• On June 25, 2026, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) posted a final notice on its rulemaking to revise orange juice grading standards. AMS addressed comments, but stated that it will publish the changes as provided in the interim final notice, released in November, 2025.
  • As we have previously blogged, FDA released a proposed rule to lower the required minimum Brix content in August, 2025. Then-FDA Commissioner Marty Makary spoke about the rule in a video with US Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins. Makary said that “for years, we’ve been wasting beautiful American oranges simply due to an outdated regulation.”
  • Later, on November 18, 2025, USDA issued an interim final rule revising its grading system and deferring to FDA’s standard of identity (SOI) for Grade B pasteurized orange juice. The revisions took effect immediately, but USDA opened a 60-day comment period.
  • In its final notice, USDA addressed each of the five comments it received. Three expressed support for revising the Grade B Brix allowances, and one “was not responsive to the action in the interim final notice.” The fifth comment expressed concern over how revising these standards would impact the taste or nutritional quality of orange juice products. USDA responded that, according to FDA, these changes would have minimal impacts on taste or nutritional value.
  • AMS plans to publish the changes at its grades and standards webpage. Instead of providing a Brix value of its own, AMS will now direct readers to FDA’s standards in 21 C.F.R. 146.140(a).
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor USDA developments.

  • On June 11, 2026, the Delaware House of Representatives passed HS1 for HB394.
  • Under the bill, the Division of Public Health would be required to create and provide signage for retailers selling energy drinks or caffeinated dietary supplements. The signage must state that “energy drinks and caffeinated dietary supplements are not recommended for children, individuals sensitive to caffeine, and individuals who are pregnant or nursing.” Notably, the bill encourages, but does not require, retailers to display the signage next to the energy drinks and caffeinated dietary supplements.
  • This bill is a modification of earlier versions, which would have required retailers to display signage in a publicly visible location next to energy drinks and caffeinated dietary supplements. The original bill had stricter provisions, prohibiting retailers from selling these products to minors and requiring individuals whose age was in question to present a valid form of identification.
  • Delaware’s HS1 for HB394 reflects a broader trend of states adopting legislation that mandates warning signage in retail settings for foods and beverages containing caffeine. For example, in April, Pennsylvania introduced HB2377, which would require retail food facilities to “clearly and conspicuously display a disclosure” for beverages on the menu containing at least 80 milligrams of caffeine per serving.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor state caffeine warning bills.

  • On June 22, 2026, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia  vacated Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) waivers that USDA had granted to Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia. The waivers had permitted the states to exclude certain foods deemed to be unhealthy such as soft drinks and candy from eligibility for purchase under the SNAP program.
  • SNAP provides federal funds to low-income households and is administered by USDA and state agencies. The uniform eligibility standards are determined at the federal level. All foods for human consumption except alcoholic beverages and hot foods prepared for immediate consumption are eligible under federal law. (See 7 USC 2012(k) definition of “food” and 7 CFR 271.2 definition of “eligible food”).
  • The Court held that USDA’s waivers improperly waived the statutory definition of “food.” Furthermore, the Court held that USDA improperly sidestepped notice requirements by asserting, without support, that the waivers would not have a significant impact on the public.  
  • The ruling only addressed the five state waivers that were challenged by Plaintiffs. However, USDA has granted eighteen similar waivers, and the Court’s reasoning seems equally applicable to them.
  • This holding is a snag for the Make America Healthy Again MAHA movement, which has sought to allow states to restrict “unhealthy items” from purchase with SNAP benefits.
  • Keller & Heckman will continue to monitor USDA developments.
  • On June 2, 2026, the New York Legislature advanced its bill for uniform date labels, S7618/A7291, to Governor Kathy Hochul for final consideration.
  • The bill standardizes date labeling for food products by mandating the terms “Use By” or “Use By or Freeze By” to indicate safety-based dates and “Best if Used By” or “Best if Used or Frozen By” to indicate quality-based dates. The measure largely mirrors California’s AB 660.
  • For smaller food items, the bill permits abbreviated labels in the form of “UB” and “BB.”  The bill also prohibits products using “sell by” dates.
  • The bill exempts certain products from the date labeling requirements. For example, infant formula and alcoholic beverages are not subject to this requirement, and wine and distilled spirit-based products may include labels indicating the date the product was manufactured or bottled.
  • If signed by the governor, the effective date of this bill will be July 1, 2028.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor state food labeling requirements.
  • On June 18, 2026, FDA updated its webpage on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The webpage outlines the efforts FDA has made to understand and mitigate the risks of PFAS in food while explaining some specific actions FDA plans to take.
  • In the updated webpage, FDA now states that one of its goals is to regulate PFAS levels in bottled water under its authority from the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). Under the FFDCA, FDA may set allowable levels for contaminants in bottled water when EPA sets levels for those same contaminants in drinking water. EPA released a PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation in April 2024, and recently proposed to amend this regulation in May, 2026.
  • This update also notes FDA’s concerns relating to potential PFAS contamination in seafood. FDA is assessing data and determining risk management actions for seafood products after an import alert issued for imported clams contaminated with PFOA. According to FDA, adding firms to an import alert will help reduce PFAS exposure across the food supply. The Agency’s testing under the Total Dietary Study (TDS) found that over 95% of tested fresh and processed foods were PFAS-free while 69% of tested seafood contained PFAS.
  • Additionally, FDA referred to test results for PFAS and other contaminants in infant formula. The Agency will continue researching this category and plans to eventually establish action levels for infant formula contaminants.
  • FDA continues research to identify new types of PFAS in foods through high resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS).
  • Keller & Heckman will continue to monitor FDA updates.
  • On June 11, 2026, Consumer Reports, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group, sent a letter to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), requesting the release of information about salmonella testing methods for certain chicken products the agency once determined as adequate, but now says are unsatisfactory due to high false-positive rates, especially at low levels of contamination.
  • Previously, in 2024, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) initiated efforts to establish enforceable product standards for Salmonella in poultry products, including not-ready-to-eat (NRTE) breaded stuffed chicken, by setting a limit of 1 Colony Forming Units per gram (1 CFU/g) of Salmonella in the source material used for producing the chicken products.
  • However, FSIS delayed further verification sampling stating in December 2025 that “current available test methods have accuracy limitations and have resulted in finding false positives, especially at low levels of contamination.” According to Consumer Reports, “this assertion is troubling,” as FSIS previously stated that validated, accurate test methods already exist that detect Salmonella at the regulatory threshold, such as the BioMerieux GENE-UP QUANT Salmonella Test Kit.
  • Consumer Reports is now asking USDA to release data that supports the determination that there are inaccuracies associated with the testing methods, with the group alleging that further delays could allow potentially contaminated foods to remain on the market longer, increasing the risk of outbreaks. As of yet, USDA has not published a formal response to the letter.
  • On June 13, 2026, a kratom drink maker filed an appeal (Law360 subscription required) from the denial of a motion for preliminary injunction, arguing that Utah’s law that bans mixing kratom with any “nonkratom substance” is preempted by federal law.
  • The law, which went into effect on May 6, 2026, prohibits kratom processors from selling or distributing any kratom product that is not pure leaf kratom. The law defines “pure leaf kratom” as a kratom product that is not mixed or packed with a nonkratom substance unless that substance is an inert encapsulating agent.
  • The plaintiffs argue that this requirement directly contradicts federal good manufacturing practices (GMPs), which require botanicals, such as kratom, used as a dietary supplement, to be free of dangerous pathogens. To meet this standard, the industry has relied on washing kratom leaves with heated chlorinated water which kills virtually all bacteria.
  • However, according to the plaintiffs, Utah’s law would prohibit the use of this technique because chlorinated water meets the definition of a non-kratom substance, meaning kratom producers would not be able to sell kratom products without either violating federal law or state law.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor litigation related to kratom products.
  • On May 1, 2026, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations printed appropriations Report 119-632 to accompany H.R.8646. The Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies released the report, explaining its stance toward a variety of agricultural and food-related topics.
  • Some parts of the report make specific requests to the agencies. For example, the Committee directs the USDA to ensure that Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) funds, are not used to purchase cell-cultured protein. The report also asks that the FDA deliver a report on its actions to phase-out “harmful food dyes” such as Red No. 40 and Blue No. 1 within 90 days of H.R.8646 being enacted.
  • Other parts of the report express the Subcommittee’s disposition toward agency actions or inactions, without concrete requirements. For example, the report showed support for FDA’s GRAS process and post-market safety assessments for food additives while encouraging FDA to conduct further research on ultra-processed foods.
  • The Subcommittee expressed concern about food products containing cannabinoids since these substances are not yet approved as food additives and asks FDA to coordinate with other agencies to develop an appropriate enforcement mechanism for these products.
  • H.R. 8646 was received by the Senate on June 8, 2026. In addition to allocating appropriations, the bill adds a section to the end of Chapter IV of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. This new section declares food additives used in animal food safe for use if they are accepted for use in specified species under AAFCO’s 2024 Publication and if the FDA has not found these ingredients to be unsafe. Animal food manufacturers will not be required to notify FDA of GRAS ingredients in animal food but may still notify the agency voluntarily. These amendments are the same as those in the PURR Act which was introduced in January 2025, but did not move past committee.
  • Keller & Heckman will continue to monitor federal legislative developments.

  • On June 10, 2026, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a report on the Traceability Readiness Tabletop Exercises held with industry between March 9 and April 1, 2026.  The report was released in anticipation of a public meeting on June 15, 2026, where FDA will engage with stakeholders regarding the lot-level tracking requirements in the Food Traceability Rule (FTR).
  • The exercises were developed to help companies prepare to comply with the FTR, which requires manufacturers that process, pack, or hold foods included on the Food Traceability List (FTL) to maintain records containing Key Data Elements (KDEs) associated with specific Critical Tracking Events (CTEs), which are used to track critical events in the food’s supply chain.  In the exercise, participating companies had to respond to a mock FDA request by providing traceability records within 24 hours and if available, a traceability plan.
  • The report highlighted that while there was meaningful progress toward meeting the FTR requirements, there were still some significant gaps in information retention and sharing.  For example, the report noted that although most companies responded within 24 hours, they showed uneven readiness in sharing Traceability Lot Codes (TLC) and TLC source information, and that data quality and completeness require attention across all CTEs a firm performs.
  • In addition to the report, FDA updated its frequently asked questions on the FTR to provide greater guidance on different topics such as food traceability plans and intracompany shipments.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor and report on developments involving the FTR.
  • As readers of The Daily Intake know, Louisiana adopted a law last year, SB 14, that requires foods sold in the state that contain certain additives to bear on-pack QR codes leading consumers to a web site saying “NOTICE: This product contains [insert ingredient here]. For more information about this ingredient, including FDA approvals, click HERE.” The link would be to FDA’s web page regarding food chemical safety (New Louisiana Law Mandates Ingredient Disclosures & Bans Ingredients in Schools | The Daily Intake). 
  • On June 1, 2026, Louisiana governor Jeff Landry signed SB 57, a bill that amends the food additive disclosure requirements of SB 14. These amendments change the criteria for covered food additives and push the effective date back to December 31, 2028.
  • SB 14 originally applied the disclosure requirement to “food or beverages intended for human consumption” that contain any additive on the list. However, SB 57 narrows this to situations where FDA requires the listed additive to be named on the food label (i.e., in the list of ingredients). Incidental additives, which are defined as ingredients that are present in the food at insignificant levels and which do not have any technical or function effect in the food, are exempt from ingredient labeling requirements.
  • Additionally, SB 57 removes the intense sweetener, acesulfame potassium, from the list of additives that trigger the QR code disclosure requirement and from the list of additives that are prohibited in school foods. 
  • SB 14, as enrolled, was supposed to take effect on January 1, 2028. SB 57 moves this effective date back to December 31, 2028.
  • Keller & Heckman will continue to monitor state food law developments.