Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 155, Number 24: Feeds Regulations, 2022

June 12, 2021

Statutory authorities
Feeds Act
Health of Animals Act
Food and Drugs Act

Sponsoring agency
Canadian Food Inspection Agency

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues: The Feeds Regulations, 1983 have become outdated. The last comprehensive review of these Regulations took place in 1983 and some ad hoc amendments have been made to the Regulations since then to only address specific issues (e.g. regulating feeds derived from biotechnology, strengthening measures against the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy). The Regulations have not kept up with innovation (e.g. they do not require efficient use of feed ingredients to reduce environmental footprints), the management of safety risks, international standards, science and technology. Feed and livestock production sectors in Canada and abroad have also evolved considerably since 1983, operating in an environment influenced by several changing factors such as nutritional awareness, feed manufacturing and distribution, globalization of trade, recognition that feed is an integral component that underpins food production, heightened consumer awareness of food safety, and emergence of new pathogens and disease agents (e.g. bovine spongiform encephalopathy).

The current framework requirements apply mostly to products (e.g. registration, standards and labelling), with few or no requirements that apply to processes (e.g. manufacturing standards and record keeping).

Canada's principal feed industry association, the Animal Nutrition Association of Canada, has signalled a need for regulatory change some time ago.

Description: These proposed amendments would repeal and replace the Feeds Regulations, 1983 of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Minimizing the health risks for livestock and Canadians associated with livestock feeds manufactured in or imported into Canada is one of the principal anticipated outcomes of the proposal. Feed operators would be required to conduct hazard identification and put in place preventive controls to address risks posed by the identified hazards.

The regulatory proposal would strengthen the ability to protect Canada's food supply as well as the plant and animal resource base, allow the CFIA to take different regulatory approaches (e.g. moving the “livestock” definition under the Feeds Regulations, 2022 [proposed Regulations] and removing it from the Feeds Act) provided by new regulation-making authorities in the Feeds Act made available by the Agricultural Growth Act, and address concerns raised by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations regarding lack of authority for the release of novel feeds and bilingual labelling. In addition, it would increase the consistency of the CFIA inspection system among all commodities by applying inspection oversight on the preventive controls and preventive control plans that are based on risk and would be required of most feed suppliers and distributors along the supply chain.

Rationale: The linkages between feed, the safety of food and public health have received an increased focus in recent years. The feed and livestock production sectors in Canada and abroad also continue to evolve. The CFIA has consulted extensively with stakeholders, including a recent consultation to validate potential economic impacts of the proposed regulatory changes with the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most stakeholders indicated that they did not have any concerns with the estimated costs and they remained generally supportive of the regulatory proposal moving forward.

The proposed Feeds Regulations, 2022 were also identified as a priority under the Government's targeted Regulatory Review Roadmap and 2018 Fall Economic Statement.

The estimated monetized costs of the proposed Regulations would have a present value of approximately $479.5 million over 10 years. These costs would mostly be associated with the implementation of preventive controls. The estimated monetized benefits would have a present value of approximately $7.7 million over 10 years, driven by the CFIA resource savings associated with processing fewer product registration applications. The net monetized cost (i.e. costs minus benefit) is estimated to be a present value of $471.8 million over 10 years.

Even though the feed industry would face additional costs with the proposed Regulations, there would also be many qualitative benefits, including a reduction in feed safety risks for animals, which in turn would translate into reduced food safety risks to consumers. Other qualitative benefits would include a more level playing field for the feed industry, increased international and domestic regulatory alignment, a consistent and more effective feed safety approach to inspection and oversight by the CFIA, and an enhanced reputation for Canada as a global feed safety leader.

Issues

The last comprehensive review of the Feeds Regulations, 1983 took place in 1983. The current requirements apply mostly to products (e.g. registration, standards and labelling), with few or none that apply to processes (e.g. manufacturing standards and record keeping). While some ad hoc amendments have been made to the Regulations since 1983 to address specific issues (e.g. regulating feeds derived from biotechnology, strengthening measures against the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy), the Regulations have fallen largely out of date given the risks and operating environment outlined above. In addition, a number of other domestic and international drivers (e.g. the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations, Codex Alimentarius' Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding and the U.S. Food Safety Modernization Act) have increased the need for a comprehensive review of the current regulatory framework.

In 2015, the Feeds Act was modernized and included the amendment and addition of several new regulation-making authorities. The Feeds Regulations, 1983 need to be amended to reflect the broader range of authorities that are now available to the CFIA, in particular

More recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has implemented a series of human and animal food safety rules that require products to be manufactured using good manufacturing practices and preventive controls to manage known or reasonably foreseeable hazards posing risks to public health. The proposed regulatory amendments would ensure alignment with the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory framework. They would also ensure that a robust market access with the United States is maintained, not only for feed but also for human food.

Background

Regulatory authority

The Feeds Regulations, 1983, made according to the authorities provided by the Feeds Act, set out requirements for the importation, manufacture, and sale of feed (including feed ingredients) in Canada. Feed (defined as “animal food”) is also regulated by the Health of Animals Regulations, which regulate the use of rendered animal protein products (e.g. animal meat and bone meal, feather meal, tallow, poultry fat) for use in ruminant and other animal feed.

According to these authorities, the CFIA verifies that livestock feed manufactured, sold or imported in Canada are safe for animal health and the environment, effective for animal production, comply with standards, are labelled appropriately and are safe for livestock that would be used for human consumption (meat, milk, eggs).

Livestock producers who manufacture feed for their own animals and do not use medications are exempted under the Feeds Act and they are not subject to the requirements under the Feeds Regulations, 1983.

Regulated products

Feeds for the following species of livestock are currently regulated under the Feeds Act and the Feeds Regulations, 1983:

These were the main species being raised commercially at the time the regulations were developed. Feeds for other species are exempt from the Feeds Act and the Feeds Regulations, 1983 since those species were assumed to not be a significant part of the commercial market.

A wide range of feeds are subject to the regulations, and are grouped primarily into two categories: feed ingredients and mixed feeds (premixes, supplements and complete feeds that contain a combination of approved feed ingredients). The CFIA assesses and approves all feed ingredients for use in livestock feeds. Ingredients represent individual sources of nutrients such as minerals, vitamins, fibre, protein and energy as well as substances that have a function in the feed such as flavours, colours, pellet binders and antioxidants. At present, the CFIA has some 1 250 feed ingredients approved for livestock feeding in Canada.

Risks and operating environment

Safe feeds contribute to the production of safe foods of animal origin for human consumption. Feeds contaminated by harmful pathogens (e.g. Salmonella), chemical residues (e.g. heavy metals, drug residues, dioxins) or mycotoxins may not only affect the health of the animal, but may also adversely affect the safety of meat, milk, eggs and other animal products used for human consumption. Medicated feeds present potential risks to animals and human health, as well, being implicated in global concerns associated with the increasing incidence of pathogenic organisms becoming resistant to antimicrobial drugs.

As part of the National Feed Inspection Program, the CFIA investigates contamination events predominantly related to issues with medications in feed, but also including other contaminants such as metals or dioxins. In addition, during routine inspections, feeds can be found to be out of compliance. Reports presenting results for the Monitoring program for mycotoxins in livestock feeds and the Salmonella monitoring program are available on the National Feed Inspection Program web page.

The feed industry and livestock producer organizations have worked to establish sector specific, voluntary feed and food safety programs. This collaborative work has been driven by heightened consumer awareness and demands for safe food.

Feed represents a significant input cost to the production of livestock. Feed also plays an important role in contributing to the health and productivity of livestock.

In recent years, the linkages between feed, the safety of food and public health have received an increased focus. For example, the detection of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in cattle internationally and in Canada has prompted governments to strengthen food safety and animal feeding measures to protect public health as per recommendations made by the World Health Organization.

The feed and livestock production sectors in Canada and abroad continue to evolve, operating in an environment influenced by several trends including

Objective

The amendments to the Feeds Regulations, 1983 are required to establish a more robust feed framework that would include hazard identification, preventive controls, traceability, increased record-keeping requirements and licensing. This would enable the CFIA and regulated sectors to better understand and manage risks that livestock feeds pose to human, animal and plant health and the environment. In addition, this would allow the proposed Regulations to align with international frameworks and best practices.

The basis for proposals and consultation to date has followed the objective of developing a modernized regulatory framework based on risk and outcomes for feeds that

Description

The proposed Regulations would apply to feed ingredient and mixed feed manufacturers, feed retailers and distributors, feed importers and exporters, as well as on-farm feed manufacturers that sell off the farm or incorporate any drug or other substance that presents a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment into their feeds.

The regulatory proposal represents a comprehensive review of the current regulatory framework and would result in a range of updated or new requirements for feeds and the regulated parties involved in their production and commerce. The scope of the framework would apply to the domestic supply chain as well as to feeds being imported and exported.

The proposed changes would require feed manufacturers to develop plans to prevent and control potential hazards in livestock feed; introduce licensing requirements for feed sold between provinces, exported and imported for sale; allow faster, easier updates to safety standards based on the latest science; be better aligned with international partners; be based on outcomes, instead of prescriptive requirements that become easily outdated as science and technology change; and reduce the number of feeds that require registration.

Scope of species — Definition of livestock

The Feeds Act was amended in 2015 by the Agricultural Growth Act (S.C. 2015, c. 2). Section 53 of this Act replaces the definition of “livestock” with a new definition that provides authority to designate in the Feeds Regulations, 2022 the animals to which the Feeds Act applies. This provision would be brought into force by an order in council at a time that would coincide with the registration of the proposed Regulations, with a delayed coming into force of one year for the new species. The additional species to which the Feeds Act and the proposed Regulations would apply are game birds, ratites, bison, water buffalo, cervids, llamas, alpacas, molluscs, crustaceans and bees. Mink and fox would be removed, as they are not considered food producing animals.

Incorporation by reference

The amendments would include the application of ambulatory incorporation by reference. Incorporation by reference is a drafting technique that may be used to bring the content of an incorporated document into a regulation. Documents incorporated by reference have the same force as the regulation into which it is incorporated. An ambulatory reference refers to the incorporation of a document in such a way as to include any future changes to that document without a need to remake the regulation. The relevant authorities that allow for the use of incorporation by reference are found in section 5.1 of the Feeds Act.

The amendments would incorporate by reference nine documents, written, maintained and published by the CFIA

  1. Canadian Feed Ingredients Table;
  2. Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures;
  3. Compendium of Non-Feed Product Brochures;
  4. Tables of Nutrient Guarantees and Conditions for Feed Labels;
  5. Tables of Permissible Claims for Feed Labels;
  6. List of Weed Seeds and Maximum Levels for Feeds;
  7. Tables of Maximum Nutrient Values for Feeds;
  8. Tables of Maximum Contaminant Levels for Feeds; and
  9. List of Prescribed Deleterious Substances.

Updates to these documents would follow the CFIA Incorporation by Reference Policy.

Exemptions

General and specific exemptions for feeds or for persons, from some or all of the provisions of the Feeds Act and the Feeds Regulations, 1983, would be updated and clarified, including the exclusion of some products intended for animals not being raised for food production (e.g. pet rabbits and fish), for exhibitions, laboratory testing and other non-commercial purposes.

Permissions (approvals, registrations and licences)

An updated, clearer and broader permissions approach for feed products (approvals and registrations) and individuals (licensing) would be established in the proposed Regulations.

1. Feed ingredient approval

At present, application requirements and assessment processes for feed ingredients and mixed feeds are combined and not well defined. Under the regulatory proposal, the CFIA would maintain its role in assessing the purpose and safety of feed ingredients. All feed ingredients, including novel feeds (new feeds that are organisms or parts or products thereof or feeds that have a novel trait) and new feeds (of chemical origin) would continue to require assessment and approval before they could be placed on the market. In addition, anyone doing research with a novel feed would require approval before they could conduct the research. As part of this approval, industry would need to demonstrate how they would control the novel feed to ensure that it does not present a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment. These amendments regarding novel feeds would address the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations concerns.

A more transparent feed ingredient assessment and approval process would be set out in the proposed Regulations and would have the following features:

2. Feed registration

Feed registration requirements and exemptions would be updated, including the reduction in the number of feeds requiring mandatory product registration. The CFIA would require a short list of higher-risk mixed feeds to still be registered, including feeds administered by water, mineral feeds containing medications and feeds bearing labels with languages other than English or French or claims not set out in a list of pre-approved label claims and conditions. In addition, all imported mixed feeds would no longer require registration if they are imported by a licence holder. Instead, it would be required that the feed manufacturers develop and implement preventive control plans. That way, increased responsibility is put on feed manufacturers for the safety of their feed products.

3. Licensing of individuals

The proposed Regulations would see the creation of licensing requirements for individuals engaged in activities associated with feeds that are to be sent or conveyed interprovincially, have been imported for sale or are intended for export. This would enhance the oversight of feed imports and exports and improve alignment with the requirements of other CFIA regulations such as the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations. Licensing would not be required for individuals that are importing a feed that is not intended to be sold. In this case, the oversight of imported feeds, not for sale, would default to requiring registration rather than the licensing of an individual.

General and safety standards for feeds

General and safety standards for feed would be updated to better reflect current science, risks, production practices and technology. The following are examples of updated standards:

Labelling

Labelling requirements would be updated to reduce prescriptiveness and rigidity, provide better information to purchasers and address concerns by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations regarding official languages obligations (i.e. health and safety labelling requirements to appear in both official languages). Improved flexibility would be provided by allowing additional information, such as claims and guarantees, to be added to the label without requiring the feed to be registered. To increase the traceability of feeds through the supply chain (in the event recalls are necessary), feeds would need to be labelled with a lot number / identification code. Under the proposed Regulations, it would continue to be prohibited for feed labels to be misleading or not be truthful. For example, the label should not deceive or mislead the purchaser with regards to the composition, usefulness or purpose of the feed. The information presented on the label would need to correspond to the purpose of the feed and guarantees would need to accurately reflect its contents.

Amendments would serve to reduce the regulatory burden on stakeholders while increasing responsiveness to industry changes by improving the clarity, transparency, and flexibility of the proposed Regulations. For example, pre-approved claims and optional (non-mandatory) guarantees on labels would be permitted if they comply with requirements set out in documents listing claims and guarantees to be incorporated by reference in the modernized framework. This would mean registration of feeds bearing such claims or guarantees by the CFIA, as is the case at present, would no longer be required.

Mandatory bilingual labelling requirements would be required for any label information that could impact the health and safety of the purchaser or livestock to be fed with the feed product. This would include medication information, and caution and warning statements.

Finally, it is proposed that when a feed is manufactured using a feed ingredient or mixed feed which has a caution or warning statement on its label, or for which there is a maximum inclusion rate of a feed ingredient, this information would need to be transferred onto the label for any other feed that includes the feed ingredient or mixed feed in its formulation.

Feed hazard identification and preventive controls

Under the proposed Regulations, regulated parties would be required to conduct a hazard identification (e.g. biological, chemical and physical hazards) for the feeds they manufacture. In addition, they would be required to develop, implement, and maintain a written preventive control plan to demonstrate how the preventive controls (e.g. cleaning and sanitation, pest control, conveyances, equipment, contaminated material, interior of the facility, movement of persons, and water, steam and ice) and other requirements (e.g. packaging and labelling) are met. Regulated parties would have the flexibility to apply the preventive controls and other measures with an approach based on outcomes that demonstrate their operations and feeds comply with the proposed Regulations.

There would be an exception where feed operators would not be required to prepare, keep or maintain a preventive control plan when the feed is approved for research or experimental purposes. In addition, the Feeds Act does not apply to livestock producers that make feed for their own animals provided that the feed does not contain any medications; therefore, they would not be subject to the proposed Regulations.

All feed manufacturers who are required to have a preventive control plan would be required to have a written plan. An exception from having a written plan in the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations is provided to small businesses and is based on an analysis of the food safety risks. Similar to the food businesses (meat, milk, eggs and fish) that do not qualify for the exception under the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations, feed stakeholders would not be exempt by regulations from the requirement to develop a written plan. The majority of affected stakeholders are considered small businesses and they feed livestock species that may eventually become part of the food supply chain as meat and animal products (milk, eggs, fish). As the meat and animal products processors are not exempt from Safe Food for Canadians Regulations' requirements, the feed manufacturers would not be exempt from the Feeds Regulations, 2022 requirements.

The most effective way to reduce or eliminate risks posed by livestock species being fed with contaminated feed and introduced into the food supply chain as meat and animal products (milk, eggs, fish) is to address risks early in the food supply chain at the feed production level. Risks introduced in the food supply chain would have an impact on an exponentially larger number of food operators and food products as it travels through the food supply chain through these livestock species fed with contaminated feed.

The hazard identification and preventive control plan approach reflect internationally recognized standards and management-based requirements, such as hazard analysis and critical control points principles and good manufacturing practices in the European Union and preventive control plans in the United States.

Traceability

New traceability requirements would require more detailed record-keeping requirements to better support risk management along the feed supply chain, especially where timely responses to incidents of risks to public, animal or plant health or the environment are involved.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Since 2012, the CFIA has done a considerable amount of consultation in advance of completing this proposal, including

Copies of the proposals and consultation summary (“What We Heard”) reports are posted on the CFIA Livestock Feed Consultations on Proposed Regulatory and Policy Changes web page.

Initially, the CFIA engaged most-affected stakeholders by way of bilateral discussions and multi-stakeholder meetings, and less-affected stakeholders by way of an online discussion paper and survey. By July 2012, the CFIA had held 29 bilateral meetings with stakeholder groups and government partners. A two-day, multi-stakeholder workshop was also held, in September 2012. There was general support from stakeholders for using the Codex Alimentarius' Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (PDF) as a basis for safeguarding the feed supply.

As a result of this preliminary consultation, an industry-government Feed Regulatory Steering Group was formed, comprising members representing commercial feed manufacturers, major national livestock producer associations, the CFIA, and Health Canada's Veterinary Drugs Directorate. The Feed Regulatory Steering Group has been the first point of contact for the CFIA to solicit input or feedback on regulatory modernization topics, and technical working groups formed on an ad hoc basis to discuss aspects of the feed regulatory modernization process. Meetings of the Feed Regulatory Steering Group were held on an ad hoc basis as the CFIA worked to develop different elements of the modernized framework in stages and sought the steering group's feedback as the elements took shape.

In 2013–14, consultation documents were prepared and posted on the CFIA website and circulated to industry stakeholders to consult on specific components of the feed regulatory modernization (i.e. labelling, feed ingredient assessment and approval, and hazard identification and preventive controls).

In 2016, a consolidated proposal was released on the CFIA website and circulated to industry stakeholders to provide a comprehensive overview of the proposed regulatory direction, to address comments and feedback received during previous consultations, and to address additional components that were not included as part of previous consultations. In addition, eight town hall sessions were held across Canada to meet face-to-face with stakeholders and share the information from the Consolidated Proposal.

Between 2016 and 2018, technical standards proposals were developed and shared with stakeholders for review and comment to address specific components of the proposed Regulations that would be incorporated by reference (e.g. required guarantees and permissible claims on feed labels, veterinary biologics used in feeds, weed seed standards for feeds).

In addition, from September 30 to November 15, 2020, stakeholders were consulted on the proposed changes to the Feeds Regulations, 2022. The purpose of the online consultation was to gather feedback and confirm support from industry on the proposed regulatory framework for livestock feeds; to validate potential economic impacts of the proposed regulatory changes, especially with respect to the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic; and to determine where additional guidance would be required. The consultation was developed with the participation of the Animal Nutrition Association of Canada (ANAC). Stakeholders were given an advance copy of the consultation document before it was posted on the CFIA Consultations and Engagement website for comments. Further, to increase response, external and internal listserv messages were sent out and the public and stakeholders were also informed through social media. In total, 36 sets of written comments were received from this consultation. Six sets of comments were received from government organizations (federal and provincial), 11 sets of comments were received from livestock producer associations, 6 sets of comments were received from feed industry associations, 12 sets of comments were received from individual feed companies, and 1 comment was received from an international certification company. Of the comments received from individual feed companies, almost half were from small feed businesses.

Support from stakeholders

Overall, the fall 2020 consultation resulted in a continued confidence by the CFIA that there is broad support to move forward quickly with this regulatory initiative.

Stakeholders are supportive of a more outcome- and risk-based approach that allows for innovation and flexibility. The following topics/areas were supported by many respondents:

Stakeholders expressed some concerns about the exemption in the Feeds Act and the Regulations provided to livestock producers making feeds on farm, and the proposed requirement for bilingual labelling of health and safety-related information. For these concerns, the CFIA is limited in applying regulations by the scope of the exemption provided to livestock producers in the Feeds Act. The proposed bilingual labelling obligations are in response to concerns raised by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations regarding respecting bilingual labelling obligations applied under the Official Languages Act.

In addition, a few concerns were raised regarding preventive control plans for small commercial feed mills, record-keeping requirements at feed retail outlets, and maximum standards for certain contaminants (e.g. dioxins). These concerns were mostly raised by individual stakeholders and some small businesses. In order to obtain a better understanding of these concerns and to determine the manner in which they can adequately be addressed, outreach and engagement with stakeholders would be undertaken in parallel to the comment period in the Canada Gazette, Part I. More time and effort will be spent on engaging with the small feed businesses to understand the impacts that these regulatory changes would have on the small feed business communities. Prepublication of the proposed Regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part I, where stakeholders could view the regulatory text, would present this opportunity to further consult with stakeholders. Based on more detailed feedback and better understanding of the root of the concerns, the proposed Regulations can be changed to address these outstanding issues.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultations

As required by the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, the proposal's possible treaty implications were assessed. No such implications were identified, including with respect to the issue of jurisdiction.

Instrument choice

A range of regulatory and non-regulatory options was considered, including the baseline scenario and any other feasible regulatory and non-regulatory actions. The regulatory proposal was chosen as the instrument of choice to address the issue.

Baseline scenario (no change)

In the baseline scenario, the CFIA would continue to administer the highly product-based regulatory framework that applies to feeds in domestic and import trade and does not benefit from more up-to-date approaches that are based on risk and outcomes. This option would not provide a more level playing field of oversight of domestic and imported feeds (i.e. in which most domestic feeds would remain exempted from registration, but all imported mixed feeds would continue to require it). In addition, the CFIA would retain the majority of the responsibility for confirming the compliance of imported feeds via the registration process, which is required before a product can be imported. The registration of such imported feeds is considered to be burdensome by industry and not “World Trade Organization-friendly” by the U.S. feed industry. Furthermore, it does not align well with the principles and outcomes of the Integrated Agency Inspection Model that sets out a standardized and consistent approach to inspection oversight.

The CFIA would continue to exempt feeds for export from Canada from the scope of the Feeds Act and Regulations. While this option would maintain the minimal level of regulatory burden on feed exporters and align with the U.S. approach, it may serve to limit broader market access for Canadian livestock feeds internationally, given the limited level of government oversight that would apply to feeds in export trade.

Regulatory proposal (preferred option)

The regulatory proposal would see a comprehensive, complete and robust renewal of the Feeds Regulations, 1983 that would include more transparent feed approval and registration requirements, updated product standards, new manufacturing standards that require preventive controls, new traceability requirements and updated labelling requirements. Similar to the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations, this option would require that operators of establishments who send or convey feeds across provincial borders, who export feeds or engage in activities related to feeds that have been imported for sale have a licence and comply with any conditions set out in the licence.

In addition, this regulatory option aligns with principles of the Integrated Agency Inspection Model. The Integrated Agency Inspection Model principles are based on the premise that industry is responsible for its products and processes and must demonstrate ongoing compliance with legislative requirements and that approaches should be flexible to accommodate the complexity and size of an operation. A consistent regulatory approach between CFIA-regulated commodities would allow for a more consistent inspection and enforcement approach. Such an approach is beneficial to stakeholders and the CFIA, as it allows for a greater understanding of compliance requirements and enforcement outcomes. The regulatory proposal also aligns with desired outcomes such as licences and preventive control plans, and allows for a combination of oversight mechanisms for imports (via a licence or by product registration with the CFIA).

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

This section assesses the incremental impacts (i.e. benefits and costs) resulting from the difference between the baseline and regulatory scenarios. The baseline scenario describes the situation under the current regulatory framework and what it would look like in the future if the proposed Regulations did not come into force. The regulatory scenario describes the alternate situation should the regulatory proposal come into force. The complete descriptions of the baseline and regulatory scenarios and the methodology used to assess the incremental impacts (including detailed assumptions) are fully documented in a cost-benefit analysis report, which is available from the CFIA by request.

Affected stakeholders

The following stakeholders would be affected by the proposed Regulations:

The number of affected stakeholders is represented by the number of establishments (see Table 1).

Table 1: Number of affected establishments
Type of establishment Total number of establishments
Commercial feed manufacturers 480 table b1 note a
Ingredient manufacturers 2 619
On-farm feed manufacturers 17 123 table b1 note b
Feed retailers/distributors 1 500 table b1 note a
Total 21 722

Table b1 note(s)

Table b1 note a

CFIA inspection database.

Return to table b1 note a referrer

Table b1 note b

Statistics Canada's 2016 Census of Agriculture estimated that there are 85 615 farms in Canada that are raising live animals such as cattle and pigs. CFIA subject matter experts estimated that approximately 20% of these farms are making medicated feeds on site and may potentially be impacted by the proposed changes.

Return to table b1 note b referrer
Baseline versus regulatory scenario

Due to the scope of the proposed amendments, only key elements of the baseline and regulatory scenarios are described below.

1. Proposed licensing regime

There is currently no licensing regime under the Feeds Regulations, 1983. The proposed licensing regime would apply to stakeholders that import for sale or export feed and/or convey feed from one province to another. As well, a licence would need to be renewed every two years.

Table 2: Proposed licensing regime
Baseline scenario Regulatory scenario
No licensing regime New licensing regime would apply to stakeholders that import for sale or export feed and/or convey feed from one province to another
2. Proposed preventive control and preventive control plan requirements

The feed industry has worked to establish sector specific, voluntary feed and food safety programs in recent years (e.g. FeedAssure®). These voluntary programs are based on hazard analysis and critical control points principles, the focus being largely on food safety risks and controls. The proposed preventive control and preventive control plan requirements are also based on hazard analysis and critical control points principles and would be mandatory across the feed industry. None of the voluntary feed and food safety programs currently fully meet the proposed requirements, as these requirements would be broader in scope.

Table 3: Proposed preventive control and preventive control plan requirements
Baseline scenario Regulatory scenario
May or may not be enrolled in voluntary feed safety program, such as FeedAssure® Mandatory preventive controls and preventive control plans
3. Proposed product registration requirements

Registration of certain mixed feeds would still occur. However, fewer mixed feeds would require mandatory registration than at present, as the CFIA proposes to shift more responsibility for compliance to regulated parties (as part of the proposed preventive controls and preventive control plan requirements).

4: Proposed product registration requirements
Baseline scenario Regulatory scenario
Registration required if any feed ingredients and mixed feeds are new, modified or have health purposes to animals Reduced product registration
4. Proposed labelling requirements

Labelling regulatory requirements currently exist for all feeds and feed ingredients. For the proposed regulatory change, all feeds would still require a label with basic labelling information. Additional proposed labelling requirements would include an identification code and bilingual health and safety information.

Table 5: Proposed labelling requirements
Baseline scenario Regulatory scenario
Basic labelling requirement (e.g. product type) for all feeds and feed ingredients Additional identification codes and bilingual health and safety information
5. Proposed traceability requirement

There would be two tasks performed by affected stakeholders under the proposed traceability policy. Stakeholders would first need to develop a traceability template and then use it to perform the required record keeping. The approach, which is based on outcomes, would allow for flexibility in the type/format used for the template. Stakeholders covered by the proposed requirements would have to keep the following basic traceability information on each feed supplied to them or by them: feed product name, identification code, business name and address, date of purchase or sale, and contact person. Therefore, the traceability template could simply entail using these data elements as category headers in a paper-based or electronic document. Additional guidance documents would also be provided to affected stakeholders to assist with the development of the template.

Currently, the majority of the establishments already have the traceability templates. It was estimated that 94% of commercial feed manufacturers, 99% of feed ingredient manufacturers, 99% of on-farm feed manufacturers and 98% of feed retailers already keep traceability records. It is therefore assumed that these regulated parties have already developed a template.footnote 1 However, not all of these regulated parties have all of the basic record-keeping practices necessary to facilitate timely feed safety investigations, recalls or withdrawals of non-compliant feeds from livestock before they are consumed. The proposed traceability record-keeping requirements would apply the international standard for traceability established by the Codex Alimentarius to everyone who sells feeds. The Codex standard calls for traceability of feed one-step forward to the immediate customer and one-step back to the immediate supplier.

Table 6: Proposed traceability requirements
Baseline scenario Regulatory scenario
Voluntary Mandatory for everyone who sells feeds
Description of benefits and costs

This section provides a list and brief description of all the benefits and costs. The listing is broken up into categories based on benefits and costs that were monetized and those that were assessed qualitatively.

1. Monetized benefits for industry
a. Reduction in product registrations

The proposed Regulations would reduce the number of products required to be registered with the CFIA; thus, the industry would avoid the time required to prepare and submit required documents to the CFIA.

b. Avoidance of product registration fees

The proposed Regulations would reduce the number of products required to be registered with the CFIA; thus, the industry would avoid ongoing fees associated with product registration.

2. Monetized benefits for the CFIA
a. Reduction in product registrations

The CFIA would have to process fewer applications for product registration.

3. Qualitative benefits for Canadians
a. Improved quality and safety of feeds for animal and human health

Feeds represent significant costs for the production of livestock and also play an important role in contributing to their health and productivity. The proposed regulatory requirements would improve the quality and safety of feed and feed ingredients, which would lead to a reduction of contaminated feeds and recalls. Any such reduction in contaminated feed would reduce the feed safety risk to animals and to consumers of food products of animal origin.

b. Increased public confidence in feed quality and safety

Consumers, food processors and livestock producers would have increased confidence in the quality and safety of the feed, as it would be produced in a manner that is more likely to ensure feed safety. In addition, there would be increased confidence in the feed supply chain due to the traceability requirements, as products could be identified and traced more easily.

4. Qualitative benefits for industry
a. More level playing field for feed industry

Currently, some establishments are required by their associations to maintain a feed safety plan and traceability records (while others are not). This is one example of why operations vary across commercial feed manufacturers and ingredient manufacturers. To address these regulatory inconsistencies, the proposed Regulations would establish consistent requirements for all operations. This would provide a more level playing field for the industry as a whole.

b. More timely and improved market access

With reduced product registration, commercial feed manufacturers and ingredient manufacturers would have more timely access to domestic markets. Moreover, the CFIA would provide a publicly available list of permissible claims and guarantees, which would allow specialty or other mixed feeds to be exempt from product registration. Also, domestic and imported feeds would be treated equally by the CFIA in terms of the need for registration and the associated requirements (if applicable).

c. Increased labelling flexibility

There would be more flexibility provided for claims, non-mandatory guarantees and labelling statements on feed labels. Manufacturers of mixed feeds could choose to provide additional label information to highlight specific qualities of their feeds, such as additional nutrient guarantees or product claims that presently trigger product registration. This approach would enable innovation and allow manufacturers to differentiate their feeds in a competitive environment.

In addition, requiring that health and safety information (e.g. caution and warning statements) be in both English and French languages may help feed manufacturers access some Canadian markets more easily where only English or French is used.

d. More efficient and effective feed safety recalls

Traceability requirements would allow recalls to be conducted in a more efficient and effective manner. This is because the traceability information would be more readily available and precise than with the current regulatory requirements. The proposed traceability requirements would reduce the duration of feed recalls or feed safety investigations and minimize unnecessarily wasted feed through improved targeting of affected feed products in comparison with the baseline scenario.

5. Qualitative benefits for the CFIA
a. Improved feed and food safety approach

Currently, the CFIA uses different regulatory approaches to achieve compliance with respect to the safety of livestock feed and foods of animal origin intended for human consumption. In the regulatory scenario, there would be a consistent CFIA feed and food safety approach based on risk, outcomes and regulatory oversight. An example of this would be the proposed preventive control and preventive control plan requirements, which would be enforced for both food producers/processors (who supply food by-products for feed production) and feed establishments.

b. Improved knowledge and additional enforcement tool

The CFIA would have improved knowledge of the feed industry based on the activities for which a licence is required. In addition, the CFIA would be able to request additional information about which establishments are involved in higher and lower risk activities. This would allow the CFIA to better allocate existing resources based on an establishment's risk level.

The proposed licensing requirement would also provide the CFIA with an additional enforcement tool, including the potential for licence suspension or cancellation.

6. Monetized costs for industry
a. Licence applications

In the regulatory scenario, there would be licensing requirements for businesses that are involved with feeds imported for sale, or feeds exported or being conveyed from one province to another. Licences would need to be renewed every two years. The administrative costs associated with licence applications would be the time spent to prepare and submit required documents to the CFIA.

b. Development and modification of preventive control plans

Businesses that do not currently have any feed safety program would be required to develop preventive control plans. Additionally, businesses that currently have a feed safety program in place would need to modify their programs to be fully compliant with the proposed regulatory requirements.

c. Implementation of preventive controls

Costs would include implementation of preventive controls, training for employees and record-keeping. The magnitude of this cost would be dependent on current industry practices, since some establishments have already implemented many of the proposed requirements.

d. Review of preventive control plans

This cost would include the time spent to review the preventive control plans annually.

e. Label modification

Businesses would have to spend time modifying their current labels to include bilingual health and safety information and an identification code if this information is not currently on their feed labels.

f. Development of traceability template

Businesses would have to spend time developing a new traceability template to keep traceability records. This template could entail creating a simple tracking spreadsheet or paper-based documentation.

g. Traceability record-keeping

Businesses would have to spend time keeping records on each feed commodity supplied to and from them.

7. Monetized costs for the CFIA
a. Compliance promotion

The CFIA would bear transitional costs for the following three activities:

Methodology

This section briefly describes the methodology, key data sources and key assumptions used to estimate the monetized benefits and costs.

1. Model parameters and assumptions

The key assumptions and parameters that were used in this cost-benefit analysis include the following:

2. Key data sources

The key data sources that were used in this cost-benefit analysis include the following:

Monetized benefits and costs

The approaches used to monetize the most significant impacts are discussed below. The “One-for-one rule” section contains details on the monetized administrative costs and benefits.

1. Monetized benefits for industry
a. Reduction in product registrations

There are approximately 2 000 product registration applications received annually by the CFIA, including 1 200 initial applications and 800 renewal applications. CFIA subject matter experts estimated that there would be a 41% reduction for both initial and renewal applications.

Based on survey results, it takes 1.5 hours, on average, to prepare and submit the required documentation for an initial product registration application package and 30 minutes for a renewal application package.

b. Avoided product registration feesfootnote 5,footnote 6

The fee for a new application is $179, and the fee for a renewal application is $31.

2. Monetized benefits for the CFIA
a. Reduction in product registrations

Due to the reduced number of applications, the CFIA would avoid resource costs associated with processing applications. Savings were calculated using processing costs minus application fees.

3. Monetized costs for industry
a. Implementation of preventive controls

Preventive control tasks would include training, performing feed safety–related activities and record-keeping. The magnitude of this cost would be dependent on current industry practices. Businesses with a feed safety program (see Table 7) are already implementing some of the proposed activities. However, they would require some additional time to be fully compliant with the proposed requirements. Businesses without a feed safety program would begin to implement preventive controls and the amount of time required was assumed to be the same as the amount of time required for survey respondents who are already implementing feed safety programs.

Table 7: Current industry status on the feed safety program
Affected stakeholders With feed safety program Without feed safety program Total
Commercial feed manufacturer 384 96 480
% share 80 20 100
Ingredient manufacturer 1 309 1 309 2 618
% share 50 50 100
On-farm feed manufacturer 14 555 2 568 17 123
% share 85 15 100
Feed retailer/distributor 150 1 350 1 500
% share 10 90 100

Table 8 below presents the survey results used to estimate the time required for the implementation of preventive controls.

Table 8: Survey results on implementation of preventive controls
Affected stakeholders Current training hours/year Additional training hours/year Current hours/week for implementation Additional hours/week for implementation Current
record-keeping hours/week
Commercial feed manufacturers 4.7 0.9 21.7 4.7 9.5
Ingredient manufacturers 3.9 1.6 11.1 6.8 6.0
On-farm feed manufacturers 1.2 0.2 6.3 1.2 3.2
Feed retailers/distributor 3.3 0.7 2.5 1.0 2.5

It was assumed that regulated parties would start to gain efficiency in implementing these preventive control activities over time. It is expected that small businesses would face greater challenges in understanding and fulfilling their compliance obligations than larger establishments. Therefore, the analysis assumed that small businesses would spend 50% less time implementing preventive controls starting in year three while medium-to-large businesses would spend 50% less time starting in year two.

b. Label modification

A feed label would need to include the bilingual health and safety information and identification codes. It would be a one-time cost because the industry survey results showed that this information could be added into the computer system once and automatically applied to all future feed labels.

According to CFIA subject matter experts, all affected parties would need to make changes to their feed labels to meet the proposed requirements. Therefore, the survey collected data on the number of affected labels and the additional time required to adjust the current labels to be fully compliant. These survey results are summarized in the following table:

Table 9: Survey results on label modification
Affected stakeholders Average number of affected labels per establishment Additional hours/bilingual label Additional hours/label identification code Other costs table b9 note a /label ($)
Commercial feed manufacturers 535.5 0.4 0.1 26.5
Ingredient manufacturers 14.7 0.3 0.1 0
Feed retailers/distributor 3.0 0.3 0.1 0
Table b9 note(s)
Table b9 note a

Costs associated with the modification, such as buying new software, extra printer and ink.

Return to table b9 note a referrer

It is important to note that there would be efficiency gains from incorporating all of the requirements at the same time. This is consistent with the findings from other CFIA proposed regulatory labelling initiatives. The analysis assumed that total hours would be reduced by 50% if all of the changes were incorporated at the same time.

c. Development of traceability template and traceability record-keeping

Businesses would have to develop a traceability template to keep traceability records. This template would need to include only basic information (e.g. feed product name and date of purchase/sale) for each feed product supplied to/by them. Based on CFIA subject matter experts, it is assumed that this information would take an average of five minutes to create as additional guidance documents would also be provided to affected stakeholders to assist with the development of the template.

The traceability record-keeping cost was estimated based on the amount of additional time that a business would need to keep all of the purchases and/or sales record (see the “One-for-one rule” section for more information).

Estimated result
Cost-benefit statement
Table 10: Cost-benefit statement (Canadian dollar [Can$], 2017 prices)
Monetized costs
Impacted stakeholder Description of cost Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Total (present value) Annualized value
CFIA e.g. compliance promotion, licensing processing, and the resource costs associated with applications (i.e. net of fees received) 1,068,573 0 4,290,169 16,644,232 2,369,764
Feed industry e.g. licence applications, development and modification of preventative control plans, implementation of preventative controls, review of preventative control plans, label modification, development of traceability template, traceability record-keeping 0 52,082,778 52,590,478 462,888,788 65,904,950
All stakeholders Total costs 1,068,573 52,082,778 56,880,647 479,533,020 68,274,714
Monetized benefits
Impacted stakeholder Description of benefit Year 1 Year 5 Year 10 Total (present value) Annualized value
CFIA e.g. reduction in product registration fees 883,176 883,176 883,176 6,637,272 944,998
Feed industry e.g. reduction in product registrations, avoided product registration fees 142,589 142,589 142,589 1,071,588 152,570
All stakeholders Total benefits 1,025,765 1,025,765 1,025,765 7,708,860 1,097,568
Summary of monetized costs and benefits
Impacts Base year Other relevant years Final year Total (present value) Annualized value
Total costs 1,068,573 52,082,778 56,880,647 479,533,020 68,274,714
Total benefits 1,025,765 1,025,765 1,025,765 7,708,860 1,097,568
NET IMPACT 471,824,160 67,177,146
Qualitative impacts

Canadian public:

Industry:

Consumers and livestock producers:

CFIA:

The following table shows all monetized costs and benefits by category.

Table 11: Monetized costs and benefits by impact (Can$, 2017 prices)
Notes: The analysis covered a 10-year time period (2022– 2031). Values were calculated using 2022 as the base year and a 7% discount rate.
Monetized impact by category Total present value Annualized value
Review time 3,035,136 432,135
Preventive controls and preventive control plans 434,795,915 61,905,157
Traceability 17,420,939 2,480,350
Labelling 5,793,573 824,875
Licensing 112,596 16,031
Licensing fees 1,730,629 246,403
CFIA resource and implementation costs 16,644,232 2,369,764
Total costs 479,533,020 68,274,714
Reduction in product registration 334,113 47,570
Avoided product registration fees 737,475 105,000
CFIA resource savings 6,637,272 944,998
Total benefits 7,708,860 1,097,568
Net cost (i.e. costs minus benefits) 471,824,160 67,177,146
Sensitivity analysis

A sensitivity analysis is the portion of the analysis that attempts to deal with the uncertainty that is inherent in the estimates and in predicting the future. Sensitivity analysis involves changing key parameters and assumptions and assessing how this affects the costs and benefits of the regulatory proposal.

The first approach for the sensitivity analysis was to vary the discount rate used to estimate the annualized values. The medium estimate of 7% used in the cost-benefit analysis was changed to 3% and 10%.

The second approach was to vary the costs for on-farm feed manufacturers. This is because the number of affected on-farm feed manufacturers is the largest group among all stakeholders; thus, any variation in their costs would significantly affect the total costs of the proposed Regulations. Moreover, the CFIA did not receive any survey responses from on-farm feed manufacturers with costing data related to the preventive controls and preventive control plan requirements. Therefore, the analysis utilized the survey results for commercial feed manufacturers as a starting point for estimating the costs to on-farm feed manufacturers.

However, the costs associated with preventive controls and preventive control plans to on-farm feed manufacturers would be significantly lower than for commercial feed manufacturers for the following reasons:

The medium estimate used in the cost-benefit analysis assumed that on-farm feed manufacturers would experience 70% less cost than commercial feed manufacturers. The sensitivity analysis then used the following rates:

The results of the sensitivity analysis are shown in the following table. The range of the annualized net costs is between $41.5 million to $94.5 million.

Table 12: Sensitivity analysis cost-benefit summary (Can$ millions, 2017 prices)
Notes: Numbers may not add up due to rounding. Values were calculated using 2022 as the base year and a 7% discount rate.
Discount rates Annualized benefits Annualized costs Net monetized cost (i.e. annualized costs minus annualized benefit)
Medium (on-farm feed manufacturers assume 70% less costs than commercial feed manufactures)
Medium table b12 note a (7%) 1.1 68.3 67.2
Low (3%) 1.06 65.1 64.0
High (10%) 1.13 70.6 69.5
Low (on-farm feed manufacturers assume 50% less costs than commercial feed manufactures)
Medium (7%) 1.1 92.4 91.3
Low (3%) 1.06 88.0 86.9
High (10%) 1.13 95.6 94.5
High (on-farm feed manufacturers assume 90% less costs than commercial feed manufactures)
Medium (7%) 1.1 44.6 43.5
Low (3%) 1.06 42.5 41.5
High (10%) 1.13 46.0 44.9

Table b12 note(s)

Table b12 note a

This row represents the CBA findings.

Return to table b12 note a referrer
Conclusion

The proposed repeal and replacement of the Feeds Regulations, 1983 would support the protection of public health as well as that of animal health, reduce feed safety risks for animals and consumers, and create a level playing field for the feed industry. Other benefits include increased international and domestic regulatory alignment, a consistent and more effective feed safety approach to inspection and oversight by the CFIA, and an enhanced reputation for Canada as a global feed safety leader.

The estimated monetized benefit of the regulatory proposal would be $7.7 million (present value) over 10 years (or $1.1 million annualized). Industry would have fewer products that require registration, fewer fees to pay and less time spent on filling out registration forms for new feeds and renewals. The benefits to the CFIA are fewer resources to provide product registration services to industry.

The estimated monetized costs would be $479.5 million (present value) over 10 years (or $68.3 million annualized). The main component for the monetized costs for businesses is the proposed requirement for them to adopt and implement preventive control plans, representing 83% of the total costs. The CFIA would incur resource costs associated with processing licence applications, and for planned compliance promotion activities such as presentations and town hall meetings.

The overall result would be a net cost (i.e. costs minus benefit) of $471.8 million (present value) over 10 years (or $67.2 million annualized).

Small business lens

The small business lens applies as there would be costs for small businesses when complying with the proposed Regulations. Approximately 94% of affected stakeholders are considered small businesses.

The CFIA has undertaken significant consultation with stakeholders, including small businesses, since 2013. The CFIA is sensitive to the needs of small businesses and is aware of the importance of finding the right balance between feed safety and costs to businesses. Therefore, the CFIA has included in its regulatory proposal some flexibility that is expected to reduce the potential costs to small businesses.

The following provisions would be included as part of the proposed regulatory change:

In addition, the CFIA would provide the following to help small businesses with compliance:

The incremental monetized cost would be approximately $58.7 million annualized for all small businesses, or $3,497 per impacted small business. The administrative costs include time for the revision of the Feed Regulations, 2022, for licence applications and for record keeping (preventive controls, preventive control plans and traceability). Compliance costs include the development and modification of preventive controls and preventive control plans, development of a traceability template, modification of labelling, and licensing fees. The incremental monetized benefits would be $143,416 because of fewer product registrations, hence, fee savings to industry, as well as less time spent on filling out registration forms for new feeds and renewals. The resulting net cost would be $58.7 million for all small businesses or $3,497 per impacted small business.

Table 13: Small business lens summary (Can$, 2017 prices)

Compliance costs
Activity Annualized value Present value
PCP development and modification 5,386,005 37,829,047
PCP implementation (training and conducting) 36,953,130 259,543,321
PCP maintenance (review plan) 1,471,644 10,336,213
Traceability development 136 958
Labelling modification 796,871 5,596,886
Licence fees 183,547 1,289,154
Total compliance costs 44,791,333 314,595,580
Administrative costs
Activity Annualized value Present value
Regulatory review time 413,132 2,901,665
PCP implementation (record keeping) 11,158,123 78,369,985
Traceability implementation 2,373,118 16,667,787
Licence application 11,942 83,873
Total administrative costs 13,956,314 98,023,309
Total compliance and administrative costs
Note: The analysis covered the 10-year period of 2022–2031. Figures may not add up to totals due to rounding.Values were calculated using 2022 as the base year and a 7% discount rate.
Totals Annualized value Present value
Total cost (all impacted small businesses) 58,747,647 412,618,889
Cost per impacted small business 3,497 24,564

Table c2 note(s)

Footnote a

On average, 1 business represents 1.25 establishments.

Return to footnote a referrer

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies, as the proposal results in an incremental increase in administrative burden on business. The proposal repeals the existing Regulations and replaces them with a new regulatory title, which results in no net increase or decrease in regulatory titles.

The administrative burden would involve licensing applications and record keeping, resulting from the implementation of preventive controls and traceability requirements. However, businesses would benefit from some administrative relief, as fewer feeds would require registration (see Table 14).

Table 14: List of all administrative cost/benefit impacts
Impact category Why is it administrative impact? Administrative costs imposed or avoided
Initial review of the Feeds Regulations, 2022 Familiarization with the new information obligation Costs imposed
Licensing applications Authorizations Costs imposed
Preventive controls —
implementation (record keeping)		 Collecting and retaining data Costs imposed
Traceability — purchases/sales record keeping Collecting and retaining data Costs imposed
Product registration Authorizations Avoided cost

The net annualized administrative costs (i.e. costs minus benefits) would be approximately $7,226,332, which equates to an annualized net administrative cost per impacted business of $416 (see Table 15).

Table 15: Estimated annualized values of administrative impacts for the one-for-one rule (Can$, 2012 prices)
Note: 2012 prices, 2012 present value base year, 7% discount rate. On average, 1 business represents 1.25 establishments.
Net annualized administrative costs (i.e. costs minus benefits) 7,226,332
Annualized administrative costs per business ($2012) 416

These estimated impacts were based on information gathered from industry surveys, reasonable assumptions, and consultation with stakeholders and CFIA subject matter experts. The assumptions used to estimate the administrative impacts are as follows:

Table 16.1 Industry survey results on time spent to keep purchases and sales records for small businesses
Activity Commercial feed manufacturer
(hr/year)		 Ingredient manufacturer
(hr/year) table c5 note a		 On-farm feed manufacturer
(hr/year) table c5 note b		 Feed retailer/distributor
(hr/year)
Keep purchase records 220 32 69 200
Keep sales records 110 31.5 N/A 200

Table c5 note(s)

Table c5 note a

The survey only received one response from small ingredient manufacturers. Therefore, the analysis decided to omit the result realizing that using one result may not be appropriate as a representative of all the ingredient manufacturers. The analysis assumed small ingredient manufacturers would use 50% less time than a medium-to-large ingredient manufacturer.

Return to table c5 note a referrer

Table c5 note b

The analysis did not receive any baseline and costing data from on-farm feed manufacturers. The Feed Program subject matter experts estimated that on-farm feed manufacturers are likely to experience 70% less impacts compared to commercial mills, as the scale of the production by on-farm feed manufacturers is much smaller than commercial mills.

Return to table c5 note b referrer
Table 16.2 Industry survey results on time spent to keep purchases and sales records for medium-to-large businesses
Activity Commercial feed manufacturer
(hr/year)		 Ingredient manufacturer
(hr/year) table c6 note a		 On-farm feed manufacturer
(hr/year) table c6 note b		 Feed retailer/distributor
(hr/year)
Keep purchase records 838 64 251.4 400 table c6 note c
Keep sales records 1 693 63 N/A 400 table c6 note c

Table c6 note(s)

Table c6 note a

The survey only received one response from small ingredient manufacturers. Therefore, the analysis decided to omit the result realizing that using one result may not be appropriate as a representative of all the ingredient manufacturers. The analysis assumed small ingredient manufacturers would use 50% less time than a medium-to-large ingredient manufacturer.

Return to table c6 note a referrer

Table c6 note b

The analysis did not receive any baseline and costing data from on-farm feed manufacturers. The Feed Program subject matter experts estimated that on-farm feed manufacturers are likely to experience 70% less impacts compared to commercial mills, as the scale of the production by on-farm feed manufacturers is much smaller than commercial mills.

Return to table c6 note b referrer

Table c6 note c

The survey did not receive any results from medium-to-large retailers/distributors. Therefore, the analysis assumed that these establishments may spend twice as much time as small retailers/distributors to keep records due to difference in business size.

Return to table c6 note c referrer

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

Feed safety is a shared responsibility between the federal government, livestock producers, ingredient and commercial feed manufacturers and processors, feed retailers/distributors, and many other stakeholders. The CFIA enforces the Feeds Act and the Feeds Regulations, 1983 with the assistance of the Canada Border Services Agency.

At the federal level, Health Canada is responsible through the Food and Drugs Act for approving veterinary drugs, defining manufacturing standards for approved drugs, and coordinating the assessment of the impact of the use of veterinary drugs on antimicrobial resistance and developing appropriate control strategies. The CFIA also collaborates with Health Canada in responding to the Federal Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance and Use in Canada, which maps out a coordinated, collaborative federal approach to responding to the threat of antimicrobial resistance. The Action Plan also involves participation from the Public Health Agency of Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the National Research Council of Canada, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. Provinces, territories, and other stakeholders also play a key role by virtue of their responsibility for the delivery of health care, the approval of antimicrobials for medical coverage, and the regulation of antimicrobial use in agriculture and veterinary medicine. The CFIA verifies, through inspection and sampling, that medicated feeds manufactured or sold in Canada meet the standards set by Health Canada as per the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures or have been prescribed by a veterinarian.

Of the provinces and territories, only British Columbia and Quebec have regulations pertaining to livestock feed. In both cases, the scope of the regulations is limited to medicated feeds and mostly pertains to record keeping.

Internationally and domestically, there has been increased focus on the linkages between feed and the safety of food over the last decade. Since the detection of Canada's first native-born case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in 2003 and subsequent bovine spongiform encephalopathy cases, international delegations have been coming to Canada regularly to see first-hand the control measures in place to protect against the transmission of this disease. Their evaluations of Canadian animal and food production systems, the nature of feeds, feed controls and feeding practices have become an integral part of their assessment of Canada's overall health and food safety systems.

The proposed amendments are based upon many internationally recognized standards and requirements, including preventive controls (e.g. good manufacturing practices), standards and guidelines. Recommendations established by national and international authorities have also been taken into account, including from

This has the effect of aligning Canadian feed requirements with those of Canada's trading partners.

The CFIA uses all these guidelines to maintain international harmonization when prioritizing which hazards require standards, and therefore which should be prioritized for incorporation by reference into proposed regulations.

Strategic environmental assessment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, a preliminary scan concluded that a strategic environmental assessment is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus

The proposed regulatory amendments would affect various stakeholder groups in very different ways. It is important to provide an analysis of the distribution of the costs and benefits among stakeholder groups to help understand the differentiated impacts. This analysis is focused on the distribution of potential economic impacts of the regulatory amendments to the feed industry, by geographic region and province in Canada.

The analysis was performed by identifying the regional locations of the establishments (Table 17). The annualized value is shown in Table 18. This value was obtained by applying the share of establishments by the province to the total costs carried by each stakeholder. Since Ontario and Quebec have the greatest number of feed manufacturers, these two provinces would likely experience more impacts from the proposed regulations, accounting for almost 60% of the total costs.

Table 17: Provincial distribution of feed manufacturers (share of establishments by provinces and territories, %)
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Affected stakeholders AB BC MB ON QC SK Atlantic table c7 note a Territories table c7 note b Canada
Commercial feed manufacturer table c7 note c 14 4 7.4 33.5 27.5 7 6.4 0 100
Ingredient manufacturer 8.1 12.9 3.6 27.4 23.7 2.4 21.6 0.3 100
On-farm feed manufacturer 13.4 9.4 5.5 22.3 37.4 5.1 6.7 0 100
Feed retailer/distributor 11.5 15.5 5.3 36.6 23.2 4.3 3.6 0 100
Total 13.0 9.7 5.4 23.4 35.7 4.9 7.9 0.1 100

Table c7 note(s)

Table c7 note a

Atlantic includes New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Return to table c7 note a referrer

Table c7 note b

Territories includes Nunavut, Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory.

Return to table c7 note b referrer

Table c7 note c

Calculated using the CFIA inspection database.

Return to table c7 note c referrer
Table 18: Total industry annualized costs distributed by region (Can$ millions, 2017 prices)
Note: Figures may not add up to totals due to rounding.
Affected stakeholders AB BC MB ON QC SK Atlantic table c8 note a Territories table c8 note b Canada
Commercial feed manufacturer table c8 note c 0.7 0.2 0.4 1.7 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.0 4.0
Ingredient manufacturer 1.4 2.3 0.6 4.9 4.2 0.4 3.9 0.0 14.2
On-farm feed manufacturer 4.8 3.4 2 8 13.5 1.8 2.4 0.0 28.8
Feed retailer/distributor 0.8 1.1 0.4 2.7 1.7 0.3 0.3 0.0 5.9
Total 7.8 7.0 3.4 17.2 20.8 2.9 6.8 0.0 65.9

Table c8 note(s)

Table c8 note a

Atlantic includes New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Return to table c8 note a referrer

Table c8 note b

Territories includes Nunavut, Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory.

Return to table c8 note b referrer

Table c8 note c

Calculated using the CFIA inspection database.

Return to table c8 note c referrer

Rationale

Modernization of the feed regulatory framework would reaffirm that the necessary level of protection for Canadians is maintained, while enabling regulated industries to adapt as practices, technology and science evolve. The CFIA anticipates that the modernization of the Feeds Regulations, 1983, developed via extensive consultation with stakeholders, would bring benefits to the feed industry and other regulated parties, small business owners, users, producers and consumers. The flexibility provided by an approach based on outcomes is intended to support innovation, reduce regulatory burden, where possible, and enable a risk-based approach to feed safety in Canada.

The proposed regulatory amendments would reflect internationally recognized standards and management-based requirements while also adhering to the guiding principles of the CFIA modernized Integrated Agency Inspection Model.

Safe feeds contribute to the production of healthy livestock and safe foods of animal origin for human consumption (e.g. milk, meat, eggs). Feeds contaminated by harmful pathogens (e.g. Salmonella) and chemical residues (e.g. heavy metals, drug residues, dioxins) may adversely affect the safety of animals used for human consumption. Medicated feeds present risks to animal and public health given global concerns associated with the increasing incidence of pathogenic organisms becoming resistant to antimicrobial drugs.

Livestock feeds and feed ingredients are also pathways for pests and diseases to be transmitted to animals and plants (e.g. bovine spongiform encephalopathy, insects, and weed seeds in grain products). Consequently, controls on the production of feeds play an important role in protecting human, animal and plant health. The expanded scope of species would ensure that feeds are safe for animals being used for human consumption and would help safeguard the food production continuum.

To mitigate risks, feed hazards must be identified and assessed prior to manufacturing, distribution, and feeding of livestock. Assessments must consider both the safety to livestock as the primary consumer of the feed and the safety to humans as the consumers of the food of animal origin. It is necessary to update prescribed deleterious substances and the list of specific hazards and standards identified for feeds; identify specific hazards and maximum limits in feeds in guidance documents; and include known hazards and limits, where appropriate, in ingredient descriptions that are currently set out in Schedule IV of the Feeds Regulations, 1983.

The industry must anticipate and take necessary measures to address the hazards that can be present in feed, on the equipment, or in the establishment and its facilities where feed is manufactured. The proposed Regulations would represent a significant stride in augmenting the regulated industry's responsibility and accountability, and the application of hazard identification and prevention measures is a clear raising of the bar for feed safety in Canada. Hazard identification and preventive controls would be adaptable over time to address new or emerging hazards that pose risks to feed and food safety.

Feed ingredient approvals and mixed feed registration requirements would be based on feeds that present higher risks to human, animal or plant health or the environment. This would result in a significant reduction in product registration as well as a reduction in the administrative burden. A robust, more transparent feed ingredient assessment and approval process would focus on safety and purpose while being supported by scientific data.

The CFIA and its regulated parties must be able to rapidly respond to and mitigate emerging feed and food safety risks. Information gaps within the feed supply chain can lead to a less efficient response to a feed safety incident. The use of licensing as well as traceability requirements for domestic, imported and exported feed would enhance consumer protection during a feed safety incident by providing more accurate information to facilitate the rapid identification of the origin and movement of a feed through the feed supply chain.

Labels play an important role in the safe and proper use of feeds by livestock producers. Proper labelling allows a purchaser and user of a feed to distinguish one feed from another and provides information on what the feed is and how it is to be used as part of a feeding program. Feeds that are not labelled, or that do not have the appropriate information on the label, may be unintentionally used in a manner that is not safe and may pose risks to animal health, food safety, or the environment. The regulation of labels also helps to ensure a fair and level playing field for both purchasers and businesses. Consistent information means consumers can trust what is on the label. For the industry, everyone has the same requirements and competes based on merit, not unfounded label claims.

The CFIA is proposing to implement bilingual labelling requirements on feed labels to promote accessibility of pertinent health and safety product information on labels for all Canadians in accordance with the requirements of the Official Languages Act. Section 26 of the Official Languages Act requires that where labelling requirements relate to the health, safety or security of members of the public, the required information should appear in both official languages.

The current feed regulatory framework does not offer as broad or flexible a range of compliance and enforcement approaches as some of the more up-to-date regulatory frameworks the CFIA administers. The level of oversight should correspond to the level of risk associated with the product or process and the degree of control demonstrated by the regulated party. The approach proposed in the Regulations would be flexible enough to encompass a range of compliance verification activities. Furthermore, response to non-compliance must be predictable, transparent, graduated and based on risk. The proposed Regulations would enable the implementation of this approach.

The CFIA re-examined and further consulted on the proposed Regulations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic recovery. Stakeholders indicated that they did not have any concerns specific to the projected costs for this regulatory proposal.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The proposed Regulations will come into force on the day on which they are registered in the Canada Gazette, Part II. However, to provide the industry with time to adjust to the proposed Regulations, the CFIA is proposing a delayed coming into force for some provisions and transitional provisions for others.

Coming into force

There would be a delay for the coming into force of certain regulatory requirements, including

Transitional provisions

To provide time for industry to transition to the new regulatory requirements, a feed may continue to be labelled in accordance with the former Regulations or meet the standards in the former Regulations for a period of one year after the proposed Regulations come into force. In addition, applications for registration or exemption received before the proposed Regulations come into force would be dealt with in accordance with the former Regulations, and any registration issued under the former Regulations would continue to be valid. There are also provisions related to notification of release and retention of documents that continue to follow the former Regulations for feeds that have already been manufactured.

Alternatively, industry would have the option to follow some of the new regulatory requirements as soon as they come into force. However, using a combination of new and old requirements on the same product label would be prohibited.

The CFIA recognizes that guidance material would assist in the successful implementation of the proposed Regulations. Guidance documents should facilitate compliance with the Regulations. The CFIA is developing a new suite of regulatory guidance documents that would improve the format, content and accessibility of its guidance material. Some of the documents will be available to industry and the inspectorate when the proposed Regulations are prepublished in the Canada Gazette and the rest will be available by the coming-into-force date. These documents will update or replace existing manuals to help industry to comply with the Feeds Act and the Feeds Regulations, 2022.

The CFIA will also provide model systems as tools to promote compliance. Model systems provide examples that when properly applied have been demonstrated to achieve compliance with regulatory requirements. These would initially be drawn from existing guidance and systems recognized by the CFIA, but in time could include other validated generic models or programs.

Implementation of the proposed Regulations would also be supported by the Agency's online Digital Service Delivery Platform to apply for permissions (such as registrations and licences) and other services (e.g. export certificates) electronically.

In addition to the proposed regulatory amendments, the CFIA has initiated a project to consider the equivalency of feed ingredient assessment and approval systems employed in other jurisdictions (in the United States and the European Union to start). If a determination of equivalency is achieved for a foreign jurisdiction, regulated parties seeking Canadian approval for new or modified ingredients that have already been approved in that jurisdiction could submit a less detailed application for assessment by the CFIA. The CFIA will consult separately with industry and other stakeholders on this once the development of a proposed approach is completed.

Compliance and enforcement

The CFIA would continue to enforce the regulatory requirements of livestock feeds and would implement a redesigned feed regulatory compliance program to take into account the principles of the Integrated Agency Inspection Model, new regulatory requirements, standards, and other considerations (e.g. licensing requirements that follow the process and system tools of the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations). The CFIA is collaborating with academia and industry representatives to construct and implement an establishment-based risk assessment model for feed establishments that would better identify the relative risks of different establishments and the inspection frequencies to be applied. Consequently, an updated training program for CFIA inspection staff would be designed, developed and delivered to support the implementation of the regulatory amendments. The CFIA would implement the redesigned program and would continue to enforce feed regulatory requirements by way of pre-market, marketplace and post-market inspection activities aligned with the updated regulatory framework and product, process and establishment risks.

The proposed amendments would operate under existing complaint and appeal mechanisms. The CFIA uses an incremental process to manage complaints and appeals, which ranges from discussions with CFIA employees to the submission of a formal complaint to the CFIA Complaints and Appeals Office.

The CFIA uses a range of tools to verify compliance, including inspections, surveillance, sampling, and testing. When non-compliance is determined, the CFIA takes enforcement action commensurate with the seriousness of the non-compliance. Under the proposed Regulations, the Minister may suspend or cancel a licence. For example, a licence could be suspended, upon notice, if there is a risk of harm to animal or human health or the environment that may result if the licence holder continues to conduct an activity that is identified in the licence. This enforcement tool would be in addition to other compliance and enforcement tools and measures available to inspectors, including penalties such as the issuance of an administrative monetary penalty under the Agriculture and Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act.

Service standards

With respect to service standards for the review of applications for feed ingredient approvals and product registration, the CFIA has been reporting on performance for efficacy, livestock, human and environmental safety reviews on an annual basis. There are several initiatives tied to regulatory modernization (e.g. reducing the number of feed types requiring mandatory registration) and other non-regulatory initiatives (e.g. the equivalency of feed ingredient assessment and approval systems employed in other jurisdictions discussed above, the creation of a Digital Service Delivery Platform), and these initiatives are expected to have a positive impact on performance of the current service standard. In addition, reporting on a different set of service standards is being contemplated by the CFIA going forward. If changes are made to the standards, the CFIA will consult stakeholders and implement the changes as a separate exercise from regulatory modernization.

Contact

Laura Scott
National manager
Feed Program Coordination and Outreach Section
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
59 Camelot Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0Y9
Telephone: 613‑773‑7527
Email: cfia.feedregmodernization-modernisationregalibetails.acia@inspection.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Administrator in Council proposes to make the annexed Feeds Regulations, 2022 pursuant to

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 90 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be addressed to Laura Scott, National Manager, Feed Program Coordination and Outreach Section, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 59 Camelot Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0Y9 (tel.: 613‑773‑7527; email: laura.scott@canada.ca).

Ottawa, May 27, 2021

Julie Adair
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

TABLE OF PROVISIONS

Feeds Regulations, 2022

Interpretation

1 Definitions

Incorporation by Reference

2 Documents incorporated by reference

Exemptions

3 Exemption from Act and Regulations

Deleterious Substances

4 Prescribed substances

Approval and Registration of Feeds

Feeds to Be Approved or Registered

5 Feeds that must be approved

6 Feeds that must be registered

Application and Requirements

7 Application for approval or registration

Evaluation and Decision of Minister

8 Approval or registration of feed

Approval — Listing and Cancellation

9 Notice of approval

10 Cancellation

Registration — Number, Certificate and Cancellation

11 Assignment and issuance

12 Use of registration number

13 Expiration of registration

14 Surrender of certificate

15 Cancellation of registration

Renewal or Amendment

16 Application for renewal or amendment of registration

New Information

17 Provision to Minister

Licences

Prescribed Feeds and Activities

18 Section 3.1 of the Act — import for sale

Issuance, Renewal and Amendment

19 Subsection 5.2(1) of the Act — import for sale

20 Application

21 Conditions

22 Refusal

23 Notice of refusal

24 Place of business

25 Amendment — inability to conduct activity

Expiry, Surrender, Suspension and Cancellation

26 Expiry

27 Surrender

28 Grounds for suspension

29 Conditions for suspension

30 Suspension — risk of harm

31 Duration of suspension

32 Grounds for cancellation

33 Conditions for cancellation

Standards

General Provisions

34 No risk of harm

35 Prohibited content

36 Suited for purpose

Mixed Feeds

37 Content

38 Premix — content

39 Mineral feed — content

40 Chop feed

Single Ingredient Feeds

41 Chopped, crushed or ground grain

42 Single ingredient feed set out in Table

Packaging

43 Packaging requirements

Labelling

General Provisions

44 Location of label

45 Content of label

46 Request for list of ingredients

47 Restrictions — information, guarantee or claim

48 Language of label — information required

49 Placement of information on label

Naming Feeds

50 Suitable name

51 Mixed feed for single species or class

Guaranteed Analysis

52 Mandatory guarantee

53 Individual serving

54 Minimum guaranteed amount

Units of Measurement

55 Metric units

Preventive Controls

Interpretation

56 Definitions

Biological, Chemical and Physical Hazards

57 Identification and analysis of hazards

Preventive Control Plan

58 Preparing, keeping and maintaining

59 Implementation

60 Content — hazards

61 Retention period — documents

Investigation, Complaints and Recall

62 Investigation — risk of harm

63 Complaints — procedure

64 Recall procedure

Requirements Specific to Certain Activities

Manufacture of Feeds

65 Mixed feed

Import of Feeds

66 Information

67 Further inspection

68 Same level of protection

69 Non-compliant feed

Manufacture or Sale for Export or Export of Feeds

70 Non-compliant feed

71 Export certificate or document

Traceability

72 Documents

73 Request for documents

Samples for Analysis

74 Requirements

Tolerance Limits

75 Nutrient guarantee

Seizure and Detention

76 Detention tag

Transitional Provisions

77 Definition of former Regulations

78 Exemption — paragraph 3(b) of former Regulations

79 Notification of release

80 Pending application to register a feed

81 Validity of registration certificate

82 Cancellation of registration certificate

83 Retention of documents — manufacture before coming into force

84 Content of feed

Consequential Amendments

Health of Animals Act

85 Health of Animals Regulations

Food and Drugs Act

86 Food and Drug Regulations

90 Repeal

Coming into Force

91 Registration

SCHEDULE

Tolerance Limits

TABLE 1

TABLE 2


Feeds Regulations, 2022

Interpretation

Definitions

1 (1) The following definitions apply in these Regulations.

Act
means the Feeds Act. (Loi)
Agency
means the Canadian Food Inspection Agency established by section 3 of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act. (Agence)
cattle
means animals of the species Bos taurus or Bos indicus. (bœuf)
caution statement
means a statement concerning animal health hazards or safe product handling or storage. (précaution)
complete feed
means a mixed feed that, when used for the type of livestock and for the purposes stated on the label, provides all of the nutrients necessary for the maintenance of life or for promoting production, except water and, in the case of ruminants and horses, roughage. (aliment complet)
contaminant
means any micro-organism, chemical substance, extraneous material or other substance that may present a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment, including any substance that is not permitted under these Regulations or that does not comply with any limits or levels provided under these Regulations. (contaminant)
custom medicated feed
means a medicated feed that is manufactured in accordance with a veterinary prescription and contains a medicating ingredient that
  • (a) is not set out in the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures for the species of livestock for which the feed is intended; or
  • (b) is of a brand, level or compatibility that differs from that set out in the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures in respect of that particular ingredient, for the species of livestock for which the feed is intended. (aliment médicamenté sur mesure)
customer formula feed
means a mixed feed that is manufactured by a feed manufacturer
  • (a) for feeding their livestock; or
  • (b) in accordance with a written order that is signed by a purchaser if
    • (i) the order states the name of each single ingredient feed, medicating ingredient set out in the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures or type of product set out in the Compendium of Non-Feed Product Brochures, and their respective amounts, to be used in the manufacture of that feed or to be added to other mixed feeds that conform to the standards prescribed in these Regulations,
    • (ii) the feed does not contain a pest control product as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Pest Control Products Act, and
    • (iii) the feed is not intended for resale. (aliment préparé selon la formule du client)
disposed of in a safe manner
means disposed of, other than by human or animal consumption, in a manner that does not present a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment. (disposition sécuritaire)
flavouring agent
means a mixed feed that is composed predominantly of flavour ingredients listed in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table and that is added to a feed to enhance its flavour. (agent de saveur)
holder of the approval
means a person who has been provided with a written notice under subsection 9(1) confirming that approval of a feed that is manufactured by or for a government, academic or private research establishment for research or experimental purposes has been given. (titulaire de l'approbation)
identification code
means any combination of letters or figures or letters and figures by which a lot of feed can be traced during manufacture and distribution. (code d'identification)
medicated feed
means a mixed feed that contains a medicating ingredient. (aliment médicamenté)
medicating ingredient
means a drug for which a drug identification number is assigned under subsection C.01.014.2(1) of the Food and Drug Regulations or for which a letter of authorization for use in emergency treatment has been issued to a veterinarian under subsection C.08.010(1) of those Regulations and that is intended
  • (a) for use in the prevention or treatment of disease in livestock; or
  • (b) to affect the structure or any function of the body of the livestock. (substance médicatrice)
mineral feed
means a mixed feed that is composed predominantly of mineral elements or inorganic nutrients. (aliment minéral)
mixed feed
means a feed that contains at least two single ingredient feeds. (aliment mélangé)
novel feed
means a feed that is an organism, a part of an organism or a product of an organism, or that consists of parts or products of an organism, and that
  • (a) is not listed in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table; or
  • (b) has a novel trait. (aliment nouveau)
novel trait,
in respect of a feed that is an organism, a part of an organism or a product of an organism, or that consists of parts or products of an organism, means a characteristic of the feed that
  • (a) has been intentionally selected, created or introduced into the feed through a specific genetic change; and
  • (b) based on valid scientific rationale, is not substantially equivalent, in terms of its specific use and safety for human or animal health or the environment, to any characteristic of a similar feed that is listed in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table. (caractère nouveau)
percentage
or %, with respect to any product, means the percentage by mass of the product. (pourcentage or %)
poultry
means chickens, turkeys, ducks and geese. (volaille)
premix
means a mixed feed that provides micro-ingredients, including vitamins or minerals, and that is intended to be further diluted and mixed with other ingredients to produce a supplement or complete feed. (prémélange)
President
means the President of the Agency. (président)
principal display panel
means the part of the label applied to all or part of any side or surface of a feed that is displayed or visible under normal or customary conditions of sale or use. (espace principal)
processing
includes the use of a feed for the purpose of manufacturing another feed or the mixing of a feed with another feed. (transformation)
registrant
means a person who has been issued a registration certificate under section 11. (titulaire de l'enregistrement)
ruminant
means an animal of the suborder Ruminatiae and includes an animal of the family Camelidae. (ruminant)
single ingredient feed
means any substance or mixture of substances that has been approved for feeding to livestock and that is listed in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table. (aliment à ingrédient unique)
specialty feed
means a mixed feed that does not provide any nutritional value and that is used to improve or facilitate
  • (a) the preservation of any feed with which it is mixed prior to feeding or during storage;
  • (b) the qualities, flowability or pelleting of any feed with which it is mixed;
  • (c) ingredient dispersion or distribution in any feed with which it is mixed;
  • (d) ingestion, acceptability or digestion by livestock of any feed with which it is mixed;
  • (e) the quality or availability of nutrients in any feed with which it is mixed; or
  • (f) the absorption of nutrients by livestock of any feed that is fed to it. (aliment spécialisé)
supplement
means a mixed feed that provides a significant source of nutrients in order to improve the nutritional value of the total diet and that is intended to be
  • (a) fed undiluted in addition to other feeds;
  • (b) offered on a free-choice basis with other feeds that are available separately; or
  • (c) further diluted and mixed to produce the total diet. (supplément)
total diet
means the ration consisting of all feeds, including roughage, that are offered daily to livestock. (ration totale)
trace mineral salt feed
means a mineral feed that is composed of salt (NaCl) and trace minerals. (complément d'oligo-éléments et de sel)
veterinary prescription
means an order prescribing a medicated feed issued by a veterinarian licensed to practise in the province in which the feed is to be fed to the livestock to be treated. (ordonnance)
warning statement
means a statement concerning human health hazards. (mise en garde)

Definition of livestock

(2) For the purposes of the definition livestock in section 2 of the Act, the following animals, which are domestically raised or kept, are designated as livestock:

Incorporation by Reference

Documents incorporated by reference

2 (1) The following documents, prepared by the Agency and published on its website, and as amended from time to time, are incorporated by reference into these Regulations:

Inconsistency

(2) In the event of an inconsistency between a provision of these Regulations and any document incorporated by reference into these Regulations, that provision prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.

Words and expressions

(3) For the purposes of interpreting any document prepared by the Agency that is incorporated by reference into these Regulations, words and expressions that are used but not defined in that document have the same meaning as in these Regulations.

Exemptions

Exemption from Act and Regulations

3 (1) The following feeds are exempt from the application of the Act and these Regulations:

Feed not exempted under paragraph (1)(g)

(2) In the case of a feed that is manufactured by or for a government, academic or private research establishment for research or experimental purposes, that is not otherwise exempted under paragraph (1)(g) and that is intended to be fed to livestock owned by or under the direct supervision of the establishment, the following requirements do not apply:

Certain products or substances

(3) Any medicating ingredient, any pest control product registered under the Pest Control Products Act and any type of product set out in the Compendium of Non-Feed Product Brochures for which there is an approved brand are exempt from the application of the definition feed in section 2 of the Act.

Deleterious Substances

Prescribed substances

4 For the purposes of subsection 3(2) of the Act, the substances listed in the List of Prescribed Deleterious Substances are prescribed as deleterious substances.

Approval and Registration of Feeds

Feeds to Be Approved or Registered

Feeds that must be approved

5 (1) For the purposes of paragraph 3(1)(a) of the Act, the following feeds must be approved:

Exemption from approval

(2) Any feed that is not referred to in subsection (1) is exempt from approval.

Feeds that must be registered

6 (1) For the purposes of paragraph 3(1)(a) of the Act and subject to subsections (2) and (3), all feeds must be registered.

Exemption from registration

(2) The following feeds are exempt from registration:

Conditions

(3) The exemption of the feeds referred to in subsection (2) applies only if

Application and Requirements

Application for approval or registration

7 (1) An application for approval or registration of a feed must be made to the Minister in a form approved by the President.

Elements required

(2) Subject to subsection (4), any application referred to in subsection (1) must be accompanied by

Additional information — novel trait

(3) In the case of a feed with a novel trait, an application for approval must be accompanied by the following additional information:

Information — research or experimental purposes

(4) In the case of a feed that is manufactured by or for a government, academic or private research establishment for research or experimental purposes, an application for approval referred to in subsection (1) must be accompanied by the following information:

Scientific investigation

(5) If any scientific investigation has been conducted under paragraphs (2)(k) or (3)(c), the applicant must provide the following information:

Evaluation and Decision of Minister

Approval or registration of feed

8 (1) Once an application for approval or registration of a feed under subsection 7(1) is evaluated, the Minister must approve or register the feed if the following requirements are met:

Evaluation of risk

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(c), the Minister must evaluate the risk of harm presented by the feed to human or animal health or the environment, including whether the feed is toxic or capable of becoming toxic.

Toxic feed

(3) A feed is toxic or capable of becoming toxic if it enters or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that

Notice of refusal

(4) If the requirements set out in subsection (1) are not met, the Minister must notify the applicant in writing of the refusal to approve or register the feed and provide the reasons for the refusal.

Approval — Listing and Cancellation

Notice of approval

9 (1) If a feed is approved by the Minister under section 8, a written notice confirming that approval has been given and specifying the purpose for which it is given must be provided to the applicant.

Listing in Canadian Feed Ingredients Table

(2) If a feed is approved by the Minister, other than a feed that is manufactured by or for a government, academic or private research establishment for research or experimental purposes,

Cancellation

10 (1) Subject to subsections (2) to (5), the Minister may cancel the approval of a feed that is manufactured by or for a government, academic or private research establishment for research or experimental purposes if there are reasonable grounds to believe that, in respect of that feed, there has been a contravention of the Act or these Regulations.

Factors

(2) In deciding whether to cancel an approval in accordance with subsection (1), the Minister must take into account the following factors:

Conditions for cancellation

(3) The Minister may cancel an approval only if a written notice has been provided to the holder of the approval that

Notice of hearing

(4) Within 30 days after the day on which the Minister receives the notice that the holder of the approval wishes to have an opportunity to be heard, the Minister must notify the holder of the approval in writing of the time and place of the hearing to determine whether the approval is to be cancelled.

Grounds for cancellation

(5) The Minister must not cancel the approval unless

Notice of cancellation

(6) The Minister must notify the holder of the approval in writing of the cancellation of the approval and the date on which it takes effect.

Registration — Number, Certificate and Cancellation

Assignment and issuance

11 If a feed is registered by the Minister under section 8, a registration number must be assigned to that feed and a registration certificate must be issued to the applicant.

Use of registration number

12 (1) It is prohibited for any person to use a registration number assigned to a feed unless they are the registrant of the feed.

False registration number

(2) It is prohibited for any person to use a false registration number in respect of any feed.

Expiration of registration

13 Every registration expires on the date indicated on the registration certificate.

Surrender of certificate

14 A registrant may surrender a registration certificate by submitting a written notice to the Minister; the registration becomes invalid as of the day on which the notice is received by the Minister.

Cancellation of registration

15 (1) Subject to subsections (2) to (5), the Minister may cancel a registration in respect of a feed if there are reasonable grounds to believe that, in respect of that feed, there has been a contravention of the Act or these Regulations.

Factors

(2) In deciding whether to cancel a registration in accordance with subsection (1), the Minister must take into account the following factors:

Conditions for cancellation

(3) The Minister may cancel a registration only if a written notice has been provided to the registrant that

Notice of hearing

(4) Within 30 days after the day on which the Minister receives the notice that the registrant wishes to have an opportunity to be heard, the Minister must notify the registrant in writing of the time and place of the hearing to determine whether the registration is to be cancelled.

Grounds for cancellation

(5) The Minister must not cancel the registration unless

Notice of cancellation

(6) The Minister must notify the registrant in writing of the cancellation of the registration and the date on which it takes effect; the registration certificate becomes invalid as of that day.

Renewal or Amendment

Application for renewal or amendment of registration

16 (1) Any application to renew or amend an approval or a registration must be made to the Minister in the same manner as an application for approval or for registration referred to in section 7 and is considered to be an application for approval or for registration for the purposes of these Regulations.

No change in respect of a feed

(2) The holder of the approval or a registrant must not make a change in respect of an approved or registered feed unless the approval or registration of the feed has been amended by the Minister on application made in accordance with subsection (1).

New Information

Provision to Minister

17 (1) If, after approval or registration of a feed, a person becomes aware of any new information that the feed may present a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment, the person must immediately provide the new information to the Minister.

Evaluation and decision

(2) If, on the basis of the new information, the Minister determines, in re-evaluating the feed,

Notice of amendment

(3) The Minister must give public notice of the Minister's determination under subparagraph (2)(b)(i) to amend the description of the feed in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table or remove the feed from that Table and the date on which the amendment or removal takes effect.

Licences

Prescribed Feeds and Activities

Section 3.1 of the Act — import for sale

18 (1) For the purposes of section 3.1 of the Act, a prescribed feed that has been imported for sale is any feed other than a feed registered under section 8, and the prescribed activities that a person is prohibited from conducting in respect of that prescribed feed, unless the person is authorized to conduct that activity by a licence, are storing, processing, packaging, labelling and delivering.

Section 3.1 of the Act — export and interprovincial trade

(2) For the purposes of section 3.1 of the Act, a prescribed feed that is to be exported or to be sent or conveyed from one province to another is any feed other than a feed registered under section 8 or manufactured by a livestock producer and intended for feeding their livestock, and the prescribed activities that a person is prohibited from conducting in respect of that prescribed feed, unless the person is authorized to conduct that activity by a licence, are manufacturing, storing, processing, packaging, labelling and selling.

Exception

(3) A licence is not required to conduct any prescribed activity referred to in subsection (2) if it is being conducted at

Definition of grain elevator

(4) For the purposes of paragraph (3)(b), a grain elevator means any premises

Issuance, Renewal and Amendment

Subsection 5.2(1) of the Act — import for sale

19 (1) For the purposes of the issuing of a licence under subsection 5.2(1) of the Act, a prescribed feed that has been imported for sale is any feed, and the prescribed activities in respect of that prescribed feed are storing, processing, packaging, labelling and delivering.

Subsection 5.2(1) of the Act — export and interprovincial trade

(2) For the purposes of the issuing of a licence under subsection 5.2(1) of the Act, a prescribed feed that is to be exported or to be sent or conveyed from one province to another is any feed, and the prescribed activities in respect of that prescribed feed are manufacturing, storing, processing, packaging, labelling and selling.

Application

20 An application for the issuance, renewal or amendment of a licence must be made to the Minister in a form approved by the President.

Conditions

21 The Minister may issue, renew or amend a licence if

Refusal

22 The Minister may refuse to issue, renew or amend a licence if, in the five years before the day on which the application is made, the applicant

Notice of refusal

23 If the Minister refuses to issue, renew or amend a licence, the Minister must provide a written notice to the applicant and provide the reasons for the refusal.

Place of business

24 A licence holder must conduct the activities identified in their licence, other than delivery or sale, in a place of business identified in their licence for the activities.

Amendment — inability to conduct activity

25 (1) If a licence holder is unable to conduct an activity identified in their licence in a place of business identified in the licence, the Minister may amend the licence to remove the authorization to conduct that activity in that place of business.

Notice of amendment

(2) The Minister must notify the licence holder in writing of any amendment to the licence and the date on which it takes effect.

Expiry, Surrender, Suspension and Cancellation

Expiry

26 (1) A licence expires two years after the date of issuance or renewal that is specified in the licence unless the licence has been surrendered or cancelled before that date.

Expiry — amendment

(2) If the Minister amends a licence, its expiry date remains unchanged.

Surrender

27 A licence holder may surrender their licence to the Minister and that licence becomes invalid on surrender, if it is not subject to a cancellation procedure.

Grounds for suspension

28 The Minister may suspend a licence if

Conditions for suspension

29 (1) The Minister must not suspend a licence unless the licence holder

Notice of suspension

(2) The Minister must notify the licence holder in writing of the suspension and the date on which it takes effect.

Suspension — risk of harm

30 (1) Despite section 29, if there is a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment that may result if the licence holder continues to conduct an activity that is identified in the licence, the Minister may suspend the licence immediately after the licence holder is provided with a written report that sets out the grounds for the suspension.

Notice of suspension

(2) The Minister must notify the licence holder in writing that their licence is suspended and that the suspension takes effect immediately.

Duration of suspension

31 The suspension of a licence must be lifted if the Minister determines that corrective action has been taken.

Grounds for cancellation

32 The Minister may cancel a licence if

Conditions for cancellation

33 (1) The Minister must not cancel a licence unless the licence holder has been notified in writing of the grounds for cancellation and has been provided with an opportunity to be heard in respect of the cancellation.

Notice of cancellation

(2) The Minister must notify the licence holder in writing of the cancellation and the date on which it takes effect.

Standards

General Provisions

No risk of harm

34 (1) A feed must not present a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment.

Mixing of feed presenting a risk

(2) It is prohibited for a person to mix a feed that presents a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment with another feed for the purpose of bringing the feed into compliance with the requirements of the Act and these Regulations.

Exception

(3) Subsection (2) does not apply if

Prohibited content

35 A feed must not contain or present, as the case may be,

Suited for purpose

36 A feed must be uniformly mixed and have the chemical and physical composition necessary for it to be suited for the purpose for which it is intended.

Mixed Feeds

Content

37 A mixed feed must contain only

Premix — content

38 A premix must contain only

Mineral feed — content

39 A mineral feed

Chop feed

40 A chop feed must be obtained by grinding, chopping or crushing

Single Ingredient Feeds

Chopped, crushed or ground grain

41 Chopped, crushed or ground grain sold as a feed or as an ingredient of a feed must meet, at a minimum, the characteristics set out in Schedule 3 to the Canada Grain Regulations for the lowest grade established by those Regulations for that kind of grain.

Single ingredient feed set out in Table

42 A single ingredient feed sold or imported under an approved name set out in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table must conform to the description of that feed set out in that Table.

Packaging

Packaging requirements

43 A package for a feed must

Labelling

General Provisions

Location of label

44 (1) Any feed that is manufactured, sold or imported must have a label affixed to it or to a package containing it or, if the feed is shipped in bulk, attached to or printed on any document, including the invoice, shipping bill or statement of account delivered with the shipment.

Exception

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a customer formula feed if the feed is manufactured by a feed manufacturer for feeding to their livestock.

Content of label

45 (1) Subject to subsection (4), the label referred to in subsection 44(1) must contain

Additional information

(2) The label referred to in subsection 44(1) must also contain

Feed manufactured in another country

(3) If a feed that is manufactured in a foreign state bears a label that shows the name and principal place of business of the person in Canada for whom the feed was manufactured for resale, the name and principal place of business of that person must be preceded by the words “imported by” or “importé par” or by the words “imported for” or “importé pour”, unless the geographic origin of the product is stated on the label.

Customer formula feed

(4) In the case of a customer formula feed, the label referred to in subsection 44(1) must contain

Request for list of ingredients

46 (1) If the name of each single ingredient feed used in a mixed feed is not contained on the label under subparagraph 45(2)(b)(i), any person may, within three years after the day on which the mixed feed is manufactured, make a written request to the manufacturer or registrant to obtain the name of each single ingredient feed used in that feed.

Provision of information

(2) The manufacturer or registrant must provide in writing the information referred to in subsection (1) within three business days of the day on which the request is received.

Restrictions — information, guarantee or claim

47 A label must not contain

Language of label — information required

48 (1) The information required to be shown on the label of a feed must be printed conspicuously, legibly and indelibly in English or French or both languages, except the following information, which must be shown in both English and French:

Language of label — optional information

(2) Any optional information printed on the label that is provided to prevent any risk of harm to animal or human health or the environment, including any caution statement or warning statement that is useful to the purchaser of the feed or any information that is included in the preventive control plan under paragraph 60(1)(a), must be printed in both English and French.

Placement of information on label

49 (1) Subject to subsection (2), any information required to be shown on a label must appear on the principal display panel.

Exception

(2) The directions for use, guaranteed analysis statement and list of ingredients may be provided on an insert that is enclosed in, or attached to, the package, if there is a reference on the principal display panel to where that information is located.

Presentation of information on label

(3) A label must not contain any variation in the character, size, colour or placement of the printing that obscures or emphasizes any part of the information required to be shown on the label unless such variation is to draw attention to the caution statements or warning statements required to be shown on the label.

Naming Feeds

Suitable name

50 The name of a feed required to be shown on the label of a feed must not tend to deceive or mislead a purchaser.

Mixed feed for single species or class

51 (1) A mixed feed formulated for a single species or class of livestock must have as part of its name the name of the species or class of livestock and the purpose for which the feed is intended.

Feeds not formulated for species or class

(2) A feed that is not formulated for a single species or class of livestock must have as part of its name

Identical names

(3) If the name of a feed is identical to that of another feed of the same manufacturer but is different in terms of its guaranteed level of protein, the brand of the feed must be different from the brand of the other feed or the percentage of protein content must form part of the name of each feed.

Premix

(4) If a feed is a premix, the word “premix” or “prémélange” must form part of the name of the feed.

Supplement

(5) If a feed is a supplement, the word “supplement” or “supplément” must form part of the name of the feed.

Customer formula feed

(6) If a feed is a customer formula feed, the words “customer formula” or “formule du client” must form part of the name of the feed.

Single ingredient feed

(7) If a feed is a single ingredient feed, the name of the feed must be one of the names approved and set out for that ingredient in the Canadian Feed Ingredients Table.

Guaranteed Analysis

Mandatory guarantee

52 (1) The guaranteed analysis statement required to be shown on the label of a feed must include

Optional guarantee

(2) In the case of a mixed feed, the guaranteed analysis statement may also include a guarantee, other than a guarantee referred to in paragraph (1)(b), if the guarantee

Individual serving

53 (1) In the case of a mixed feed that is in the form of an individual serving, the guaranteed analysis statement referred to in section 52 may include an indication of the amount per individual serving of each guaranteed nutrient.

Moisture content

(2) For the purposes of section 52 and subsection (1), and unless specified on the label, the guaranteed analysis statement must be based on the feed as it is fed to livestock and take into account its maximum moisture content.

Minimum guaranteed amount

54 (1) If the guarantee specifies the minimum amount of a substance in a feed without specifying the maximum amount, the actual amount of the substance in the feed must not exceed the minimum guaranteed amount by more than 10%.

Maximum guaranteed amount

(2) If the guarantee specifies the maximum amount of a substance in a feed without specifying the minimum amount, the actual amount of the substance in the feed must not be less than 90% of the maximum guaranteed amount.

Units of Measurement

Metric units

55 (1) All units of measurement shown on a label of a feed must be expressed in metric units in accordance with the Weights and Measures Act.

Other units of measurement

(2) Other units of measurement may be shown on a label if

Definition of metric unit

(3) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2), metric unit means any unit of measurement that is set out in Schedule I to the Weights and Measures Act.

Preventive Controls

Interpretation

Definitions

56 The following definitions apply in this section and sections 57 to 61.

acceptable level
means a level of a biological, chemical or physical hazard that does not present a risk of contamination of a feed. (niveau acceptable)
control measure
means a measure that can be applied to prevent or eliminate any biological, chemical or physical hazard that presents a risk of contamination of a feed or to reduce the hazard to an acceptable level. (mesure de contrôle)
critical control point
means a step at which the application of a control measure is essential to prevent or eliminate any biological, chemical or physical hazard that presents a risk of contamination of a feed or to reduce the hazard to an acceptable level. (point de contrôle critique)
equipment
means equipment, in a facility, that is used in connection with an activity that is regulated under the Act. (équipement)
facility
means a location, excluding a conveyance, where a feed is manufactured, stored, packaged, labelled or sold. (installation)

Biological, Chemical and Physical Hazards

Identification and analysis of hazards

57 (1) A person who manufactures, stores, packages, labels, sells or exports a feed must identify the biological, chemical and physical hazards that are present in that feed and analyze those hazards to determine whether they present a risk of contamination of that feed.

Control of hazards

(2) The person referred to in subsection (1) must prevent, eliminate or reduce to an acceptable level the hazards identified as being present in the feed by using control measures that are shown by evidence to be effective, including any treatment or process that is necessary for the feed to comply with section 35.

Factors

(3) In identifying and analyzing the hazards referred to in subsection (1), the person referred to in that subsection must consider the effect of any factor relevant to the safety of the feed, including

Preventive Control Plan

Preparing, keeping and maintaining

58 (1) A person who manufactures, stores, packages, labels, sells or exports a feed must prepare, keep and maintain a written preventive control plan that meets the requirements set out in section 60 for any of those activities.

Exception

(2) Despite subsection (1), a preventive control plan is not required to be prepared, kept or maintained for any activity conducted by that person in respect of a feed that is a cultivated farm crop that

Implementation

59 Any person that is required to prepare, keep and maintain a preventive control plan must implement that plan.

Content — hazards

60 (1) The preventive control plan must include the following information:

Content — measures to be taken

(2) The preventive control plan must describe the measures that will be taken to ensure that

Content — other requirements

(3) The preventive control plan must include a description of the measures for ensuring that the applicable requirements set out in sections 34 to 55, 62 to 65, 70 and 72 are met.

Retention period — documents

61 Any person that is required to prepare, keep and maintain a written preventive control plan must keep

Investigation, Complaints and Recall

Investigation — risk of harm

62 (1) Any person that manufactures, stores, packages, labels, sells or exports a feed and who suspects on reasonable grounds that the feed presents a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment or does not meet the requirements of the Act or these Regulations must immediately investigate the matter.

Notification

(2) If the investigation establishes that the feed presents a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment, the person must immediately notify the Minister and immediately take action to respond to the risk.

Complaints — procedure

63 (1) Any person that manufactures, stores, packages, labels, sells or exports a feed must prepare, keep and maintain a document that sets out a procedure for receiving, investigating and responding to complaints that relate to the feed.

Complaints — implementation

(2) On receipt of a complaint, the person must implement the procedure, prepare a document that sets out the details of the complaint, the results of the investigation and the actions taken based on those results and keep the document for three years after the day on which the actions are completed.

Recall procedure

64 (1) Any person that manufactures, stores, packages, labels, sells or exports a feed must prepare, keep and maintain a document that sets out a recall procedure that enables the effective recall of the feed, the name of a contact person who is responsible for the procedure and the name of a contact person who is responsible for conducting recalls.

Recall — implementation

(2) If a feed is recalled because it presents a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment, the person referred to in subsection (1) must

Requirements Specific to Certain Activities

Manufacture of Feeds

Mixed feed

65 (1) Any person that manufactures a mixed feed must keep a copy of the mix sheet for a period of three years after the day of manufacture of each lot as well as a copy of the mix formula for a period of three years after the last day of manufacture of that feed.

Customer formula feed or custom medicated feed

(2) If the feed is a customer formula feed or a custom medicated feed, the person who manufactures that feed must have a copy of the customer formula or the veterinary prescription under which the feed is manufactured in their possession during the manufacture of that feed and keep that copy for a period of three years after the last day of manufacture of that feed.

Single ingredient feed

(3) Any person that manufactures a single ingredient feed must keep a document containing the name of the feed, its identification code, its date of manufacture and the quantity manufactured for a period of three years after the day of manufacture of each lot of the feed, and keep a copy of any mix formula for a period of three years after the last day of manufacture of the feed.

Import of Feeds

Information

66 (1) Any person that imports a feed must, before or at the time of the import, provide to the Minister, in a form approved by the President, the following information:

Exception

(2) Despite subsection (1), the Minister may authorize the person who imports the feed, at their written request, to provide the information after the time of import, at the time specified by the Minister.

Further inspection

67 If, during an inspection that is conducted at the time of the import of a feed, the inspector determines that a further inspection is required, the person who imports the feed must keep it at the address referred to in paragraph 66(1)(d) until the further inspection is completed.

Same level of protection

68 The person who imports a feed must demonstrate that the feed imported has been manufactured, stored, packaged and labelled in a manner and under conditions that provide at least the same level of protection as that provided by subsections 57(1) and (2) and sections 60 to 64.

Non-compliant feed

69 Any person may import a feed, other than a novel feed, that does not meet any of the requirements set out in sections 6 and 34 to 47 of these Regulations if

Manufacture or Sale for Export or Export of Feeds

Non-compliant feed

70 Any person may manufacture or sell a feed, other than a novel feed, that is intended to be exported and that does not meet any of the requirements set out in sections 6 and 34 to 47 of these Regulations if a label that bears the word “Export” or “exportation” is applied or attached to the feed or accompanies it and if

Export certificate or document

71 (1) An application for the issuance of a certificate or other document referred to in section 5.5 of the Act must be made to the Minister in a form approved by the President.

Conditions for issuance

(2) The Minister may issue a certificate or other document referred to in section 5.5 of the Act in respect of a feed that has been manufactured, stored, processed, packaged, labelled, sold or delivered by the holder of a licence issued under section 5.2 of the Act if the licence holder complies with all the conditions to which the licence is subject.

Inspection before export

(3) The Minister may require that an inspection be conducted of any feed in respect of which a person has applied for a certificate or other document referred to in section 5.5 of the Act, for the purpose of deciding whether to issue the certificate or other document.

Traceability

Documents

72 (1) Any person that manufactures, stores, packages, labels, sells, imports or exports a feed must, if they provide the feed to another person, including as a sale at retail, prepare, keep and maintain documents that set out the following information:

Retention period of documents

(2) The documents must be kept for three years after the day on which the feed was provided to another person and must be accessible in Canada.

Request for documents

73 (1) If the Minister believes on reasonable grounds that a feed presents a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment, any person that is required to prepare, keep and maintain documents must, at the Minister's request, provide the Minister with any document referred to in subsection 72(1), or any part of such a document.

Production of documents

(2) The person referred to in subsection (1) must provide the documents

Samples for Analysis

Requirements

74 (1) A sample of feed taken by an inspector for analysis must be representative of the lot of feed from which it is taken and be of sufficient size to be satisfactory for analytical purposes.

Packaged feed — more than 5 kg

(2) If the feed to be analyzed is in packages of more than 5 kg, samples approximately equal in size must be taken from not fewer than 10 separate packages of the feed or, if the lot contains fewer than 10 packages, samples approximately equal in size must be taken from each of the packages.

Packaged feed — 5 kg or less

(3) If the feed to be analyzed is in packages of 5 kg or less, one unbroken package may constitute a sample.

Damaged feed

(4) If a portion of the feed that is to be analyzed appears mouldy or otherwise damaged in a manner to affect its suitability for feeding purposes, separate samples may be taken of the undamaged portion and the damaged portion.

Bulk feed

(5) If the feed to be analyzed is in bulk, samples of approximately equal size must be taken from not fewer than 10 separate sections of the bulk.

Tolerance Limits

Nutrient guarantee

75 (1) The tolerances set out in column 3 of Table 1 of the schedule must be applied to the analysts' results of the analysis for the purpose of determining the accuracy of the guaranteed analysis shown on the label under paragraph 45(1)(e) for the nutrients set out in column 1.

Medicating ingredient guarantee

(2) The tolerances set out in column 2 of Table 2 of the schedule must be applied to the analysts' results of the analysis for the purpose of determining the accuracy of the guaranteed amount shown on the label under subparagraphs 45(2)(c)(i) and (d)(iii) for a medicating ingredient set out in column 1 that is present in a feed.

Seizure and Detention

Detention tag

76 (1) Any article seized under section 9 of the Act may be detained by an inspector at any place by attaching a detention tag to the article or to any part of it.

Notice of detention

(2) If an article is detained in accordance with subsection (1), an inspector must provide a notice of detention to its owner or to the person in possession of it.

Prohibition

(3) It is prohibited for a person to alter or remove a detention tag or to sell or move any detained article unless an inspector gives written authorization to the person to do so.

Notice of release

(4) If an article is released under subsection 9(2) of the Act, an inspector must provide a notice of release to the person to whom the notice of detention was provided.

Forfeited articles

(5) Any article forfeited under subsection 9(3) or 9.1(3) of the Act must be disposed of in the following manner:

Transitional Provisions

Definition of former Regulations

77 In sections 78 to 84, former Regulations means the Feeds Regulations, 1983 as they read immediately before the day on which these Regulations are registered.

Exemption — paragraph 3(b) of former Regulations

78 (1) Paragraph 3(b) of the former Regulations continues to apply in respect of a feed referred to in that paragraph for the 12-month period that begins on the day on which these Regulations are registered.

Exemption — paragraph 3(c.1) of former Regulations

(2) Paragraph 3(c.1) of the former Regulations continues to apply in respect of a feed referred to in that paragraph on or after the day on which these Regulations are registered provided that the importer of the feed has submitted to the President, before the day on which these Regulations are registered, the information referred to subparagraph 3(c.1)(i) of the former Regulations for approval by the President for the importation and accepted responsibility for the disposal in a safe manner of all livestock produced from the feed in accordance with subparagraph 3(c.1)(ii) of the former Regulations.

Notification of release

79 (1) If, before the day on which these Regulations are registered, a notification for an authorization for the release of a novel feed has been provided to the Minister under paragraph 4.1(1)(a) of the former Regulations, accompanied by the undertaking referred to in paragraph 4.1(1)(b) of those Regulations and the information set out in section 4.2 of those Regulations, and a decision has not been made by the Minister under subsection 4.3(1) of those Regulations, the Minister must approve the feed under section 8 of these Regulations if the requirements set out in paragraphs 8(1)(b) and (c) are met.

Notice of refusal

(2) If the requirements set out in paragraphs 8(1)(b) and (c) of these Regulations are not met, the Minister must provide written notice of the refusal to approve the feed to the person providing the notification and provide the reasons for the decision not to approve the feed.

New information — release

(3) If, at any time after receiving authorization from the Minister for the release of a novel feed under paragraph 4.3(1)(a) of the former Regulations, a person becomes aware of any new information that the feed may present a risk of harm to human or animal health or the environment, the person must make an application for approval for that feed in accordance with section 7 of these Regulations.

Pending application to register a feed

80 Every application to register a feed made to the Director in accordance with section 6 of the former Regulations that is pending on the day on which these Regulations are registered must be dealt with in accordance with the former Regulations.

Validity of registration certificate

81 A registration certificate issued under section 9 of the former Regulations that is valid immediately before the day on which these Regulations are registered is deemed to have been issued under section 11 of these Regulations.

Cancellation of registration certificate

82 Section 12 of the former Regulations continues to apply in respect of a registration certificate on or after the day on which these Regulations are registered if, before that day, the Minister has sent the notice referred to in subsection 12(2) of the former Regulations to the registrant by registered mail.

Retention of documents — manufacture before coming into force

83 (1) Subsections 15(1) and (4) of the former Regulations continue to apply in respect of any of the feeds referred to in those subsections if they were manufactured before the day on which these Regulations are registered.

Retention of documents — manufacture on or after coming into force

(2) Section 65 of these Regulations applies in respect of any of the feeds referred to in that section only if they are manufactured on or after the day on which these Regulations are registered.

Content of feed

84 (1) Nothing in these Regulations prohibits the manufacture, sale or import of a feed that does not comply with the standard set out in section 35 of these Regulations if it complies with the standard set out in section 19 of the former Regulations.

Mixed feed or single ingredient feed

(2) Nothing in these Regulations prohibits the sale or import of a feed that does not comply with the standard set out in section 42 of these Regulations if it complies with the standard set out in section 22 of the former Regulations.

Labelling

(3) Nothing in these Regulations prohibits the manufacture, sale or import of a feed the labelling of which does not comply with the requirements set out in sections 44 to 55 of these Regulations if the labelling of that feed complies with the requirements set out in sections 24 and 26 to 33 of the former Regulations.

Cessation of effect

(4) Subsections (1) to (3) cease to have effect 12 months after the day on which these Regulations are registered.

Consequential Amendments

Health of Animals Act

Health of Animals Regulations

85 Section 113 of the Health of Animals Regulationsfootnote 7 is replaced by the following:

113 Section 112 does not apply to any feed approved or registered under the Feeds Act.

Food and Drugs Act

Food and Drug Regulations

86 Subsection C.01.014(2) of the Food and Drug Regulationsfootnote 8 is replaced by the following:

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of a veterinary health product, a study drug as defined in section C.03.301 or a medicated feed as defined in subsection 1(1) of the Feeds Regulations, 2022.

87 The definition dilute drug premix in subsection C.01A.001(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

dilute drug premix
means a drug for veterinary use that results from mixing a drug premix with a feed, as defined in section 2 of the Feeds Act, to such a level that at least 10 kg of the resulting mixture is required to medicate one tonne of complete feed, as defined in subsection 1(1) of the Feeds Regulations, 2022, with the lowest approved dosage level of the drug. (prémélange médicamenteux dilué)

88 Paragraph C.01A.001(2)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

89 Subsection C.08.012(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(2) For the purpose of this section, medicated feed has the same meaning as in the Feeds Regulations, 2022.

Repeal

90 The Feeds Regulations, 1983footnote 9 are repealed.

Coming into Force

Registration

91 (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), these Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

First anniversary of registration

(2) The following provisions come into force on the first anniversary of the day on which these Regulations are registered:

18 months after registration

(3) Sections 18 to 33, 69 and 71 come into force on the day that, in the 18th month after the month in which these Regulations are registered, has the same calendar number as the day on which they are registered or, if that 18th month has no day with that number, the last day of that 18th month.

SCHEDULE

(Section 75)

Tolerance Limits

TABLE 1

Tolerances to be applied to the analysts' results of the analysis on nutrients in feed under subsection 75(1)
 

Column 1

Nutrient

Column 2

Guaranteed Amount

Column 3

Permitted tolerances not to exceed
1 Calcium (Ca), Magnesium (Mg), Sodium (Na), Potassium (K), Sulphur (S), Salt (NaCl) (a) 1% and under A deficiency or excess of 0.2% of the feed
(b) Over 1% A deficiency or excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
2 Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu), Manganese (Mn), Iodine (I), Cobalt (Co) All amounts A deficiency or excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
3 Fluorine (F) All amounts An excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
4 Phosphorus (P) (a) 5% and under A deficiency or excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
(b) Over 5% A deficiency of 10% or an excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
5 Iron (Fe) All amounts A deficiency of 20% or an excess of 40% of the guaranteed amount
6 Crude protein (mixed feed) (a) 24% and under A deficiency of 1.0% of the feed
(b) Over 24% A deficiency of 1.5% of the feed
Crude protein (single ingredient feed) All amounts A deficiency of 0.8% of the feed
7 Equivalent crude protein (a) 5% and under An excess of 1.0% of the feed
(b) Over 5% and up to and including 25% An excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
(c) Over 25% An excess of 5% of the feed
8 Crude fat All amounts A deficiency or excess of 0.5% of the feed
9 Crude fibre (a) 5% and under A deficiency or excess of 0.5% of the feed
(b) Over 5% and up to and including 15% A deficiency or excess of 10% of the guaranteed amount
(c) Over 15% A deficiency or excess of 1.5% of the feed
10 Vitamin A, Vitamin E All amounts A deficiency of 20% of the guaranteed amount
11 Vitamin D All amounts A deficiency of 25% of the guaranteed amount
12 Sugar (invert) (a) 24% and under A deficiency of 1.5% of the feed
(b) Over 24% A deficiency of 2% of the feed
13 Pepsin digestible protein All amounts A deficiency of 10% of the guaranteed amount

TABLE 2

Tolerances to be applied to the analysts' results of the analysis on medicating ingredients under subsection 75(2)
 

Column 1

Medicating Ingredient

Column 2

Permitted tolerances not to exceed
1 Medicating ingredients except antibiotics A deficiency or excess of 20% of the guaranteed amount
2 Antibiotics A deficiency or excess of 25% of the guaranteed amount

Privacy notice statement

Provision of the information is on a voluntary basis. We will use the information for the purpose of responding to your questions/comments, and to improve our Internet presence. The information will be held in Public Services and Procurement Canada's Personal Information Bank number PPU 115 Internet and PPE 830 intranet Services, and it will be retained according to the retention and disposal schedule established for this bank.

Your personal information is protected under the provisions of the Privacy Act. Under the Act, you have the right to request access to and correction of your personal information, if erroneous or incomplete. If you wish to avail yourself of this right or require clarification about this statement, contact our Privacy Coordinator at aiprp.atip@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca. For more information on privacy issues and the Privacy Act consult the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

For more information about your rights, visit Info Source. This is a Government of Canada publication available in major libraries, at government information offices and from constituency offices of federal Members of Parliament.

The Internet is a public forum and electronic information can be intercepted. This is not a secure website. Please do not disclose unnecessary confidential information about yourself or your accounts with Public Services and Procurement Canada.