MN FOOD SAFETY AND DEFENSE TASK FORCE Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019

Today's meeting was held at the University of MN, St. Paul Campus, 1964 Fitch Avenue, St. Paul, MN, 55108, Ben Pomeroy Center, Room 213 Ruth Petran called the meeting to order at 1:35 PM. Members present included: Courtney Bidney, Chris Gindorff, Benjamin Warren, Cecilia Coulter, Annalisa Hultburg, Ruth Petran, Susan Stokes (via WebEx) Visitors present included: Neal Fredrickson, Tom Webber, Heidi Kassenborg, Jennifer van de Ligt, Joe Scimeca, Amy Couther, Mary Rosenthal, Angie Cyr, Vanessa Kindred-Burandt, Jan Kelly, Lou Keely, Dave Read, Katherine Simon, Heidi DeBeck, Lisa Wetzel, Kelsey Huus, Jessica Laurent, Joe Jurusik, Julia Selleys, Jane Jewett, Ben Miller, Alida Sorenson, Jill Ball (via WebEx), Brad Stonefield (via WebEx), Roberta Wagner (via WebEx), 1. Dates and links:

The next Food Safety and Defense Task Force meeting will be held Tuesday, May 21, 2019. Location: Room TBD, Orville L. Freeman Building, 625 Robert Street North St. Paul, 1:30 pm – 4:30 pm. • Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO) annual meeting will be June 22-26 in Atlanta, GA:

https://afdoconference.org/ • FDA published guidance on Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional

Adulteration: https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/ucm610946.htm

• FDA posted resources online for food producers in flooded areas in the Central and Southern Plains: https://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/ConstituentUpdates/ucm634017.htm

• MDA AGRI Dairy Farm Improvement Grants are available, application deadline is May 1, 2019: https://www.mda.state.mn.us/business-dev-loans-grants/agri-dairy-farm-improvement-grant

2. Member and Visitor Updates

Courtney Bidney (General Mills): Courtney mentioned that she recently attended an AFDO board meeting. AFDO is starting work on process improvement, including recalls and traceability. Neal Fredrickson (Cargill): Neil mentioned that they are rolling out food defense programs at our facilities around the world. He will be participating on a panel at the GMA Science Forum in late March. Heidi Kassenborg (consultant): Heidi mentioned she has been working with AFDO on general education modules for regulators. She is also participating in NCBRT emergency preparedness and

response training. And she is going to American Samoa for FAO. Jennifer van de Ligt (Food Protection and Defense Institute (FPDI)): Jennifer announced that FDA is rolling out intentional adulteration training; vulnerability assessment training will be arriving soon and FPDI will be certified to provide that training. Also, FPDI is accepting applications for the fall 2019 Cohort. Information about the Integrated Food Systems Leadership program may be found at: ifsl.umn.edu. Chris Gindorff (Lunds & Byerlys): Chris mentioned they are finishing up mitigation strategies. He is also working with the National Registry for Food Safety Professionals job task assessment for their training and on integrating more elements on Food Safety Culture. Joe Scimeca (Cargill): Joe mentioned that UNL's Food Allergy Research and Resource Program has new leadership. Amy Couther (Land O'Lakes): Amy mentioned she attended the GFSI conference in France in February. Ben Warren (Land O'Lakes): Ben mentioned he is working on intentional adulturation and biosecurity programs. Angie Cyr (Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)): - industry training and expanding regulator training for revised food code; working on revising our codes; begun flood response. Vanessa Kindred-Burandt (Legendary Baking): Vanessa mentioned preparing for a 3rd party audit and their food defense plan. Jan Kelly (Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA)): Jan mentioned that the Manufactured Food Program is implementing projects based on their strategic plan. They will have 5 position vacancies that will be announced soon. Lou Keeley (Baldinger Bakery): This is Lou's first time attending the FPDTF. Dave Read (International Food Protection Training Institute (IFPTI)): Dave mentioned they are working on a project with Land O'Lakes in Egypt. Katherine Simon (MDA): Katherine mentioned MDA's participation in a Minnesota Association of Meat Processors (MAMP) meeting last weekend and discussed updates on processing of wild game in the new food code. Also, MDA staff attended the National Consortium for Produce Safety Program Development meeting in Orlando earlier this month. Heidi DeBeck (US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)): Heidi mentioned that FDA is implementing full preventive controls (PC) inspections for human and animal food and that HAF1W recently finished first PC for animal food inspection. There is guidance for submitting Qualified Facility Attestation online. For the intentional adulteration rule, guidance was published this month and FDA is working on their procedures for the intentional adulteration rule. FDA is also finalizing the new rule for agricultural water requirements; working with USDA on jointly regulating cell-cultured meat; and has

posted flooding/reconditioning resources on FDA web site. Lisa Wetzel (MDA): Lisa mentioned that the Dairy and Meat Inspection Division is in the midst of USDA on-site review for state equal to program; USDA will be here for 2 weeks visiting 12 of our plants. There have been serious dairy impacts from the winter weather: over 25 dairy farm collapsed barns this winter and snow was added as a natural disaster to assist in recovery. AGRI improvement grants are available for moving from grade B to grade ‘A’ or maintain grade ‘A’ (no required matching funds). Also, there has been a lot of work in MDA on promoting mental health for farmers and producers. And MDA will soon launch a system for getting Certificates of Free Sale online. Kelsey Huus (USDA FSIS): This is Kelsey's first time attending the FPDTF. Joe Jurusik (Hennepin County): Joe mentioned that Hennepin County will be conducting food safety training for farmer’s market groups soon. Julia Selleys (Hennepin County): Hennepin County will be posting openings for students looking for internship positions. Cecilia Coulter (Minnesota Farmers Market Association (MFMA)): Working on a food hub project with Chisago City farmers market. Annalisa Hultburg (University of Minnesota): Annalisa announced that they have held 15 Produce Safety Rule trainings in Minnesota since October. Trainers have noticed confusion between GAP audits and FSMA produce safety rule. Also, there is a real need for more lead trainers in Minnesota as Annalisa is the only one. Jane Jewett (Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture (MISA)): Jane mentioned on-going work on the farmer’s market aggregation project. Also, the "Blazing Trails through the Jungle of Food Regulations" training has started. Ben Miller (The Acheson Group): Ben mentioned that they are seeing a lot of interest in edible marijuana markets around the country. Collin Kappenman (MDA): This was Collin's first time at the FSDTF. He is a retail food inspector out of the Grand Rapids area and will be filling in for Natasha Hedin as Task Force Administrator while she is on maternity leave.

3. Minutes will be marked as accepted; no changes identified. 4. USDA- FSIS regulatory update – Roberta Wagner

[See slides] 5. Announcements - Ruth Petran • We need to have a quorum of members attending these meetings, ideally in person. The on-

phone option will be made available, as we can • Quorum is more than 50% or 9 members to attend each • If we do have votes that are taken, we need to record the votes

o Voting via phone is okay

o Voting via proxy is not o Voting via email in not

6. FSDTF Member Update - Courtney Bidney - General Mills

[See slides] 7. FIT - Jane reviewed scenarios that were discussed today (no case to review) 8. Legislative Updates MDH - Angie Cyr • Lemonade Stand Bill hf 210 sf 77 - this bill would allow the sale of potentially-hazardous food • Sf 756 - prohibit plastic, single use plastic straw, unless requested • Sf 2088 prohibit PFOAs (perfluorooctanoic acid) to food packaging

MDA - Katherine Simon • Chapter 28A licensing statute

o Update to include to pull out custom processors as their own licensing category o Minor language updates to delegation of authority to be more reflective of the RFH

delegation today • Chapter 25 - feed chapter - semicolon addition to the definition of a drug that will grammatically

in line with FDA definition • 28A.16 exclusion - liquor stores to be excluded from a license

o How to calculate GAS for those that don't meet this inclusion o Proposal to add wholesalers to this exclusion

• Lisa Wetzel

o Language updates for eggs so that they match surrounding states language o Chapter 32D Dairy - working to get the MN Rules related to this update last session repealed

since they are no longer relevant to current statues o Requested additional 500 to support the meat program that hopefully will be matched by

USDA 9. IA Training Update - Jennifer van de Ligt FPDI and the TF are collaborating to provide a 2-day IA training April 3 and 4. The training will be most helpful for companies that don't have dedicated staff to these types of program. FPDI ideally would like to 20 with a minimum. We will reschedule the training if we don't meet that by next Tuesday, March 26. There was clarification between this shorter training and the longer standardized training. FPDI believes the shorter training would be equivalent to the standardized training. 10. Call for agenda topics: • Terms of Reference • Member presentation: Ben Warren, LOL • Legislative updates • Church Lady Law and other exemptions

o Community event o Fellowship meal

• RRT - food pantry outbreaks

MN FOOD SAFETY AND DEFENSE TASK FORCE Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019

Attachment 1 Upcoming Event Flyers and Additional Information

Are you aware that food manufacturers will have to comply with the FSMA Intentional

Adulteration Rule as soon as this summer? Are you ready?

Please join this training on May 1-2, 2019 in Minneapolis, MN to help make sure you are!

Food Defense and Intentional Adulteration Rule Training May 1-2, 2019

The Food Protection and Defense Institute and the Minnesota Food Safety and Defense Task

Force are hosting a 2-day Food Defense and Intentional Adulteration Rule Training on May

1-2, 2019 in Minneapolis, MN.

REGISTER NOW

The FSMA Intentional Adulteration Rule requires that a qualified individual must be able to

properly perform the Food Defense Measures required by the IA Rule. Training and/or on-

the-job experience are an integral part, and an IA Rule requirement, of learning how to

properly perform these measures.

This training will introduce participants to methods to prepare a food defense plan, conduct

vulnerability assessments, and identify and implement mitigation strategies. In addition, the

training will include the 1-day FDA standardized curriculum FSPCA Intentional Adulteration

Conducting Vulnerability Assessments Course.*

Be one of the first in the industry to take this course.

Training topics include:

● Food Defense and Global Complexity

● FSMA Intentional Adulteration Rule

● Food Defense Plans

● Food Defense Preparedness Program

Training Details

Date: May 1-2, 2019

Time: 8:30AM - 4:00PM CT

MN FOOD SAFETY AND DEFENSE TASK FORCE Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019

Attachment 2 USDA-FSIS update – Roberta Wagner, Assistant Administrator FSIS Office of Policy and Program

Development

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

USDA-FSIS Regulatory/Policy UpdateMinnesota, Food Safety and Defense Task Force

MeetingMarch 19, 2019

Roberta Wagner, Assistant AdministratorFSIS Office of Policy and Program Development

1

FSIS is the public health agency in the USDA

responsible for ensuring that meat, poultry, and processed egg products

are safe, wholesome, and accurately labeled.

• Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), 1906• Agricultural Marketing Act (AMA), 1946• Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA), 1957• Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA), 1958• Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA), 1970

Our AuthorityThrough a series of Acts,

Congress empowers FSIS to inspect all meat, poultry, and processed egg products in

interstate commerce.

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Topics• Regulatory Agenda Highlights

• Processed Egg Products Inspection Modernization Update– HACCP for Egg Products

• Swine Slaughter Inspection Modernization Update– New Swine Slaughter Inspection System (NSIS)

• Cattle/Beef Update– Salmonella Performance Standards for Certain Raw Beef Products– Expansion of non-O157 STEC Testing for Raw Beef Products

• Poultry Update– Campylobacter Performance Standards in Raw

3

Regulatory Agenda Highlights

For information about regulations under development, visit: http://www.reginfo.gov

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

4

5

Rulemaking• Modernization of Swine Slaughter

InspectionProposed Rule:Final Rule:

2/01/2018May 2019

• Egg Products Inspection Regulations Proposed Rule:Final Rule:

2/13/2018Aug 2019

• Elimination of Unnecessary Requirements for Hog Carcass Cleaning

Proposed Rule:Final Rule:

5/16/2018Issued Feb 2019

• Preparation of Pet Food /Other Uninspected Products in Official Establishments Outside Hours Operation/Inspectional Supervision

Proposed Rule:Final Rule:

7/31/2018August 2019

• Elimination of Requirement that Livestock Carcasses be Marked "U.S. Inspected and Passed" at Time of Inspection when Carcasses are Further Processed Within Same Establishment

Proposed Rule:Final Rule:

7/31/18May 2019

• Eliminating Dual Weight Labeling Requirements for Certain Meat/Poultry Products

Proposed Rule: June 2019

6

Rulemaking• Changes to Accreditation of Non-

Federal Laboratories for Analytical Testing of Meat, Poultry, Processed Egg Products

Proposed Rule: August 2019

• Changes to Publication Method for Lists of Foreign Countries Eligible to Export Meat, Poultry, Egg Products to the United States

Proposed Rule: May 2019

• Establishment of a Uniform Time Period Requirement and Clarify Related Procedures for Filing Appeals of Agency Inspection Actions

Proposed Rule: October 2019

Processed Egg Products Update

Proposed Rule to Amend Egg Products

Inspection Regulations

“HACCP for Processed Egg Products”

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

7

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Highlights of the Proposed Rule to Amend Egg Products Inspection Regulations

• Requires establishments to develop/implement HACCP plans, Sanitation SOPs, meet sanitation performance standards (9 CFR Parts 416, 417)

• Converts prescriptive command-and-control requirements to performance standards providing industry more flexibility and ability to innovate; specifically:– Removes prescriptive pasteurization regulations, replaces them

with new regulations that specify that egg products must be produced to be edible without additional preparation to achieve food safety

– Eliminates requirements for prior approval by FSIS of egg products plant drawings, specifications and equipment

• Changes the Agency’s interpretation of “continuous” inspection• Takes over jurisdiction of egg substitutes from FDA

8

Swine UpdateModernization of

Swine Slaughter InspectionProposed Rule

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

9

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Modernization of Swine Slaughter Inspection• On February 1, 2018, FSIS published the proposed rule

“Modernization of Swine Slaughter Inspection” (83 FR 4780)– Comment period closed May 2, 2018– 83,000 comments received

• Proposed new voluntary inspection system for market hog slaughter establishments, the New Swine Slaughter Inspection System (NSIS), informed by the Agency’s experiences under the HACCP-Based Inspection Models Project or HIMP– Market hog slaughter establishments that do not choose to

operate under the NSIS may continue to operate under traditional inspection

• The Agency also proposed several changes to the regulations that would affect all establishments that slaughter any swine, regardless of the inspection system under which they operate or the age, size, or class of swine

10

Cattle/Beef Update• Propose: Salmonella Performance

Standards for Certain Raw Beef Products

• Announce: Expanding non-O157 STEC Sampling/Testing in Raw Beef

Products

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

11

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Salmonella Performance Standards for Certain Raw

Beef Products

12

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Background: Performance Standards • Since 1996, FSIS has employed pathogen-specific performance

standards to reduce the presence of pathogens not designated as adulterants (Salmonella, Campylobacter) in meat/poultry, thereby reducing illnesses– Encourages continual improvement of process control

• FSIS conducts raw product verification sampling to assess whether establishments are meeting performance standards

• In 1996, Salmonella performance standards codified for establishments producing select classes of raw meat products, including ground beef, carcasses of steers/heifers, and carcasses of cows/bulls

• FSIS is not presently assessing beef establishments against 1996 Salmonella performance standards because data used to establish standards is outdated, sampling methodology for carcasses is problematic

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Controlling Salmonella in Ground BeefSalmonella Foodborne Outbreaks Associated With Ground Beef Continue

• 2016-2017: 106 Salmonella Newport illnesses in 21 States linked to ground beef. One person died and 42 people were hospitalized.

• 2018-2019: Multi-state illness outbreak from beef products contaminated with Salmonella Newport. To date, outbreak has resulted in 333 illnesses and 91 hospitalizations in 28 States. – October 4, 2018, ~ 6.5 million pounds of raw

beef products, including ground beef were recalled from one establishment that has been directly linked to this outbreak; December 4, 2018, recall expanded to include an additional ~ 5.2 million pounds of raw beef products. 14

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Salmonella Performance Standards• To address continued outbreaks, in FY2019, FSIS

intends to update its Salmonella performance standard for ground beef and establish a new Salmonella performance standard for beef manufacturing trimmings

• FSIS anticipates the new performance standards will lead establishments producing raw ground beef and beef manufacturing trimmings to strengthen their own Salmonella control measures

• FSIS will propose these performance standards through an FRN, consider comments received on the FRN, and announce final standards in the Federal Register and then implement them

15

Expanding non-O157 STEC Sampling/Testing in Raw Beef

Products

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

16

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Expansion of non-O157 STEC Testing• In 1994, FSIS declared raw ground beef products contaminated

with E. coli O157:H7 to be adulterated under the FMIA

• In 2011, FSIS announced that raw non-intact beef products and beef products intended for non-intact use are adulterated if contaminated with non-O157 serogroups O26, O45, O102, O111, O121, and O145- (21 U.S.C. 601(m)(3)) (76 FR 58159)

• FSIS began verification testing for non-O157 STEC in beef manufacturing trimmings (BMT) June 2012- (77 FR 9889; Feb. 21, 2012)

• FSIS announced in recent sampling plans its intention to expand non-O157 STEC testing to include additional raw ground beef components other than BMT

17

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Rationale for Expansion of non-O157:H7 (STEC) Testing• Since 2012: 16 Class I recalls associated with raw beef products

contaminated with non-O157 STEC; 3 prompted by State testing of products for non-O157 STEC at retail

• Summer of 2018: Outbreak of E. coli O26; raw ground chuck probable source of reported illnesses; 18 confirmed ill in 4 states; 6 hospitalized

• FSIS currently only tests BMT for both non-O157 STEC, E. coli O157:H7– FSIS evaluated its BMT test results, positives for E. coli O157:H7

and non-O157 STEC are not typically found in the same sample– FSIS BMT test results don’t support using E. coli O157:H7 as an

indicator of the presence/absence of non-O157 STEC and support FSIS’s decision to conduct verification testing of additional raw beef products for both E. coli O157:H and non-O157 STEC

• In light of the information above, FSIS is preparing to announce the expansion of its non-O157 STEC verification program to all raw beef products that we currently test for E. coli O157:H7, including other ground beef components, bench trim use to produce raw ground beef and raw ground beef itself

18

Poultry UpdateCampylobacter

Performance Standards for Raw Poultry

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

19

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Campylobacter Performance Standards

• FSIS finalized Campylobacter performance standards but is not assessing establishments against them currently because we observed that nBPW adversely impacts Campylobacter recovery from chicken parts (similar impact has not been noted for poultry carcasses)

15% (pre-nBPW) to 3.5% (post-nBPW) drop in Campylobacterpositives

Percentage of chicken parts establishments not meeting the Campylobacter performance standard dropped from 44% (pre-nBPW) to 11% (post-nBPW)

• Currently, > 90% of chicken parts and poultry carcass establishments are passing the Campylobacter performance standards

20

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Campylobacter Performance Standards• May 1 through July 31, 2018, FSIS performed side-by-side

analysis of chicken/turkey carcass and chicken parts samples using current method (direct plate) and an enrichment method

• Enrichment method uses larger sample volume (30 mL vs 1 mL direct plate), and allows for recovery of injured cells before adding selective culture media

• Results show significantly higher recovery of Campylobacter, with levels comparable to or higher than prior baseline studies using the enrichment method

• Also, previous study involving comminuted poultry showed significantly higher recovery of Campylobacter when using the enrichment method as compared to direct plate method

21

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Campylobacter Performance Standards• In August 2018, FSIS initiated testing all raw poultry

samples for Campy using the enrichment method; discontinued use of direct plating method

• In August, 2018, FSIS also announced that after collecting sufficient data, it intends to revise Campylobacter performance standards for raw poultry products based on the enrichment method and intends to propose and request comments on these revised standards in the Federal Register

• Until new Campylobacter performance standards are finalized, FSIS will discontinue assessing whether establishments meet current performance standards and discontinue related web postings

• FSIS will continue to provide establishments subject to FSIS Campylobacter sampling their enrichment method generated results via PHIS and quarterly letters

22

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Next Steps: Campylobacter Performance Standards

• FSIS intends to first propose revised Campylobacter performance standards for NRTE comminuted chicken/turkey products in the Federal Register; Target: Spring of 2019.– Proposed standards account for the method change and provide

the same public health benefits, industry costs as the original standards

• For chicken/turkey carcasses and chicken parts, FSIS is collecting data and intends to propose performance standards in the Federal Register Target: Summer or Fall of 2019.

• FSIS will propose and solicit comments on these proposed standards before finalizing them in the Federal Register and implementing them

23

Guideline for Industry Response to Customer Complaints

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

24

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Guideline for Industry Response to Customer Complaints

25

11/157

16/11522/134

27/111

7%

14%

16%

24%

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Guideline for Industry Response to Customer Complaints

26

• FSIS has posted the document titled “Guideline for Industry Response to Customer Complaints” to address the increase in recalls of meat/poultry products adulterated with foreign materials– In many cases, recalling establishments had received multiple customer

complaints prior to these foreign material recalls

• While FSIS specifically developed this guidance to address foreign material customer complaints, establishments can apply the information to other customer complaints of adulterated or misbranded products in commerce

• Guideline includes Agency’s key policy point on foreign materials:– Meat/poultry products that are contaminated with foreign materials are

adulterated under the FMIA and PPIA regardless of the physical characteristics of the foreign material or whether or not the foreign material is determined to represent a public health hazard

• FSIS’s guideline is broader but compliments the industry document titled “Industry Best Practices for Customer Complaints of Foreign Materials in Meat and Poultry Products” published by NCC August 2018

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

Thank You For Your Attention!

27

Questions?

MN FOOD SAFETY AND DEFENSE TASK FORCE Meeting Minutes March 19, 2019

Attachment 3 General Mills: An Overview – Courtney Bidney, General Mills

General Mills: An Overview

Minnesota Food Safety & Defense Task Force

March 2019

Our Legacy: +150 Years of Making Food People Love

Today: General Mills at a Glance

• $17.0 billion in fiscal 2018 net sales

• Our eight largest brands each generate +$1 billion in annual retail sales

• Our brands are enjoyed by people in +100 markets globally

• Our team of 38,000 employees brings passion & creativity to work each day

Global Platforms

Snacks YogurtConvenient

MealsCerealSuper-premium

Ice CreamPet

Pioneers in Natural & Organic

• General Mills is the 2nd

largest organic (3rd largest natural and organic) food producer in the U.S.

• General Mills has been making natural and organic foods since 2000 when it acquired Small Planet Foods

• We’ve since expanded our portfolio to include 9 brands

Our Beloved Brands

…and many more.

Shareholder value:

• General Mills has paid dividends without

interruption or reduction for each of our 90

years as a publicly-traded company

• Since Fiscal 2013, our dividend has been

growing at 8 percent compound annual rate

• General Mills has delivered double-digit

shareholder returns over the past thirty years

Key Financials

* In addition to $17.0 billion consolidated net sales, our proportionate share

of non-consolidated joint venture net sales totaled $1.1 billion.

59%

11%

12%

10%

8%

North America Retail ($10.1 billion)Convenience & Foodservice ($1.9 billion)Europe & Australia ($2 billion)Asia & Latin America ($1.7 billion)Pet ($1.3 billion)

FY18 Global Net Sales: $17.0 billion*

A Focus in Sustainability Around:

HEALTHY

WATERSHEDS

HEALTHY

SOIL

STRONG

ECOSYSTEMS

STABLE

CLIMATE

We’ve Pledged to:

• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions across our full value chain by

28% by 2025.

➢ We’ve decreased it 11% since 2010

• Help improve soil health on +50% of U.S. cropland by 2025.

➢ We’ve invested $3 million to advance on-farm practices

• Sustainably source 100% of our 10 priority ingredients by 2020.

➢ In 2017, we achieved 76%

• Protect and establish +100,000 acres of pollinator habitat

through 2021.

➢ 49% of General Mills brand commitments are complete

• Help restore key at-risk watersheds to health by 2025.

➢ We have a four-step plan in place, and we’re ranked #5 of 42 food

companies on how we’re responding to water risk

General Mills Giving

Giving by the Numbers

A few examples:

• General Mills’ food donations have enabled

233 million meals globally since 2010

• In fiscal 2018, we helped rescue +4 billion

pounds of safe, editable food from landfills

• 83% of our employees volunteer in their

communities

• Nature Valley has given +$2 million to U.S.

national parks, with plans to double that

over the next 3 years

• Since the program began in 1996, schools

have earned +$840 million through Box

Tops for Education

General Mills Food Safety

Food must be trustworthy

13

Food Safety Across the Product Lifecycle

Product Design Supply Chain Marketplace

From Concept to Consumer

Design Safety In

Manufacture as Designed

Consumer and Customer Feedback

Food Safety Governance

IntegratedSafety Management

System

⚫ Management commitment

⚫ Goals, objectives and plans

⚫ Culture of reporting safety incidents

⚫ Line management accountability and responsibility

⚫ Safety personnel

⚫ Integrated organization structure

⚫ Motivation and awareness

⚫ Effective communication

⚫ Incident investigation

⚫ Policies, procedures and performance standards

⚫ Inspections and audits

⚫ Organizational Capability and Capacity Needs Assessment

⚫ Education, Training and Development

Strong Culture & Leadership

1Appropriate

Structure

2

Processes & Actions

3Learning &

Development

4

Expectations Policy & Standards Laws & Regulations

Educations & Awareness

Guidance Documents &Training

Outreach & Guidance Documents

Skills NeededProcess & Systemsto Produce Safe Food

Knowledge & Critical Thinkingto Assess Food Safety Control Programs

Risk-based Assessment

Qualitative &Quantitative Data

Qualitative & Quantitative Data

OutcomeComplianceSafe Food for Consumers

ComplianceVerification of Control Programs that

Lead to Safe Food for Consumers

“Regulated Industry”

“Regulators”

Industry & Regulators:We Have a Lot in Common

Q&A