Ever wondered where that apple or deli salad you’re noshing on came from (and where it’s been)? We may soon have more clarity on questions like these, thanks to a new federal regulation known as FSMA 204.
Ben Ames has spent 20 years as a journalist since starting out as a daily newspaper reporter in Pennsylvania in 1995. From 1999 forward, he has focused on business and technology reporting for a number of trade journals, beginning when he joined Design News and Modern Materials Handling magazines. Ames is author of the trail guide "Hiking Massachusetts" and is a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism.
The next time you pick up a snack—say, an apple or a jar of almond butter—at a local store, take a moment to see if you can figure out where that item was grown or produced. If you’re in a supermarket, you might glance at the label, but that often just tells you the name of the distributor. Bar codes aren’t much help either—they typically provide little more information than the item’s price or SKU (stock-keeping unit) number.
But just over two years from now, the picture will be much clearer—at least for players in the food supply chain—thanks to a federal regulation known as FSMA 204. FSMA 204, which stands for Section 204 of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Safety Modernization Act, establishes new, tightened traceability recordkeeping requirements for “persons who manufacture, process, pack, or hold foods included on the [agency’s] Food Traceability List”—a roster that includes many fresh fruits and vegetables, a variety of soft cheeses, shell eggs, nut butter, herbs, some categories of seafood, and refrigerated and ready-to-eat deli salads.
The FDA’s goal is to better protect the public from foodborne diseases by strengthening the food tracking system from farm to retailer, according to a white paper from Wiliot, an Illinois-based provider of cloud services and internet of things (IoT) technologies. The end goal is a stronger tracking system that will allow for faster identification and rapid removal of potentially contaminated food from the market, the FDA says on its website.
THE NUTS AND BOLTS
Though it’s part of a much broader food safety initiative, FSMA 204 at its core is simply about recordkeeping—recordkeeping by every entity that participates in the “harvesting, packing, and transportation of foods covered by Section 204,” according to the Wiliot white paper. That includes commercial farms, packing operations, and food processing facilities as well as a host of logistics-sector players. While carriers are exempt from FSMA 204, warehouses, food suppliers, wholesalers/distributors, grocery and convenience stores, and retail food establishments of all stripes come under the new rule’s purview.
As for the records themselves, parties subject to the rule must “maintain records containing key data elements (KDEs) associated with specific critical tracking events (CTEs) in the food handling process,” according to the FDA’s website. Examples of CTEs include harvesting, cooling, initial packing, shipping, and receiving. KDEs vary according to the CTE, but in the case of harvesting, for instance, the data elements would include the location of the farm (or even field) and date of harvest. Each affected company must store all of that information for 24 months. And if an outbreak of foodborne illness occurs, the company must be able to share all of it with federal regulators on 24 hours’ notice.
What makes this all the more complicated is that these companies must be able to share the data not just with the FDA, but also with suppliers, wholesalers, distributors, stores, and restaurants.
“Historically, the industry was only required to track where product came from and directly where it was shipped. That’s all changed with FSMA 204,” Brian Piancino, COO of Texas-based wholesaler Affiliated Foods Inc., said in a release describing his company’s response to the new requirements. “Now everyone from the grower in the field, to the processor, to the warehouse must have electronic data tracking in place and the ability to provide that data to the next person in line in the supply chain all the way to the backroom of the retail store.”
The FDA doesn’t dictate the type of technology required for compliance, but Wiliot says any company looking to meet the new requirements will almost certainly have to use automatic identification(auto ID) technologies such as smart tags and IoT sensors, all linked to interoperable online databases, to avoid incurring huge increases in labor costs.
NO TIME TO WASTE
The new traceability regulations took effect on Jan. 20 of this year, but the FDA has set a three-year grace period for adopting new processes, so enforcement begins on Jan. 20, 2026. While that might sound like a lot of breathing room, experts say it’s actually a pretty aggressive timeline for an IT project of this scope.
“That leaves only [28] months for an estimated 1.5 million-plus grocery stores, restaurants, convenience stores, and the entire supply chains of the products on the Food Traceability List to get traceability processes and traceability data management and recordkeeping systems in place,” says Derek Hannum, chief customer officer for ReposiTrak, a provider of supply chain risk mitigation and compliance management solutions. “In short, there is an enormous amount of work to get done and not very much time to do it.”
According to Hannum, the protocols needed to comply with the new traceability requirements will be a big step up from current recordkeeping practices, like the common “one forward/one back” approach, where each company keeps its own records on who it receives product from and who it ships product to. A big part of the challenge will be finding ways to share detailed information swiftly with so many other parties.
“It’s the sharing of the data between suppliers, wholesalers, distributors, stores, and restaurants that is new, and virtually no one has systems or processes in place today to make this data-sharing easy and routine in the complex network of players that comprise the U.S. food supply chain,” Hannum says.
Savanna Holt, a transportation manager with supply chain consulting and technology services firm enVista, agrees. “Based on [what we’re seeing with] the clients, organizations, and other industry stakeholders we’ve been working with, [almost] no one is compliant with FSMA 204 standards yet,” she says. “The majority of the industry is still in the initial stages of trying to wrap their heads around FSMA 204’s requirements and determine what best practices are for compliance.”
The chief hurdle is that the new rule requires a far more granular level of data tracking than current practices like one step forward/one step back, Holt says. Complying with the new standards will likely require significant technology investments, a burden that will probably fall most heavily on the parties closest to consumers. “FSMA 204 is not the first FSMA ruling. Previous rulings were more focused on suppliers, so they would likely already have more practices in place for becoming compliant with this new ruling,” Holt says. “Because of this, FSMA 204 is impacting those toward the middle and end of the supply chain, like distributors and[retailers], the most.”
FOCUS ON THE TECHNOLOGY
That’s not to say everybody has yet to leave the starting gate. Some companies, like Affiliated Foods Inc., are well underway on their compliance journey. Affiliated, which serves more than 800 member stores across the Southwest, recently adopted the ReposiTrak Traceability Network, an online portal that enables its suppliers to exchange the “key data element” information required by the FDA for every critical tracking event in the food handling process.
But Affiliated may be more the exception than the rule. As the enforcement deadline draws near, many players in the food supply chain will have to significantly up their tracking game, which will likely mean investing in more robust auto ID, IoT, and other data-management and -sharing technologies.
For those starting out on their journey, ReposiTrak’s Hannum offers a word to the wise. For all its complexities, he says, FSMA 204 compliance is fundamentally an IT matter—and organizations should approach it that way.
“As more companies start to realize that FSMA 204 traceability is not actually a food safety project, but rather a supply chain data management project, they can then begin to mobilize the people and resources required for compliance,” he says.
The next time you buy a loaf of bread or a pack of paper towels, take a moment to consider the future that awaits the plastic it’s wrapped in. That future isn’t pretty: Given that most conventional plastics take up to 400 years to decompose, in all likelihood, that plastic will spend the next several centuries rotting in a landfill somewhere.
But a Santiago, Chile-based company called Bioelements Group says it has developed a more planet-friendly alternative. The firm, which specializes in biobased, biodegradable, and compostable packaging, says its Bio E-8i film can be broken down by fungi and other microorganisms in just three to 20 months. It adds that the film, which it describes as “durable and attractive,” complies with the regulations of each country in which Bioelements currently operates.
Now it’s looking to enter the U.S. market. The company recently announced that it had entered into partnerships with South Carolina’s Clemson University and with Michigan State University to continue testing its products for use in sustainable packaging in this country. Researchers will study samples of Bio E-8i film to understand how the material behaves during the biodegradation process under simulated industrial composting conditions.
“This research, along with other research being conducted in the United States, allows us to obtain highly reliable data from prestigious universities,” said Ignacio Parada, CEO and founder of Bioelements, in a statement. “Such work is important because it allows us to improve and apply academically driven scientific research to the application of packaging for greater sustainability packaging applications. That is very worthwhile and helps to validate our sustainable packaging technology.”
It’s probably safe to say that no one chooses a career in logistics for the glory. But even those accustomed to toiling in obscurity appreciate a little recognition now and then—particularly when it comes from the people they love best: their kids.
That familial love was on full display at the 2024 International Foodservice Distributor Association’s (IFDA) National Championship, which brings together foodservice distribution professionals to demonstrate their expertise in driving, warehouse operations, safety, and operational efficiency. For the eighth year, the event included a Kids Essay Contest, where children of participants were encouraged to share why they are proud of their parents or guardians and the work they do.
Prizes were handed out in three categories: 3rd–5th grade, 6th–8th grade, and 9th–12th grade. This year’s winners included Elijah Oliver (4th grade, whose parent Justin Oliver drives for Cheney Brothers) and Andrew Aylas (8th grade, whose parent Steve Aylas drives for Performance Food Group).
Top honors in the high-school category went to McKenzie Harden (12th grade, whose parent Marvin Harden drives for Performance Food Group), who wrote: “My dad has not only taught me life skills of not only, ‘what the boys can do,’ but life skills of morals, compassion, respect, and, last but not least, ‘wearing your heart on your sleeve.’”
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.”