Product Labeling: Definition of the Term “Natural”, 70503-70505 [06-9546]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 5, 2006 / Notices
response time of 2.7 hours per form,
representing a total annual burden for
this form to be 34,177 hours. Thus, for
this CRIS information collection
CSREES estimates a total of 68,638
annual burden hours.
Comments: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the Agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology;
and (e) the expanded use of CRIS forms
for education and extension programs,
particularly programs that are
competitive, project-based, and funded
under section 3(d) of the Smith-Lever
Act (7 U.S.C. 341).
Dated: November 24, 2006.
Gale Buchanan,
Under Secretary, Research, Education, and
Economics.
[FR Doc. E6–20555 Filed 12–4–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS 2006–0040]
Product Labeling: Definition of the
Term ‘‘Natural’’
Food Safety and Inspection
Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of petition and public
meeting; request for comments.
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Food Safety and
Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing
receipt of a petition from Hormel Foods
to establish a definition for the
voluntary claim ‘‘natural’’ and to
delineate the conditions under which
the claim can be used on the labels of
meat and poultry products. The use of
the claim ‘‘natural’’ is an issue of
significant interest to the Agency, to
industry, and to the public. Therefore,
the Agency is inviting comments on the
issue generally and on the petition and,
to facilitate the comment process, is
announcing that it will hold a public
meeting to discuss the petition. After
the comment period closes, FSIS will
initiate rulemaking on the claim
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Dec 04, 2006
Jkt 211001
‘‘natural.’’ The Agency has decided to
initiate rulemaking because it is the
most appropriate, open, and transparent
method to deal with issues surrounding
the definition and use of the claim
‘‘natural.’’
The public meeting will be held
on Tuesday, December 12, 2006, from 9
a.m. to 1 p.m. Comments on this notice
must be received by January 11, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be
held in the rear of the Cafeteria, South
Agriculture Building, United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA),
1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250.
FSIS invites interested persons to
send comments on this notice. FSIS will
finalize an agenda on or before the
meeting date and will post it on the
FSIS Internet Web page https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/
News?Meetings_&_Events/. The petition
discussed in this notice is available for
viewing by the public in the FSIS
Docket Room (see address below) and
on the FSIS Web site at: https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/
News?Meetings_&_Events/. The official
transcript of the meeting will be
available for viewing by the public in
the FSIS docket room and on the FSIS
Web site https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
News?Meetings_&_Events/ when it
becomes available.
Comments on this notice may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
• Mail, including floppy disks or CD–
ROM’s, and hand-or courier-delivered
items: Send to FSIS Docket Room,
Docket Clerk, USDA, FSIS, 300 12th
Street, SW., Room 102 Cotton Annex,
Washington, DC 20250.
• Electronic mail:
fsis.regulationscomments@fsis.usda.gov.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: This
Web site provides the ability to type
short comments directly into the
comment field on this Web page or
attach a file for lengthier comments. Go
to https://www.regulation.gov and in the
‘‘Search for Open Regulations’’ box,
select ‘‘Food Safety and Inspection
Service’’ from the agency drop-down
menu, then click on ‘‘Submit.’’ In the
Docket ID column, select FDMS Docket
Number 2006–0040 to submit or view
public comments and to view
supporting and related materials
available electronically.
All submissions received by mail or
electronic mail must include the Agency
name and docket number 2006–0040.
All comments sent in response to this
document, as well as research and
background information used by FSIS in
developing this document, will be
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
70503
available for public inspection in the
FSIS Docket Room at the address listed
above between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. Comments will
also be posted on the Agency’s Web site
at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
regulations_&_policies/
regulations_directives_&_notices/
index.asp.
For
technical information: Dr. Robert C.
Post, Director, Labeling and Consumer
Protection Staff, Office of Policy,
Program, and Employee Development,
USDA, FSIS, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250,
(202) 205–0279, FAX: (202) 205–3625,
e-mail: Robert.Post@fsis.usda.gov.
Pre-registration for this meeting is
recommended. To pre-register, please
contact Diane Jones by telephone at
(202) 720–9692 or be e-mail at
Diane.Jones@fsis.usda.gov. Persons
requiring a sign language interpreter or
special accommodations should contact
Ms. Jones as soon as possible.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Background
FSIS is the public health regulatory
agency in the USDA responsible for
ensuring that the nation’s commercial
supply of meat, poultry, and egg
products is safe, wholesome, and
truthfully labeled and packaged. In
particular, FSIS develops and
implements national policies to ensure
that meat, poultry, and egg product
labeling is truthful and non-misleading.
Labeling Guidance on the Voluntary
Claim ‘‘Natural’’
To guide manufacturers in the
development of labeling that FSIS was
likely to determine to be truthful and
not misleading with regard to the
voluntary claim ‘‘natural,’’ FSIS
published policy guidance in the form
of Standards and Labeling Policy
Memorandum (Memo) 055, dated
November 22, 1982. The policy guide
states that the term ‘‘natural’’ may be
used on labeling for meat products and
poultry products provided that the
applicant for such labeling demonstrates
that:
(1) The product does not contain any
artificial flavor or flavoring, coloring
ingredient, or chemical preservative (as
defined in 21 CFR 101.22), or any other
artificial or synthetic ingredient; and (2)
the product and its ingredients are not
more than minimally processed.
Minimal processing may include: (a)
Those traditional processes used to
make food edible or to preserve it or to
make it safe for human consumption,
e.g., smoking, roasting, freezing, drying,
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
70504
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 5, 2006 / Notices
and fermenting, or (b) those physical
processes that do not fundamentally
alter the raw product or that only
separate a whole, intact food into
component parts, e.g., grinding meat,
separating eggs into albumen and yolk,
and pressing fruits to produce juices.
Relatively severe processes, e.g., solvent
extraction, acid hydrolysis, and
chemical bleaching, would clearly be
considered more than minimal
processing. Thus, the Policy Memo
explained, the use of a flavor or
flavoring, for example, that has
undergone more than minimal
processing would, in general, mean that
a product in which the ingredient is
used could not be called ‘‘natural.’’
The Policy Memo acknowledged,
however, that there are exceptions to
this general view, and that the presence
of an ingredient that has been more than
minimally processed would not
necessarily preclude a product from
being promoted as ‘‘natural.’’ The Policy
Memo stated that exceptions of this type
would be granted on a case-by-case
basis if it could be demonstrated that
the use of such an ingredient would not
significantly change the character of the
product to the point that it could no
longer be considered a ‘‘natural’’
product. In such cases, the ‘‘natural’’
claim would have to be qualified to
clearly and conspicuously identify the
ingredient, e.g., ‘‘all natural ingredients
except dextrose, modified food starch,
etc.’’
Policy Memo 055 further stated that
all products claiming to be ‘‘natural’’ or
a ‘‘natural’’ food should be accompanied
by a brief statement that explains what
is meant by the term ‘‘natural,’’ i.e., that
the product is a ‘‘natural’’ food because
it contains no artificial ingredients and
is only minimally processed. This
statement should appear directly
beneath or beside all ‘‘natural’’ claims
or, if elsewhere on the principal display
panel of the label, an asterisk should be
used to tie the explanation to the claim.
According to the 1982 policy, the
decision of the Agency to approve or
deny the use of a ‘‘natural’’ claim may
be affected by the specific context in
which the claim is made. For example,
claims indicating that a product is
‘‘natural’’ food, e.g., ‘‘natural’’ chili or
‘‘chili—a ‘‘natural’’ product’’ would be
unacceptable for a product containing
beet powder which artificially colors the
finished product. However, ‘‘all natural
ingredients’’ might be an acceptable
claim for such a product.
Since 1982, except for the conditions
in points (1) and (2) of the Policy Memo
stated above, FSIS modified the
guidance on occasion to make it
consistent with prevailing policies, to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Dec 04, 2006
Jkt 211001
reflect case-by-case decisions made by
the Agency, and to update references to
regulations. In August 2005, FSIS
modified the guidance by
acknowledging that sugar, sodium
lactate (from a corn source), and natural
flavorings from oleoresins or extractives
could be acceptable for products bearing
‘‘natural’’ claims.
The Agency has come to recognize,
based on the controversy that has arisen
about ‘‘natural’’ in recent months, that
there is significant disagreement about
aspects of the August 2005 policy
modification, particularly the
recognition of sodium lactate as an
ingredient that could be included in
products that bear a ‘‘natural’’ claim.
The Agency has received information
that raises questions about when, and if,
a food to which sodium lactate has been
added would be fairly characterized as
‘‘natural.’’ The Agency has come to
believe that this question, like
numerous others alluded to in this
document, is best resolved through a
rulemaking process. Therefore, FSIS has
removed the reference to sodium lactate
from the 2005 modification. As the
Agency moves through the stages of
rulemaking on ‘‘natural,’’ ‘‘natural’’
claims for foods in which sodium
lactate is used will continue to be
considered by FSIS on a case-by-case
basis, in light of factors such as the level
used, the claimed technical effect of the
sodium lactate, and the actual effect that
it is having on the product.
Advances in Food Processing
In recent years, the longstanding
policy on ‘‘natural’’ has been challenged
by advances in food processing and in
packaging methods, e.g., the use of
techniques such as high pressure
processing, food ingredients that are
regulated to provide multiple technical
effects, and modified atmosphere
packaging. The value and integrity of
the 1982 policy is challenged further by
new uses of ingredients that have
previously been used for flavoring
purposes, for example, as antimicrobial
agents. While the food safety purpose of
using antimicrobial agents is important,
their effects raise questions as to
whether they can be used in products
labeled ‘‘natural.’’
Petition
On October 9, 2006, Hormel Foods
submitted a petition to FSIS for
rulemaking to codify in the Federal
meat and poultry inspection regulations
a definition of ‘‘natural.’’ The petitioner
requested that FSIS begin rulemaking
procedures to clarify the circumstances
in which the claim may be used on the
labeling of a meat or poultry product.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The petition states that, consistent with
FSIS’s longstanding policy, a meat or
poultry product should not be labeled as
‘‘natural’’ unless (1) It does not contain
artificial flavorings, artificial coloring
ingredients, other artificial or synthetic
ingredients, or chemical preservatives;
and (2) it is not more than minimally
processed. The petition further states
that consumer confidence and
consistency in labeling dictate that
exceptions for specific chemical
preservatives and synthetic ingredients
should not be allowed.
In support of the need for a regulatory
definition of ‘‘natural,’’ the petition
explains that consumer interest and
concern in natural products are rising.
Meat and poultry food manufacturers
are seeking to establish marketing
presence in this growing area of
labeling. The petitioner cites the
difficulty in maintaining a level playing
field among manufacturers wishing to
establish a marketing presence with
FSIS’s acceptance of ingredients such as
sodium lactate and the AMS National
Organic Program ‘‘national list’’ of food
substances as a reference to support that
such ingredients may be considered
‘‘natural.’’ According to the petition, as
a result, there is a significant likelihood
of inconsistent guidance that provides
an opportunity for food manufacturers
to manipulate exceptions in the policy
and to undercut the intent for ‘‘natural’’
labeling. The petitioner requests that the
Agency conduct rulemaking regarding
the claim ‘‘natural’’ to provide clarity
and certainty in its use of product
labeling in the interest of consumer
protection and consumer confidence in
labeling.
Public Meeting
FSIS is holding a public meeting in
order to gain public input on the use of
the ‘‘natural’’ claim and the points
raised by the petition, the ideas set out
in this notice, and the impact of
possible changes discussed herein.
Following the public meeting, the
Agency intends to initiate rulemaking
on ‘‘natural’’ claims.
In order to benefit from this public
meeting, FSIS seeks input on the
following questions concerning the
petition discussed above:
1. Considering the types of food
processing methods that are
commonplace today, as opposed to 24
years ago when the policy on ‘‘natural’’
claims was established, is it reasonable
to include as part of the definition of
‘‘natural’’ a stipulation that products, to
be eligible to bear the claim, can be no
more than minimally processed? Are
there any accommodations necessary to
allow for certain operations because
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
70505
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 5, 2006 / Notices
this notice, FSIS will announce it online through the FSIS Web page located
at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations/
2006_Notices_Index/. FSIS will also
make copies of this Federal Register
publication available through the FSIS
Constituent Update, which is used to
provide information regarding FSIS
policies, procedures, regulations,
Federal Register notices, FSIS public
meetings, recalls, and other types of
information that could affect or would
be of interest to constituents and
stakeholders. The update is
communicated via Listserv, a free
electronic mail subscription service for
industry, trade and farm groups,
consumer interest groups, allied health
professionals, and other individuals
who have asked to be included. The
update is available on the FSIS Web
page. Through the Listserv and Web
page, FSIS is able to provide
information to a much broader and more
diverse audience. In addition, FSIS
offers an e-mail subscription service
which provides automatic and
customized access to selected food
safety news and information. This
service is available at https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/news_and_events/
email_subscription/. Options range from
recalls to export information to
regulations, directives, and notices.
Customers can add or delete
subscriptions themselves and have the
option to password protect their
account.
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of
rulemaking and policy development is
important. Consequently, in an effort to
ensure that minorities, women, and
persons with disabilities are aware of
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
food processing and packaging
techniques for enhancing safety may
disqualify a product as ‘‘natural?’’
2. What are the implications and
conflicts that exist with regard to using
current and new food processing
methods, e.g., chlorine in poultry
chillers; steam pasteurization of
carcasses; high pressure processing; and
modified atmosphere packaging and
uses of certain classes of ingredients,
e.g., antimicrobial agents, and the
meaning of the claim ‘‘natural’’ on the
labels of meat and poultry products?
3. Are there available data, in addition
to the data provided in the petition,
from consumer studies on views,
perceptions, and beliefs about what the
claim ‘‘natural’’ means on the labels of
food products, including meat and
poultry products? What do consumers
think that the terms ‘‘minimal
processing,’’ ‘‘artificial and synthetic,’’
and ‘‘preservatives’’ mean?
4. Do food safety and consumer
protection benefits of using what
historically may have been considered
more than minimal processing
techniques and antimicrobial agents
outweigh conflicts with the meaning of
‘‘natural?’’ In recent years, FSIS has put
a great deal of emphasis on improving
food safety. In some ways, however,
some definitions of ‘‘natural’’ might
unnecessarily undercut this objective.
For example, some definitions of
‘‘natural’’ could discourage the use of
antimicrobials, which are used to
reduce and prevent the growth of
Listeria monocytogenes in foods. The
Agency seeks comment on how it best
determines an appropriate and rational
balance between the need to ensure the
safety of the food supply and the need
to ensure that labels are truthful and not
misleading.
BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P
Done at Washington, DC on: December 1,
2006.
Barbara J. Masters,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 06–9546 Filed 12–1–06; 2:25 pm]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of Proposed Fee Changes;
Federal Lands Recreation
Enhancement Act, (Title VIII, Pub. L.
108–447)
Malheur National Forest,
USDA Forest Service.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Fee Changes.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Malheur National Forest
is planning to increase fees at numerous
campgrounds as well as begin charging
fees at other campgrounds. Funds from
fees collected will be used for the
continued operation and maintenance of
fee campgrounds on the Malheur
National Forest.
DATES: Fees will be charged beginning
on: May 28, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Forest Supervisor, Malheur
National Forest, 431 Patterson Bridge
Road, John Day, OR 97845.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Harris, Recreation Fee
Coordinator, 541–575–3008.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Recreation Lands Enhancement
Act (Title VII, Pub. L. 108–447) directed
the Secretary of Agriculture to publish
a six-month advance notice in the
Federal Register whenever new
recreation fee areas are established.
These new fees will be reviewed by a
Recreation Resource Advisory
Committee prior to a final decision and
implementation.
The Malheur National Forest
currently has 35 campgrounds. Of these
35 campgrounds, the Malheur National
Forest is proposing modest increases in
fees at 15 sites where fees are currently
charged and to begin charging fees at 8
additional sites. A market analysis
indicates that the proposed increases
and fees are both reasonable and
acceptable for this sort of recreation
experience. The following is being
proposed:
Proposed Increases:
Parish Cabin Campground ..........................................................................................................................................
Starr Campground .......................................................................................................................................................
Delintment Lake Campground ...................................................................................................................................
Emigrant Campground ................................................................................................................................................
Falls Campground .......................................................................................................................................................
Idlewild Campground .................................................................................................................................................
Joaquin Miller Campground .......................................................................................................................................
Yellowjacket Campground .........................................................................................................................................
Deerhorn Forest Camp ................................................................................................................................................
Dixie Campground ......................................................................................................................................................
Magone Lake Campground .........................................................................................................................................
Middle Fork Campground ..........................................................................................................................................
Big Creek Campground ...............................................................................................................................................
Strawberry Campground .............................................................................................................................................
Trout Farm Campground ............................................................................................................................................
Proposed Charging Fees:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 Dec 04, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
Increase
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
fee
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
$8.
$6.
$10.
$8.
$8.
$10.
$8.
$10.
$8.
$8.
$13.
$8.
$8.
$8.
$8.
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70503-70505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9546]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food Safety and Inspection Service
[Docket No. FSIS 2006-0040]
Product Labeling: Definition of the Term ``Natural''
AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of petition and public meeting; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing
receipt of a petition from Hormel Foods to establish a definition for
the voluntary claim ``natural'' and to delineate the conditions under
which the claim can be used on the labels of meat and poultry products.
The use of the claim ``natural'' is an issue of significant interest to
the Agency, to industry, and to the public. Therefore, the Agency is
inviting comments on the issue generally and on the petition and, to
facilitate the comment process, is announcing that it will hold a
public meeting to discuss the petition. After the comment period
closes, FSIS will initiate rulemaking on the claim ``natural.'' The
Agency has decided to initiate rulemaking because it is the most
appropriate, open, and transparent method to deal with issues
surrounding the definition and use of the claim ``natural.''
DATES: The public meeting will be held on Tuesday, December 12, 2006,
from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Comments on this notice must be received by
January 11, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in the rear of the
Cafeteria, South Agriculture Building, United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA), 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20250.
FSIS invites interested persons to send comments on this notice.
FSIS will finalize an agenda on or before the meeting date and will
post it on the FSIS Internet Web page https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
News?Meetings--&--Events/. The petition discussed in this notice is
available for viewing by the public in the FSIS Docket Room (see
address below) and on the FSIS Web site at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
News?Meetings--&--Events/. The official transcript of the meeting will
be available for viewing by the public in the FSIS docket room and on
the FSIS Web site https://www.fsis.usda.gov/News?Meetings--&--Events/
when it becomes available.
Comments on this notice may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
Mail, including floppy disks or CD-ROM's, and hand-or
courier-delivered items: Send to FSIS Docket Room, Docket Clerk, USDA,
FSIS, 300 12th Street, SW., Room 102 Cotton Annex, Washington, DC
20250.
Electronic mail: fsis.regulationscomments@fsis.usda.gov.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: This Web site provides the
ability to type short comments directly into the comment field on this
Web page or attach a file for lengthier comments. Go to https://
www.regulation.gov and in the ``Search for Open Regulations'' box,
select ``Food Safety and Inspection Service'' from the agency drop-down
menu, then click on ``Submit.'' In the Docket ID column, select FDMS
Docket Number 2006-0040 to submit or view public comments and to view
supporting and related materials available electronically.
All submissions received by mail or electronic mail must include
the Agency name and docket number 2006-0040. All comments sent in
response to this document, as well as research and background
information used by FSIS in developing this document, will be available
for public inspection in the FSIS Docket Room at the address listed
above between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Comments
will also be posted on the Agency's Web site at https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/regulations_directives_&_
notices/index.asp.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information: Dr. Robert
C. Post, Director, Labeling and Consumer Protection Staff, Office of
Policy, Program, and Employee Development, USDA, FSIS, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250, (202) 205-0279, FAX:
(202) 205-3625, e-mail: Robert.Post@fsis.usda.gov.
Pre-registration for this meeting is recommended. To pre-register,
please contact Diane Jones by telephone at (202) 720-9692 or be e-mail
at Diane.Jones@fsis.usda.gov. Persons requiring a sign language
interpreter or special accommodations should contact Ms. Jones as soon
as possible.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FSIS is the public health regulatory agency in the USDA responsible
for ensuring that the nation's commercial supply of meat, poultry, and
egg products is safe, wholesome, and truthfully labeled and packaged.
In particular, FSIS develops and implements national policies to ensure
that meat, poultry, and egg product labeling is truthful and non-
misleading.
Labeling Guidance on the Voluntary Claim ``Natural''
To guide manufacturers in the development of labeling that FSIS was
likely to determine to be truthful and not misleading with regard to
the voluntary claim ``natural,'' FSIS published policy guidance in the
form of Standards and Labeling Policy Memorandum (Memo) 055, dated
November 22, 1982. The policy guide states that the term ``natural''
may be used on labeling for meat products and poultry products provided
that the applicant for such labeling demonstrates that:
(1) The product does not contain any artificial flavor or
flavoring, coloring ingredient, or chemical preservative (as defined in
21 CFR 101.22), or any other artificial or synthetic ingredient; and
(2) the product and its ingredients are not more than minimally
processed. Minimal processing may include: (a) Those traditional
processes used to make food edible or to preserve it or to make it safe
for human consumption, e.g., smoking, roasting, freezing, drying,
[[Page 70504]]
and fermenting, or (b) those physical processes that do not
fundamentally alter the raw product or that only separate a whole,
intact food into component parts, e.g., grinding meat, separating eggs
into albumen and yolk, and pressing fruits to produce juices.
Relatively severe processes, e.g., solvent extraction, acid hydrolysis,
and chemical bleaching, would clearly be considered more than minimal
processing. Thus, the Policy Memo explained, the use of a flavor or
flavoring, for example, that has undergone more than minimal processing
would, in general, mean that a product in which the ingredient is used
could not be called ``natural.''
The Policy Memo acknowledged, however, that there are exceptions to
this general view, and that the presence of an ingredient that has been
more than minimally processed would not necessarily preclude a product
from being promoted as ``natural.'' The Policy Memo stated that
exceptions of this type would be granted on a case-by-case basis if it
could be demonstrated that the use of such an ingredient would not
significantly change the character of the product to the point that it
could no longer be considered a ``natural'' product. In such cases, the
``natural'' claim would have to be qualified to clearly and
conspicuously identify the ingredient, e.g., ``all natural ingredients
except dextrose, modified food starch, etc.''
Policy Memo 055 further stated that all products claiming to be
``natural'' or a ``natural'' food should be accompanied by a brief
statement that explains what is meant by the term ``natural,'' i.e.,
that the product is a ``natural'' food because it contains no
artificial ingredients and is only minimally processed. This statement
should appear directly beneath or beside all ``natural'' claims or, if
elsewhere on the principal display panel of the label, an asterisk
should be used to tie the explanation to the claim.
According to the 1982 policy, the decision of the Agency to approve
or deny the use of a ``natural'' claim may be affected by the specific
context in which the claim is made. For example, claims indicating that
a product is ``natural'' food, e.g., ``natural'' chili or ``chili--a
``natural'' product'' would be unacceptable for a product containing
beet powder which artificially colors the finished product. However,
``all natural ingredients'' might be an acceptable claim for such a
product.
Since 1982, except for the conditions in points (1) and (2) of the
Policy Memo stated above, FSIS modified the guidance on occasion to
make it consistent with prevailing policies, to reflect case-by-case
decisions made by the Agency, and to update references to regulations.
In August 2005, FSIS modified the guidance by acknowledging that sugar,
sodium lactate (from a corn source), and natural flavorings from
oleoresins or extractives could be acceptable for products bearing
``natural'' claims.
The Agency has come to recognize, based on the controversy that has
arisen about ``natural'' in recent months, that there is significant
disagreement about aspects of the August 2005 policy modification,
particularly the recognition of sodium lactate as an ingredient that
could be included in products that bear a ``natural'' claim. The Agency
has received information that raises questions about when, and if, a
food to which sodium lactate has been added would be fairly
characterized as ``natural.'' The Agency has come to believe that this
question, like numerous others alluded to in this document, is best
resolved through a rulemaking process. Therefore, FSIS has removed the
reference to sodium lactate from the 2005 modification. As the Agency
moves through the stages of rulemaking on ``natural,'' ``natural''
claims for foods in which sodium lactate is used will continue to be
considered by FSIS on a case-by-case basis, in light of factors such as
the level used, the claimed technical effect of the sodium lactate, and
the actual effect that it is having on the product.
Advances in Food Processing
In recent years, the longstanding policy on ``natural'' has been
challenged by advances in food processing and in packaging methods,
e.g., the use of techniques such as high pressure processing, food
ingredients that are regulated to provide multiple technical effects,
and modified atmosphere packaging. The value and integrity of the 1982
policy is challenged further by new uses of ingredients that have
previously been used for flavoring purposes, for example, as
antimicrobial agents. While the food safety purpose of using
antimicrobial agents is important, their effects raise questions as to
whether they can be used in products labeled ``natural.''
Petition
On October 9, 2006, Hormel Foods submitted a petition to FSIS for
rulemaking to codify in the Federal meat and poultry inspection
regulations a definition of ``natural.'' The petitioner requested that
FSIS begin rulemaking procedures to clarify the circumstances in which
the claim may be used on the labeling of a meat or poultry product. The
petition states that, consistent with FSIS's longstanding policy, a
meat or poultry product should not be labeled as ``natural'' unless (1)
It does not contain artificial flavorings, artificial coloring
ingredients, other artificial or synthetic ingredients, or chemical
preservatives; and (2) it is not more than minimally processed. The
petition further states that consumer confidence and consistency in
labeling dictate that exceptions for specific chemical preservatives
and synthetic ingredients should not be allowed.
In support of the need for a regulatory definition of ``natural,''
the petition explains that consumer interest and concern in natural
products are rising. Meat and poultry food manufacturers are seeking to
establish marketing presence in this growing area of labeling. The
petitioner cites the difficulty in maintaining a level playing field
among manufacturers wishing to establish a marketing presence with
FSIS's acceptance of ingredients such as sodium lactate and the AMS
National Organic Program ``national list'' of food substances as a
reference to support that such ingredients may be considered
``natural.'' According to the petition, as a result, there is a
significant likelihood of inconsistent guidance that provides an
opportunity for food manufacturers to manipulate exceptions in the
policy and to undercut the intent for ``natural'' labeling. The
petitioner requests that the Agency conduct rulemaking regarding the
claim ``natural'' to provide clarity and certainty in its use of
product labeling in the interest of consumer protection and consumer
confidence in labeling.
Public Meeting
FSIS is holding a public meeting in order to gain public input on
the use of the ``natural'' claim and the points raised by the petition,
the ideas set out in this notice, and the impact of possible changes
discussed herein. Following the public meeting, the Agency intends to
initiate rulemaking on ``natural'' claims.
In order to benefit from this public meeting, FSIS seeks input on
the following questions concerning the petition discussed above:
1. Considering the types of food processing methods that are
commonplace today, as opposed to 24 years ago when the policy on
``natural'' claims was established, is it reasonable to include as part
of the definition of ``natural'' a stipulation that products, to be
eligible to bear the claim, can be no more than minimally processed?
Are there any accommodations necessary to allow for certain operations
because
[[Page 70505]]
food processing and packaging techniques for enhancing safety may
disqualify a product as ``natural?''
2. What are the implications and conflicts that exist with regard
to using current and new food processing methods, e.g., chlorine in
poultry chillers; steam pasteurization of carcasses; high pressure
processing; and modified atmosphere packaging and uses of certain
classes of ingredients, e.g., antimicrobial agents, and the meaning of
the claim ``natural'' on the labels of meat and poultry products?
3. Are there available data, in addition to the data provided in
the petition, from consumer studies on views, perceptions, and beliefs
about what the claim ``natural'' means on the labels of food products,
including meat and poultry products? What do consumers think that the
terms ``minimal processing,'' ``artificial and synthetic,'' and
``preservatives'' mean?
4. Do food safety and consumer protection benefits of using what
historically may have been considered more than minimal processing
techniques and antimicrobial agents outweigh conflicts with the meaning
of ``natural?'' In recent years, FSIS has put a great deal of emphasis
on improving food safety. In some ways, however, some definitions of
``natural'' might unnecessarily undercut this objective. For example,
some definitions of ``natural'' could discourage the use of
antimicrobials, which are used to reduce and prevent the growth of
Listeria monocytogenes in foods. The Agency seeks comment on how it
best determines an appropriate and rational balance between the need to
ensure the safety of the food supply and the need to ensure that labels
are truthful and not misleading.
Additional Public Notification
Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy
development is important. Consequently, in an effort to ensure that
minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are aware of this
notice, FSIS will announce it on-line through the FSIS Web page located
at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations/2006_Notices_Index/. FSIS
will also make copies of this Federal Register publication available
through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide
information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal
Register notices, FSIS public meetings, recalls, and other types of
information that could affect or would be of interest to constituents
and stakeholders. The update is communicated via Listserv, a free
electronic mail subscription service for industry, trade and farm
groups, consumer interest groups, allied health professionals, and
other individuals who have asked to be included. The update is
available on the FSIS Web page. Through the Listserv and Web page, FSIS
is able to provide information to a much broader and more diverse
audience. In addition, FSIS offers an e-mail subscription service which
provides automatic and customized access to selected food safety news
and information. This service is available at https://www.fsis.usda.gov/
news_and_events/email_subscription/. Options range from recalls to
export information to regulations, directives, and notices. Customers
can add or delete subscriptions themselves and have the option to
password protect their account.
Done at Washington, DC on: December 1, 2006.
Barbara J. Masters,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 06-9546 Filed 12-1-06; 2:25 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P