Food Safety: FDA Should Strengthen Its Oversight of Food Ingredients Determined to Be Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS)
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for ensuring the safety of most of the U.S. food supply, is not required to review substances, such as spices and preservatives, added to food that are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for their intended use. Currently, companies may determine a substance is GRAS without FDA's approval or knowledge. However, a few substances previously considered GRAS have later been banned; and concerns have been raised about the safety of other GRAS substances, including those containing engineered nanomaterials, materials manufactured at a tiny scale to take advantage of novel properties. GAO was asked to review the extent to which (1) FDA's oversight of new GRAS determinations helps ensure the safety of these substances, (2) FDA ensures the continued safety of current GRAS substances, and (3) FDA's approach to regulating engineered nanomaterials in GRAS substances helps ensure the safety of the food supply. GAO reviewed FDA data on GRAS substances and interviewed a range of stakeholders, among other things.
FDA's oversight process does not help ensure the safety of all new GRAS determinations. FDA only reviews those GRAS determinations that companies submit to the agency's voluntary notification program--the agency generally does not have information about other GRAS determinations companies have made because companies are not required to inform FDA of them. Furthermore, FDA has not taken certain steps that could help ensure the safety of GRAS determinations, particularly those about which the agency has not been notified. FDA has not issued guidance to companies on how to document their GRAS determinations or monitored companies to ensure that they have conducted GRAS determinations appropriately. Lastly, FDA has yet to issue a final regulation for its 1997 proposed rule that sets forth the framework and criteria for the voluntary notification program, potentially detracting from the program's credibility. FDA is not systematically ensuring the continued safety of current GRAS substances. While, according to FDA regulations, the GRAS status of a substance must be reconsidered as new scientific information emerges, the agency has not systematically reconsidered GRAS substances since the 1980s. FDA officials said they keep up with new developments in the scientific literature and, on a case-by-case basis, information brought to the agency's attention could prompt them to reconsider the safety of a GRAS substance. However, FDA has largely not responded to concerns about GRAS substances, such as salt and the trans fats in partially hydrogenated vegetable oils, that individuals and consumer groups have raised through 11 citizen petitions submitted to the agency between 2004 and 2008. In fact, FDA has decided on the validity of these concerns in only 1 of 11 cases. In addition, FDA does not know to what extent, or even whether, companies track evolving scientific information about their GRAS substances. FDA's approach to regulating nanotechnology allows engineered nanomaterials to enter the food supply as GRAS substances without FDA's knowledge. While some uses of engineered nanomaterials have the potential to help ensure food safety, uncertainties remain about how to determine their safety in food. After reviewing the uncertainties associated with the safety of engineered nanomaterials, FDA has decided that it does not need additional authority to regulate products containing such materials. Rather, FDA encourages, but does not require, companies considering using engineered nanomaterials in food to consult with the agency regarding whether such substances might be GRAS. Because GRAS notification is voluntary and companies are not required to identify nanomaterials in their GRAS substances, FDA has no way of knowing the full extent to which engineered nanomaterials have entered the U.S. food supply as part of GRAS substances. In contrast to FDA's approach, all food ingredients that incorporate engineered nanomaterials must be submitted to regulators in Canada and the European Union before they can be marketed.
Recommendations for Executive Action
|Food and Drug Administration||To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to require any company that conducts a GRAS determination to provide FDA with basic information--as defined by the agency to allow for adequate oversight--about this determination, such as the substance's identity and intended uses, and to incorporate such information into relevant agency databases and its public Web site.||
In its August 2016 Final Rule on Substances Generally Recognized as Safe (81 FR 54959), FDA clarifies that it does not propose to require the submission to the agency of notices concerning all conclusions of GRAS status. Therefore this recommendation is being closed as not implemented.
|Food and Drug Administration||To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest in companies' GRAS determinations, including taking steps such as issuing guidance for companies on conflict of interest and requiring information in GRAS notices regarding expert panelists' independence.||
On November 16, 2017, FDA published a notification of availability for the draft guidance "Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel: Guidance for Industry," with a request for comments on the draft guidance by May 15, 2018. FDA indicated that the draft guidance represented FDA's current thinking on strategies to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest in companies' GRAS determinations, including assessing potential GRAS panel members for conflicts of interest. In April 2022, FDA indicated it is actively working to finalize this guidance in calendar year 2022. As of July 2022, FDA had not yet finalized the guidance, so we are leaving the recommendation open.
|Food and Drug Administration||To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to monitor the appropriateness of companies' GRAS determinations through random audits or some other means, including issuing guidance on how to document GRAS determinations.||
On November 15, 2017, FDA issued a guidance entitled "Regulatory Framework for Substances Intended for Use in Human Food or Animal Food on the Basis of the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) Provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act." This guidance for industry encourages the use of the GRAS framework in documenting a GRAS conclusion, even when a company or individual chooses to market a food substance on the basis of an independent GRAS conclusion (i.e., a GRAS determination not submitted to FDA as a GRAS notice). With the issuance of this guidance on how to document GRAS determinations, FDA has satisfied this recommendation.
|Food and Drug Administration||To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to finalize the rule that governs the voluntary notification program, including taking into account the experience of the program to date, incorporating input from a new public comment period, and reporting to Congress and the public the agency's timeline for making it final.||
On December 28, 2010, FDA published a proposed rule reopening the comment period on the GRAS proposal (75 FR 81536). According to FDA, this is the first step of its strategy to issue a final rule. In addition, as part of this action, FDA requested comments on several of GAO's other recommendations. The comment period closed on March 28, 2011. On August 17, 2016, FDA published a Final Rule on Substances Generally Recognized as Safe (81 FR 54960), thereby implementing this recommendation.
|Food and Drug Administration||To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to conduct reconsiderations of the safety of GRAS substances in a more systematic manner, including taking steps such as allocating sufficient resources to respond to citizen petitions in a timely manner, developing criteria for the circumstances under which the agency will reconsider the safety of a GRAS substance, and considering how to collect information from companies on their reconsiderations.||
As of September 2014, FDA indicated that it continues to strive to use its resources as efficiently and effectively as possible in conducting certain post-market reviews, including citizen petition reviews, in order to best serve public health interests. However, FDA noted that existing resources are insufficient to conduct a comprehensive re-review of GRAS substances listed in its regulations. Since FDA has not taken specific actions to address this recommendation, this recommendation is closed as not implemented.
|Food and Drug Administration||To better ensure FDA's oversight of the safety of GRAS substances, the Commissioner of FDA should develop a strategy to help ensure the safety of engineered nanomaterials that companies market as GRAS substances without the agency's knowledge, including taking steps such as issuing guidance recommended by the agency's nanotechnology taskforce, developing an agency definition of engineered nanomaterials, and requiring companies to inform FDA if their GRAS determinations involve engineered nanomaterials.||
On June 24, 2014, FDA issued final guidance for industry on assessing the effects of significant manufacturing process changes, including where such changes involve nanotechnology, on the safety and regulatory status of food ingredients. With respect to the use of nanomaterials in food substances and the GRAS status of such products, the guidance notes that, at this time, FDA is not aware of any food ingredient engineered on the nanometer scale for which there are generally available safety data sufficient to serve as the foundation to meet the GRAS criteria. On the same day, FDA also issued final guidance for industry on considering whether an FDA-regulated product involves the application of nanotechnology. While the guidance does not establish a regulatory definition of the term "nanotechnology," it presents points that the agency intends to consider in determining whether an FDA-regulated product involves the use of nanotechnology and, therefore, may merit further examination. The guidance also indicates that, where a product may involve the use of nanotechnology, the agency will pay particular attention to the product to identify and address potential implications for the safety, effectiveness, public health impact, or regulatory status of the product. Taken as a whole, these actions address our recommendation that FDA develop a strategy to help ensure the safety of engineered nanomaterials that companies market as GRAS substances without the agency's knowledge.