North Dakota Century Code Chapter 23-09, titled “Sale and Distribution of Foods,” outlines the state’s regulatory framework for food safety. Specifically, section 23-09-05 addresses the adulteration of food. This statute defines adulterated food broadly, encompassing substances that render the food injurious to health. It also includes provisions for food containing poisonous or deleterious substances, or any filthy, decomposed, or putrid animal or vegetable substance. Furthermore, it covers food that has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health. The law also specifies that food is adulterated if it consists in whole or in part of any diseased or decomposed animal or vegetable substance, or if it has been processed in a facility where rodent or insect infestation is evident and poses a risk of contamination. In North Dakota, the focus is on preventing the introduction of harmful elements and ensuring that food processing and handling environments meet stringent sanitation standards to safeguard public health from potential contamination and health hazards. The law’s intent is to ensure that all food sold or distributed within the state is safe for consumption and free from adulterants that could compromise consumer well-being.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-10, addresses the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-10-04 outlines prohibitions against introducing into commerce any food that is adulterated or misbranded. Adulteration, as defined in Section 23-10-02, includes situations where a food bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. If a food product contains a level of a pesticide residue that exceeds the tolerance established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and subsequently adopted or referenced by North Dakota, it is considered adulterated under this framework. The North Dakota Department of Health, through its food and drug regulatory functions, is tasked with enforcing these provisions. Therefore, a food product found to contain pesticide residues above the federally established limits, which are generally incorporated into state law, would be deemed adulterated and subject to regulatory action in North Dakota. The key is the presence of a substance that makes the food injurious to health, and exceeding established safe limits for pesticides falls squarely within this definition.

North Dakota law, specifically under Chapter 23-10 of the North Dakota Century Code concerning Food and Drugs, outlines the requirements for food labeling. Section 23-10-04 details that all food sold in North Dakota must bear labeling that is in accordance with federal regulations, primarily the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. This includes providing accurate information about the product’s identity, net quantity of contents, ingredient list in descending order of predominance, and nutritional information where applicable. The law also addresses misbranding, which occurs when labeling is false or misleading in any particular. For instance, if a product claims to be “all natural” but contains artificial ingredients, it would be considered misbranded. Similarly, if the net weight is not accurately declared or if the ingredient list is incomplete or incorrect, the food product would violate North Dakota’s labeling provisions. The state’s enforcement powers, as detailed in sections like 23-10-08, allow for the seizure of misbranded food, further emphasizing the importance of strict adherence to labeling requirements. The North Dakota Department of Health plays a crucial role in enforcing these statutes, ensuring that consumers receive accurate and complete information about the food they purchase and consume within the state. The principle behind these regulations is consumer protection, ensuring transparency in the food supply chain.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 23-10, outlines the requirements for the labeling of food products. Section 23-10-05 addresses the general provisions for labeling, mandating that food labeling must not be false or misleading. It requires that food be labeled to provide adequate information regarding its identity, quality, and quantity. This includes specifying the common or usual name of the food, the net quantity of contents in terms of weight, measure, or numerical count, and the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor. For a product like “Prairie Harvest Granola Bars,” which is a food item, the labeling must adhere to these fundamental principles. The inclusion of “Net Wt 10 oz (283g)” on the packaging directly addresses the requirement for stating the net quantity of contents, a critical component of accurate food labeling under North Dakota law to prevent consumer deception regarding the amount of product received. Other potential labeling requirements, such as ingredient lists or allergen warnings, would also fall under the broader provisions of the Act, but the net quantity is a universally mandated element for packaged foods.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically under NDCC Chapter 23-10, grants the State Department of Health authority to establish and enforce regulations concerning the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-10-04 outlines that a food is considered adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. Furthermore, Section 23-10-06 details that a food is misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. In the scenario presented, the artisanal cheese producer in Fargo, North Dakota, is using a novel, unapproved preservative in their product. While the preservative itself might not be immediately toxic in small quantities, its long-term effects and potential interactions with other food components are unknown. This lack of established safety data means it could be considered a deleterious substance under the Act. Additionally, if the labeling on the cheese does not clearly disclose the presence and specific nature of this unapproved preservative, or if it implies a natural composition without it, the product would be considered misbranded. The core issue is the introduction of an ingredient with an unknown safety profile into the food supply without proper regulatory review and approval, which directly contravenes the principles of food safety and accurate labeling mandated by North Dakota law. The State Department of Health would likely take action based on the potential for harm and deceptive labeling practices.

The scenario involves a food establishment in North Dakota that received a citation for failing to maintain proper temperature controls for potentially hazardous foods, specifically a batch of cooked chicken stored at \(15^{\circ}C\) (59\(^{\circ}F\)). North Dakota’s food safety regulations, largely mirroring the FDA Food Code, establish critical temperature limits for food storage. Potentially hazardous foods must be kept at or below \(5^{\circ}C\) (41\(^{\circ}F\)) or at or above \(57^{\circ}C\) (135\(^{\circ}F\)) to inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria. The chicken, being a potentially hazardous food, was stored significantly above the safe cold holding temperature. This failure constitutes a direct violation of the North Dakota Food and Drug Law and its associated administrative rules, which mandate adherence to established food safety standards to prevent foodborne illness. The severity of the violation would be categorized based on its potential to cause harm, and improper temperature control of potentially hazardous foods is typically considered a high-priority violation due to the direct risk of pathogen proliferation. Therefore, the primary legal basis for the citation is the violation of the specific temperature control requirements for potentially hazardous foods as outlined in North Dakota’s food safety statutes and administrative rules.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically referencing North Dakota Century Code Chapter 23-10, outlines the responsibilities and authorities concerning the adulteration and misbranding of food products. A food is considered adulterated if it contains any poisonous or deleterious substance in a quantity that may render it injurious to health. This also includes food that consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance, or that is otherwise unfit for human consumption. Furthermore, if a food has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health, it is also deemed adulterated. The Act empowers the State Department of Health to take action against such products. The core principle is to protect public health by ensuring that food sold within North Dakota is safe, wholesome, and not deceptive in its labeling or composition. The scenario describes a batch of frozen berries that, due to improper storage in a facility experiencing power outages, have undergone partial thawing and refreezing, leading to a compromised texture and potential for microbial growth. This condition directly aligns with the definition of food prepared or held under insanitary conditions, making it potentially injurious to health and thus adulterated under North Dakota law. The correct course of action for the regulatory agency is to seize and condemn such food to prevent its distribution and consumption.

The North Dakota Food and Drug Law, specifically as it pertains to adulteration, focuses on ensuring that food products are not contaminated with substances that could render them harmful to health. North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 23-09 outlines the general provisions for food and drug control. Section 23-09-02 defines adulterated food, which includes cases where a food contains any poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to health. It also covers situations where a food has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health. Furthermore, it addresses cases where the food consists in whole or in part of any diseased, contaminated, or decomposed substance, or if it is otherwise unfit for consumption. The key here is the *potential* for harm or contamination due to the presence of undeclared or prohibited substances, or due to the conditions under which it was processed or stored. This broad definition encompasses a wide range of potential adulterants, from chemical contaminants to biological hazards. The intent of the law is to protect public health by preventing the distribution of unsafe food products. The scenario describes a bakery product containing an undeclared ingredient that is a known allergen. While the product itself might not be immediately poisonous in a toxicological sense, the undeclared allergen presents a significant health risk to individuals with sensitivities, fitting the criteria of a substance that may render the food injurious to health. Therefore, the product is considered adulterated under the North Dakota Food and Drug Law.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically Chapter 23-09, outlines the requirements for the labeling of food products. Section 23-09-04 addresses the general requirements for food labeling, mandating that labels must not be false or misleading and must present information in a clear and conspicuous manner. When a food product is manufactured or processed in North Dakota and intended for sale within the state, the North Dakota Department of Health is responsible for ensuring compliance with these provisions. The Act defines “misleading” broadly to encompass any representation that creates a false impression, whether by direct statement, omission, or implication. A product containing an ingredient that is not permitted for use in food by federal regulations, such as the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 21, would be considered misbranded under North Dakota law. Specifically, if a food product contains an additive that has not been affirmed as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) or approved through a food additive petition process by the FDA, and this is not disclosed or is misrepresented on the label, it violates the principle of not being misleading. Therefore, a food product manufactured in North Dakota that includes an unapproved food additive, such as a novel sweetener not listed in the FDA’s GRAS list or approved food additive regulations, and fails to disclose this or falsely claims it to be a standard ingredient, would be subject to regulatory action by the North Dakota Department of Health for misbranding under Chapter 23-09. The focus is on the deceptive nature of the labeling concerning the product’s composition and safety, which directly falls under the purview of preventing misbranded food from entering commerce within the state.

North Dakota’s food and drug laws, particularly as they relate to adulteration and misbranding, are designed to protect public health. Under North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 23-10, a food product is considered adulterated if it contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. Furthermore, if a food product bears or contains any added poisonous or deleterious substance, and the quantity of that substance does not exceed the tolerance established by the state or federal government, it is not considered adulterated unless the substance is of a character that the food is not safe for consumption. For example, if a batch of apples processed in North Dakota is found to have trace amounts of a pesticide residue that is within the Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which North Dakota law often defers to for such standards, the apples would not be deemed adulterated due to that specific residue. However, if the residue exceeded the MRL, or if the substance was inherently injurious regardless of quantity, it would be considered adulterated. The intent of the law is to prevent harm to consumers by ensuring food is free from harmful contaminants or that any unavoidable contaminants are present at levels demonstrably proven to be safe. NDCC 23-10-03 specifically addresses poisonous or deleterious substances in food, making it clear that the presence of such substances, which can render food injurious to health, constitutes adulteration. The concept of “deleterious” extends beyond acute toxicity to include substances that might cause harm over time or through cumulative exposure. Therefore, a food product containing a substance that is harmful, even if present in small amounts, can be classified as adulterated if that substance poses a risk to public health as defined by statute or regulation.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-10, outlines the regulations concerning the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-10-04 addresses misbranded food. A food product is considered misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. This includes misrepresentations regarding the identity, quality, or quantity of the food. Furthermore, if a food product purports to be a food for which a definition and standard of identity have been prescribed by regulation under the North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and it does not conform to such definition and standard, it is also misbranded. In the scenario presented, the “Prairie Harvest” brand of wild rice, labeled as “100% North Dakota Grown,” is found through laboratory analysis to contain 15% of rice sourced from Minnesota. This directly contradicts the explicit claim on the packaging. Therefore, the labeling is false and misleading regarding the origin of the food, rendering the product misbranded under North Dakota law. The North Dakota Department of Health, as the regulatory body, would have the authority to take action against such a product.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-10, governs the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-10-04 defines adulterated food. A food is considered adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance in a quantity that may render it injurious to health. This includes substances that are not naturally occurring in the food or are present at levels exceeding established safety thresholds. For instance, if a batch of locally sourced apples, intended for sale in North Dakota, is found to contain pesticide residues exceeding the maximum allowable limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and subsequently adopted or referenced by North Dakota regulations, that batch would be deemed adulterated under this provision. The presence of such a substance, even if not intentionally added, makes the food unfit for consumption and subject to regulatory action. The core principle is the protection of public health by ensuring that food available for consumption in North Dakota does not pose an unreasonable risk due to contamination or the presence of harmful agents.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-10, governs the misbranding of food. Section 23-10-04 defines misbranded food. A food is considered misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. This includes instances where the labeling fails to reveal material facts or information that is necessary to render it adequate to prevent deception. Furthermore, if a food purports to be a food for which a definition and standard of identity has been prescribed by federal regulation, but it fails to comply with such definition and standard, it is also considered misbranded. The intent behind these provisions is to ensure that consumers are provided with accurate and complete information about the food they purchase, thereby protecting public health and preventing fraudulent practices. In this scenario, the label on the artisanal cheese states it is “Pure Wisconsin Cheddar” but the cheese is actually produced in Minnesota and contains non-dairy ingredients not disclosed. This directly violates the principles of accurate labeling and material fact disclosure as mandated by North Dakota law. The misrepresentation of origin and the undisclosed ingredients render the labeling false and misleading, thus constituting misbranding under North Dakota law.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically referencing North Dakota Century Code Chapter 23-09, outlines the requirements for food establishments. Section 23-09-03 details the prohibition of adulterated or misbranded food. Adulteration, as defined within the act and its associated administrative rules, encompasses situations where a food contains poisonous or deleterious substances, has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. Misbranding pertains to labeling that is false or misleading in any particular. A food product that is found to have been manufactured in a facility that has not undergone the required periodic inspection by the North Dakota Department of Health, and consequently lacks documentation proving compliance with sanitation standards, would fall under the category of being prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions, thereby rendering it adulterated. This lack of documented inspection signifies a failure to meet regulatory oversight designed to prevent contamination and ensure public safety, a core tenet of food law enforcement. The absence of a valid permit to operate, which is contingent upon meeting these sanitation requirements and passing inspections, further solidifies the adulterated status of the food.

The North Dakota Food and Drug Act, specifically Chapter 23-09, governs the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-09-04 defines adulterated food. Under this section, a food is considered adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This includes any pesticide chemical residue in excess of the tolerance prescribed by federal law or regulation, or if the quantity of such pesticide chemical residue, though not exceeding the tolerance, is unsafe. Furthermore, if a food contains any added poisonous or deleterious substance, other than a pesticide chemical residue, that is not an approved food additive, or if the quantity of an approved food additive exceeds the limit set by federal regulation, it is also deemed adulterated. The presence of decomposition, contamination, or infestation that renders the food unfit for consumption, or if it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health, also constitutes adulteration. The question posits a scenario where a shipment of apples from a farm in Minnesota arrives in North Dakota. These apples have been treated with a pesticide, and laboratory analysis reveals a residue level of 5.5 parts per million (ppm) of this pesticide. Federal regulations, which North Dakota law often defers to for pesticide residue tolerances, have established a maximum permissible tolerance of 4.0 ppm for this specific pesticide on apples. Therefore, since the detected residue level of 5.5 ppm exceeds the federal tolerance of 4.0 ppm, the apples are considered adulterated under North Dakota law, as they contain a poisonous or deleterious substance in excess of the prescribed tolerance.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically referencing North Dakota Century Code Chapter 23-09, outlines the requirements for the adulteration of food. Section 23-09-03(1) defines adulterated food. This section states that a food is considered adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This includes substances that are naturally present in excessive amounts or introduced through contamination. The scenario describes a batch of wild-caught North Dakota blueberries that have been found to contain elevated levels of naturally occurring cadmium, a heavy metal that can be toxic. The presence of this poisonous or deleterious substance, even if naturally occurring, renders the food adulterated under the statute because it may be injurious to health. Therefore, the blueberries are adulterated because they contain a poisonous or deleterious substance. The question tests the understanding of the definition of adulterated food as per North Dakota law, focusing on the presence of harmful substances regardless of their origin.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically focusing on adulteration, outlines that a food product is deemed adulterated if it contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This includes substances that are not normally present in food but are added during processing or handling. The Act also addresses contamination with filth or decomposed material. In the scenario presented, the presence of trace amounts of a known industrial solvent, even if not intended to be in the food, falls under the definition of a poisonous or deleterious substance. While the concentration might be low, the potential for harm, however remote, is the critical factor for adulteration under the statute. The North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) § 23-09-02 defines adulterated food broadly to encompass such situations, prioritizing public health and safety by preventing the introduction of harmful contaminants. The intent of the processor or the exact level of toxicity is secondary to the mere presence of a substance that could potentially cause harm. Therefore, the food product is considered adulterated because it contains a substance that is not naturally occurring and has the potential to be injurious to health, regardless of the minimal quantity.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-09, addresses the regulation of food establishments and the prevention of foodborne illnesses. This chapter outlines the powers and duties of the State Department of Health, including the authority to adopt and enforce rules and regulations. A critical aspect of this enforcement involves inspections and the subsequent classification of food establishments based on their compliance with sanitation and safety standards. The code establishes a tiered system for classifying establishments, ranging from satisfactory to unsatisfactory, with specific criteria tied to the presence and severity of violations. For instance, a food establishment found to have significant critical violations that pose an immediate public health risk would likely be placed in a lower classification, necessitating immediate corrective action. The classification system is designed to guide enforcement actions, prioritize resources for inspections, and inform the public about the safety of establishments. North Dakota Administrative Code (NDAC) 33-16-02 provides further detail on the food code, including inspection procedures and violation classifications, aligning with the principles established in the Century Code. The intent is to ensure that all food served to the public meets stringent safety and sanitation requirements, thereby protecting the health of North Dakota residents. The classification of an establishment is directly linked to the severity of observed food safety deficiencies.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically Chapter 23-10, outlines the responsibilities of the State Department of Health concerning the prevention of foodborne illnesses and adulteration. When a food establishment in North Dakota is found to be in violation of established sanitation standards, the Department has a tiered approach to enforcement. For a first offense involving a minor, correctable violation, such as a non-critical sanitation lapse that does not immediately endanger public health, the typical initial action is to issue a written warning or a notice of violation. This notice details the deficiency and specifies a reasonable timeframe for correction. Fines or license suspension are generally reserved for repeat offenses, failure to correct violations, or for more severe, imminent health hazards. The focus is on education and correction for initial, less critical issues. Therefore, issuing a written warning is the most appropriate initial step for a minor, correctable sanitation issue that does not pose an immediate threat to public health in North Dakota.

The North Dakota Food and Drug Law, specifically as it pertains to adulteration and misbranding, outlines strict requirements for food products. A food is considered adulterated if it contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This includes substances not naturally present in the food or present in excessive amounts. Furthermore, if a food has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health, it is also deemed adulterated. The law also addresses economic adulteration, where the quality or purity of a food has been lowered by substituting a cheaper substance or removing a valuable constituent. Misbranding occurs when the labeling is false or misleading in any particular, or if the food is in package form and the name of the food is not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside thereof as required by or under authority of the North Dakota Food and Drug Law. A food product that has been intentionally coated with a poisonous or deleterious substance to conceal damage or inferiority is also considered adulterated under these provisions, as the coating itself renders the product unsafe or unwholesome for consumption. The North Dakota Century Code, Chapter 23-10, provides the legal framework for these definitions and prohibitions.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-09, governs the regulation of food and drugs within the state. This chapter outlines the powers and duties of the State Department of Health and Human Services (NDDHHS) in ensuring the safety, wholesomeness, and proper labeling of food and drug products sold or distributed within North Dakota. The NDDHHS is empowered to conduct inspections, collect samples for analysis, and take enforcement actions against violations. Violations can include misbranding, adulteration, or the sale of contaminated products. The law emphasizes the prevention of deceptive practices and the protection of public health. When a food establishment is found to be in violation of food safety regulations, the NDDHHS has the authority to issue corrective action notices, impose fines, or, in severe cases, suspend or revoke operating permits. The process for these enforcement actions is detailed within the code, ensuring due process for the regulated entities. The focus is on proactive prevention and swift remediation of identified risks to public health. The legislative intent is to align with federal standards where applicable, such as the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, while also addressing specific state concerns. The NDDHHS plays a pivotal role in implementing these regulations through its various divisions and programs dedicated to food and drug safety.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically Chapter 23-09, outlines the requirements for the labeling of food products. Section 23-09-03 mandates that food labeling must not be false or misleading. This includes ensuring that the label accurately reflects the ingredients, quantity, and origin of the food. When a food product is manufactured in North Dakota but distributed under a brand name owned by a company based in Minnesota, and the labeling specifies “Manufactured for [Minnesota Company Name], Minneapolis, MN,” this accurately conveys the relationship between the manufacturer and the distributor. The law requires the principal place of business of the manufacturer or distributor to be identified. In this scenario, identifying the company for whom the product was manufactured, along with their location, satisfies the spirit and letter of the law, which aims to inform consumers about the entities responsible for the product’s presence in the market. The focus is on preventing deception, and stating “Manufactured for” clearly delineates the roles without implying the Minnesota company is the direct manufacturer. The core principle is transparency in identifying responsible parties in the food supply chain.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically referencing the principles of adulteration and misbranding as defined within the North Dakota Century Code, outlines strict prohibitions against the introduction of any food into commerce that has been prepared, packed, or held in unsanitary conditions where it may have become contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health. Furthermore, a food is deemed misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. In this scenario, the discovery of insect fragments within a batch of packaged flour, coupled with the absence of any declaration of this presence on the product’s label, directly contravenes these statutory provisions. The presence of insect fragments constitutes adulteration because it renders the food unfit for consumption and indicates a failure to maintain sanitary conditions during processing or packaging. The lack of disclosure on the label constitutes misbranding, as it misleads consumers regarding the true nature and quality of the product. Therefore, the flour is subject to regulatory action for both adulteration and misbranding under North Dakota law.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically Chapter 23-10, outlines the requirements for the labeling of food products. Section 23-10-04 addresses the general labeling provisions, requiring that food labeling must not be false or misleading. It also mandates that food must be labeled with information required by federal law, which includes the identity of the food, the net quantity of contents, and the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor. Furthermore, if a food purports to be or is represented as a food for which a standard of identity has been prescribed by federal regulations, it must conform to that standard. When a standard of identity has not been established, the labeling must describe the food with common or usual names. The inclusion of “Nutri-Brite” as a proprietary name for a vitamin-fortified beverage, without further clarification of its vitamin content or the specific vitamins present, could be considered misleading if it implies a unique or superior nutritional profile that is not substantiated by the product’s actual composition, especially under North Dakota’s general prohibition against misleading labeling. The question tests the understanding of how North Dakota law aligns with federal labeling requirements and the overarching principle of preventing deceptive practices in food marketing. The scenario requires an understanding that simply using a brand name does not fulfill the labeling requirements for accurate nutritional information or product identity if those are implied by the branding.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically Chapter 23-09, outlines the requirements for the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-09-04 defines when a food is considered adulterated. One key provision states that a food is adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. Another provision addresses economic adulteration, where a food is adulterated if any valuable constituent has been wholly or in part omitted or abstracted therefrom, or if any substance has been substituted wholly or in part therefor. Furthermore, if a food has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health, it is also considered adulterated. The act also specifies that if a food contains an added poisonous or deleterious substance, other than one added for the purpose of preventing or preserving it, which may render it injurious to health, it is adulterated. The core principle is to ensure that food sold in North Dakota is safe for consumption and not misrepresented in its composition or quality. The scenario involves a bakery in Fargo, North Dakota, that uses a non-food-grade sealant on its mixing bowls. This sealant, if it leaches into the dough, would be considered a poisonous or deleterious substance, making the final baked goods adulterated under the Act. The question tests the understanding of what constitutes adulteration under North Dakota law, focusing on the presence of harmful substances or insanitary practices.

The North Dakota Food and Drug Act, specifically referencing the provisions for adulterated food, outlines several conditions under which a food product is deemed adulterated. One such condition, as detailed in NDCC Chapter 4-17, pertains to food that contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This is a broad category designed to protect public health from harmful contaminants. Another key provision addresses food that has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. This clause emphasizes the importance of hygienic practices throughout the food production and handling process. Furthermore, the act specifies that food is adulterated if it consists in whole or in part of any diseased or from a diseased animal or fowl, or if any part of it has undergone decomposition. The presence of insect or rodent contamination, or evidence of infestation, also renders food adulterated. Finally, the act addresses intentional adulteration, where a substance has been substituted for a food, or if any valuable constituent of the food has been wholly or partly abstracted, or if any substance has been added to the food to increase its bulk or weight, or to lower its quality or strength, or if any substance has been added to the food to make it appear better than it is, or if any substance has been added to the food, which is below the standard of quality or strength which it purports or is represented to possess. Considering a scenario where a batch of dried blueberries from a North Dakota farm is found to contain trace amounts of a pesticide residue that, while not immediately acutely toxic at the detected levels, is known to have potential long-term carcinogenic effects when consumed consistently over time, this would fall under the category of a poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to health, even if the immediate danger is not apparent. Therefore, the primary legal basis for deeming this product adulterated is the presence of a substance that may render it injurious to health.

The North Dakota Food and Drug Law, specifically concerning adulterated food, is governed by principles that define when a food product is considered unsafe for consumption. Under North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 23-09, a food is deemed adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This also extends to food that has been produced, prepared, packed, or held in unsanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health. Furthermore, if the food consists in whole or in part of any diseased animal or of any animal which died otherwise than by slaughter, or if it has been prepared in a facility that has not met specific sanitation standards outlined by the North Dakota Department of Health and Human Services, it is considered adulterated. The presence of insect fragments or rodent hairs above established tolerance levels, as defined by federal standards adopted by reference or state-specific regulations, would also render a food adulterated. The core principle is the protection of public health by ensuring that food available for consumption in North Dakota is free from hazards that could cause illness or injury. This includes both chemical and biological contaminants, as well as physical contamination arising from poor handling or processing. The law aims to prevent the distribution and sale of any food that poses a risk to consumers, regardless of whether the adulteration was intentional or accidental.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically Chapter 23-09, addresses the adulteration and misbranding of food. Section 23-09-03 defines adulterated food. One key provision relates to food containing poisonous or deleterious substances. If a food product contains any substance that may render it injurious to health, it is considered adulterated. This includes substances that are added to the food, or naturally present in quantities that pose a risk. The Act emphasizes the protection of public health by ensuring that food sold within North Dakota is safe for consumption. Therefore, a food product containing a residue of a pesticide, even if within federal tolerance limits, would still be subject to North Dakota’s regulatory framework if that residue could potentially render the food injurious to health under specific circumstances or if North Dakota law imposes stricter standards or different interpretations of “deleterious substance.” The key is whether the substance *may* render the food injurious to health, which is a broader standard than simply exceeding federal limits. The Act aims to prevent any potential harm, not just proven harm.

The North Dakota Century Code, specifically Chapter 23-09, outlines the requirements for the licensing and regulation of food establishments. This chapter addresses the authority of the State Department of Health and its ability to adopt rules and standards for food safety. Section 23-09-02 grants the department the power to prescribe sanitary regulations for food establishments. These regulations are designed to prevent the adulteration or misbranding of food, ensuring public health. When a food establishment fails to meet these prescribed sanitary standards, the department has the authority to take corrective actions. These actions can range from issuing warnings and requiring remediation plans to, in cases of persistent or severe violations that pose an imminent health hazard, suspending or revoking the establishment’s license. The core principle is to protect consumers from unsafe food products and practices. The department’s actions are guided by the severity of the violation and the establishment’s willingness and ability to comply with the law and regulations. A failure to maintain the required sanitary conditions, as stipulated by the department’s rules, directly impacts the establishment’s legal standing and its right to operate.

The North Dakota Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, specifically referencing regulations concerning adulterated food, provides a framework for identifying and addressing food products that are unfit for consumption. A food is considered adulterated if it contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. This includes substances that are not naturally occurring in the food or are present in excessive quantities. In the scenario presented, the presence of lead, a known poisonous substance, at a detectable level in the apple cider, even if not immediately causing acute illness, renders the product adulterated under North Dakota law. The law does not require a specific threshold of toxicity to be met for a substance to be considered adulterant; rather, the mere presence of a poisonous or deleterious substance that *may* render it injurious to health is sufficient. Therefore, the apple cider, containing lead, is deemed adulterated. This principle aligns with the broader intent of food safety regulations, which aim to prevent consumer exposure to harmful contaminants. The focus is on the potential for harm, not solely on demonstrated harm. This understanding is crucial for businesses operating within North Dakota to ensure compliance and protect public health by meticulously controlling ingredient sourcing and manufacturing processes to prevent contamination.