requirement for an electronic interface among all federal agencies that monitor or control the movement of imported products in domestic commerce. The ITDS will create a single-window environment in which importers, transportation carriers, and government agencies can exchange information on imported products. When fully implemented, ITDS will facilitate the processing of legitimate import transactions, improve how imported products are identified and classified, strengthen entry screening capabilities, and help to target inspection resources to areas of greatest risk.
Comments