Strong medicine: interview with Elizabeth Gallenagh
Strict track and trace requirements for prescription drugs are about to kick in, but is the pharmaceutical industry ready? To find out, we spoke with Elizabeth Gallenagh of the Healthcare Distribution Alliance.
David Maloney has been a journalist for more than 35 years and is currently the group editorial director for DC Velocity and Supply Chain Quarterly magazines. In this role, he is responsible for the editorial content of both brands of Agile Business Media. Dave joined DC Velocity in April of 2004. Prior to that, he was a senior editor for Modern Materials Handling magazine. Dave also has extensive experience as a broadcast journalist. Before writing for supply chain publications, he was a journalist, television producer and director in Pittsburgh. Dave combines a background of reporting on logistics with his video production experience to bring new opportunities to DC Velocity readers, including web videos highlighting top distribution and logistics facilities, webcasts and other cross-media projects. He continues to live and work in the Pittsburgh area.
For players in the drug distribution business, the countdown is on. In less than two months, every business involved in the pharmaceutical supply chain must be fully compliant with the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA)—a 2013 law containing strict traceability requirements for the distribution of certain prescription drugs. Over the past decade, the DSCSA has been implemented in phases, but now the clock is running out. The law takes full effect on Nov. 27, barring any further adjustments or delays.
Among other measures, the DSCSA requires drug manufacturers to affix a unique product identifier, essentially a barcode, to every package so it can be tracked and traced during its journey through the supply chain. To thwart drug counterfeiters, the new law further requires wholesalers and drug dispensers to verify the validity of products they handle to assure they are genuine.
Is the pharmaceutical industry ready for all this? To find out, we spoke with Elizabeth Gallenagh, general counsel and senior vice president, supply chain integrity at the Healthcare Distribution Alliance(HDA), a national organization that represents U.S. health-care distributors. In addition to serving as HDA’s chief legal officer, Gallenagh is also the group’s primary expert on prescription drug traceability, supply chain safety and integrity, distributor licensure, and tax issues. She is a graduate of the George Mason University School of Law and George Washington University.
Gallenagh recently spoke with David Maloney, **{DC Velocity’}s group editorial director, about the enactment of DSCSA for an episode of the “Logistics Matters” podcast.
Q: First of all, can you tell us a little bit about the Healthcare Distribution Alliance?
A: Yes, the Healthcare Distribution Alliance, or HDA, is a national trade organization representing pharmaceutical distributors, also known as wholesalers. We have about 40 members that purchase drugs from manufacturers. They store the products in their warehouses and then fill orders for pharmacy customers throughout the country.
Q: The Drug Supply Chain Security Act will go into final effect in November. What’s the intent of the legislation?
A: The Drug Supply Chain Security Act—or as we call it, the DSCSA—is a law that was enacted in 2013. Its intent was to put together a national framework for drug supply chain security, essentially to enable a tighter, safer, more secure supply chain for the domestic U.S. market.
It involves all trading partners and ultimately will create an interoperable system that enables investigations by tracing a product with every transaction or sale of that product throughout the supply chain, down to the provider level.
Q: What are the law’s major requirements?
A: The law was actually phased in over a period of about 10 years. Many of the major requirements went into effect throughout that initial 10-year period—things like requirements mandating that manufacturers serialize their products and stipulating that trading partners only do business with other authorized trading partners. Authorized trading partners are defined as those that are duly licensed or registered with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or licensed by the states.
It also requires tracking of product with every transaction. A transaction is defined as a sale of the product, essentially from one authorized trading partner to another. And as we progress into the final phase, the law will also require serialized data, basically transaction information at the serial-number level that moves with the product through every transaction throughout the supply chain.
Q: You’ve said that the industry has had years to ramp up to comply with the law. Are our pharmaceutical supply chains ready for the final phase?
A: I think that’s still the $64,000 question. I can speak for our members, who have been doing everything in their power to get their own systems and processes ready to receive the serialized products and data, and then to transmit that serialized data with the product to their pharmacy customers.
That said, there are still some gaps in the system. We have been in a “stabilization” period that expires on Nov. 27. During this period, everybody has been testing and bringing product and data transactions live into production. I will tell you that many are ready, but there are still bugs that are being worked out as we race toward November.
I should also note that on Aug. 19, the HDA sent a letter to the FDA stating that “despite a concerted effort, some in the supply chain appear to remain short of reaching our joint goal of complete implementation.” In its letter, the group urged the FDA to “take immediate action to forestall potential disruptions to the drug supply chain and patient care that could stem from incomplete implementation of the enhanced drug distribution security (EDDS) requirements” and asked the agency to adopt “a phased, stepwise approach” to implementing the requirements in order to avoid disruptions to the movement of drugs through the supply chain.
Q: Will penalties be imposed on companies that fail to meet the deadline?
A: There will be penalties. But it’s important to note that the DSCSA is really about setting up the framework for tracking and tracing products—so that a manufacturer will only be permitted to sell its product downstream if it is a serialized product and the manufacturer can transmit the corresponding serialized data with the product. And then a distributor can only receive that product and purchase it if it has the corresponding data.
Q: Of course, this is only possible if you have the right technology in place to monitor and track drugs as they move through the supply chain. What kind of technologies are being deployed to make this possible?
A: The key to all of this is the barcode, which is mandated under the law in terms of the way that product is serialized. Everybody in the supply chain has to have the capability to utilize the barcode. If you’re a manufacturer, you have to incorporate that 2-D barcode with the serialized data into that product’s label. And that should already be in place under the first phases of the law.
Downstream partners will have to be able to read that barcode and import that data into their systems. This also enables verification of the product at the unit level.
In addition, we’re also deploying what we call EPCIS [a global data-sharing standard developed by the global standards organization GS1 that allows businesses to capture and share information about the movement and status of goods]. That is the backbone for getting all of this serialized data flowing to all of the requisite trading partners throughout the supply chain.
Q: As we learned during the push to distribute Covid-19 vaccines, a good number of pharmaceutical products must be temperature- or humidity-controlled. Will these new regulations help ensure that they’re properly handled as they move through the supply chain?
A: The DSCSA doesn’t speak specifically to temperature controls. However, there are other parts of the law [the overall Drug Quality and Security Act, which includes the DSCSA as well as the Compounding Quality Act] that do require those controls to be in place. That said, the DSCSA does require affected parties to do business with authorized trading partners. And in order to be an authorized trading partner, you have to adhere to temperature controls and safety rules for products, product handling, etc.
Q: Many of our pharmaceuticals are manufactured overseas, in China and India, for example. Do foreign manufacturers have to comply with DSCSA requirements?
A: If a foreign entity is producing product for use in the U.S. domestic market, the product has to be approved by the FDA. And it also has to meet DSCSA requirements.
Q: We hear a lot about counterfeit products infiltrating the drug supply chain. Will these new regulations reduce the number of counterfeits in the market?
A: We certainly hope so. All of this really started [as an effort to combat the rise in] counterfeit products and transactions back in the early 2000s. Obviously, the idea is to deter counterfeiters from infiltrating the U.S. drug supply chain. But really, what the law does is provide tools for the FDA and regulatory agencies to investigate suspect and illegitimate product, as well as tools that will enable the trading partners that are involved in the transactions to identify suspect product, flag it, quarantine it, investigate it, and deem it OK or deem it illegitimate based on their investigations.
So it really gives some investigatory and prosecutorial tools to the agencies. And it puts a process in place with the technology and serialization to pinpoint whether something is good product through verification with the manufacturer or through tracing of the product data that has accompanied the product throughout its journey through the supply chain.
Q: Drug prices in the U.S. are notoriously high compared with prices in many other countries. Will these new requirements add to the overall cost of supplying medication?
A: I haven’t seen any data that alludes to DSCSA compliance adding to drug costs. It’s an industry that’s built around efficiency, and so my sense is that [pharma industry players] probably have also built in plans over the last decade to absorb some of those costs. That said, the law also established a national tracking and tracing framework, where before we had a 50-state patchwork of regulations. So there would likely be some efficiencies gained from following a single, nationwide protocol, even though it’s a huge undertaking, versus doing it 50 different ways across the country.
Q: Now that DSCSA is nearing full implementation, how are your members feeling about the process?
A: Our members have been committed to this from the very beginning. We were very involved in negotiating on the legislation and pushing these concepts. We really have been working toward implementation from the get-go and throughout this entire 11-year period; we very much want to get to full implementation. But in the beginning, there may be some hiccups. We may hit a few bumps along the way.
A colleague of mine used to say, “We don’t know what we don’t know.” And I think that at each phase as we deploy new technologies and new processes, we will learn new ways to do things more efficiently. So we’re pushing hard toward November, and we are very hopeful.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."