Skip to content | Skip to institutional links

Common menu bar links

Institutional links

About the CFIA
- Overview
- Acts and Regulations
Subjects
Send this page by email
Proactive Disclosure

Proactive Disclosure

REGIONAL WORKSHOPS ON FERTILIZER PROGRAM MODERNIZATION

Summary Report
April, 2007

PDF (1588 kb)

BACKGROUND

REGIONAL WORKSHOPS

RESULTS OF THE DISCUSSIONS

Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program
Effective Stakeholder Engagement
Performance Measures

NEXT STEPS AND CLOSING REMARKS

This document provides a summary of the key discussion points that were shared during the regional workshops on the Fertilizer Program Modernization initiative.

Background

Fertilizer program modernization

In 2004, the Canadian Government embarked on the Smart Regulation initiative with the aim of improving the performance of its regulatory system. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has played a prominent role in this initiative, both in its contribution to the broad policy development, as well as in the application of these principles and best practices to its own regulatory management and development activities. The latter was exemplified by the CFIA undertaking a number of pilot projects, one of which is the Fertilizer Program Modernization Initiative. This initiative includes a range of program review and redesign initiatives focused on achieving improved program capacity and performance.

Strengthening the Consultative Framework

A key component of the Fertilizer Program Modernization Initiative is the development of a strengthened consultative framework within the sector. This framework is intended to support a systematic review and continuous improvement of the regulatory model by increasing transparency of the regulatory process and improving stakeholder engagement in issue identification, policy development and performance evaluation phases of program management.

Preliminary consultations (held in February 2005 and March 2006) have inspired the stakeholders to establish a permanent consultative body, the Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum (CFPF). Engagement and cooperation with the CFPF in conjunction with national and regional workshops as well as various other consultation strategies is intended to contribute to strengthening the consultative framework, improve the understanding of the Fertilizer Program and support a lifecycle based regulatory model.

The Strategic Action Plan

The stakeholder consultations together with an internal program review conducted by the CFIA allowed for a comprehensive compilation of issues and challenges facing the program and the sector. This has led to the development of a proposed long term Strategic Action Plan (SAP) designed to enhance the efficiency, transparency and timeliness of the regulatory framework for all fertilizers and supplements.

The Strategic Action Plan is intended to be a living document that is subject to systematic review and validation by all stakeholders both internal and external to the Agency.

Regional Workshops

During the winter of 2007, the CFIA conducted a series of regional workshops to seek input from a broader stakeholder group including consumers, agricultural producers, industry, other levels of government, as well as regional CFIA staff. The overall objective of the workshops was to develop a common understanding of the current Fertilizer Program among stakeholders that are directly impacted by the Regulations and those that have an interest in the future of the program as well as actively engage them in the modernization initiative. The workshops were further intended to build on the work that has been completed to date in cooperation with the newly established Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum, help identify issues and challenges that have not been previously captured, develop additional strategies to modernize the program and contribute to priority setting for the next 6 to 18 months.

Five workshops were held in Calgary, Vancouver, Moncton, Guelph and St-Hyacinthe between the end of January and the beginning of March 2007. The workshops were divided into three parts. The first part was dedicated to presentations providing an overview of the Fertilizer Program and a description of the modernization initiative. The second part was dedicated to discussions on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program and priorities for the next year. The third part focused on defining the performance measures for the program and the modernization initiative, which included identifying the most effective consultative mechanisms and indicators to evaluate/gauge the success of the initiative and program performance.

A broad range of stakeholders were invited to participate in these regional consultations. Participants included a cross-section of the fertilizer and supplement community including:

Provincial and municipal representatives;
Agricultural producer associations;
Manufacturers, distributors and retailers from various related industries including bulk blend fertilizers, specialty fertilizers, micronutrients, composts, plant supplements, etc.;
Industry associations; and
Regional CFIA staff.

Results of the Discussions

The regional consultations offered many opportunities for stakeholders to discuss a variety of issues related to the Fertilizer Program. The results of the discussions have been summarized below and have been grouped into three sections: (1) Feedback on the Strategic Action Plan, (2) Feedback on effective stakeholder engagement and (3) Performance measures for the Program and the Modernization initiative.

Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

During the regional consultations, participants reviewed the proposed Strategic Action Plan (SAP) and were asked to identify additional issues, challenges and strategies. In general, the participants felt that the SAP was comprehensive and addressed many important issues and challenges facing the program and the sector. The participants also felt that the plan was ambitious and adequate resources must be secured to ensure its timely delivery and implementation. Throughout the discussions it was pointed out that completion timelines should be added to the SAP and frequent updates and progress reports should be either provided or made available on the web. The following summarizes the high-level themes/issues and associated priorities (***) that were identified by the stakeholders.

Note: Detailed record of the discussions and comments provided at each location are available in the appendices. Copies of the presentations are available upon request from:

Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Plant Production Division
Fertilizer Section
2 Constellation Crescent
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0Y9
CANADA
Email: fertilizer@inspection.gc.ca
Telephone: (613) 221-7519
Fax: (613) 228-4552

COMMON THEMES IN ALL WORKSHOPS:

Staffing/Resources

Hire more staff
Develop recruitment strategies and retention incentives ***
Ensure permanent allocation of resources to maintain staff ***
Hire more inspectors
Provide ongoing and timely inspector training
Contract literature reviews to third party
Outsource efficacy data reviews (panel of experts, use of private labs)

Time to market

Eliminate the registration backlog ***
Review, revise and re-define efficacy data requirements for different product types ***
Allow for temporary registrations
Increase the registration period to 5 years and more ***
Implement notification system for minor changes
Develop and publish comprehensive guidebooks on regulation and registration requirements ***
Conduct industry training on how to prepare a complete submission ***

Product assessment process

Implement electronic file submission system
Implement a system to track files in the queue ***
Implement a tiered assessment process and different queuing systems ***
Implement service delivery standards (per submission type) ***
Increase consistency between evaluators - develop checklists, SOPs and post them on the web ***
Broaden scope of product assessment - incorporate risk benefit analysis
Harmonize with international standards (US and EU)

Labelling

Review and revise definitions (Schedule II)
Expand the definition of a "label"
Strengthen oversight over web based sales (off-label advertising) ***
Strengthen cooperation with Industry Canada to address misleading claims ***
Revise labelling requirements in the regulations ***
Harmonize definitions and label requirements with AAPFCO
Deliver industry training/prepare guidebook on labelling

Regulatory coordination

Identify jurisdictional overlaps between provincial, municipal and federal regulations ***
Focus on waste derived products (compost, biosolids, pulp and paper sludges) including safety and efficacy standards ***
Minimize duplication of efforts with respect to product sampling and monitoring
Strengthen communication with other federal partners (HC, EC, PMRA)
Ensure adequate communication between programs within CFIA
Communicate policies across governments

Marketplace monitoring and compliance

Strengthen enforcement policy (additional tools including monetary penalties) ***
Ensure consistency in program delivery and enforcement ***
Conduct inspector training on enforcement
Focus on new products or products that have a history of non-compliance
Increase compliance of N, P, K fertilizers (CFQAP options) ***
Use third party accreditation - laboratories, efficacy trials, marketplace monitoring programs
Strengthen import controls (the same requirements should apply to domestic and imported products) ***
Increase cooperation with CBSA ***
Provide a mechanism to submit complaints on line; strengthen enforcement to complaints
Prioritize enforcement actions; focus on specific products nation-wide

Communication

Publish issues, guidance documents, changes to regulations and policies on the web ***
Ensure that reference materials are clear, accessible and up-to-date ***
Post list of registered products and approved labels on the website
Publish literature reviews on the website
Provide better education on the use of fertilizers and supplements (could be led by industry) ***
Promote the regulatory framework and the Fertilizer program ***

Implementation of Enhanced Feed ban (EFB) regulations

Communicate impacts to stakeholders
Clarify permitting criteria for SRM ***
Develop and implement monitoring program for SRM in fertilizers and supplements ***
Deliver inspector training on EFB regulations and requirements ***

REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES

Review heavy metal standards, tolerances (Schedule I) and for analysis requirements micronutrients - West
Issue export certificates - West
Regulation/requirements for hydroponic fertilizers - West
Update Provincial recommendations for fertilizer application rates - Atlantic, Quebec
Organic Regulations - impacts on fertilizer and supplement sectors - Ontario, West
Provincial Regulations on disposal of toxic wastes - Ontario
Review the 18% rule - West
Review the standards and labelling requirements for chemical products and assess whether they apply to organic products - Quebec

Effective Stakeholder Engagement

A key component of the Fertilizer Program Modernization Initiative is the development of a strengthened consultative framework within the sector. During the regional consultations, participants were asked to provide suggestions on how CFIA could more effectively engage its stakeholders. The following summarizes the common points that were shared across all regions.

Continue to hold regional and national workshops
Schedule consultations in conjunction with industry meetings and other related events
Communicate the importance of such consultations, advertise and encourage participation
Outreach to smaller companies and producer/farm organizations
Work with the CFPF/ continual funding is required
Publicize the consultation process and its outcomes
Provide documents well in advance to allow for review time
Conduct on-line consultations and surveys
Ensure accessibility of surveys to producers (paper copies)
Establish working groups to tackle specific issues
Schedule conference calls with small groups of individuals
Provide opportunity for product-specific discussions

Performance Measures

The groups were asked to share their thoughts on how to measure the effectiveness of the regulatory framework for fertilizers and supplements and the success of the modernization initiative. The following identifies performance measures shared in most regional consultations.

Timelines for registrations and re-registrations (adherence to service delivery standards)
Number of complete submissions received
Frequency and nature of data gaps in submissions
Number of products that are imported into the country and their compliance rate
Compliance rate of products sold in Canada
Lab analysis time
Stakeholder surveys (industry, producers, consumers, general public)
Review data collected by inspectors to gauge understanding of the program and success of the initiative
Results of audits
Percent of on-line documents that are up-to-date
Number of "hits" on the website
Number of new products reaching the marketplace against a baseline (survey)
Number of products imported to personal use (technology gap)
Cost of bringing products to market
Level of participation in workshops and consultations
Number of complaints received

In all regional consultations, participants suggested that CFIA continue to inform stakeholders by providing regular updates on the progress made by sharing targeted timelines, listing completed strategies in the SAP and identifying strategies that are in progress.

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

CFIA has closed each meeting by thanking the participants for their attendance and their active participation and valuable input. Participants were invited and encouraged to attend a final prioritization/workplanning workshop to be held in Ottawa at the end of March, 2007. They were also reminded that these regional consultations are likely to become an ongoing process to ensure ongoing stakeholder input and involvement in the Fertilizer Program modernization which is essential to the overall success of the initiative.

APPENDIX A

Meeting Notes
January 31, 2007
Delta Calgary Airport
Calgary, Alberta

Background and Introduction

This report summarizes the discussions that took place at the regional workshop on Fertilizer Program Modernization held on January 31^st, 2007 at the Delta Calgary Airport in Calgary, Alberta.

The objectives of the meeting, as stated in the agenda, were to:

Develop a common understanding of the current Fertilizer Program amongst stakeholders; and to
Actively engage stakeholders in the Fertilizer Program review and re-design

Welcome and Opening Remarks
Luc Mougeot, A/Associate Director, Plant Production Division, CFIA

Luc Mougeot began the workshop by welcoming the participants. He explained that this workshop was the first of a series of workshops being held across the country. He indicated that the key objective of the regional sessions was to engage a broad group of stakeholders including consumers, agricultural producers, provincial and municipal government departments, industry as well as CFIA Operations and Science staff in the Fertilizer Program modernization.

Participants were invited to introduce themselves. They represented a wide range of stakeholders and CFIA staff. Luc Mougeot explained that there were many CFIA regional employees present at this workshop because an internal CFIA meeting was being held the following day. This workshop was seen as a good opportunity for the regional employees to hear concerns directly from their stakeholders. There were 27 participants in total.

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Fertilizer Program: Overview
Kate Billingsley, A/National Manager, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Kate Billingsley provided an overview of the Fertilizer Program in Canada. She started by highlighting the importance of the fertilizer industry in Canada and its major sectors including agricultural fertilizers, speciality fertilizers and supplements. She explained that the Federal Fertilizers Act (FzA) and Regulations are administered by the CFIA and are used to regulate fertilizers and supplements imported and sold in Canada. The CFIA Fertilizer team includes program staff responsible for program design, policy and standard development, inspection staff, that administers the marketplace monitoring programs, conducts compliance and enforcement activities and laboratory services, is responsible for sample analysis, method development and regulatory research. The program also works in collaboration with other regulatory bodies both domestically and internationally. Kate Billingsley briefly explained the regulatory requirements, the safety and efficacy assessment process, labelling standards, and the marketplace monitoring activities. After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes the key discussion points.

How are plant growth regulators classified? If the supplement is added to an N, P, K fertilizer, can it be exempted from registration?

Plant growth regulators are considered supplements and must be registered. If a product contains a supplement that does require registration, then the whole product would need to be registered with the exception of potting soils. Namely, if a potting soil contains a registered supplement the whole product does not need to be registered. If, on the other hand, the supplement in the potting soil is not registered and not exempt from registration the potting soil needs to be registered.
Does compost with N, P, K need to be registered for sale?

Compost is a soil supplement and is listed in Schedule II. Compost does not require registration, but it must meet all requirements for safety and efficacy. This is true for compost sold in bulk and in bags. Information about the compost must be listed on the product label or on the invoice/shipping bill for compost sold in bulk. Farmers selling compost are also required to provide this information. The same requirements apply to municipalities selling compost.
Why do products need to be tested in different areas if they will be used in one province?

This is a requirement for efficacy assessment. Applicants have the option of explaining why a single test in a particular area should be sufficient. For example, if a product is intended to be used in a greenhouse, then it does not necessarily need to be tested at multiple locations.
When customers purchase compost directly from a farmer or from their municipality, is the seller responsible for providing a letter/invoice including information about the product being sold? Does CFIA have time to review all these applications?

Pre-market assessment of compost products is not mandatory. However, if during an inspection the CFIA identifies a violation, the seller would be required to make changes. Fines are currently not imposed for incorrect labels; however, the severity of enforcement actions depend on the product and the nature of the contravention. Stricter measures are taken to address safety issues and prosecution is used as a last resort.

Modernization Initiative: Overview
Luc Mougeot, A/Associate Director, Plant Production Division, CFIA

Luc Mougeot presented an overview of the Fertilizer Program modernization initiative in the context of Smart Regulation; a Government of Canada initiative that spearheaded the fertilizer program modernization efforts. He stated that the goal of the project is intended to streamline the regulatory process, improve the overall effectiveness of the regulatory framework and increase flexibility, consistency and transparency of the program. He listed some of the project's key deliverables which included the development of a permanent consultative framework that would provide a mechanism for open and effective communication and stakeholder engagement. The consultations together with an internal program review led to the development of a Strategic Action Plan (SAP) designed to address current issues, modernize the program and achieve common goals of all stakeholders. Luc Mougeot concluded by highlighting the various benefits this initiative would have for both Canadians and the industry.

Modernization Initiative: Introduction to the Strategic Action Plan
Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Ewa Madey provided a synopsis of the SAP. She started by explaining the origins of the SAP, its structure and the input received from stakeholders so far. Participants reviewed specific examples of the strategies that were included in the SAP. Ewa highlighted some of the short term strategies and outcomes that were identified in the SAP in addition to some of the ongoing activities that are being handled by the Agency.

After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes the key discussion points.

When will CFIA be able to guarantee service delivery standards?

At this time, the Agency is developing service delivery standards for registration-related submissions. This entails looking at different regulatory bodies, both domestically and internationally) and collecting real-time information about reviewing submissions. Once the service delivery standards are developed, their implementation will depend on elimination of the backlog and full staff complement in the Fertilizer section and the Fertilizer Safety Office. Some of the other strategies identified in the Strategic Action Plan will also help address this issue.
The registration process in Canada is problematic. Why is CFIA looking to increase the re-registration period from 2 to 3 years as opposed to longer if the product remains the same?

Moving the registration period from 2 to 3 years is a first step and the Agency does not preclude increasing it further in the long term. This, however, could be associated with additional regulatory amendments including mandatory submission of new information, and possibly ongoing submission of data/results for certain product types.

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Discussion: Issues, Challenges and Strategies

The group was asked to provide feedback on the proposed SAP. In general, the group supported the SAP and felt that many issues were being addressed. The following summarizes additional feedback that was shared by participants.

Public Consultation and Meetings:

Schedule consultations, such as this one, immediately before or after other industry meetings or related events to save time and reduce costs for participants.
Communicate the importance of these consultation meetings and continue to encourage participation.
Outreach to smaller companies and encourage them to attend these meetings.
Organize additional workshops similar to this one.

CFIA Website:

Publish issues about products on the web.
Provide additional guidance documents on-line.
Ensure that documents available on-online are current and regularly updated.
Modify the web site when regulations and policies are changed and clearly communicate those changes.

Regulatory Issues:

Regulation of compost is an issue. Farm generated compost should be regulated even when it is not sold. Other participants felt that this represents overregulation. There are many provincial legislations (e.g., Alberta, AOPA) that cover the safety and quality standards of compost.
Maintain the minimum level for micronutrients, review the standards for heavy metals and the tolerance levels for the maxima as prescribed in Schedule I. Note: Tolerance levels may need to be adjusted to take into consideration that test results have variances of more than 13%.
Identify and address some of the "grey areas" in the regulations particularly with respect to jurisdictional overlaps between various departments and levels of government.

Program Delivery:

Provide clear and consistent information on the website, gazette, etc., for both internal and external communication.
Additional inter-governmental cooperation is required. CFIA should work more in collaboration with provincial governments.
Ensure consistency of program delivery and enforcement practices.
Ensure training requirements for CFIA Operations staff are fulfilled. Provide additional training on the new Enhanced Feed Ban Regulations.

Discussion: Priorities

Based on the proposed SAP, the group was asked to identify which strategies should become priorities for the next 6 to 18 months.

Program Delivery

Develop a communication plan that describes the current regulatory framework and other CFIA activities to promote the program. (Relates to strategies 43.1 and 43.2).
Ensure that information posted on the CFIA website is up-to-date.
Provide enforcement training for inspectors.
Increase the number of inspectors.
Ensure succession planning.
Provide portable documentation, assigned vehicles and/or laptops to inspection staff so there is less loading required.
Establish a fertilizer inspection certification process to ensure that inspectors have adequate training.
Ensure that managers schedule enforcement training for inspectors
Provide clear and up-to-date resource materials (e.g. guidelines, T-memos, inspection manual).
Update of AIRS and training of ISC.
Ensure timely access to innovative products.

Regulations and Enforcement

Identify lab methodologies for verifying tolerance levels (Relates to strategies 16.1 and 17.1).
Strengthen control over imports. The same regulations should apply for both domestic products and imports.
Strengthen enforcement tools and respond to complaints.
Provide producers with mechanisms to identify which labels are valid.
Obtain the authority to regulate advertising on the web (i.e. MOU with Industry Canada).
Move micronutrients to Schedule II. Timely approval/registration of micronutrient products is a barrier to trade. Farmers/producers while wanting access to new products also want to have confidence in the products they are buying.

Registration and re-registration process

Extend registration period to 5 years and gradually increase it.
Implement an automatic re-registration process when there are no changes made to the product label.
Establish different registration periods for different product types.
Create a file tracking system for applications and provide ways for companies to access their files electronically. (Relates to Strategy 13.1).
Sreamline the registration process to ensure timeliness (i.e. file processing, efficacy data information requirements, using different queuing systems for different applications).

Path to Success

Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum
Jereleen Brydon, CFPF

The Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum (CFPF) was launched in November 2006 to improve the regulatory systems for fertilizers and supplements and to encourage innovation, economic sustainability; and international leadership. Jereleen Brydon, from the CFPF, was invited to present an overview of the CFPF, its objectives, and its membership. She explained that the CFPF created 5 working groups to address policy development issues, these include: (1) the Regulatory Efficiency WG, (2) the Marketplace Monitoring WG, (3) the New Products WG, (4) the Communications and Operating Environment WG and (5) the Bio-solids WG. Jereleen Brydon also invited participants to register for their next conference scheduled for November 26 and 27 2007 which will be held in Ottawa.

Getting Involved: Effective Stakeholder Engagement

The group discussed how CFIA could more effectively engage its stakeholders. The following summarizes the key discussion points:

Organize face-to-face meetings at least once a year. Face-to-face meetings are helpful and should be the first point of contact.
Regional workshops are a good idea, since people are not always willing to travel to Ottawa.
Utilize web-based consultations following face-to-face meetings to collect additional information. Web-based consultations are useful to address smaller issues.
Web questionnaires could be used within specific working groups.
Ensure that consultations are accessible to producers. Web-based consultations are not always accessible to farmers who do not have high-speed internet.
Working groups should be representative of the industry and provide a broad representation of all stakeholders.
Involve more commodity groups and producers in these discussions to ensure inclusiveness in the consultation process.
Consultations, workshops and meetings must be effectively advertised. CFIA should attend other workshops and consultations organized by the industry. These are good venues for CFIA to promote its program and engage stakeholders.

Performance Measures

The group was asked to share their thoughts on how to measure the effectiveness of the regulatory framework for fertilizers and supplements and the success of the modernization initiative. They were further asked to identify potential performance measures and indicators that could be used. The following lists suggest performance measures as well as desired outcomes for the fertilizer program.

Suggested performance measures	Desired outcomes
Registration and re-registration timelines	Decreased registration and re-registration times
Number of products imported and how many are in compliance	Decreased number of imported products that do not comply with the Regulations
Percentage of on-line documents that are up-to-date	Increased number of up-to-date documents available online
Develop service delivery standards	Adhere to service delivery standards
Number of products in a queue	Workload management
Lab analysis time	Decreased lab analysis time
Cost of bringing products to market	Reduced cost of brining products to market

Other desired outcomes

Farmers have access to innovative products in a more timely fashion.
Fewer complaints from industry regarding consistency in program delivery (to be informally captured by inspectors).
Compliance levels have increased.
Increased participation at CFPF and CFIA consultations.

Others comments related to performance measurement

Regularly update CFIA's website to show progress on the Strategic Action Plan. List strategies being addressed and by when they will be completed.
Compare how the program is doing versus others organizations (e.g. PMRA).
Provide mechanisms for applicants to view the status of their applications.
Measure and publish review times and response times from applicants.
Develop a compliance database to be used nationally by inspectors. Many products can be sampled in various regions or areas; the database would provide a better way to track compliance history in specific regions.
Prepare quarterly reports on program modernization initiative.
Improve the fertilizer training manual for inspectors.
Utilize data colleted by inspectors, as it could be valuable.

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Luc Mougeot closed the meeting by thanking participants for their attendance and noted that the workshops objectives were met. He mentioned that input collected at this session would be combined with information collected at the other sessions in Vancouver, Moncton, Guelph and Saint-Hyacinthe. A national workshop is being organized in Ottawa at the end of March to finalize the prioritization and workplanning exercise for 2007/2008. He reminded participants that these consultations would become an ongoing process to ensure ongoing stakeholder involvement in the Fertilizer Program modernization.

Appendix B

Meeting Notes
February 6, 2007
Fairmont Vancouver Airport
Vancouver, British Columbia

Background and Introduction

This report summarizes the discussions that took place at the workshop on the Fertilizer Program Modernization held on February 6^th, 2007 at the Fairmont Vancouver Airport in Vancouver, British Columbia.

The objectives of the meeting, as stated in the agenda, were to:

Develop a common understanding of the current Fertilizer Program amongst stakeholders; and to
Actively engage stakeholders in the Fertilizer Program review and re-design

Welcome and Opening Remarks
Ewa Madey, A/Chief of the Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Ewa Madey began the workshop by welcoming the participants. She explained that this workshop was the second of a series of workshops being held across the country. She indicated that the key objective of the regional sessions was to engage a broad group of stakeholders including consumers, agricultural producers, provincial and municipal government departments, industry as well as CFIA Operations and Science staff in the Fertilizer Program modernization.

Participants were invited to introduce themselves. They represented a wide range of stakeholders and CFIA staff. They stated they were looking forward to hearing from the Western area, to understand the fertilizer registration process and the scope of the industry. Ewa Madey explained that there were many CFIA regional employees present at this workshop because an internal CFIA meeting was being held the following day. This workshop was seen as a good opportunity for the regional employees to hear concerns directly from their stakeholders. There were 22 participants in total.

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Fertilizer Program: Overview
Anthony Parker, A/Chief Efficacy Data Assessment and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Anthony Parker provided an overview of the Fertilizer Program in Canada. He started by highlighting the importance of the fertilizer industry in Canada and its major sectors including agricultural fertilizers, speciality fertilizers and supplements He explained that the Federal Fertilizers Act (FzA) and Regulations are administered by the CFIA and are used to regulate fertilizers and supplements imported and sold in Canada. The CFIA Fertilizer team includes program staff responsible for program design, policy and standard development, inspection staff, that administers the marketplace monitoring programs, conducts compliance and enforcement activities and laboratory services, that are responsible for sample analysis, method development and regulatory research. The program also works in collaboration with other regulatory bodies both domestically and internationally. Anthony briefly explained the regulatory requirements, the safety and efficacy assessment process, labelling standards, and the marketplace monitoring activities.

After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes the key discussion points.

In Canada, there are a great number of minor crops that are not on the international radar. The growers of these crops are trying to be competitive while meeting the stringent efficacy requirements. Who is making the evaluation on efficacy for these products?

Provisions for demonstrating efficacy are stated in the Regulations. There have been some discussions regarding the removal of efficacy requirements and moving towards a more "buyers beware" system. However, the overall feedback received from stakeholders was that they want the provision of efficacy to be maintained but it needs to be revised. Suggestions for revisions include:
- Determining the degree of testing necessary to support a very localized regional product.
- Identifying faster ways to deal with efficacy:
  - Revise efficacy data requirements
  - Revise and modernize efficacy standards for various product types
  - Accept producer grown large scale farm trials in support of registration and product approval.
Concerning the pulp and paper sector, if a product has over 18% of cumulative nutrient content then would it not be subject to registration - is that correct?

Pulp and paper sludge products are listed in Schedule II of the Fertilizers Regulations (meet the definition of processed sewage) and as such are exempt from registration. These products are still regulated and must meet all the prescribed safety, efficacy and labelling standards (including grade) once in the marketplace. The 18% rule for combined nutrient content in fertilizers containing organic materials is reserved for mixed farm fertilizers. As such, pulp and paper sludge products even if their combined nutrient content is below 18% would not require registration unless the product is mixed with other nutrient sources and is represented for farm use.
We found that 18% in organic nutrients is high and is hard to achieve. How did the Agency establish the amount of 18%? Is it open to debate?

Historically, the 18% was in the Regulations. It could be open for discussion if a valid rationale against the rule was presented, bearing in mind its current scope (i.e., application to mixed farm fertilizers)
The CFIA Program 1 is a challenge in the Prairies. If you get two non-compliant samples in 1A - it moves over to Program 8. Nationally, how many problems are dealt with under Program 8?

Currently, if a blender is found to have non-compliant product, under program 1A, 3 times in 5 years, the blender will be listed as a priority sampling location for the following fiscal year, and five samples will be requested per blender under program 8-1. Last fiscal, 55 samples were requested under program 8-1 and a further 27 samples were estimated to be required for various other types of sampling under this program.
When a product is already registered (e.g., supplement) and there is a request to register it under a new name (new label - re-brand), where does this fit into the registration process?

This is referred to as a me-too registration. All information concerning the product including the ingredients, application rates, etc., except the product name and/or brand name, must remain the same. Submission processing is usually limited to a quick review but the file still goes into the queue. The problem is the amount of time it remains in the queue waiting to be assessed (files are processed on first come-first serve basis). To make the process more efficient, the CFIA is currently implementing a tiered system based on the nature and complexity of the required assessment (different queues).
If a company is producing a new product based on another company's product, does it need to obtain the proprietary information from the original company?

Yes, again this is a me-too registration. The original company/registrant needs to provide the information that was used to support the registration either directly to the CFIA or to the new applicant.

Modernization Initiative: Overview
Ewa Madey, Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Ewa Madey presented an overview of the Fertilizer Program modernization initiative in the context of Smart Regulation; a Government of Canada initiative that spearheaded the fertilizer program modernization efforts. She stated that the goal of the project is intended to streamline the regulatory process, improve the overall effectiveness of the regulatory framework and increase flexibility, consistency and transparency of the program. She listed some of the project's key deliverables which included the development of a permanent consultative framework that would provide a mechanism for open and effective communication and stakeholder engagement. The consultations together with an internal program review led to the development of a Strategic Action Plan (SAP) designed to address current issues, modernize the program and achieve common goals of all stakeholders. Ewa Madey concluded by highlighting the various benefits this initiative would have for both Canadians and the industry.

After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes key discussion points.

What do you mean when you refer to transparency?

The idea behind transparency is for the policy development process to be effectively communicated by inviting dialogue and feedback from various stakeholders. CFIA is trying to make the regulatory process as open and accessible as possible to all regulated parties, consumers and the public.

Modernization Initiative: Introduction to the Strategic Action Plan
Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Ewa Madey provided a synopsis of the Strategic Action Plan. She started by explaining the origins of the SAP, its structure and the input received from stakeholders so far. Participants reviewed specific examples of the strategies that were included in the SAP. Ewa Madey highlighted some of the short term strategies and outcomes that were identified in the SAP in addition to some of the ongoing activities that are being handled by the Agency.

After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes a key discussion point.

How cumbersome is the process of importing products into Canada for export?

CFIA has a special program for importing products that require registration into Canada for export. Products imported under this program are granted special registration that is conditional upon the fact that the product will not be sold in Canada and confinement measures are implemented to prevent its release, spread and establishment in the environment. It is a relatively fast process.

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Discussion: Issues, Challenges and Strategies

The group was asked to provide feedback on the proposed Strategic Action Plan (SAP). In general, the group supported the Strategic Action Plan and felt that many issues were being addressed. The following summarizes additional feedback that was shared by participants.

Public Consultation, SAP and Meetings:

The SAP is very comprehensive and includes all significant regional issues, but it needs prioritization. In addition, the SAP needs more detail with respect to the specific objectives and deliverables (e.g., efficacy).
Incorporate a wider and more market focused risk/benefit analysis as part of product assessment (e.g. Is a fusarium resistant PNT variety more of a risk or a "benefit" for humans and livestock health?)
Establish broader lines of communication and consultation with other government departments such as ec, HC and others.
Consult with industry about emerging issues prior to implementation of drastic regulatory measures.

CFIA Website:

Develop an electronic filing system for registration applications.
List registered products on the website.

Registration and enforcement process:

Streamline the registration system so it is timelier and tracks files in the queue.
Reduce the registration backlog.
Allow temporary registration in order to generate efficacy data.
The number and timing of micronutrient analyses required is an issue (e.g., require 3 samples from 3 batches). Some manufacturers only make the product once a year so providing 4 sets of analysis over two years presents a problem.
Increase coordination between Provincial and Federal Regulations.
More clearly define regulatory requirements for Waste Derived Materials (Pulp & Paper); a waste derived product working sub-group could help.
Variability in feedstocks for biosolids can greatly affect the guarantees and the safety and quality of the final product. Determine what needs to be guaranteed and how can the product safety be assessed.
Issue export certificates for fertilizers and supplements to encourage trade.
Allow consumers to decide whether the product works and reduce efficacy requirements
Ensure timely and consistent enforcement of regulations especially in the area of non-store sales (web/sales, and through US border). Checking compliance at the border does not prevent smuggling non-compliant products into the country.
Separate commercial and public use of fertilizers, as it is done by the PMRA. The greatest potential for misuse is at the home and garden level. Also, labelling is an issue - getting the instructions small enough to fit on the package. Deal with each use pattern differently.
Ensure timely follow-up to detentions under the supervision of the CFIA.
Inform industry of the enforcement strategy and implement penalty for non-compliance and/or incentive programs to facilitate compliance.
Enforcement for non-compliant bulk blends is an issue. Look to other resources to enforce compliance, perhaps local crop consultants, and agronomists. Possibly create a "gold certification" program for plants that self-regulate and take their own samples (random inspections, CFQAP programs similar to HACCP or Q.C. accredited processes). Another limitation is the blending process, e.g., 30g in a 5T blend is it blended or is it floating on top?

Regulatory issues:

Create a simple, straight-forward submission process.
Allow for approval of "me-too" products, i.e.: Weed and Feed (N-P-K may change but basic components are always the same) which may be included in the tiered assessment system.
Deliver better training on regulatory guidelines for inspectors and industry.
There are some local area concerns related to special soil interactions, i.e., loamy soils and fertilizer efficacy on those soils. Look at multiple locations "on farm demo" size plots:
- Need a single location to track results on specific soil types
- Look at local plot demo associations to support plot tests across the prairies, i.e., ARECA in Alberta.
- Hydroponics versus coconut fiber may cause a fertilizer to react differently.
Accept efficacy data for hydroponics from controlled facilities (greenhouses).
Harmonize standards with the US and other countries (to speed up registration/approval of products).
Provide a clear timeline on the registration process in order to provide predictability
Accept EU data on safety ("Reach").

Program delivery:

Create a guidance document on how to complete applications.
Update schedule II (being reviewed by CFPF).
Reduce efficacy data requirements for small businesses or small markets.
Organize and deliver industry training on labelling, etc..
Develop a guidebook on the Fertilizer Act with clear descriptions of the requirements for registration and exemptions for the different product types including guidelines for the tiered system.

General comments:

Identify agency key stakeholders and regulatory links.
Publicize the consultation process: how priorities were identified and how the SAP will continue to be a "living document" and how it will respond to emerging issues.

Alternate strategies:
Efficacy issues:

Clarify the definition of efficacy for "intended purpose" and post (on-line)
Use outside accredited labs for items # 18.1 - 18.1.13 [in the SAP document]. (The demands for these tests are so small they don't all need to be done in-house.)
Use ARECA-like organizations, large demo field plots or university style tests to conduct field trials tests; publish clear definitions of appropriate level of testing.
Approve new products based on "labeled ranges" of deviation that are "perceived as safe". Using the CFIA table 4 for feeds, if you label the range you do not have to "register" a new product.
Issue a ticket/monetary penalty for non-compliance and publish results in the media for "self compliance".
Use a competition-based system to determine efficacy.
Reduce delays in sample analysis (the delays increase staff time for follow up and increase cost to both agency and the regulated parties). Upfront reduced funding for review and analysis may lead to high back-end costs.

Registration process:

Consider alternate registration procedures; continue to regulate the safety of products but minimize efficacy requirements - rely more on a "buyer beware" process. When reducing efficacy, be mindful of the farmer for whom efficacy is key.
Identify and clarify linkages between labels and claims with respect to efficacy.
All testing should be timely - no batching.
By reducing the backlog, non-compliance will be less of a problem.
Implement "service delivery standards" which will inform the applicant of the decision in 60 days or 270 days, etc..
Identify liability and conflict of interest issues concerning contaminated site inspections.

Staffing issues:

Incorporate staffing actions into the SAP.
Build a case for new staff and retention processes. Look to Alberta and ECO Canada for models.

Implementation

Reduce the broad need for data to support claims
Implement tiered efficacy requirements based on history of performance for different product categories.
Ensure funding for the modernization initiative that lasts more than 2 years to support consistent delivery of the plan and sufficient Human Resources.
Verify label claims and guarantees with lab tests.
Determine if the population would be willing to share the "proof of efficacy" costs for "projects of merit" in exchange for a safer environment.
Use cross-functional teams and rotation of employees from files to policy to safety to files, etc.

Regulatory issues:

Define the term "efficacy" more clearly.
Look to US state models for guidance in developing "advisory panels".

After discussion, there was a clarification question:

Where did the SAP document come from, is this the round two of this process and what does the March 31^st deadline mean?

The document is a result of consultations that have been ongoing for the last two years. These regional workshops are intended to reach out to a broader range of stakeholders. The March 31^st is the delivery date for the yellow items in the document. These workshops are intended also to identify the next big items to be focused on.

Discussion: Priorities

Based on the proposed Strategic Action Plan, the group was asked to identify which strategies should become priorities for the next 6 to 18 months.

Registration & re-registration process:

Hire more people.
Streamline the review process by:
- Implementing tiered product assessment (point 13.1.3)
- Identifying products that pose low risks (point 13.3)
- Reducing efficacy but not safety requirements (buyer-beware)
- Harmonizing standards with other countries (point 39)
- Recognizing product efficacy/safety based on many years of safe use and well established history of performance
- Establishing a database for safety and efficacy data for individual ingredients to prevent/reduce duplication of effort. (Example: establish a system that withholds "privacy" information for a certain time to allow the originating company to market their product 1st before allowing a me-too registration)

Regulations & Enforcement:

Prioritize which products should be focused on nation-wide (focus on specific ingredients)
Address the loophole that allows companies to remove ingredients from their labels to avoid registration (This can be a safety concern to consumers).
Establish efficacy tiers by examining the trends in industry and allow for streamlining of regulation; using red/green/yellow/ codes for products (can be easily done without lots of effort, e.g., humic and fulvic acids and chelating agents).
Identify common points of agreement between CFIA and AAPFCO for language and SOP's, i.e.: for analytical procedures, data, etc.
Focus on endpoint of regulations and policy, not on the process to get to the endpoint.
Re-evaluate the 18% rule for cumulative nutrient content for organic and liquid fertilizers.
Eliminate product efficacy trials that have already been conducted in other countries under reasonable conditions.
Ensure consistent enforcement and prioritization of which regulations need to be enforced, rather than attacking one product at a time.

Program Delivery:

Create a training package to explain the Fertilizers Act and Regulations (point 15.2) which includes guidebooks, workshops and a self-help website. This training would comprise:
- A simplified registration process
- Clear description of requirements by product type or by tiered system
- Workshops to discuss requirements and guidelines
- Definitions (e.g., "organic" and misleading claims)
- Clarification on organic farming and the use of organic fertilizers
Put more emphasis on new innovative products rather than re-registration
Move "Management of waste products", points 7.1 and 7.2, to a higher priority and update schedule II
Create an ombudsman to identify high nutrient waste products including waste water, pulp and paper or sewage sludges) that have an economic benefit.
Create a requirement for availability (i.e., 0-0-0-90, currently is not available to the plant).

Other comments about SAP document:

Strategy # 6 would be achieved by achieving strategy # 1.
Clarify point # 18.1 - it seems redundant.
Focus more on points: 6.2, 6.1 - amino acids and vitamins need to be defined as ingredients
Develop workshops/workbooks for points 15.1 and 15.2 as well as a guidebook for staff in order to reduce company time in this area.
Move points 31.1/31.2/32.1/32.2/32.3 to the top of the pile for action; have a body of individuals with science background and an endpoint to work on these issues.
Combine section 5.1-5.3 with sections 35.5 and 35.6 and 36.1
Important: significantly revise section 6.2 and 6.4; don't restrict producer's access to useful products
Recommend Section 37.1 and 37.2 as good next steps and bring them together w/CFPF.
Reconsider Section 13.3; it is better to ensure that claims and efficacy are in alignment with best available science
Clarify point 28.1 and the definition of "new".

After discussion, there was the following clarification.

Concerning developing a database of safety and efficacy data for ingredients; if a product is commonly used in commercial applications and the history of its safe use is well documented, why would we have to go back and get testing on it? (not including new products)

CFIA operates based on the protection of confidential business information and will not share safety and efficacy data between clients and between products.

Path to Success

Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum
Mike Leslie, CFPF

The Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum (CFPF), a volunteer organization, was launched in November 2006 to improve the regulatory systems for fertilizers and supplements and to encourage innovation, economic sustainability; and international leadership. Mike Leslie, from the CFPF, was invited to present an overview of the CFPF, its objectives, and its membership. He explained that the CFPF created 5 working groups to address policy development issues, these include: (1) the Regulatory Efficiency WG, (2) the Marketplace Monitoring WG, (3) the New Products WG, (4) the Communications and Operating Environment WG and (5) the Biosolids WG. Mike Leslie also invited participants to join a working group to make a contribution and to register for the CFPF conference scheduled for November 26 and 27 2007 which will be held in Ottawa.

Getting Involved: Effective Stakeholder Engagement

The group discussed how CFIA could more effectively engage its stakeholders. The following summarizes the key discussion points:

Broaden the base of stakeholders consulted, i.e., include canola, wheat, corn producers etc. and realistically discuss what is in it for them; deal with the "industry/producer organizations" to get representation
As business people, the stakeholders work under tight deadlines, the CFIA needs to be respectful of our time
- Give advance notice, a chance to review and comment on documents;
- Chose a convenient place for people to attend (not the airport)
Rewrite SAP in such a way that it is a win-win for farmers, the CFIA and the industry (being competitive in the world).
Ease up on the regulations.
Organize regional workshops on labelling which enable increased compliance.
Provide periodic updates on CFIA progress; annually? Or as needed?
CFIA should attend major events [CFIA asked to be informed of this year's calendar of events]

Performance Measures

Suggestions to improve performance	Desired outcomes
Implement web-based tracking system for submissions (look to BC Agland website)	Increased ability to track submission and thus more efficient response and decision making; improve transparency of the process
Extend the registration period to 5 or 10 years	Reduction in the registration/re-registration queue
Implement a Human Resources policy that rewards and keeps employees	Increased staff retention and expertise
Effective use of external resources/labs/testing	Reduced wait time and costs for lab analysis
Reduce the backlog	Decreased days to register/ claim resolution
Implement targeted surveys (on-line)	Increase in positive feedback from the public
Harmonize regulations between agencies (CFIA/HC/ec/AAFC/USDA/CFIA/PMRA)	Increased clarity and efficiency when enforcing regulations

Registration and re-registration processes:

Reduced negative public feedback and increase in positive feedback.
Shorter line-ups for new products.
Faster, more efficient evaluation and feedback on new and existing products.
Post an e-learning website on labelling.
Implement check lists.

Other comments related to performance measurement

Post old and newly registered products and registration cancellations/withdrawals on the website - this will give greater clarity of information and transparency for the CFIA.
Better follow-up measures - action and report back.
Provide training to inspection staff on regulatory requirements. Often, when new officers take over a file, he/she identify a new list of "requirements" for the product
Provide feedback on the progress of the modernization initiative, report back to the participants on progress and success; maintain on-going dialogue.
Create more tangible deliverables and strategies.

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Ewa Madey closed the meeting by thanking participants for their attendance and noted that the workshops objectives were met. She mentioned that input collected at this session would be combined with information collected at the other sessions in Calgary, Moncton, Guelph and Saint-Hyacinthe. A national workshop is being organized in Ottawa at the end of March to finalize the prioritization and workplanning exercise for 2007/2008. She also reminded the participants that these consultations would become an ongoing process to ensure ongoing stakeholder involvement in the Fertilizer Program modernization.

Appendix C

Meeting Notes - DRAFT 1
February 13, 2007
Future Inn - Hotel
Moncton, New Brunswick

Background and Introduction

This report summarizes the discussions that took place at the workshop on the Fertilizer Program Modernization held on February 13^th, 2007 at the Future Inn Hotel in Moncton, New Brunswick.

The objectives of the meeting, as stated in the agenda, were to:

Develop a common understanding of the current Fertilizer Program amongst stakeholders; and to
Actively engage stakeholders in the Fertilizer Program review and re-design

Welcome and Opening Remarks
Luc Mougeot, A/Associate Director, Plant Production Division, CFIA

Luc Mougeot began the workshop by welcoming the participants. He explained that this workshop was the third of a series of workshops being held across the country. He indicated that the key objective of the regional sessions was to engage a broad group of stakeholders including consumers, agricultural producers, provincial and municipal government departments, industry as well as CFIA Operations and Science staff in the Fertilizer Program modernization.

Participants were invited to introduce themselves. They represented a wide range of stakeholders and CFIA representatives. Luc Mougeot explained that there were many CFIA regional employees present at this workshop because an internal CFIA meeting was being held the following day. This workshop was seen as a good opportunity for the regional employees to hear concerns directly from their stakeholders. There were 21 participants in total.

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Fertilizer Program: Overview
Ryan Ring, A/National Manager, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Ryan Ring provided an overview of the Fertilizer Program in Canada. He started by highlighting the importance of the fertilizer industry in Canada and its major sectors including agricultural fertilizers, speciality fertilizers and supplements He explained that the Federal Fertilizers Act (FzA) and Regulations are administered by the CFIA and are used to regulate fertilizers and supplements imported and sold in Canada. The CFIA Fertilizer team includes program staff responsible for program design, policy and standard development, inspection staff, that administers the marketplace monitoring programs, conducts compliance and enforcement activities and laboratory services, is responsible for sample analysis, method development and regulatory research. The program also works in collaboration with other regulatory bodies both domestically and internationally. Ryan Ring briefly explained the regulatory requirements, the safety and efficacy assessment process, labelling standards, and the marketplace monitoring activities. Ryan Ring also pointed out that the Fertilizer Program at Headquarters and in the Regions was recently restructured.

Modernization Initiative: Overview
Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Ewa Madey presented an overview of the Fertilizer Program modernization initiative in the context of Smart Regulation; a Government of Canada initiative that spearheaded the fertilizer program modernization efforts. She stated that the goal of the project is intended to streamline the regulatory process, improve the overall effectiveness of the regulatory framework and increase flexibility, consistency and transparency of the program. She listed some of the project's key deliverables which included the development of a permanent consultative framework that would provide a mechanism for open and effective communication and stakeholder engagement. The consultations together with an internal program review led to the development of a SAP designed to address current issues, modernize the program and achieve common goals of all stakeholders. Ewa Madey concluded by highlighting the various benefits this initiative would have for both Canadians and the industry.

Modernization Initiative: Introduction to the Strategic Action Plan
Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes the key discussion points.

"For the first time this summer, an inspector showed up at my facility. There were two facilities inspected out of the 19 facilities in Nova Scotia. When will staff be hired to inspect all facilities every year to ensure a level playing field?"

Marketplace monitoring activities are performed through random sampling of facilities. It is not feasible for the CFIA to inspect all facilities that sell fertilizers and supplements every year. Providing a level playing field is essential, and inspections are only one of many approaches to ensure compliance.
"There is duplication of compost monitoring in Nova Scotia; both the province and CFIA are monitoring compost. The proposed action plan is ambitious and if CFIA does not have the staff to perform all monitoring activities the provincial government could provide some support. Why would the national compost program be better than the program in Nova Scotia? Composters in Nova Scotia are happy with the provincial regulations."

CFIA currently monitors compost products when they are imported or sold by conducting random inspections. We are currently exploring a quality assurance program whereby composters would be submitting samples to an accredited laboratory to demonstrate compliance. This would reduce CFIA's monitoring efforts, since those participating in the program would receive less attention from the inspectors. (The issue concerning duplication of efforts was acknowledged.)
"Will there be changes affecting how NPK fertilizers are regulated? What will be the impact on the agricultural side?"

Agricultural fertilizers are well established products and we are not proposing to change or modify the way they are regulated. The most important strategy related to these products is the re-design of the Canadian Fertilizer Quality Assurance Program (CFQAP). The program has various success rates across the country, in some regions it is very effective and in others, particularly in the West, participation is very low. To address this, many options are being considered starting with completely eliminating the program (which would result in additional CFIA monitoring), re-designing it to reflect regional differences or creating a new national program.
"Have timelines been established to change the CFQAP? Will the new program take into consideration the size of the companies, the amount of fertilizers they sell, and the number of incidences that they were non-compliant? It is important to sample both large and small companies, because in some cases, larger companies may be doing a better job at complying with the regulations, but appear to be doing worse because of high volumes."

The Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum (CFPF) has a marketplace monitoring and product labelling working group concentrating on these issues. They are discussing how to increase compliance and how to improve the CFQAP. With respect to the criteria, the size of the company may be considered; this needs to be looked at when developing enforcement and sampling strategies. The current focus is on increasing the compliance rate. Companies with a history of non-compliance will be visited more often by CFIA inspectors. Timelines for redesigning the CFQAP have not been identified.

At the end, a participant representing a farm organization commended CFIA on their efforts. He said he hoped CFIA would receive sufficient resources to implement strategies identified in the SAP.

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Discussion: Issues, Challenges and Strategies

The group was asked to provide feedback on the proposed SAP. In general, the group supported the Strategic Action Plan and felt that many issues were being addressed. It was also felt that given the size of the document and the time allocated for the discussion it was difficult to review the document in its entirety. Some participants felt that timelines needed to be identified in the SAP to ensure timely implementation of the various strategies.

The following summarizes additional feedback that was shared by participants.

Public Consultation and Meetings:

Announce consultation events to farm organizations in advance

Communication:

Provide better education on the use of fertilizer products to ensure proper use and application. This initiative could be led by industry.

Regulatory Issues:

CFIA in association with the Canadian Compost Council (CCC) need to develop standards and regulations to address consumer acceptance issues related to compost.
Increase the level of communication and exchange of information between provincial and federal government regarding compost and biosolids
Improve compliance rates of N, P, K fertilizers through standardized sampling and analytical techniques, for blending,
Streamline registration process for new products (i.e. current process is too long and products cannot enter the market in a timely fashion)
Reduce timelines for renewing product registrations
Provide additional flexibility for labelling water soluble fertilizers. Efficacy criteria are required for hydroponics (although it is not a big market)
Update Provincial recommendations for fertilizer application rates and soil testing

Program Delivery:

Ensure retention and recruitment of staff through more permanent funding. (Already addressed in the SAP)
Reduce staff turnover by introducing staff retention initiatives. Term positions need to be re-examined, provide more permanent positions.
Training for inspectors must be done in a timely fashion across the country to ensure consistency.
Ensure consistency between staff by creating a standard set of requirements for each submission (e.g. create a checklist for each product category and provide it to industry)
Ensure that CFIA labs provide results back to inspectors in a timely fashion (address capacity issues)
Consider different approaches for approved products and new products.
Ensure better interdepartmental cooperation and coordination with provinces when it comes to regulation of new products (e.g., products possibly regulated by Environment Canada and CFIA).
Increase international cooperation to harmonize regulations.
Questions:
- Will new resources from headquarters be available to address program delivery challenges or will it be accomplished with current resources?
- Will third party organizations (e.g., accredited laboratories) be used to meet program challenges?

Comments about the SAP

Ensure that sufficient resources are in place to address the challenges and deliver the SAP
Consider dividing the SAP into two parts. One part would focus on Programs and the second part would focus on Operations.
Add a strategy to the SAP that calls for the identification of overlaps between different government departments and national/regional associations when it comes to regulation of fertilizers and supplements.

Discussion: Priorities

Based on the proposed SAP, the group was asked to identify which strategies should become priorities for the next 6 to 18 months. The following lists all priorities mentioned by the group (Note: The numbered strategies correspond to those identified in the SAP.)

Foresight, Intelligence and Research

Strategy 5.1 - Evaluate the appropriateness of conducting risk benefit analysis as part of product assessment (and work together)

Policy

Strategy 6.5 - Evaluate the feasibility of third party review of efficacy data (e.g. panel of experts in the specific area, use of private labs)
Strategy 7.1 - Conduct literatures reviews on dioxins, furans, metal standards, and fecal coliform
Strategy 10.1 - Develop and implement standard operating procedures for product assessment (HIGH priority)
- Strategy 10.1.6 - Permitting criteria for SRM materials (all criteria relating to SRM) (HIGH priority)
Strategy 6.1.2 and 6.1.5 - Conduct literature reviews to support policy changes relating to efficacy standards and data requirements for hydroponic fertilizers and microbial supplements.

Product Assessment

Strategy 15.2 - Develop a product registration/regulation guidebook in consultation with stakeholders (and ensure it is continuously updated, preferably in electronic format) (HIGH priority)
- Ewa Madey asked whether the guidebook should be developed once all regulatory amendments and policy changes have been implemented or if the guidebook should describe the current process and be updated as regulatory changes are implemented. The group agreed that an electronic version, describing the current process, should be available. The electronic format would be easier to update and share with stakeholders.
Strategy 13.6 - Explore the option of increasing the fertilizer and supplement registration period to five years (Also relates to Strategy 28.1 - Require mandatory submission of any NEW information that comes to light after the product has been approved/registered.
Strategy 13.3 - Conduct risk assessment to identify product types that pose no or negligible risk with respect to their safety and efficacy. (Relates to Strategy 20.1 on implementation of additional marketplace monitoring programs, and 24.1 on quality assurance, more rapid analysis and laboratory accreditation)
Strategy 15.1 - Develop and conduct industry training workshops on submission preparation. Use these workshops as an opportunity to hold bilateral company pre-submission consultations.

Marketplace Monitoring

Strategy 18.1 - Develop and validate analytical methods for detecting and quantifying all contaminants HIGH
Strategy 21.1 - Develop and deliver inspector training on additional authorities under the Health of Animals Act (based on Enhanced Feed Ban Regulations)
Strategy 20.3 - Develop and implement a monitoring program for SRM in fertilizer and supplement products HIGH
Strategy 26.1 - Revise and update AIRS (Automated Import Reference System)

Regulatory Gaps and Legislative Authority

Strategy 31.2 - Expand the definition of label in the Regulations to include website-based marketing if referenced on the label
Strategy 33.1 - Amend the Fertilizers Regulations to require a systematic review of the regulatory framework including the Act, Regulations and associated policies
Strategy 34.2 - Assess the resources and regulatory implication of harmonization with Environment Canada (if applicable)

Inter-governmental and interdepartmental/international Cooperation

Strategy 35.5 - Create and inter-departmental microbial working group (EC, PMRA, HC)
Strategy 36.1.1 - Delineate the respective roles, responsibilities and regulatory authorities for various products between departments
Strategy 37.1 - Assess gaps and inconsistencies between federal/provincial and municipal regulations pertaining to fertilizer and supplement products

Transparency, communication and consultation

Strategy 42.3 - Present and obtain approval from Senior Management for the Strategic Action Plan

Priorities missing from the current SAP:

Develop marketplace information packages and inspector information packages
Clarify which fertilizer products will be allowed to contain SRM and what will be the permitted use for these products (e.g. compost used on non-agricultural lands, Christmas trees, etc..)
Inform and educate general public and regulated parties HIGH

Ryan Ring commented that some of the strategies identified had already been implemented. For example, they have received approval and buy-in from senior management for the SAP (Strategy 42.3).

Path to Success

Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum
Janice Transberg, CFPF

The Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum (CFPF) was launched in November 2006 to improve the regulatory systems for fertilizers and supplements and to encourage innovation, economic sustainability; and international leadership. Janice Transberg, on behalf of the CFPF, was invited to present an overview of the CFPF, its objectives, and its membership. She explained that the CFPF created the following five working groups to address policy development issues: (1) the Regulatory Efficiency WG, (2) the Marketplace Monitoring WG, (3) the New Products WG, (4) the Communications and Operating Environment WG and (5) the Bio-solids WG. Janice Transberg also invited participants to register for their next conference scheduled for November 26 and 27 2007 in Ottawa. She also encouraged participants to get involved with the forum and pointed out that it required minimal time investment.

Getting Involved: Effective Stakeholder Engagement

The group discussed how CFIA could more effectively engage its stakeholders. The following summarizes the key discussion points:

Continue to organize CFIA employee meetings
Although this workshop was good to discuss broad industry issues, more meetings are needed to focus on specific sectors and product types (e.g. Organize a meeting to address issues specific to compost, where only stakeholders with a keen interested in compost would attend)
Ensure that documentation is provided prior to the meeting/workshop, to help focus the discussion and inform participants that the discussion will be concentrated on the documents (to encourage them to read the materials prior to the meeting)
Meetings in Moncton work for the Atlantic Region.

Performance Measures

Desired outcomes:

Improved timelines for review of submissions
Increase the speed of the application process
Increased compliance (without regular CFIA input).
Increased access to new innovative technologies for producers/farmers/end-users
Improved roll-out of new guidelines
Reduced registration times
Reduced lab analysis time
Successful third party delivery of some aspects of the program
Increased public confidence
Increased traceability of applications (Updates should be provided to registrants when they request it)
Increased participation in CFQAP
Increased participation in workshops (demonstrates increased interests)
- Positive feedback received following workshops
Reduced complaints (e.g. phone calls) (Note: Not all stakeholders know who to contact to address their complaints. Number of complaints may increase initially. This may be a long term measure)

How would you measure the success of the modernization initiative?

Perform audits
Survey stakeholders and develop outreach programs. Evaluate how much they retained.
- Suggestion: Industry is often asked to complete surveys. Surveys should be short, available electronically, and easy to fill out). Surveys could come from the CFPF.
- Suggestion: Grain industry is surveyed every year. There is an opportunity for interdepartmental collaboration.
Organize annual workshops and see if participation levels increase. Increased levels of participation would indicate trust in the system,
Improve advertising of the event

Others comments related to performance measurement

Identify quantifiable objectives and indicators
CFIA should publicize their timelines and communicate the progress. This would increase their accountability.
Ensure open communication between all parties (i.e., federal, provincial, municipal)

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Luc Mougeot closed the meeting by thanking participants for their attendance and noted that comments received today complemented those received from the previous consultations. He mentioned that the next steps involve two additional workshops in Guelph and Ste-Hyacinthe. A national workshop is being organized in Ottawa at the end of March to finalize the prioritization and workplanning exercise for 2007/2008.

Luc Mougeot encouraged participants to complete the evaluation form; since this was the first year CFIA organized regional consultations. Any feedback received would help improve future consultations.

Appendix D

Meeting Notes - DRAFT 1
February 28, 2007
Holiday Inn
Guelph, Ontario

Background and Introduction

This report summarizes the discussions that took place at the workshop on the Fertilizer Program Modernization held on February 28^th, 2007 at the Holiday Inn Hotel in Guelph, Ontario.

The objectives of the meeting, as stated in the agenda, were to:

Develop a common understanding of the current Fertilizer Program amongst stakeholders; and to
Actively engage stakeholders in the Fertilizer Program review and re-design

Welcome and Opening Remarks
Ryan Ring, A/National Manager, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Ryan Ring began the workshop by welcoming the participants. He explained that this workshop was the fourth of a series of workshops being held across the country. He indicated that the key objective of the regional sessions was to engage a broad group of stakeholders including consumers, agricultural producers, provincial and municipal government departments, industry as well as CFIA Operations and Science staff in the Fertilizer Program modernization.

Participants were invited to introduce themselves. They represented a wide range of stakeholders and CFIA representatives. Ryan Ring explained that there were many CFIA regional employees present at this workshop because an internal CFIA meeting was being held the following day. This workshop was seen as a good opportunity for the regional employees to hear concerns directly from their stakeholders. There were 29 participants in total.

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Fertilizer Program: Overview
Ryan Ring, A/National Manger, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Participants asked questions during and after the presentation. The following summarizes the key discussion points.

"What are some examples of products listed in Schedule II?"

Products in Schedule II include ammonium nitrate, urea, some supplements (e.g., compost) and processed sewage.
"Is there a formal process for efficacy assessment?"

There is no form to complete for the efficacy assessment, but a file must still be submitted. A submission control number is assigned to the file and the file proceeds into the queuing system. Certain information is required depending on the nature of the product and the claims on the label. This may include a complete efficacy data package.
"What percentage of international and Canadian data is accepted for efficacy assessment?"

There is no fixed percentage; the CFIA will accept international efficacy data given a scientific rationale demonstrating the equivalence and relevancy of the trials to Canadian conditions (including climate, soil types, agricultural practices etc.). All of the data could be derived from international sources if sufficient rationale was provided.
"Why is sulphur not included as major nutrient?"

Sulphur is a lesser nutrient and does not require registration unless it is sold with a micro-nutrient.
"What is the process for label reviews for products that do not require registration? Is there a fee for this service?"

Label reviews for products that do not require registration are free. The system works on a first-come-first-serve basis, so that an application for a label review enters a queue based on its date received. The CFIA has recently implemented a tiered system where products that require efficacy data are placed in a separate queue than those that do not require efficacy data review.

Modernization Initiative: Overview
Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

Ewa Madey presented an overview of the Fertilizer Program modernization initiative in the context of Smart Regulation; a Government of Canada initiative that spearheaded the fertilizer program modernization efforts. She stated that the goal of the project is intended to streamline the regulatory process, improve the overall effectiveness of the regulatory framework and increase flexibility, consistency and transparency of the program. She listed some of the project's key deliverables which included the development of a permanent consultative framework that would provide a mechanism for open and effective communication and stakeholder engagement. The consultations together with an internal program review led to the development of a SAP designed to address current issues, modernize the program and achieve common goals of all stakeholders. Ewa Madey concluded by highlighting the various benefits this initiative would have for both Canadians and the industry.

Modernization Initiative: Introduction to the Strategic Action Plan
Ewa Madey, A/Chief Biological Evaluation and Policy Unit, Fertilizer Safety Office, CFIA

After the presentation, participants had an opportunity to ask questions. The following summarizes the key discussion points.

"Is this version of the Strategic Action Plan the same as the one that was distributed at the Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum in November?"

This is the same Strategic Action Plan that was presented at the last CFPF Forum.
"If you wanted to remove a provision from the Regulations, would you need to go through the same process as any other regulatory amendment? Is it just as hard to change or repeal a section in the existing regulation as it is to add a new section?"

This depends on the nature of the change and the impact it has on stakeholders and other regulated parties. Any regulatory amendment includes an assessment of the impacts. If the impacts are anticipated to be relatively low and adequate consultation has been conducted then you may be able to skip certain steps such as pre-publication in Gazette I which expedites the process.
"Is the national meeting in March being advertised to everyone? Has CFIA invited groups such as the Canadian Council of Ministries of Environment (CCME) and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) to encourage inter-governmental communication?"

A general invitation has been sent out to a variety of stakeholders including Provincial governments and all participants of the regional workshops. It has been challenging for us to engage provincial and municipal counterparts but the initiative is still in its early stages. CFIA has been working with the Canadian Waste Water Association (CWWA) to ensure municipal representation. It has also been very challenging to identify the right individual(s) within an organization or department to invite. (Ryan Ring encouraged participants to provide names of individuals that should be invited to the meeting.)

At the end of the Q&A period, Ryan Ring added that the CFIA has hired a contractor to review the Section's internal file review processes. The contractor will be reviewing our current IT tools, file processing and tracking procedures as well as the electronic filling systems implemented by other government departments such as PMRA. Some participants felt it would be preferable if CFIA's submission system was similar to PMRA's, as it is easy to use and highly effective. The contractor will be providing recommendations to the section by March 31^st. Some participants felt that the revision and improvements to the file review procedures should be done in consultations with the stakeholders. Ryan Ring invited workshop participants to submit their ideas directly to the CFIA if they had any recommendations to improve the submission process.

With respect to interdepartmental coordination and communication the CFIA mentioned that they are currently engaged in various initiatives held across federal government. Some examples include the establishment of an inter-departmental working group on microbial product regulation, the categorization of products on the DSL led by Environment Canada and hopefully in the near future the establishment of a federal-provincial working group on regulation of biosolids.

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Discussion: Issues, Challenges and Strategies

The group was asked to provide feedback on the proposed Strategic Action Plan (SAP). In general, the group supported the Strategic Action Plan and felt that many issues were being addressed.

The following summarizes additional feedback that was shared by participants.

Transparency, Communication and Consultation:

Organize information and training sessions on the requirements for submitting registration packages. Face-to-face meeting or on-line training would be acceptable.
Literatures reviews should be posted online for public access (See Strategy - 44.1.1 Update content on the website)
Develop guidelines to identify what is considered a major change and what is important enough to trigger a consultative process. These guidelines need to be available to the public.
Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum needs to remain a continuous process and be funded on ongoing basis.

Inter-governmental, Inter-departmental and International Cooperation:

More communication/coordination is required between federal, provincial and municipal government.
- By-laws from municipalities should make their way up to the CFIA (Current SAP focuses on information flow downwards, but it should consider mechanisms for communicating upwards as well)
- Address issues related to disposal of fertilizers and fertilizer containers (new regulations on toxic waste disposal)
Canadian Council of Ministries of Environment (CCME) can provide the communication link between municipalities and federal/provincial governments.
More communication is required within CFIA, i.e., among different programs (e.g. Feed, Fertilizer and Animal Health have different takes on BSE regulations).
Develop working relationships with municipal and regional governments.
Strengthen the relationship with Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to ensure compliance of imported products.

Policy (Standards, data and information requirements):

Strategy 7.1.4 (Conduct literature reviews and risk assessments to support the review of current safety standards and develop of new safety policies for endocrine disruptors and pharmaceuticals in biosolids) should be coordinated with EPA and provinces.
Strategy 6.4 (Develop a comprehensive guide on efficacy data requirements) needs to be addressed before or at the same time as Strategy 1.4 (Encourage and hold regular pre-submission consultation meetings with stakeholders).

Regulatory Gaps:

Organic policy and new organic regulations.

Marketplace Monitoring, Inspection Monitoring and Enforcement:

Marketplace monitoring should focus on products that are new rather than products that are being phased out and resources should be allocated accordingly.

Product Assessment Process:

Service delivery standards for registration are needed to help registrants plan and set expectations.
The registration system should be divided into three separate tracks: (1) New registration (2) Re-registration with minor changes, (3) re-registration without changes. Each track should have its own services delivery standards.
Registration process for private label products that are identical to a previously registered product (me-too registration) should be relatively short. Initial registrant would then bear the majority of the cost.
"Me-too" registrants should require consent from original registrant.
Consider changing the word "queue" which implies "waiting time"
Product approval guidelines should include information on determining alternative ways of doing research (e.g., in greenhouses) to allow generation of data without performing field trials.
(Related to goal 5) Expand the scope of product evaluation to include risk-benefit analysis and/or socio-economic factors without delaying the process.
Review the PMRA electronic submission system (related to Strategy 13.1.2 - Review the feasibility of implementing an electronic submission process.)

Program Delivery:

Create a stable workforce in the Fertilizer Section and provide incentives to retain employees
Outsource literature reviews to get the work done and publish results
Outsource laboratory services.
Provide training sessions on the registration process.

Discussion: Priorities

Based on the proposed Strategic Action Plan, the group was asked to identify which strategies should become priorities for the next 6 to 18 months. The following identified all priorities mentioned by the group (Note: The numbered strategies correspond to those identified in the SAP.)

Priorities identified in the Strategic Action Plan (Strategies identified with * have been identified as higher priorities or by more than one group of participants):

Strategy 5.1 Evaluate the appropriateness of conducting risk benefits analysis as part of product assessment
Strategy 6.2.4 Update efficacy standards and data requirements for Micronutrients in oxide form.
Strategy 6.3 Create a list of products with reduced data/information requirements
Strategy 6.4 Develop a comprehensive guide on efficacy data requirements***
Strategy 6.5 Evaluate the feasibility of third party review of efficacy data
Strategy 7.1.3 and 7.2.3 Conduct literature review and risk assessment to support the review of current safety standards and development of new safety policies and safety standards for fecal coliform test.
Strategy 10.1 Develop and implement standard operating procedures for permitting criteria for SRM materials***
Strategy 13.5 Update Schedule II
Strategy 13.6 Explore the option of increasing the fertilizer and supplement registration process to 5 years***
Strategy 15.1 Develop and conduct industry training workshops on submission preparation.
Strategy 15.2 Document current efficacy requirements, safety standards and guidelines and update documentation as requirements and standards evolve. This document should be web-based and identified as a work-in-progress rather than being delayed until everything is completed***.
Strategy 21.1 Develop and deliver inspector training on additional authorities under the Health and Animals Act (based on the Enhanced Feed Ban Regulation) ***
Strategy 35 to 40 Increase interdepartmental and intergovernmental coordination***.
Strategy 42.3 Present and obtain approval from senior management for the action plan***
Strategy 43.1 Develop a communication plan that describes the current regulatory framework and its pillars (safety, efficacy and labelling) and promotes the transparency and effectiveness of the regulatory process***.
Strategy 44.1.4 Make approved labels available on the web
Strategy 44.1.5 Develop and implement electronic submission system

Other short term priorities not identified in the SAP:

Eliminate the submission backlog
Ensure staff retention within the section
Reduce submission wait time to zero (if registration is still required)
Develop a communication plan that describes the regulatory framework
Provide links on CFIA website for individuals to report/complain about non-compliant products and share information with the public. Industry Canada currently has the responsibility for this, but it should be taken back by the CFIA.
Work with CBSA to address border issues
Improve regulatory efficiency by introducing a notification process for minor changes to registered products.
Consider other changes (such as package size and logo changes) as minor amendments to registration rather than major amendments.

Path to Success

Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum Wendy Omvelee

The Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum (CFPF) was launched in November 2006 to improve the regulatory systems for fertilizers and supplements and to encourage innovation, economic sustainability; and international leadership. Wendy Omvlee, from the CFPF, was invited to present an overview of the CFPF, its objectives, and its membership. She explained that the CFPF created 5 working groups to address policy development issues, these include: (1) the Regulatory Efficiency WG, (2) the Marketplace Monitoring WG, (3) the New Products WG, (4) the Communications and Operating Environment WG and (5) the Bio-solids WG. Wendy Omvelee also invited participants to register for their next conference scheduled for November 26 and 27 2007 which will be held in Ottawa.

Getting Involved: Effective Stakeholder Engagement

The group discussed how CFIA could more effectively engage its stakeholders. The following summarizes the key discussion points:

Continue to involve stakeholders as their input is important
Provide meeting documentation well in advance for participants to carefully review the information and discuss with their colleagues prior to the meeting.
- Consider producing short versions of the document that highlights key points. There is a lot of information to review and not enough time to review it.
All information should be made available on CFIA's website. Companies are becoming more involved in the process. The CFIA website should provide some timelines and describe issues that are being discussed. Decisions could be presented at the following CFIA workshop.
Use online consultations and surveys when appropriate. Face-to-face meetings are also valuable and should continue to be used.
Online surveys are generally preferred to paper surveys, although not necessarily accessible to all. (Note: Consider outsourcing surveys). Announce surveys in advance and clearly identify who is conducting the survey and why it is being done.
There are several different approaches to consultations and should be considered.
- Establishing working groups to tackle specific issues.
- Scheduling conference calls with small groups of key individuals
- Conducting consultations process on the web to communicate information and validate decisions.
- Using online chats. These are used for classification criteria with PMRA

Performance Measures

Desired outcomes:

Reduction in timelines and improved service delivery standards
Increased number of complete submissions
Implemented service delivery standards
Increased transparency in the file processing system
Separate performance standards for different file types
Development of the product registration guidebook
Increased compliance rate
Developed procedures provision of training.
Reduced number of non-compliant products being sold
Reduced number of complaints about the process.
Increased access to new technologies
Increased access to products (especially innovative products in the marketplace while maintaining safety, efficacy and labelling standards)
Achieved a degree of harmonization between CFIA standards and AAPFCO standards
Increased employee retention in the fertilizer section

How would you measure the success of the modernization initiative?

Gather survey responses from stakeholders on regular basis to measure success.
Take a baseline survey of product types and measure compliance against a predetermined timetable
Count the number of applications that are complete.
Calculate the percentage of submissions that meet service delivery standards based on submission type. This will help identify where service standards need to be analysed and possibly modified.
Measure and identify data gaps in submissions
Obtain baseline measure of technology gaps and continue to measure it on a regular basis. Identify which products are being imported for personal use which can provide an indication of the technology gaps and the needs of the sector that are not been met
Count the number of updated documents available on CFIA website.

Others comments related to performance measurement and desired outcomes

Identify and communicate which activities have been completed in the action plan to demonstrate that progress is being made.
CFIA has a consistent voice across the various programs.
Standard operating procedures are in place and hard copy documents are available.
CFPF is working as a team with the CFIA
Reduced number of efficacy requirements
Extension of the renewal period from the current 2 year period

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Ewa Madey and Ryan Ring closed the meeting by thanking participants for their attendance and noted that comments received today complemented those received from the previous consultations. Ewa Madey noted that a national workshop is being organized in Ottawa at the end of March to finalize the prioritization and workplanning exercise for 2007/2008.

APPENDIX E

Meeting Notes
Saint-Hyacinthe, Québec
March 6, 2007

Background and Introduction

This report summarizes the discussions that took place at the regional workshop on Fertilizer Program Modernization held on March 6^th, 2007 in Saint-Hyacinthe, Québec.

The objectives of the meeting, as stated in the agenda, were to:

Develop a common understanding of the current Fertilizer Program amongst stakeholders; and to
Actively engage stakeholders in the Fertilizer Program review and re-design

The workshop was divided into three parts. The first part was reserved for presentations that gave an overview of the Fertilizer Program and its Modernization initiative. The second part focussed on the strategic action plan (SAP) and the identification of objectives and strategies to improve the Fertilizer Program. Participants were given the opportunity to share their opinions and comment on the final version of the SAP. Finally, in the third part of the workshop, we asked the participants for recommendations to keep stakeholders engaged and to identify performance measures to evaluate success of the Modernization.

Welcome and Opening Remarks
Benoit Dubé, A/Chief Program Design and Delivery Unit, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Benoit Dubé began the workshop by welcoming the participants. He explained that this workshop was the last of a series of workshops being held across the country. He indicated that the key objective of the regional sessions was to engage a broad group of stakeholders including consumers, agricultural producers, provincial and municipal government departments, industry as well as CFIA Operations and Science staff in the Fertilizer Program modernization. These workshops will allow the Fertilizer Section to get direction and set priorities for the Program.

Participants were invited to introduce themselves. They represented a wide range of stakeholders and CFIA staff. There were 27 participants in total.

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Fertilizer Program: Overview
Benoit Dubé, A/Chief Program Design and Delivery Unit, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Benoit provided an overview of the Fertilizer Program in Canada. He started by highlighting the importance of the fertilizer industry in Canada and its major sectors including agricultural fertilizers, speciality fertilizers and supplements. He explained that the Federal Fertilizers Act (FzA) and Regulations are administered by the CFIA and are used to regulate fertilizers and supplements imported and sold in Canada. The CFIA Fertilizer team includes program staff responsible for program design, policy and standard development, inspection staff, that administers the marketplace monitoring programs, conducts compliance and enforcement activities and laboratory services, is responsible for sample analysis, method development and regulatory research. The program also works in collaboration with other regulatory bodies both domestically and internationally. Benoit Dubé briefly explained the regulatory requirements, the safety and efficacy assessment process, labelling standards, and the marketplace monitoring activities.

A participant asked a question following the presentation. Below is a summary of the key points of this discussion.

"Can you elaborate on the point made with regards to the regulations related to the enhanced feed ban?"

The changes to the regulations were accepted in June 2006 to mitigate the risks associated with "Mad Cow disease". More information on this subject is provided in the folder we distributed at the beginning

Modernization Initiative: Overview
Glyn Chancey, Director, Plant Production Division, CFIA

Glyn Chancey presented an overview of the Fertilizer Program modernization initiative in the context of Smart Regulation; a Government of Canada initiative that spearheaded the fertilizer program modernization efforts. He stated that the goal of the project is intended to streamline the regulatory process, improve the overall effectiveness of the regulatory framework and increase flexibility, consistency and transparency of the program. He listed some of the project's key deliverables which included the development of a permanent consultative framework that would provide a mechanism for open and effective communication and stakeholder engagement. The consultations together with an internal program review led to the development of a Strategic Action Plan (SAP) designed to address current issues, modernize the program and achieve common goals of all stakeholders. Glyn Chancey concluded by highlighting the various benefits this initiative would have for both Canadians and the industry.

A participant asked a question following the presentation. Below is a summary of the key points of this discussion.

"When you mention common goals, are making reference to industry, or did you also consult with agricultural producers and consumers?"

Over the past two years the Agency has organised multiples meetings with stakeholders and has participated in meetings organized by stakeholders. Consultations have been restricted to face to face meetings. The Agency was able to reach a few producers and consumers; however, we are still not satisfied with the level of participation form these specific groups. We will have to find other means to increase the number of producer and consumer groups participating in the Modernization. It can be easy to sell the idea to farmers and producers, but it will be more difficult to get the consumers input. There are so many consumers with so many different points of view that it will be difficult to find the appropriate consumer representatives. Other Departments have been faced with the same challenge and some have begun using methods such as surveys and focus groups. These methods are expensive, but should be considered. The Agency has not yet formulated a plan to systematically approach consumers. Glyn Chancey invited participants of the workshop to offer recommendations to improve the consultation process.

Modernization Initiative: Introduction to the Strategic Action Plan
Benoit Dubé, A/Chief Program Design and Delivery Unit, Fertilizer Section, CFIA

Benoit Dubé provided a synopsis of the Strategic Action Plan. He started by explaining the origins of the SAP, its structure and the input received from stakeholders so far. Participants reviewed specific examples of the strategies that were included in the SAP. Benoit Dubé highlighted some of the short term strategies and outcomes that were identified in the SAP in addition to some of the ongoing activities that are being handled by the Agency.

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Discussion: Issues, Challenges and Strategies

The group was asked for their feedback on the proposed SAP. For the most part, the group agreed with the plan, however, other issues were raised that should be addressed.

The main points raised by participants were to:

Create an information gateway so stakeholders can be updated on consultations, new regulations, etc.
Create a sector for the growing natural and organic products industry. These products are not dealt with comprehensively in the Act, and the legislation is not always interpreted consistently.
Streamline the labelling requirements so there is certain mandatory information and other information is voluntary to allow leeway for marketing. Differentiate between what must appear on the product label (e.g. nutrient guarantees) from what is used to market the product.
Develop a labelling "how-to" guide for the industry that:
- presents the main guidelines;
- is organized by product type;
- is easy to understand;
- provides a checklist that the industry could use; and
- clearly identifies what is and what is not acceptable.
Create tools to facilitate understanding of the regulations (e.g. labelling, registration applications, claims, efficacy data, case-study examples).
Standardize enforcement of the Act and the work of all inspectors so they interpret the Act in the same manner. There are significant economic factors related to label modifications.
(See goal 17 of the SAP) - Specify accredited laboratories.
(See strategy 24.1 of the SAP) - Accreditation organizations must work within the National Standards System managed by the Standards Council of Canada based on ISO Guide 65.
For accreditation, ensure that a specifications or standards book is developed based on ISO Guide 59 within the National Standards System managed by Standards Council of Canada (e.g. compost standards are developed by BNQ).

Comments on the Canadian Fertilizer Quality Assurance Program (CFQAP)

The lack of participation from western provinces affects the credibility of the program.
Reduce the number of ratings (success-failure).
Increase inspection frequency among non-participants and program participation will increase (e.g. with milk producers, their permits are suspended when they receive a rating of D).
Publish an annual report presenting the overall statistics by province; the plant's rating would be confidential.
- Disclose the list of participants.
- Disclose non-compliant non-participants.
- Post the report to the Web site and explain the program.

Other comments

In accordance with point 31.2 expand the definition of a label in the Regulations to include Web-site-based marketing if referenced on the label. In addition, all forms of advertising in the media must also be covered.
Labelling requirements are a problem for small plants that operate one or two months per year. It is difficult to come into compliance in light of staff turnovers and monthly billing.
Approve the statement on micronutrient labels: "agricultural fertilization plan" when a plan exists.
Increased fertilizer homogeneity with greater control of the size guide number (SGN)

Discussion: Priorities

Based on the strategic action plan, the group identified strategies that they believed to be priority over the next 6 to 18 months. The priorities shared by the group are set out below. (Note: The numbering used below corresponds to the numbering used in the SAP.)

Priorities identified in the strategic action plan

(Strategy 5.3) - Cooperate with other sections/divisions within the Agency to develop a consistent position and approach to product evaluations (e.g. CFQAP, sampling).
(Goal 24 - Implementation of alternative program delivery mechanisms) - Establish guidelines on the accreditation of third parties.
(Strategy 25.2) - Explore change options for CFQAP in consultation with the industry to develop a system that ensures effective monitoring of bulk blend fertilizers.
(Strategy 25.3) - Promote industry participation in the revised CFQAP (if still in existence).
(Strategy 31.2) - Expand the definition of a label in the Regulations to include Web-site-based marketing if referenced on the label.
(Strategy 32.3) - Revise labelling requirements prescribed in the regulations with respect to their applicability and relevance to current scientific knowledge, product types and agricultural practices.

Other priorities not identified in the SAP

Update Schedule II of Fertilizers Regulations.
Speed up the application response time.
Decide on whether to maintain/revise/reject the CFQAP.
Hold meetings by industry sector and/or product type (e.g. agricultural, horticultural, compost, supplements).
Determine how to manage the enforcement of the Enhanced Feed Ban which will take effect on July 12, 2007 (Will there be time limits for the enforcement? Will all groups involved be notified in advance?).
Present a realistic deadline, based on market conditions, when regulatory changes occur (i.e. seasonal production).
Ensure good communication/transparency with the industry.
Form a consultation group for "natural" products:
- Chemical and natural fertilizers should not be governed by the same standards. Other materials need to be considered, such as organic matter where sources of nitrogen are very different. If the same rate is used, over fertilization may occur.
Establish standards for organic products and identify the recommended rates.
Combine Canada and US labelling rules/standards.
Review natural and organic product evaluation/labelling standards.

The Path to Success

Getting Involved: Effective Stakeholder Engagement

Benoit Dubé explained that the consultations organized by the Agency began in February-March 2005. Following the consultations, the industry decided to create the Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum, a permanent organization that the CFIA could consult to validate their ideas. The Forum continued to develop during the consultations and several working groups were formed to discuss/address issues associated with efficacy standards, market monitoring, new products, communications, operational environment and biosolids. There is also a sub-group on CFQAP.

The participants were asked whether they had ideas on creating more inclusive and effective consultation processes that would allow the Agency to get a better understanding of stakeholder concerns:

Hold consultations based on product type (e.g. agricultural, horticultural, supplements, compost, natural, etc.) to get a better handle on industry's concerns.
- Do not mix the different sectors together; allow specific discussions on each theme.
Ensure good communication/transparency with the industry.
Form a consultation group for natural products.
Identify specialists in the sector to discuss an issue or to get ideas on a particular theme.
Send documentation to the stakeholders involved well before a consultation so they could discuss it with their colleagues (within their associations, organizations or other). The various associations and organizations should get together before the meeting with the Agency to discuss their viewpoints and identify the messages they wish to raise during the consultation.
Ensure strong representation (diversity) at the consultation meetings.
The Agency should take part in meetings organized by the associations and the industry to keep abreast of the issues.

The group agreed that there was no perfect formula. When asked whether they preferred if consultations were organized by sector or theme, the group agreed that it was important to well define meeting objectives before determining the format.

Performance Measures

The group shared their ideas on how the Agency could measure the effectiveness of the regulatory framework for fertilizers and supplements, and how they would gauge the success of the modernization initiative.

Performance measures

Increase the number of members and participation in the CFQAP.
Speed up time to market.
Decrease the number of complaints and improved complaint processing.
Decrease instances of non-compliance.
Increase the number of products registered.
Uniformity in terms of regulatory enforcement.
Apply the CFQAP to other sectors.
Faster response time to industry registration and labelling requests.

How would you measure the success of the modernization initiative?

Post an action plan progress report to the Agency's Web site every six months.
Disseminate the names of companies that comply with the CFQAP (to improve the level of transparency and communication).
Count the number of product registrations.
Determine label compliance rate.
Inspect plants.
Survey the industry on their level of satisfaction with our "service."
Use a quality management system.

Other comments

Plants may have access to a plant rating or province rating to measure their performance. Use samples to determine the ratings - CFQAP.
Train official label evaluators in the region.
Give priority ratings to applications.
Consider implementing a two-tiered system. This would allow companies to pay to have their products evaluated by an external consultant and decrease the response time.
Establish baseline response times or service delivery standards, and if the standards is not met, the application should be sent to an external agency.
French-language customer service must be quicker. Responses to requests in English are provided faster.

Next Steps and Closing Comments

Benoit Dubé wrapped up the workshop by thanking the group for their participation. He said that one of the goals of the session was to engage more people who had not yet participated in the modernization initiative. Benoit encouraged participants to sign up for the national consultation planned for late March. At that meeting, the Agency will present a summary of the results of the consultations held in the regions and will consolidate all of the issues and priorities for the coming year. He also stated that the Canadian Fertilizer Products Forum was another advisory body where stakeholders could share their suggestions. Lastly, Benoit Dubé asked the group to submit the names of individuals that should be invited to the next consultations.

Common menu bar links

About the CFIA

Subjects

Proactive Disclosure

Table of Contents

Background and Introduction

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Path to Success

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Background and Introduction

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Path to Success

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Background and Introduction

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Path to Success

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Background and Introduction

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

Path to Success

Next Steps and Closing Remarks

Background and Introduction

Fertilizer Program and the Modernization Initiative

Focus on the Strategic Action Plan for the Fertilizer Program

The Path to Success

Next Steps and Closing Comments