ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (84) 312 
 
 
 
Vol. 1984/0142 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conform ément au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Com munauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que m odifié par le règlem ent (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septem bre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés c onformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlement. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Economic 
Comm unity and the Eur opean Atom ic Energy Com munity (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, E uratom ) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), t his file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conform ity with Article 5 of the aforem entioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimm ung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom 1.  
Februa r 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgem einschaft und der Europäisc hen Atom gemeinschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 v om 27.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(84) 312 final
Brussels, 6 June 1984
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
on amendment of the provisions concerning the health  
inspection of poultrymeat contained in Directive  
71/118/EEC on health problems affecting trade  
in fresh poultrymeat
COM(84) 312 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL  
on amendment of the provisions concerning the health  
inspection of poultrymeat contained in Directive 71/118/EEC  
on health problems affecting trade in fresh poultrymeat
1. On 19 March 1981 the Commission sent the Council a proposal amending  
Council Directive 71/118/EEC of 15 February 1971 on health problems  
affecting trade in fresh poultrymeat^^. The main purpose of this  
proposal is to clarify the rules on the health inspection of poultrymeat  
and to postpone until 15 August 1986 the expiry of the derogation regarding  
the slaughter and evisceration of poultry.
2. In the course of the Council discussions, the French authorities asked the  
Commission to set up a working group to examine new guidelines for the  
health inspection of poultrymeat in the light of technological progress.
The Commission stated its intention of presenting the Council with a  
report, possibly followed by proposals "on developments in ante and  
post-mortem inspection of fresh poultrymeat, with particular attention  
being paid to the following questions:
i) preparation of diagnosis, analysis and monitoring criteria in poultry  
farming necessary for the application to post-mortem health inspection  
of methods alternative to the individual inspection method provided  
for by the present Directive
ii) determination of the statistically valid sampling percentage necessary  
to provide adequate consumer protection
iii) definition of the poultry categories and species to which alternative  
"sampling" methods could be applied, taking into account the pathology  
of the various species of poultry
viewed in the light of the problem raised by the French memorandum on  
health inspection (Doc 11 265/81 AGRILEC 24l)·"
(1) OJ No L 55, 8.3.1971, P 23

-  2 -
3· The Commission submitted these different problems to the Scientific Veterinary-  
Committee, section "Public Health". The report of the Scientific Veterinary-  
Committee is in the Annex attached.
According to this report, the individual post-mortem inspection provided for in  
Council Directive 71/118/EEC could be modified by introducing a system which  
gave greater importance to ante-mortem inspection on the holding of origin.
By reference to the information obtained from this ante-mortem inspection, it  
would be possible to perform a simplified post-mortem inspection not involving  
full individual inspection. This possibility, however, would be confined to  
broilers not exceeding a certain age.
This new system would make it possible to gather more complete and more detailed  
information regarding the health status of the batches of poultry for slaughter.  
This information would be an important factor in assessing the poultry's health  
status, and the health inspection of poultry would thus be improved. In fact,  
the new health inspection system offers the possibility to detect certain germs  
pathogenic to man and certain chemical substances already at the level of the  
flock of origin, which may constitute a risk to the consumer of poultrymeat.
This may make it possible to adopt preventive measures and organise control  
sufficiently early.
4· The study, however, was based mainly on scientific and technical, theoretical  
data; it therefore appears to the Scientific Veterinary Committee necessary to  
supplement it by field trials in order to estimate to what extent the new health  
inspection system could be put into practice and to obtain supplementary  
information, in particular to determine the cost of the new inspection system  
compared to the present system.
The Commission agrees with this point of view. It thinks that these trials will  
be useful all the more because the principles retained in the frame of the new  
inspection system would have important repercussions on the inspection system,  
on the slaughter conditions in the Community and also on an international level.
5. After the establishment, in the near future, of an experimental protocol, the  
trials will lead to a "pilot" study carried out in the framework of the  
existing financial possibilities of the Commission.

- 3 -
As a function of the results obtained, it is possible that it will prove  
useful and even necessary to then carry out these trials in all Member  
States that wish to participate, so as to encompass within the study the  
most diverse health and structural situations. In this case means of  
financing the action must be found.
6. While awaiting the execution of these trials, it is necessary, according to  
the Commission, to delay until 15 August 1986 the termination date of the  
derogation concerning slaughtering and evisceration, provided in Article 16a,  
point (a), third indent of the Directive 71/118/EEC.

ANNEX
Report
on an amendment of the provisions concerning  
the health inspection of poultry of Directive 71/118/EEC  
on health problems affecting trade in fresh poultrymeat

CONTENTS
1. Preface
2. Summary
3· Introduction
4· Shortcomings of the present inspection method
5· Objective of the Working Group on the Health Inspection of Poultry  
6. Modified method of poultry health inspection  
7· Ante-mortem inspection on the farm  
8. Inspection at the slaughterhouse  
9· Guarantees vis-à-vis the consumer
10. Cost of the poultry health inspection
11. "Effilé" poultry and New York Dressed poultry
12. Advantages of the modified method
13. Annexes I to V

-  1 -
1. Preface
The proposed plan for a modified poultrymeat inspection system is the  
outcome of intensive consultations with experts in a working party. The  
working group has considered the theoretical, scientific and technical  
aspects of an alternative system of inspection. The experts were very  
much aware that the proposals do not solve all problems and have some  
aspects which may be difficult in some way to apply in a practical  
situation. Therefore, the modified system will have to be tested for some  
months in the field before its practicability can be determined. This  
will involve studying the most rational deployment of inspection staff and  
costs. Emphasis has been laid on the importance of allowing the  
veterinary expert sufficient freedom of judgment. This applies, in  
particular, when it comes to classifying a poultry flock into a particular  
category.
The new inspection system which is proposed may make it possible to detect  
certain genus pathogenic to man and certain chemical substances already at  
the level of the flock of origin, which may constitute a risk to the  
consumer of poultry meat. This may make it possible to adopt preventive  
measures and organise control sufficiently early.
The intention of the working party was to propose a framework which can be  
gradually added to on the basis of knowledge acquired in the field. In  
reducing the need for individual inspection of carcases it would be  
feasible to monitor the hygiene of the slaughter plant and slaughtering  
process more thoroughly.
This corresponds to other initiatives which have been proposed by the  
Commission in order to improve the hygienic level in the poultry  
slaughterhouses, in particular the use of microbiological methods of  
surveillance.

-  2 -
2. Summary
A Working Group of the Scientific Veterinary Committee has put forward a  
proposal for a modification of the poultry inspection method, as specified  
in Directive 71/118/EEC. The individual inspection of slaughtered poultry  
on the evisceration line might he replaced by a system, where more  
importance is given to the ante-mortem inspection on the farm of origin,  
including a health appraisal of the batch on the basis of flock records, a  
clinical examination and laboratory data.
Batches which showed no abnormalities at ante-mortem inspection could then  
be subjected to a simple post-mortem inspection procedure not involving  
thorough individual inspection (category A).
Poultry from a batch showing abnormalities at ante-mortem inspection  
would, however, always have to undergo a thorough individual post-mortem  
inspection (category B).
Simple post-mortem inspections would be restricted, for the time being at  
least in principle, to batches of broilers up to eight weeks old and  
fattened in accordance with the all-in-all-out system.
In introducing this new inspection system, a more effective use of the  
veterinary inspection staff of the slaughterhouse is achieved.
Furthermore, the poultrymeat inspection will be improved because fuller  
information concerning the health status of each batch would be available; 
this data would constitute a major criterion in the assessment of the  
poultry's health status.

- 3 -
3· Introduction
a) On 19 March 1981 the Commission submitted to the Council a proposal for  
a Directive supplementing, in particular as regards the provisions on  
the post-mortem inspection of poultry, Council Directive 71/118/EEC on  
fresh poultrymeat. On 27 November 1981 Prance submitted a memorandum  
calling for reconsideration of the inspection methods and proposing  
separate procedures for domestic trade and intra-Community trade.
When the matter was discussed by the Council the Commission said that  
it intended to submit to the Council a report, possibly followed by  
proposals, "on developments in ante and post-mortem inspection of fresh  
poultrymeat, with particular attention being paid to the following  
questions:
i) preparation of diagnosis, analysis and monitoring criteria in  
poultry farming necessary for the application to post-mortem  
health inspection of methods alternative to the individual  
inspection method provided for by the present Directive
ii) determination of the statistically valid sampling percentage  
necessary to provide adequate consumer protection
iii) definition of the poultry categories and species to which  
alternative "sampling" methods could be applied, taking into  
account the pathology of the various species of poultry
viewed in the light of the problem raised by the French memorandum on  
health inspection (Doc 11 265/81 AGRILEC 241)."

- 4 -
For Its part, the Scientific Veterinary Committee set up a Working  
Group on Health Inspection of Poultry consisting of experts from the  
different Member States and requested a study of some technical  
problems which are specified in document 4347/VI/82, page 2,  
paragraph 2. The Working Group has held six plenary meetings and five  
smaller meetings in Brussels, between December 1982 and February 1984.  
The report of the Working Group has been adopted by the Scientific  
Veterinary Committee on 28 March 1984·
b) Poultry production has, in recent years, undergone fairly important  
changes in the Member States as regards production structures and  
disease prevention and control. There have been changes too in  
slaughter techniques. It is, therefore, appropriate to consider  
updating the health inspection provisions of Directive 71/118/EEC by  
introducing a more thorough form of ante-mortem inspection on the farm.
Shortcomings of the present health inspection method
a) Since poultry production is being concentrated in a diminishing number  
of establishments and the size of each batch for slaughter has  
increased considerably, some Member States are making use of the  
possibility provided for in Directive 71/118/EEC of carrying out an  
ante-mortem inspection on the poultry farm up to 24 hours before  
slaughter.
This period is, however, too short to establish the actual causes of  
abnormalities. This ante-mortem inspection is also only a "clinical  
look", which must be regarded as possibly being inadequate wixhout  
further farm and laboratory data.
b) In the ante-mortem inspection carried out at the slaughterhouse, only  
real disasters (which very rarely occur) are noticed. As a general  
ri'le, this inspection is inadequate for assessing the suitability of  
poultry for slaughter when they are in crates or hanging on the  
slaughterline. Moreover, it is virtually impossible, for  
organisational reasons, to declare a batch unsuitable for slaughter at  
that moment.

- 5 -
c) In Annex IV of the present Directive 71/118/EEC, it is specified that  
an ante-mortem inspection must be carried out within 24 hours before  
slaughter; however, it is possible to carry out this ante-mortem  
inspection on the farm.
d) The Directive also requires complete evisceration and a post-mortem  
inspection of each bird and all parts of the animal.
e) According to a study made during 1979-1980 by the services of the  
Commission, it appears that the implementation of the regulations  
concerning health control and especially with regard to the method of  
post-mortem inspection, differs from one Member State to another.
Annex I sets out condemnation rates for poultrymeat based on data  
supplied by a number of Member States.
f) Modern high speed slaughtering techniques have led to considerable  
difficulties for post-mortem examinations of individual birds, unless  
numerous inspectors are employed or line speeds and line designs are  
altered. In the case of diseased flocks, this makes the inspection  
more difficult and less effectual.
g) The present system mainly identifies patho-morphological signs and  
lesions at post-mortem and is deficient in ante-mortem information on  
health. Due to insufficient information, subclinical and asymptomatic  
carriers of disease or food poisoning organisms are not identified in  
time.

-  6 -
h) The present post-mortem inspection is based on a thorough examination  
of all parts of the poultry after slaughter; "effilé" poultry (roped,  
partly eviscerated) and New York Dressed poultry (not eviscerated) are,  
therefore, released for consumption without adequate health  
inspection. They cannot, therefore, be EEC health marked and used for  
inter-Community trade.
5· Objective of the Working Group on the Health Inspection of Poultry
Examine in depth the problems associated with inspection of poultrymeat;
to suggest a modified inspection system, which may:
a) reduce the shortcomings of the present system
b) offer a better assurance that only meat from healthy birds is marketed
c) give a better assurance that the meat is free of residues and, if  
possible, that it is free or has been made free of specific bacteria  
which may cause food poisoning
d) be applicable to eviscerated, New York Dressed and "effilé" poultry as  
well
e) be cost effective.

- 7 -
6. Modified method of poultry health inspection
- The present inspection system might be improved by a method giving more 
attention to the ante-mortem inspection at the farm of origin, based on  
a flock history record card (Annex II) and a clinical examination,  
completed, if necessary, by laboratory results.
- In the modified method of ante-mortem inspections, provision is made for  
two categories of batches: A and B. Category A batches undergo a simple  
post-mortem inspection, while those in category B are subjected to a  
thorough post-mortem inspection.
- Under the modified system each batch arriving at the slaughterhouse must  
be accompanied by a flock history record card (filled out by the farmer)  
and, where appropriate, results of laboratory tests and a health  
certificate (filled out by the official veterinarian) (Annex III).
- The new system of ante-mortem inspections on the farm should be applied  
to all poultry intended for slaughter. Simple post-mortem inspections  
(category A) should, for the time being at least, be limited to broilers  
less than eight weeks old.
- According to some experts, the possibility of a simple post-mortem  
inspection should be limited to broilers less than eight weeks old but,  
according to other experts, this possibilty should be extended to  
broilers 9-10 weeks old.
- Chickens over eight weeks old and other species of poultry (guinea fowl,  
turkeys, geese and ducks), whatever their age, must be classified in  
category B; in the light of future experience, a decision could later be  
taken as to whether this poultry too should undergo a simple post-mortem  
inspection.

-  8 -
- In case it is not possible to do the ante-mortem inspection in a farm,  
the poultry coming from this farm must be submitted to a thorough  
post-mortem inspection (category B).
- At the slaughterhouse a decision is taken by the veterinarian  
responsible for the poultrymeat inspection on the basis of the documents  
mentioned in third indent above as to whether a simple or a thorough  
post-mortem inspection should be carried out and whether additional  
laboratory tests are necessary.
- After completion of the slaughter operations, the flock history record 
card (see Annexes IV and V), including details of the results of the  
inspection carried out at the slaughterhouse, must be returned to the  
farmer; the latter shall keep these documents for one year and must,  
upon request, produce them for veterinarians conducting an ante-mortem  
inspection on his farm.
7· Ante-mortem inspection on the farm of origin
a) The ante-mortem inspection must be designed to establish:
- whether the poultry is suffering from a disease transmissible to man  
or animals, whether it shows signs of such a disease or whether its  
general state suggests that such a disease is likely to occur

- 9 -
- whether the poultry shows signs of a disease or of a deterioration in  
its general condition which is likely to render the meat unfit for  
human consumption
- whether substances have been administered to the poultry which may  
result in the meat being dangerous or harmful to the consumer's  
health.
b) According to the opinion of the majority of the experts of the Working  
Group, poultry ante-mortem inspections on the farm of origin must be  
conducted by official veterinarians only. One expert feels, however,  
that this inspection could be carried out by auxiliary staff operating  
under the control and responsibility of the official veterinarian, who  
must be available at any time, provided they are instructed to call him  
for his decision, when abnormal conditions are discovered or suspected.
c) The ante-mortem inspection should be based on three types of data and  
carried out within the five days before the scheduled date of slaughter.
If the batch is slaughtered in separate groups, at intervals of more  
than five days, an additional ante-mortem inspection must be carried  
out. Administrative measures must be taken which impose on the farmer  
to notify the veterinarian inspection service if the health status of  
the batch changes after the veterinary inspection.
d) Description of the types of data  
Batch data
A batch of poultry means all birds which are fattened under the all-in-  
all-out system in one house.

-  10  -
As a minimum, the batch data should include, in addition to general  
information about the number of birds, the number of losses,  
information about preventive and curative treatments and data  
concerning preceding flocks (Annex II).
It is also necessary to check whether the withdrawal periods following  
the administration of certain feedingstuffs or medicinal products  
(antibiotics, coccidiostats,  medicated feedingstuffs etc) have been  
respected.
Clinical examination
The veterinary clinical examination includes an inspection of the  
entire batch (clinical signs of disease, anatomic pathological  
examination, stage of development, liveliness, etc); it should take  
into account the batch data and, where appropriate, laboratory data in  
order to arrive at an overall assessment of the batch.
Laboratory data
These may be patho-morphological, bacteriological, virological,  
parasitological or serological examination results, depending on the  
sanitary history of the batch.
Where the withdrawal periods specified for certain feedingstuffs or  
medicinal products administered to the birds have not elapsed, the  
slaughter must be deferred until this period has expired.
If the data obtained from the flock history record card or the clinical  
examination reveal abnormalities and give rise to doubts as to the  
health of the birds (abnormal mortality, poor growth etc), or if the  
poultry is unhealthy, an aetiological study must be conducted, when  
there are doubts concerning the cause. This will involve: taking  
samples from sick birds and performing autopsies on the farm or in the  
laboratory; taking samples of blood, dejecta, feed etc; checking for  
residues by investigating the different types of meal fed to the flock.

-  11  -
At the moment methods for sampling and checking for residues are left  
to national legislation. However, Community legislation in this field  
will be established.
In the ] i.ght of ese three types of data, the official veterinarian  
shall c irry out i assessment of the batch with a view to classifying  
it in jategory A or category B; he shall enter his findings in the  
healti certificate (cf Annex III: "Health Certificate").
e) Classification of the batches
The table below shows how the batches may be classified in the light of  
the findings of the ante-mortem inspection:
:  Possibilities 125456 i
:  1. Batch data -++--+ :
:  2. Clinical examination ---+++ :
:  J. Laboratory results X-+-++ ;
:  4· Decision: Category A A A A B B :  
:  or or : 
:  B B :
+ = positive (presence of abnormalities)  
- = negative (no abnormalities)  
x = no test required
1. Possibilities 1 and 2
If data concerning the batch obtained from the flock history record  
card and the clinical examination are favourable, no laboratory  
examination is necessary. The batch may be proposed as category A.  
If the data concerning the batch obtained from the flock history  
record card give rise to doubts or are unfavourable, aetiological  
investigations must be carried out by a laboratory (bacteriological,  
virological, serological and parasitological tests).
If the clinical examination and the laboratory tests are negative, 
the batch may be slaughtered and a simple post-mortem inspection  
proposed (category A).

-  12 -
2. Possibilities 3 and 4
If the data concerning the batch obtained from the flock history  
record card give rise to doubts or are unfavourable, an aetiological  
investigation must be carried out by a laboratory.
If the clinical examination is negative and the laboratory tests  
positive or when the clinical examination is unfavourable (clinical  
signs of disease etc) but the examination of the flock history and  
the laboratory tests are negative, the veterinarian must, in the  
light of the findings, assess whether:
- slaughter of the batch should be authorised and a simple  
post-mortem inspection proposed (category A); according to one  
expert, it is necessary to specify that when clinical signs,  
confirmed on autopsy, of a contagious disease are discovered on  
several poultry in a batch, the simple post-mortem inspection  
cannot be authorised even if the laboratory tests and the  
examination of the flock history are negative
- slaughter of the batch should be authorised and a full individual  
post-mortem inspection proposed (category B)
- slaughter should be deferred, pending a change in the poultry's  
health status (categories A or B).
3· Possibilities 5 and 6
A full individual post-mortem inspection must always be carried out  
for batches as described in columns 5 and 6 (category B).
4. Possibilities 1 to 6
If data obtained from the flock history record card reveal that the  
withdrawal periods specified for certain feedingstuffs and  
medications administered to the poultry prior to slaughter have not  
elapsed, the official veterinarian must defer slaughter until that  
period has expired. If there are doubts concerning the presence of  
residues, the official veterinarian must call for laboratory tests  
and defer the slaughter until the reception of the results.

- 13 -
8. Inspection at the slaughterhouse
a) Ante-mor tem health control
The ba-ch must t dergo an ante-mortem health control as soon as  
possi1le afte· .rrival at the slaughterhouse and, in any case, within  
24 h' urs aftf .
This will include:
1. an examination of the flock history record card and of the health  
certificate issued by the official veterinarian who carried out the  
ante-mortem inspection on the farm
2. a health control of the poultry; mainly in view to detect any  
damages which have occurred during transportation.
b) Simple post-mortem inspection
Broiler chickens classified as category A on the basis of the data from  
the ante-mortem inspection are eligible for a simple post-mortem  
inspection.
The decision as to whether a batch should undergo a simple post-mortem  
inspection or a full individual post-mortem inspection (category B)  
must be taken by the official veterinarian responsible for meat  
inspection at the slaughterhouse, in the light of the data in the flock  
history record card, the health certificate, the remarks and  
conclusions of the veterinarian who conducted the ante-mortem  
inspection on the farm, the results of the second ante-mortem  
inspection at the slaughterhouse and the results of a full individual  
post-mortem inspection of a sample of birds.

- 14 -
To this end, the official veterinarian selects 60 birds from the batch  
intended for slaughter. The sample must be representative of the whole  
batch as far as the health status is concerned and it must be inspected  
by the official veterinarian at the beginning of the slaughter of the  
batch.
A full individual inspection of this sample is carried out to confirm  
whether the batch may be inspected according to category A or not.
If the results of the post-mortem inspection of that sample are  
favourable, a thorough individual post-mortem inspection of the all  
batch is not required; the task of removing any carcases, parts or  
offal presenting abnormalities or lesions is carried out by workers on  
the slaughterline as part of their normal duties. This must be  
supervisied throughout by an official veterinarian.
The latter may, at any time, call for a full individual post-mortem  
inspection if he deems it necessary. The official veterinarian must  
also carry out checks on the basis of random samples of the end-product  
at the rate of 300 birds per batch in order to ascertain whether the  
poultrymeat is fit for human consumption. This must include checks on  
hygiene of the process, removal of damaged or diseased parts, etc. If  
not fit, he takes the measures which he feels are required.
According to the opinion of the majority of the experts of the Working  
Group, the official veterinarian should be present during the time of  
slaughter. Some experts feel that the selection and inspection of the  
60 birds sample, the surveillance of the activities of the on-line  
workers and the check of the 300 birds sample may be carried out by the  
auxiliaries, operating under the control and responsibility of the  
official veterinarian, who must be available at any time.

- 15 -
The official veterinarian in the slaughterhouse is, therefore,  
respons ole for all meat which has received the health mark being fit  
for hur an consuir ition.
If tbi result; >f the post-mortem inspection of the sample are  
unfavourable . ·  give rise to doubts, the official veterinarian must  
ord ,r a ful' individual post-mortem inspection of the entire batch  
(c itegory E.>. With the modified inspection system fully established,  
it is the opinion of the experts that most category B batches will be  
discovered on the farm and that the above situation may only happen  
occasionally but, when it happens, full inspection facilities and staff  
must be made available to the official veterinarian before further  
slaughtering can continue.
The following, in particular, are regarded as unfavourable results:  
signs (on one or more poultry carcases) indicating a pathological  
condition in the batch or suggestive of such a condition, which render  
the meat unfit for human consumption.
c) Full individual post-mortem inspection
1. Batches classified as category B (in the light of the results of the  
ante-mortem inspection, by decision of the official veterinarian  
responsible for post-mortem inspection, and batches of poultry in  
respect of which there is no provision for a simple post-mortem  
inspection) should always be subjected to a full individual  
inspection. This involves individual inspection of the eviscerated  
carcase by a veterinary inspector on the evisceration line while the  
organs are still attached to the carcase by their natural  
connections.
2. In the case of an individual post-mortem inspection, the time  
allowed in respect of each bird must be sufficient for all parts to  
be inspected. The inspection time for each bird must be decided by  
the official veterinarian in the light of the birds' health status;  
it Is felt, however, that an inspector should not as a rule inspect  
more than:

- 16 -
- (l 200 birds/hour) in the case of broilers and guinea fowl
- (600 birds/hour) in the case of hens, geese, turkeys and ducks.
The number of veterinarians and auxiliaries assigned to inspection  
duties in the slaughterhouse should be such as to take account of  
these recommended rates and the Directive requirements for the  
supervision of hygiene within the establishment.
If a batch includes an appreciable number of birds suffering from  
diseases, the inspectors must , have more time for the post-mortem  
inspection.
The veterinarian or auxiliaries carrying out the post-mortem  
inspection should, at all times, be allowed to demand that the  
person in charge of the slaughterhouse reduce the killing rate when  
this is required for inspection purposes.
d) A survey should be conducted in the Member States to establish how many  
birds an inspector can inspect per hour, in respect of each species and  
poultry classified as category B. In particular, the survey should  
ascertain how many birds, which should normally have been totally or  
partially condemned, were missed by the post-mortem inspection on the  
slaughter line at different speeds.
9* Guarantees for the consumer
The present system of individual inspections only theoretically provides  
an absolute guarantee that each bird is in sound condition. In practice,  
a combination of ever shorter inspection times and human error would  
suggest that considerable numbers of defective carcases elude detection  
(cf 3). Wo reliable data are currently available for an assessment of the  
errors occurring under the present inspection system. It would,  
therefore, be desirable if a survey concerning this matter could be  
conducted at slaughterhouses in various Member States. This is the only  
way of ascertaining whether the proposed new inspection system with random 
sampling reduces the risk to the public more than the present system.

- 17 -
Most experts consider that the consumer is provided with an adequate  
guarantee if the ante-mortem inspection is followed by random sampling in  
accordance with the formula n = 60 (sample size not dependent on size of  
flock), c = 0 (no slaughtered bird in the sample may exhibit pathological  
changes). Due account being taken of the ante-mortem inspection and the  
epidemiology of the possible infectious diseases, the percentage of  
diseased birds in the flock will be virtually zero and thus well below the  
LTPD (Lot Tolerance Percent Defective) of 5% (the risk to the consumer  
being rated at 0.05 under the random sampling plan). Another reason why  
random sampling of the type proposed provides the consumer with adequate  
protection is that the epidemiology of any infectious disease which may be  
present is such that a comparatively high percentage of diseased birds is  
sure to be found in the flock concerned. If a representative sample is  
examined, there is a very high probability (P>0.95) that any infected  
flock will be identified as such. That is, the samples will contain at  
least one diseased bird.
Care should be taken to ensure that the flock consists of birds fattened  
in the same house, so that the birds in the n = 60 sample are a  
representative selection. The sample may consist of the first birds from  
the flock only if they are sure to be representative of the entire flock.
In addition, random sampling of flocks slaughtered as category A birds is  
carried out as a final check for the protection of the consumer. These  
checks should be made on a representative selection of carcases (n = 300,  
sample size not dependent on size of flock) at the end of the slaughter­
line (eg birds could be removed from the line at set intervals). A batch  
of carcases may be released without reservations only if there is no  
hygiene objection. Otherwise the necessary measures must be taken (cf 8b,  
page 14). If this system is followed there is a probability of at least

-  18 -
0*95 of identifying those batches in which \% or more of the carcases are  
unsatisfactory (LTPD = 1%). This final check, along with the ante-mortem  
inspection and initial post-mortem check, ensures that consumer protection  
is guaranteed.
10· Costs of the health inspection of poultry
A precise cost estimate is, of course, not possible.
It would be interesting to evaluate accurately the costs of the new  
inspection system. At this stage, the evaluation will be purely  
theoretical and based on considerations and criteria, which have not been  
tried in practice.
Consequently, it is preferable to wait for the results of an experimental  
trial of the new system in different Member States, before such an  
evaluation is performed.
However, the following aspects are to be considered in calculating the  
cost of the inspection system:
- veterinary inspection staff for ante-mortem inspection will be increased  
but may be reduced for post-mortem inspection
- the cost of laboratory investigation will certainly be increased, more  
particularly in the field controlling residual substances and pathogenic  
agents.
However, this cost will increase even more within the present system  
because this offers no possibilities for focusing on specific substances  
or pathogenic agents.
- it is the aim of the proposed system to improve general health status of  
the poultry flocks and consequently to improve the efficiency of  
poultrymeat production. This will perhaps lead to a reduction in  
general cost due to a decrease of losses during raising and a lower rate  
of condemnation at slaughter.

- 19 -
11. "Effilé” poultry
This type of poultry production is still very widespread in some Member  
States but almost non-existent in others. It appears, however, that the  
percentage of production is still decreasing.
It is necessary to wait for the results of a general study indicated in  
the "Preface" in order to see if this type of poultry offers, from the  
health point of view, the same guarantees as the eviscerated poultry.  
During this study, it will be decided if particular hygienic provisions  
must be imposed for this type of poultry.
While waiting for the results of these studies, the trade in "effilé"  
poultry should be authorised for the internal market of the Member States  
only.
However, one can already conclude that the production of "effilé" poultry  
should be restricted to birds which are eligible for a simple post-mortem  
inspection (category A). There will, however, be a slight difference as  
regards the post-mortem inspection of the two types of poultry, in that  
the sorting of "effilé" poultry by slaughterhouse staff in order to  
eliminate any carcases or organs showing lesions or signs of pathological  
change is not possible.
Similar considerations are valid for the production and control of New  
York Dressed poultry.
12. Advantages of the modified method
a) Possibilities to simplify the post-mortem inspection for the broilers  
less than 8 weeks old.
b) More detailed veterinary inspection of broilers showing abnormalities  
would be possible, thanks to the prior information available obtained  
by the ante-mortem inspection and the slowing down of the post-mortem  
inspection imposed on the basis of the observations made by the  
official veterinarian.

-  20  -
c) The possibility to focus on residue detection on the basis of the  
information and observations made on the farm and to do this  
sufficiently early.
The Working Group recalls that the establishment of the Community rules  
concerning the problem of the residues is necessary and urgent.
d) It is possible to discover early - ie on the farm - the existence of  
batches in which birds are carriers of germs which may constitute a  
human health hazard.
If this is found, the requirements of paragraph 19, Chapter IV,
Annex I, of the Directive must be observed.
e) Further improvement of the health status of poultry on the farms and  
thus of the meat is made possible because farm data and slaughter/  
inspection data are made mutually available.

- 21 -
13· Annexes
Annex I :  Survey of birds condemned at slaughterhouses based on figures  
supplied by Member States (percentage of birds slaughtered)
Annex II :  Model of flock history record card
Annex III: Model of health certificate
Annex IV :  Slaughter data
Annex V :  Inspection data

Survey of birds condemned at slaughterhouses based on figures  
supplied by some Member States (percentage of birds slaughtered)ANNEX I
SPECIES B D DK F IRL I NL UK
Broilers 0.98 0.58 0.78 No infor­ 0.87 0.70-1.40 0.89 0.64
mation for
Hens 1.78 1.58 4 .6 0 individual 1.41 No data 1.02 2.29
species.
Turkeys 0.62 0.58 0.50 Average 0.54 0.35-1.70 1.00 1.78
rate of
Ducks 0.16 0.49 0.20 condemna­ 1.06 No data 0.75 1.10
tion (all
Geese - 0.54- species): No data No data 0.86 -
0.90
Guinea fowl 0.80 No data- No data No data 0.49 -
The condemnation rate for: broilers within the European Community varies from
hens
turkeys
ducks
guinea fowl0.58 to 1.40  
1.02 4-60  
0.50 1.78  
0.16 1.10  
0.49 0.80 (incomplete information)

ANNEX II
A.MODEL
Flock history record card (one per hatch, must accompany the hatch)
(To be filled by the farmer)
General data
Name of farmer/fattener:  
Address: ..............
Fa
rm adviser:  
Address: ....
Veterinarian:  
Address: ....Flock data
Bird species: ............ .
Br
eed/mark(farmer/fattener):Number received: .....
Date
 of receipt: .....
............................  Results in respect of
............... . ...........  previous hatches: ....
Batch N
o: .................. Premature sale: ......
Ho
use No: .................. Number delivered: ....
No 
of birds in hatch: ..... Date of delivery: ....
Hatc
hery: .................. Name of slaughterhouse:
Address: .........................
Ve
hicle identification:
Laboratory data
Birds Feed/manure
Laboratory: ..................  Laboratory: .............
Address:
 ...................... Address: ................!
Date of examination: .........  Date of examination: ...!!
Res
ult of examination (l): Result of examination (l):Clinical inspection
Veterinarian (j): .....  
Date of inspection: ...  
Clinical imperfections:
Yes/No (2) ...........
He
alth Certificate No:
MortalityFeed deliveriesTreatments¥eek;Mon TueWedThu:Fri:Sat:Sun Total: Date: Kind :  Quantity DateNature By whom(5)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Grand total:  Grand total
Remarks :  .........................................
I 
hereby certify that the above particulars are correct.
.......................  (name of farmer/fattener) at: ..
........ -......... . (signature) on: ..(p
lace)
(date)
(1) Please attach laboratory test results
(2) Please give brief description
(3) Please state name and professional qualification

Annex III
MODEL
HEALTH CERTIFICATE
for the movement of poultry from the farm to the slaughterhouse  
Department responsible .............................  No^1^..................
I.
 Poultry
Species ....................................... ............................
Num
ber of birds ...........................................................
Batch number ............................................................. .
Identification mark ......................................................
II
. Source of stock
Address of poultry farm of origin ........................................
II
I. Destination of birds
The birds are being sent to the following slaughterhouse
by (means of transport used)
IV. Declaration
I, the undersigned official veterinarian, hereby certify that on .......
at ...........................,  the birds referred to above underwent an
an
te-mortem inspection on the farm referred to above.
Information obtained from the flock history record card^^/laboratory  
test results show(s)^^ that the birds in the batch referred to above:
- are (were) affected by (one of)/the following clinical disease(s)^^
- do not show (have not shown)^ signs of clinical disease(s)^^
- comply (do not comply)with  the rules concerning interruption of  
the administration of certain substances and feedingstuffs prior to  
slaughter.
The following observations may prove useful in connection with the  
decision to be taken concerning the post-mortem inspection at the  
slaughterhouse:
Done at ................... ,  ..............  (date)
Nam
e of official veterinarian ....................
Si
gnature .......... ...................
(l
) Delete where not applicable

ANNEX IV
Document to be returned to the poultry farmer/fattener
B. O n ................  the delivery took place of batch No ...............
con
sisting of ................... (number and species) of a total weight
o f........ kg.
.........  birds were found to be dead on arrival.
A si
mple post-mortem inspection procedure was/was not authorised in  
respect of the batch in question.
Done at ...................,  o n ..............  (date)
...................................  (name of slaughterhouse employee with
au
thority to issue this certificate)
Signature .............................
C.
 To be completed 
by the veterinary  
service supervising  
the slaughterhouse  
onlyAnnex V
Of the batch referred to above ..........  (number)
birds and ...... kg poultry cuts were rejected, on
th
e following grounds: ............................
Da
te The official veterinarian  
Signature ..............