The food system and supply chains continue to change and evolve at an accelerated pace. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have taken a number of significant food safety regulatory actions in the first quarter of 2025, including announcing HHS’s intent to explore potential rulemaking to eliminate the self-affirmed Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) pathway and proposing to extend the compliance date for the Food Traceability Rule by 30 months.

The regulatory landscape is shifting, and regulatory changes continue to come fast and furious. The following recent actions (amongst others) have the potential to significantly impact food companies across the U.S.

Updated Allergen Guidance

On January 6, 2025, the FDA published a revised fifth edition of its food allergen guidance for industry, Questions and Answers Regarding Food Allergens, including the Food Allergen Labeling Requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The guidance is intended to help the food industry meet requirements for accurately labeling FDA-regulated foods with the big 9 food allergens (i.e., milk, eggs, fish, crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, peanuts, soybeans, and sesame) to protect consumers with food allergies.

The guidance includes updates reflecting FDA’s current thinking on food allergen labeling topics, including the following:

• Information regarding sesame as a major food allergen.
• Expanded interpretations of milk and eggs as major food allergens to include milk from ruminant animals other than cows and eggs from birds other than chickens.
• Adjustments to remove certain tree nuts, including coconuts, from the list of major food allergens.

Companies should reference the updated guidance to ensure they understand these changes, accurately evaluate the food safety and allergen risks of their products, and update manufacturing and labeling practices to remain in compliance with food allergen labeling requirements.

Withdrawal of Salmonella Framework

On July 29, 2024, the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) issued its proposed rule and determination to more effectively reduce Salmonella contamination and illnesses associated with raw poultry products. The proposed framework presented a systematic approach to addressing Salmonella contamination at the poultry slaughter and processing stages, including the first enforceable standards to prevent raw chicken carcasses, chicken parts, ground chicken, and ground turkey products that contain any type of Salmonella at or above 10 CFU per gram/mL from entering the market. It also required poultry companies to establish microbial monitoring programs (MMPs) incorporating statistical process controls (SPCs) to identify and prevent pathogen contamination throughout the slaughter system. 

FSIS received over 7,000 public comments on the proposed framework and announced a Notice of Withdrawal on April 25, 2025, retracting the proposed rule and determination to allow the Agency to further assess its approach. FSIS cites the following areas as garnering the most comments—both positive and negative:

• FSIS’s legal authority to propose final product standards.
• Proposed Salmonella levels and serotypes for the final product standards.
• Proposed use of SPC monitoring.
• Scientific and technical information used to support the proposed framework.
• Potential economic impacts.
• Potential impacts on small poultry growers and processors.

The comments also suggested several alternative approaches to address Salmonella illnesses associated with poultry products. FSIS is taking all of this under advisement as it reassesses its approach to Salmonella and whether an update to the current standards is warranted.

Phasing Out Synthetic Dyes

HHS and FDA announced on April 23, 2025 that they are taking immediate action to phase out eight petroleum-based synthetic dyes in foods and to fast-track review and approval of natural alternatives. These dyes are found in hundreds of products, including candy, cereals, beverages, and even medications.

Many synthetic dyes currently used in the U.S. have been banned or restricted in the European Union since 2010. In November 2023, California became the first state in the U.S. to ban four food additives (Red No. 3, brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, and propylparaben) in foods sold in California through the California Food Safety Act, and in March 2025, West Viriginia signed one of the most comprehensive food dye bans into law. Now the FDA is taking the following significant actions to remove synthetic dyes from all U.S. products:

1. Establish a national standard and timeline for the food industry to transition from synthetic dyes to natural alternatives.
2. Revoke authorization of Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B in the next few months.
3. Work with industry to remove the remaining six synthetic dyes from the food supply by the end of 2026. This includes FD&C Green No. 3, Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5, Yellow No. 6, Blue No. 1, and Blue No. 2.
4. Fast-track authorization of four new natural color additives, including calcium phosphate, Galdieria extract blue, gardenia blue, and butterfly pea flower, and accelerate review of others.
5. Partner with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to further research how food additives impact children’s health.
6. Request food companies remove FD&C Red No. 3 sooner than the January 15, 2027 or January 18, 2028 deadlines established by FDA on January 15, 2025.

The FDA is planning to proceed without any statutory or regulatory changes, relying instead on the voluntary efforts of the food industry in complying. The Agency is taking steps to issue guidance and provide regulatory flexibility to industry to remove the synthetic dyes as quickly as possible from the market.

In most cases, companies will need to:

• Inventory existing products and their ingredients to determine which products use synthetic dyes.
• Reformulate affected products to use natural color alternatives, test new recipes, and, potentially, make other recipe changes.
• Identify and approve new suppliers of alternative ingredients.
• Update label design, adjust ingredient panels, and modify any relevant nutritional claims.

Stay Focused

Change is happening, and companies in the food industry need to pay attention and be prepared:

• Conduct a comprehensive food safety and quality gap assessment. Know your operations, inventory your ingredients, understand your supply chain. This assessment should be the starting point for understanding your regulatory and certification obligations and current compliance status—and for ensuring you are prepared to meet pending regulatory developments.
• Train your staff. Every change discussed above requires employee understanding. Train your team routinely on requirements, responsibilities, processes, expectations, etc.
• Seek third-party oversight. Having external experts periodically look inside your company can help determine regulatory applicability, provide an objective view of what is really going on, prepare for audits, and implement corrective/preventive actions that help ensure compliance. An outside expert can often provide the “big picture” view of what you have vs. what you need; how your plans, programs, and requirements intersect; and how you can best comply with changing requirements.

Virtually every regulatory agency has regulations that require companies to fulfill very specific compliance requirements. Sometimes, there is overlap and businesses may be required to comply with similar—yet different—regulations from two different agencies. Using containers to store hazardous waste products is one of those tricky situations.

Different Definitions

Containers used for hazardous materials or waste are regulated under the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) (49 CFR 173.29) and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous Waste Requirements (40 CFR 261.7). The confusion between these rules comes in the definition of empty, which changes significantly from one agency to the next.

For both agencies, the definition of empty dictates how containers that once held hazardous waste and/or hazardous materials are managed (i.e., shipped and disposed of). However, a container can meet the criteria for emptiness according to EPA but still not be considered empty according to DOT for transportation purposes. It is important to understand the different definitions to be able to comply.

EPA RCRA-Empty

The EPA regulations regarding management of empty containers and residues establish procedures for determining if a container is empty (i.e., no longer contains hazardous waste) and defining when hazardous waste residue in an empty container is exempt from regulation. According to EPA, an empty chemical container has been removed of all materials or liquids via commonly employed practices (e.g., pumping, pouring, or aspirating). But what does this actually mean?

RCRA-empty conditions differ based on whether the container is holding non-acute hazardous waste, acute hazardous waste, or hazardous waste in compressed gas form, as shown in the table below.

Containers that meet the definition of RCRA-empty are exempt from requiring specialized management as a hazardous waste. RCRA-empty containers can be disposed of at an authorized municipal solid waste landfill, recycled through a legitimate recycler, or reused onsite. Reuse requires properly emptying the container to avoid mixing incompatible substances that may create human health or environmental concerns. If a container is not found to be RCRA-empty, any residues removed from the container must be managed as hazardous waste under Subtitle C.

DOT Empty

DOT is responsible for hazardous materials shipping regulations. Unlike RCRA, DOT hazards are not defined by the quantity of material in the container; rather, the properties of the material dictate hazards. Even when a container appears empty, the hazardous material residue may still pose a hazard under the HMR. Per 49 CFR 173.29(a), these containers must follow the same rules as full hazmat containers when it comes to shipment. This includes having shipping papers, placards, labels, and markings, as well as providing training for employees who prepare the containers (full or empty) for shipping.

A container that once held hazardous materials is only considered exempt from HMR under the following conditions:

• The container remains unused.
• The container has been thoroughly cleaned and sufficiently purged of vapors to eliminate potential hazards.
• The container has been refilled with non-hazardous material to neutralize any remaining hazards from residue.

In addition, if the material inside the container is a DOT Class 9 material and meets the definition of RCRA-empty, the container is exempt from both EPA hazardous waste and DOT hazardous material shipping requirements.

Containers that meet the DOT criteria for being truly empty must have any hazard labels, markings, or placards that would be visible in transportation removed, covered, or obliterated to ensure emergency responders can correctly identify that the package contains no regulated hazardous materials.

Empty, Full, or Both?

In short, it is possible to have a container that EPA considers empty, but DOT does not. In this case, if you plan to ship the container, you would not have to follow any EPA hazardous waste rules, but DOT HMR would still apply when shipped.

A regulatory applicability assessment is a good first step in determining which regulations apply if you store hazardous waste in containers and/or plan to ship hazardous materials. If DOT’s HMR and EPA’s RCRA Hazardous Waste Requirements, it is then important to understand the distinction between the rules regarding what is considered empty to comply with both agency’s requirements.

Functionality: What does it do?

Management by walking around (MBWA), safety observations, and safety inspections are common terms for similar practices. All involve observing the daily work environment to assess safety practices. Historically, these types of observations have been completed using paper and pencil forms that typically get added to a binder and stored on a shelf—never to be reviewed again. KTL’s Safety Inspection Form provides an online tool for supervisors and/or employees to observe and document safety practices and/or inspect equipment and then use those observations to improve safety performance.

Benefits: Why do you need it?

KTL’s Safety Inspection Form offers the following:

• Provides a list of questions or items to inspect (e.g., equipment, safety procedures) to help ensure consistent and repeatable inspections.
• Creates an electronic means to conduct and document safety inspections.
• Collects data that can then be analyzed to identify common problems.
• Sends notifications, including alerts for negative findings and exceeding certain thresholds, as well as weekly summaries.
• Facilitates the company’s ability to provide recommended corrections to the employee being observed or to alert maintenance of necessary equipment repairs.
• Helps the company to focus resources on correcting common safety issues where return on investment (ROI) is greatest.

Technology Used

• SharePoint
• Power Apps
• Power Automate
• Power BI

Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) is a concept that harkens back to the Food Additives Amendment of 1958, when it was first established to regulate pre-market approval of new food additives, while exempting substances with a long history of safe use. Since that time, the GRAS program has undergone several changes impacting how industry manages food ingredients. On March 10, 2025, the GRAS program came under new scrutiny, as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced its intent to explore potential rulemaking to eliminate the self-affirmed GRAS pathway.  

GRAS Beginnings

The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) of 1938 first established the need for scientific proof of safety before marketing new food products. It did not, however, anticipate the bureaucratic congestion that would arise due to unnecessary regulation of commonly used food additives, such as salt, vinegar, and spices. To address this, Congress passed the Food Additives Amendment in 1958, establishing the GRAS concept.

While this Amendment improved regulatory efficiency, the FDA remained the sole gatekeeper of what did and did not qualify for the GRAS exemption. It was not until 1972, when the FDA created the GRAS affirmation process, that individual companies could begin petitioning FDA to review and approve GRAS status. This approach placed the onus for identifying new, in-need-of-review products on individual companies, while the FDA maintained responsibility for reviewing and approving the ingredients.

Self-Affirmation

As more products began to flood the market, the backlog of GRAS petitions outgrew the FDA’s resources, which led to the development of the GRAS notification system in 1997. Under this system, companies could self-determine if their new ingredients qualified as GRAS-exempt based on scientific evidence. What’s more, companies were granted autonomy to notify the FDA (or not) of their GRAS determination, setting the precedent to completely bypass FDA review.

The FDA issued the GRAS Final Rule in 2016 to formalize the notification procedure—requiring submission of detailed scientific evaluations and safety studies (i.e., toxicology reports, historical consumption data, and expert evaluations) when making a GRAS notification. However, companies retained the option to choose whether to notify the FDA, leading to a robust archive of food additives with no public record of safety review. Today, the Pew Research Center estimates that roughly 1,000 such chemical additives in the food supply chain are self-affirmed as GRAS by food manufacturers.

Policy Loophole

In its March 10, 2025 press release, the HHS announced its desire to close what it considers to be this self-affirmation “policy loophole”. According to HHS, “Eliminating the self-affirmation process would require companies seeking to introduce new ingredients in foods to publicly notify the FDA of their intended use of such ingredients, along with underlying safety data, before they are introduced in the food supply.”

Several states, including California, Illinois, Missouri, Washington, New York, and West Virginia, are passing their own legislation to address food safety and transparency concerns caused by GRAS. For example, the California Food Safety Act prohibited the statewide sale or manufacture of foods containing four chemical additives, and West Virginia recently signed a law to ban foods containing seven artificial dyes. Even Congress attempted to overhaul the GRAS rule in September 2024 through the Toxic Free Food Act.

What Does It All Mean?

By eliminating the self-affirmation process, manufacturers would be required to publicly notify the FDA of their intended use of such ingredients and supply safety data before the ingredients are introduced. Eliminating the GRAS loophole would undoubtedly introduce more transparency to the market about what ingredients are used by food companies and prohibit major chemical changes to food without public notice. However, this change could also potentially further stress an already under-resourced FDA, create delays in GRAS review and approval, and hinder food manufacturers’ ability to quickly switch to other GRAS ingredients if there are supply chain issues. And while transparency is good, it could cause consumer confusion regarding information about the toxicology of ingredients and associated hazards.

Planning Ahead

Given the trajectory of GRAS and its historical timeline, new legislation seems to be on the horizon. While the exact changes and requirements are not known, there are actions manufacturers can take now to proactively manage GRAS ingredients:

• Take an inventory of all current products with GRAS statements. Understand what those products are and how you use them.
• Make sure you have all the necessary records (e.g., safety data sheets (SDS), toxicology reports, and technical data sheets) for your GRAS products. You may be required to submit these and having them ready to go should help expedite the process.
• Plan for delays if you rely on GRAS products. FDA may have many ingredients to review/approve if the self-affirmation clause is eliminated, and this could create a bottleneck. Find substitutions in your supply chain in case they are needed.   

Join KTL at one of the premier events in the food industry–the 2025 Food Safety Summit. The Summit offers a unique opportunity for attendees to learn real-world solutions from leaders in food safety and stay informed on the latest food safety trends, innovations, emerging challenges, and more.

• When: May 12-15, 2025
• Where: Donald Stephens Convention Center, Rosemont, Illinois
• Who: Retailers, food processors, distributors, food manufacturers, growers, food service, testing laboratories, importing/exporting, law firms, and other food safety professionals
• Find KTL: Stop by our booth (#408) in the exhibit hall!

Tech Tent Case Study Presentation

Be sure to also update your agenda to attend KTL’s Tech Tent presentation on Wednesday, May 14 at 11:15 am CT:

Case Study: Using Microsoft SharePoint® and the Power Platform to Manage Food Safety Programs

Building a food safety system doesn’t have to be complicated or expensive—not when most companies already have the software they need. See how KTL helps food companies build dynamic data management tools to collect, track, and report food safety compliance information. This presentation will highlight our standard modules and most used tools and templates, including:

• Inspections and Monitoring
• Corrective Actions
• Task Management
• Preventive Maintenance
• Supplier Management
• Document Control
• Records Management
• Data Tracking and Trending
• Reporting Dashboards

Join KTL to see these modules in practice and learn from experts with food safety and IT expertise how your company can benefit from this approach.

Traceability has been a hot issue for most food companies since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) passed the final Food Traceability Rule in November 2022, especially with the original January 2026 compliance deadline approaching. However, food companies will likely have extra time to prepare, as the FDA announced on March 20, 2025 its intention to extend the compliance date for the Food Traceability Rule by 30 months.

Additional Time

KTL originally reported in our Top Food Trends for 2025 article of speculation that this deadline could be delayed due to a provision in the current draft House appropriations bill that would prohibit funding for implementation, administration, or enforcement of these regulations. According to FDA, “The compliance date extension affords covered entities the additional time necessary to ensure complete coordination across the supply chain in order to fully implement the final rule’s requirements—ultimately providing FDA and consumers with greater transparency and food safety.”

The FDA is planning to follow appropriate procedures and publish a proposed rule to extend the compliance date at a later time to be determined. The Agency remains committed to implementing the full requirements of the final rule but giving industry additional time to comply and itself time to provide additional technical assistance, tools, and other resources to assist industry. 

Stay the Course

Regardless of the compliance deadline, organizations should continue working on their traceability systems and programs. This includes performing traceability exercises to help identify gaps, testing protocols and verifying effectiveness, implementing corrective actions, and ensuring adequate traceability processes are in place. Investing in a good technology solution that integrates with the food safety management system (FSMS) will help to further streamline the process.

The Food + Beverage Environmental Conference (FBEC) is the premier and most comprehensive environmental event for the food and beverage industry in the U.S., focusing on the latest trends and innovations affecting sustainability, water resource management, supply chain, air quality, environmental compliance, and much more. 

When: March 31 – April 3, 2025
Where: Rennaissance Downtown Phoenix
Who: Environmental professionasl in any business related to the food and beverage industry 

Poster Presentation

Be sure to stop by and see the KTL and Ventura Foods poster at the Poster Session & Social Hour on Thursday, April 3 at 5:00 pm: Using Existing Software to Build the Ventura Foods EMS. We will talking about how Ventura Foods built and implemented an ISO 14001 EMS to meet customer requirements with limited resources.

No single waste management strategy is suitable for managing all waste streams in all situations (Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)). As such, EPA’s non-hazardous materials and waste management hierarchy ranks the various waste management strategies from most to least environmentally preferred. Not surprisingly, the hierarchy emphasizes reducing and reusing—followed by recycling—as best practices for sustainable materials management, when possible.

While the best way to reduce waste is to never create it, recycling is a valuable way to collect used, reused, or unused items that would otherwise be considered waste and turn them into something valuable. From Fortune 500 companies to local businesses, to the restaurant on the corner—all have materials that can and should be recycled. The five tips below offer best practices for effectively managing your recycling efforts.

1. Conduct a trash audit.

A trash audit is a process in which an organization systematically analyzes and evaluates the contents of its waste, typically by sorting through the trash to identify the types and quantities of materials being discarded. This in-depth process provides a good baseline in developing a Recycling Program, as it helps to document the contents and quantity of your waste streams and then allows you to define how that waste gets managed.The audit helps to answer questions such as: What are you throwing away? How much is wasted food? Can you separate that out and send it to a composter? Can you stop making that trash? Can you reuse something? Can you sell it to someone else? Can you recycle it?

While not all trash can be reused or repurposed, it is consistent with EPA’s hierarchy to identify the materials produced that can be reused or repurposed as the first and most sustainable waste management solution (e.g., some tools can be sent back to the manufacturer to be refurbished and resold, or there may also be a “second life” outlet for materials). If materials are not able to be reused, the next best consideration is recycling.

2. Understand state and local regulations.

Once your trash audit identifies what items you want to recycle, it is important to consider the regulations. Different states and local governments may have specific requirements for the materials you want to recycle. For example, many states have compliance requirements for electronic wastes, used oil, or other universal wastes. In addition, EPA has very specific requirements for solid and hazardous waste recycling to ensure it is managed properly to avoid environmental and safety hazards. Engage experts, where necessary, if you have questions about certain materials that may have very specific or unclear requirements. 

3. Implement a Recycling Program.

Based on the trash audit and regulatory requirements, a Recycling Program can be developed to serve as the roadmap for what gets recycled and how. The Recycling Program should clearly:

• Define what materials get recycled.
• Discuss proper disposal of materials, focusing on the most common items employees would handle in their day-to-day tasks.
• Identify collection points, so employees understand where to put items for recycling.
• Detail storage procedures for recyclable materials.
• Outline roles and responsibilities, including the parties responsible for recycling (see below).
• Provide for worker training to ensure the program is followed as intended.
• Reinforce the purpose of recycling and leadership’s commitment to the cause.
• Address how the program will be communicated to visitors, contractors, customers, shareholders, etc.

4. Partner with the right recyclers.

An important part of your Recycling Program is finding reputable recyclers who understand recycling regulations and are certified to handle the materials you are generating. This means working with recyclers who are transparent. Recyclers who are open about their practices are less likely to mishandle your recyclables than shady operators who could end up getting your company in a lot of trouble. Your recycler should help you identify the best ways to recycle your materials (e.g., setting up separate dumpsters for paper, plastic, food) and identify whether there are any cash-back opportunities for recycling certain materials (e.g., cardboard, scrap metal, electronic waste, etc.).

5. Maintain safe storage and handling practices.

As noted above, a trash audit will help you know what you are recycling. You also need to know how to properly store these materials while they are waiting to be recycled so they do not become a bigger hazard. For example, keep batteries for recycling in cool, dry places away from heat.

Conduct a proper risk assessment for the proposed storage spaces to capture and mitigate potential risks before finalizing your choice, document this in your Recycling Program, and then train employees on how to safely handle the material they are bringing to the recycling area. Precautions may include having the proper fire detection and suppression equipment for the area where you are storing material for recycling, or ensuring employees have the proper personal protective equipment (PPE) to wear when handling materials.

Creating a Recycling Culture

The above five tips can help ensure you have the systems, practices, programs, and partners in place to manage your trash and recycling. By following them, organizations can streamline their waste management processes, comply with environmental standards, and promote resource conservation and cost savings. But to truly become a “recycling superstar”, it is also important that you:

• Avoid all or nothing thinking—set realistic goals for what you can accomplish while still complying with regulations.
• Implement robust quality control processes to avoid making mistakes.
• Think creatively about how your team can work together reduce, reuse, repurpose and recycle your trash and get closer to zero waste.
• Measure your results. Conduct your trash audits annually to assess what is working and what is not and then set new goals to continually improve.

Effective waste management and recycling are essential for organizations striving to operate sustainably and reduce their environmental impacts. Ultimately, fostering a culture of creativity, continuous improvement, and accountability will lead organizations closer to their zero-waste goals, benefiting the environment and the bottom line.

Functionality: What does it do?

As part of Microsoft’s Power Platform®, Power Automate® is a workflow automation tool used to automate repetitive tasks and workflows. The purpose of workflow automation tools is to streamline manual processes and tasks in order to maximize company time and resources, increase operational efficiency, and improve overall business productivity.

Common Power Automate tasks include the following:

• Notifications: This can be as simple as creating a notification when something is submitted or changed or setting alerts to act according to a designated schedule (e.g., seven days before due date).
• Approvals: Documents and list items can be routed to specific individuals by email with a simple button to approve or decline and then automatically move along to the next step in the process.
• Document Management: Email attachments can be automatically added to OneDrive® or SharePoint; metadata (e.g., time/date, sender, and email body) can also be added.
• Form Processing: Form processing can automatically create ID numbers for list items to help with tracking. In addition, data from one form can be used to populate multiple lists. For example, entering data into a customer feedback form includes a checkbox asking if it requires a corrective and preventive action (CAPA). If so, relevant data from the feedback form populates a new entry in the CAPA list.
• Records Management: When a record is created, the retention period can be added. When the retention period expires, the record is then automatically archived or deleted.
• Calendar Management: With calendar management, you can do things like email yourself a list of your calendar entries daily or weekly, email reminders for any calendar entries you have not yet responded to, and create Outlook events or meetings from a Power App® button.
• Data Management: Large data sets can be transferred easily from Microsoft Excel® to SharePoint. Data can also be manipulated, cleaned, or transformed during or after the transfer.

Benefits: Why do you need it?

• Fewer mistakes. Replacing manual data entry with automation reduces opportunities for human error and the potential mistakes, inaccuracies, and costs that can accompany it.
• Streamlined processes. Workflow automation creates more efficiency by automatically making assignments and moving projects/documents/tasks along in the process. It is also easier to track and manage processes and performance when all steps are in Power Automate.
• Improved productivity. Automating manual tasks frees up time and resources to focus attention elsewhere. Being able to easily track a project or process through an automated system can further improve productivity and ensure tasks are completed as planned.
• Enhanced collaboration and accountability. A clearly designed workflow helps ensure all employees understand the process and their role in it. A common system further enables cross-functional collaboration and improves accountability.
• Informed business decisions. Power Automate offers real-time reporting and performance metrics that can be used to inform decisions and modify processes to enhance performance.

Technology Used

Microsoft Power Automate

Consultant Meghan Stenslien has become KTL’s newest Certified Environmental Auditor (CEA). Meghan has completed all experience and eligibility requirements—including recently passing the rigorous National Registry of Environmental Professionals (NREP) CEA exam. The CEA certification is a specialty certification program intended for professionals conducting environmental compliance and risk audits of operating facilities, related equipment and ongoing procedures.

Meghan is a Consultant with a diverse background in food safety; quality; and environmental, health, and safety (EHS) compliance. She has conducted routine environmental, safety, quality, and food safety environmental audits and facility assessments and designed programs, policies, and procedures to effectively manage requirements to help ensure regulatory compliance. In addition to her CEA certification, Meghan is a certified ISO 45001 (safety) and 14001 (environment) Lead Auditor, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Green Tier Auditor, R2 certified Lead Auditor, and HACCP certified. 

NREP is widely considered to be the foremost not-for-profit organization in the environmental and safety industry. Earning a CEA certification demonstrates the highest level of knowledge, experience, and education in the environmental field.