Mobile Food Testing Laboratories in India: The Future of Food Safety Testing on Wheels

Food testing has traditionally been associated with a fixed laboratory:- samples are collected from a market, factory, farm, warehouse or food business, transported to a laboratory, registered, prepared and finally analysed using the appropriate method.

But India is now moving towards a different approach — taking the laboratory closer to the sample.

The concept of Mobile Food Testing Laboratories (MFTLs) is not new in India. FSSAI has been implementing its Food Safety on Wheels (FSW) programme for several years to provide basic food testing, surveillance, training and awareness, particularly in remote and underserved areas. FSSAI currently reports 305 Food Safety on Wheels registered, and the Government has also reported 305 FSWs deployed across 35 States/UTs.

What makes the present development particularly important is that the concept of a mobile food laboratory is now moving towards a more formal accreditation-based framework.

The latest amendment to NABL 127, dated 10 August 2026, has introduced specific additional requirements for Mobile Food Testing Laboratories. The document defines an MFTL as a laboratory on wheels capable of conducting physical, chemical, microbiological, rapid screening or confirmatory testing at field locations outside a permanent laboratory, while making it clear that testing is performed when the vehicle is parked and stationed, not while it is moving. This development could have a significant impact on India's food-testing ecosystem.

Why does India need mobile food laboratories?

The simple answer is geography and accessibility.

India has thousands of food businesses spread across metropolitan cities, small towns, villages, agricultural areas, food-processing clusters, mandis, fisheries, warehouses and remote regions. A good network of permanent laboratories is essential, but a permanent laboratory cannot be physically present everywhere.

FSSAI itself acknowledges that the number and geographical spread of food-testing laboratories is inadequate and has therefore promoted mobile testing units to reach consumers and food businesses at more touch points.

Consider a food-processing cluster located several hundred kilometres from the nearest capable laboratory.

A manufacturer may have to:

Collect sample → pack sample → transport sample → laboratory receipt → registration → sample preparation → testing → reporting

Transportation itself can introduce delays, particularly for samples requiring controlled conditions.

A mobile laboratory changes the approach:

Sample location → Mobile laboratory → Testing → Preliminary/appropriate result → Further confirmation where required

This does not mean that every test should be performed in a vehicle. Rather, it gives regulators and laboratories another tool to decide where a particular test should be performed.

That distinction will be very important in the future.

From Food Safety on Wheels to Accredited Mobile Laboratories

India already has considerable experience with mobile food testing through FSSAI's Food Safety on Wheels programme.

The existing FSW model is designed primarily for basic qualitative testing, surveillance, awareness and training. FSSAI states that an FSW can test about 80 parameters qualitatively across seven food categories, with provision for simple microbiological testing where the State chooses to use it.

The programme is therefore much broader than simply testing food.

An FSW can also:

• support food-safety surveillance;

• reach remote areas;

• transport samples to laboratories;

• conduct awareness programmes;

• train food businesses and food handlers;

• support field food-safety officials;

• provide on-the-spot qualitative adulteration testing.

FSSAI's current information reports 60 Food Safety on Wheels and 294 Modified Food Safety on Wheels provided to States/UTs.

The Government has also planned further expansion. Its 2025–30 procurement plan includes additional mobile food-testing laboratories, showing that mobile testing is expected to remain an important part of India's food-testing infrastructure.

So, the country is not starting from zero.

The new NABL requirements could be seen as the next step: moving from the concept of mobile testing for outreach and screening towards a defined framework for competent, controlled and accredited mobile laboratory operations.

What has NABL now introduced?

The new Section 10 of NABL 127 specifically deals with Additional Requirements for Mobile Food Testing Laboratories (MFTLs).

Two broad categories are described.

Type I – Screening MFTL

Type I is intended for:

• rapid field-based screening;

• semi-quantitative methods; and

• surveillance.

Each individual mobile vehicle applying as a Type I facility is to be considered separately.

This type of laboratory has a very practical role.

For example, during a large surveillance programme, hundreds of samples may need to be examined quickly. A screening laboratory can help identify samples that appear satisfactory and, more importantly, samples that require further investigation.

Type II – Advanced MFTL

Type II is a much more ambitious model.

NABL describes it for:

• confirmatory testing; and

• advanced instrumentation such as LC-MS, GC-MS and ICP-MS.

This is where the future becomes particularly interesting.

A Type II mobile laboratory is not simply a van carrying rapid adulteration kits. It has the potential to function as a sophisticated analytical laboratory at a field location, provided the required scope, equipment, methods, personnel and quality requirements are fulfilled.

For private laboratories, this could eventually create a completely new service model.

What does an accredited mobile laboratory actually mean?

The mobile facility now has to operate as a laboratory management system.

NABL requires appropriate legal identity, regulatory approvals, defined ownership and operational responsibility, relevant vehicle registration/authorisation where applicable, and a clearly defined scope of testing for mobile operations.

Personnel also need specific competence for mobile operations. They must be trained in equipment handling under field conditions, safety and hygiene, sample handling, transportation and storage, and maintaining sample integrity and traceability. Records of training, competency assessment and authorisation are required.

In other words:

A mobile laboratory is not just a vehicle.

It is:

Vehicle + laboratory infrastructure + equipment + competent personnel + validated methods + quality system + traceability + safety + data integrity.

The biggest technical challenge: the vehicle becomes part of the laboratory

In a conventional laboratory, the building provides a relatively stable environment.

In a mobile laboratory, the laboratory itself is moving between locations and operating under changing environmental conditions.

This creates several challenges.

Temperature can change significantly between locations.

Humidity can change.

Road vibration can affect sensitive instruments.

Power supply can be unstable.

Dust and environmental contamination can become issues.

Space is limited.

Storage of chemicals, standards, reference materials and samples needs careful control.

NABL therefore requires the mobile facility to maintain suitable environmental conditions including temperature, humidity, ventilation and vibration control. It also calls for adequate workspace, vibration-resistant arrangements for sensitive instruments, power backup, lighting and ventilation. Type II facilities require an alternate power supply system for uninterrupted laboratory operation.

This is why designing a mobile laboratory is not simply a laboratory-fabrication exercise.

It requires laboratory engineering, vehicle engineering, electrical engineering, HVAC design, analytical chemistry and laboratory quality management to work together.

Can LC-MS/MS or GC-MS/MS really work inside a mobile laboratory?

Technically, this is one of the most interesting questions.

High-end instruments such as LC-MS/MS, GC-MS/MS and ICP-MS are sensitive analytical systems. They require appropriate environmental conditions, stable power, proper installation, competent operators and regular maintenance.

NABL requires equipment used in MFTLs to have valid calibration, be fit for the intended purpose under mobile operating conditions, have suitable shock protection where applicable and be protected from adverse environmental conditions during transportation and operation.

Therefore, the question is not simply:

“Can we install LC-MS in a truck?”

The real question is:

“Can we demonstrate that the LC-MS is operating under conditions that do not compromise the validity of the result?”

That is a much higher standard.

For this reason, Type II mobile laboratories will probably require considerably more sophisticated vehicle design than today's rapid-testing vans.

Method validation will become critical

Another important issue is the difference between a rapid screening result and a laboratory result intended for confirmatory or regulatory purposes.

NABL requires methods to be appropriately validated or verified before being put into service. Rapid and screening methods are also expected to be appropriately verified against recognised reference methods, where applicable.

This is particularly important in food testing.

A rapid kit may tell us:

“Possible adulteration detected.”

That is extremely useful for surveillance.

But a regulatory decision may require:

• a validated analytical method;

• appropriate measurement capability;

• traceability;

• quality control;

• competent personnel;

• appropriate uncertainty considerations;

• proper sample handling; and

• a result that is accepted for the intended regulatory purpose.

Therefore, screening should not automatically be confused with confirmatory testing.

This distinction will be one of the most important issues as mobile food-testing accreditation develops in India.

Sampling may be more important than the instrument

Mobile laboratories offer one major advantage: they can go to the sample.

But this also creates a major responsibility.

If the sample is not representative, even the world's best analytical instrument cannot correct the problem.

The NABL requirements therefore require documented procedures for sample collection, labelling, transportation, storage and disposal, with sample integrity maintained throughout the process.

This is particularly relevant in surveillance.

Suppose a mobile laboratory reaches a food market and tests one sample.

What does that sample represent?

Is it representative of the lot?

Was it collected correctly?

Was sufficient quantity collected?

Was the sample protected from contamination?

Was the temperature maintained?

Was the sample divided appropriately?

Was the chain of custody maintained?

These questions will remain important regardless of whether the laboratory is stationary or mobile.

Reporting from a mobile laboratory

A mobile laboratory also creates an additional requirement: the location and circumstances of testing matter.

NABL requires reporting to clearly indicate information such as the location/GPS or area, nature of the test, date and time of collection and testing, and whether a result is preliminary or confirmatory where applicable. Deviations from standard procedures during field operation also need to be recorded. Electronic reporting systems must maintain integrity, security and confidentiality.

This could eventually lead to highly digital mobile testing systems.

A sample could be:

QR coded → GPS tagged → entered into LIMS → tested → reviewed → digitally reported → linked with central surveillance data.

That would make the mobile laboratory part of a much larger national food-safety information system.

The international scenario

India is not alone in exploring mobile food-testing laboratories.

Internationally, mobile laboratories have been used or studied for food-safety applications in different forms. A recent feasibility initiative supported through the WTO's Standards and Trade Development Facility examined the feasibility of an ISO/IEC 17025-accredited mobile food-safety laboratory in the Southern African region, including South Africa, Namibia, Eswatini and Lesotho.

The international experience is important because it highlights a basic principle:

Mobile laboratories should generally complement permanent laboratories rather than replace them.

Countries and regions have different reasons for adopting mobile testing.

In a country such as India, the major advantage is geographical reach.

In a compact but highly developed food system such as Singapore, the emphasis can be more on rapid field response and specialised applications.

In major food-import and trading centres such as Dubai, the concept can be relevant around food distribution, logistics and inspection activities.

India needs its own model based on its geography, food supply chain, regulatory system and laboratory infrastructure.

India may actually have an advantage

India already has something that many countries would need years to build: a large existing mobile food-testing network.

The FSSAI Food Safety on Wheels programme has already created experience in operating mobile units, reaching remote areas, conducting field testing and working with State food-safety departments. FSSAI's current portal reports substantial activity in testing, training and awareness.

The future could be a three-level system

In our view, the most practical future for India is not to make every mobile laboratory a sophisticated LC-MS/MS laboratory.

Instead, a three-level model could develop.

First level – Rapid screening

Mobile units equipped with rapid and portable technologies can perform surveillance and identify potential problems.

Second level – Advanced mobile testing

Selected Type II MFTLs can perform defined confirmatory tests in areas where sufficient sample volume and technical justification exist.

Third level – Permanent laboratories

Complex, specialised or highly sensitive testing can continue to be performed in regional, referral and national laboratories.

What are the major challenges?

The biggest challenge will be economics.

A basic mobile testing vehicle and an advanced Type II mobile laboratory are two completely different investments.

An advanced unit may require expensive instruments, vehicle modification, HVAC, power backup, gas systems, vibration control, sample preparation facilities, IT systems, calibration, maintenance, consumables, reference materials and skilled manpower.

Then comes the question of utilisation.

If an LC-MS/MS-equipped mobile laboratory performs only a small number of tests each month, the cost per sample could become extremely high.

Therefore, before investing in a Type II MFTL, a laboratory should ask:

Where will the samples come from?

How many samples can realistically be tested?

Which parameters have sufficient demand?

Who will pay for the testing?

Will the results be accepted for the intended regulatory purpose?

What happens when the instrument breaks down hundreds of kilometres from the main laboratory?

These are business questions as much as technical questions.

Manpower will be another major limitation

Running a mobile laboratory requires a different type of professional.

The analyst must understand the analytical method, but also:

• field sampling;

• mobile equipment operation;

• vehicle safety;

• power systems;

• environmental monitoring;

• sample transport;

• emergency response;

• data connectivity;

• field documentation.

NABL has specifically recognised this requirement by requiring training and competency in mobile operations, field equipment handling, safety, hygiene and sample integrity.

This could create a new professional profile in India's laboratory sector:

Mobile Food Laboratory Analyst

A person who is not only an analytical chemist or microbiologist, but also understands field laboratory operations.

Safety cannot be compromised

A mobile laboratory may contain chemicals, solvents, compressed gases, electrical systems, biological materials and expensive analytical equipment in a confined environment.

Fire safety, chemical storage, waste disposal, electrical safety and emergency arrangements therefore become even more important than in many conventional laboratories.

A vehicle has limited space for storing waste and chemicals safely.

The operator also has to consider what happens after testing is completed.

Where will chemical waste go?

How will biological waste be transported?

What to do in case of emergency situation like chemical spill, gas-cylinder leak, smoke or fire is detected etc?

What to do if the vehicle is involved in an accident while carrying chemicals or food samples?

What to do if communication or GPS connectivity is lost during field operations

These are not minor operational details. They are fundamental to a credible mobile laboratory.

Another challenge: accreditation versus mobility

One of the most interesting challenges will be maintaining accreditation while the laboratory keeps changing location.

A permanent laboratory has a defined physical environment.

A mobile laboratory may operate in Mumbai today, Tamil Nandu /Karnataka tomorrow and Rajasthan next week.

The laboratory must therefore demonstrate that the change in location does not compromise the validity of testing.

NABL's framework specifically addresses environmental conditions, equipment suitability, calibration and facility changes. It also requires appropriate controls where supporting activities are carried out outside the mobile unit.

This means mobility itself has to be controlled.

A mobile laboratory cannot simply park anywhere and assume that accreditation automatically follows the vehicle.

What does this mean for private laboratories?

This development could create a completely new business opportunity.A laboratory with an established permanent facility could potentially operate a mobile unit as an extension of its services.

For example:

Permanent laboratory

• method development;

• reference standards;

• advanced instrumentation;

• calibration support;

• technical management;

• quality management;

• referral testing.

Mobile laboratory

• sample collection;

• field screening;

• selected testing;

• surveillance;

• customer support;

• rapid response.

This would allow the mobile unit to use the technical strength of the permanent laboratory rather than trying to reproduce an entire laboratory inside a vehicle.

This hub-and-spoke model may ultimately prove more practical.

What about FSSAI recognition?

This is an area where laboratories need to be particularly careful.

NABL accreditation and FSSAI recognition are related but should not be treated as exactly the same thing.

NABL 127 states that laboratories seeking FSSAI recognition after NABL accreditation have to apply under the applicable FSSAI recognition framework. FSSAI recognition is linked to maintaining the relevant NABL accreditation and applicable FSSAI requirements.

The document also specifically notes that mobile testing facilities are to be applied along with the applicable FSSAI categories as site facilities.

Therefore, a laboratory planning an MFTL should not simply assume:

“NABL accreditation = automatic acceptance for every FSSAI regulatory purpose.”

The exact scope, recognition and intended use of the results need to be clearly understood.

The biggest opportunity: testing closer to the source

Perhaps the most important future application is not the food market or the urban consumer.

It is the food supply chain itself.

For example a spice-processing cluster where hundreds of consignments are produced every month.

A mobile laboratory could potentially operate close to that cluster.

Similarly:

• dairy clusters;

• rice-processing regions;

• edible-oil manufacturing clusters;

• seafood landing centres;

• fruit and vegetable markets;

• grain mandis;

• food warehouses;

• export clusters;

could potentially benefit from mobile testing.

This could reduce the time between sampling and decision-making.

But again, the objective should not be to perform every test inside the vehicle.

The mobile laboratory should perform the tests for which it is technically and economically suitable.

Mobile laboratory does not mean “laboratory without limitations”

This point needs to be understood by regulators, laboratories and customers.

A mobile laboratory has inherent limitations.

Space is limited.

Instrument selection is limited.

Sample preparation can be difficult.

Power requirements can be significant.

Environmental control is challenging.

Maintenance can be expensive.

Highly specialised testing may remain impractical.

Therefore, the mobile laboratory should not be promoted simply as a “full laboratory on wheels.”

It is better understood as:

A laboratory designed for a defined purpose, with controlled mobility.

That is a much more realistic and scientifically defensible approach.

The Future of Mobile Food Testing in India

The future is not about replacing the conventional food laboratory.

It is about extending the laboratory network beyond the walls of the laboratory.

A permanent laboratory will continue to be essential for sophisticated analytical testing, method development, specialised instruments, reference materials, quality assurance and referral testing.

But the mobile laboratory can bring something that the permanent laboratory cannot provide:

Mobility.

It can reach the food business.

It can reach the market.

It can reach the production cluster.

It can reach the remote district.

It can reach the point where a food-safety problem begins.

That is its greatest strength.

International experience suggests that mobile food laboratories work best when they operate as part of a wider laboratory system rather than as isolated units. India's existing Food Safety on Wheels programme gives the country a strong foundation, while the new NABL requirements provide a pathway towards more formally controlled and accredited mobile testing.

The real opportunity now is to develop a model that combines mobility with scientific credibility.

And perhaps the simplest way to describe the future is:

The future of food testing may not be about bringing every sample to the laboratory. It may be about taking the right laboratory to the right sample at the right time.

For India, that could be a major step forward in building a faster, more accessible and more responsive food safety testing ecosystem.

*****

© 2026. All rights reserved. All content on this website is the intellectual property of The Food Analyst. Unauthorized use or reproduction is prohibited.

Contact Us

The Food Analyst Team

We are available in multiple locations:
Bangalore | Delhi | Mumbai

Email for editorial: contact@foodanalyst.in
For advertisement: inquiryfoodanalyst@gmail.com