Minnesota Department of Agriculture

Food and Feed Safety Division

Document: FOOD.POLICY.60.01 Page 2 of 4 Title: Food Progressive Enforcement Policy

Based on the severity and risk of the inspection orders, the agency may conduct a reinspection or a follow-up inspection to monitor compliance with inspection orders. Reinspections and follow- up inspections are considered part of the progressive enforcement continuum and considered a valuable field compliance tool. A reinspection fee may be assessed to the firm under Minnesota Statute § 28A.085. A reinspection fee is not considered a penalty but exists as a cost-recovery tool for the Department. Additional follow-up activities may include long-term control options such as risk control plans. The agency may also determine the need for a directed investigation based on known or suspected violations occurring at the firm. A directed investigation is considered an inspection conducted for any other reason other than routine and can include reinspection, follow-up inspection, foodborne illness investigation, complaint investigation, etc. The need for the directed investigation may be identified by the Food Inspection Programs or other supporting units such as the Rapid Response Team (RRT) and the Compliance Unit. The Program or Unit that identifies the need for the directed investigation references the applicable processes and procedures as is appropriate to the situation. Additional Field Inspection Compliance and Enforcement Authority Additional enforcement authorities for field inspection staff are described under Minnesota Statute § 34A.11 including embargo, seizure and condemnation. A firm may also voluntarily destroy product, in lieu of an embargo, seizure and/or condemnation order issued by MDA, if it’s determined to be adulterated based on inspection violations and observations. The inspection program may also issue Letters of Information and Warning Letters under the authority provided in Minn. Stat § 34A.06 in order to communicate a regulatory requirement or inform a firm of a previously documented violation that is of significant public health significance that remains uncorrected. Transfer of Enforcement Actions When the inspection program tools fail to gain compliance, a case is forwarded to the Compliance Unit in the division for review. This review can occur based on predefined triggers (based on severity, number, or repetitiveness of violations) as well as direct referral from the inspection programs. Upon receipt, the Compliance Unit will review the supporting evidence and use a quantitative scoring methodology to recommend additional enforcement action. This recommendation may also include no action based on the evidence provided. Compliance Unit Actions Based on the Compliance Unit review, administrative, civil or criminal actions or penalties may be recommended with these decisions approved by the Compliance Unit Supervisor and the Division Director. Compliance case review procedures are designed for selection of the most appropriate enforcement action. However, they also allow flexibility and do not dictate what specific action must occur; rather they provide choices for each level of enforcement based on the evidence and facts of each case.