Report from the Commission on the second series of visits by Commission representatives to the Member States pursuant to Article 5 of Council Directive 93/99/EEC with a view to evaluating the national systems for the official control of foodstuffs
Date: 2000-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: food inspection, foodstuff, health control, import, research body

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 12.01.2000
COM(1999) 751 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

ON THE SECOND SERIES OF VISITS BY

COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES TO THE MEMBER STATES

PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 5 OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/99/EEC

WITH A VIEW TO EVALUATING THE NATIONAL SYSTEMS

FOR THE OFFICIAL CONTROL OF FOODSTUFFS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

2.

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

4.

4.1

4.2

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................3

DEVELOPMENT OF THE OFFICIAL CONTROL OF FOODSTUFFS SINCE THE INITIAL
VISITS................................................................................................................4

CONTROL STRUCTURES .......................................................................................4

HACCP IN FIRMS, GUIDE ON GOOD HYGIENE PRACTICES: TRAINING AND ACTIVITIES
OF THE CONTROL AUTHORITIES............................................................................4

ACCREDITATION OF ANALYSIS LABORATORIES.....................................................5

REGISTRATION AND AUTHORISATION OF ESTABLISHMENTS ...................................5

STAFF RESOURCES ..............................................................................................5

CONTROLS OF IMPORTED FOODSTUFFS OF NON-ANIMAL ORIGIN .....................5

CONTROLS AT ENTRY POINTS...............................................................................6

CONTROLS OF FOODSTUFFS FOR SALE ..................................................................8

SELF-MONITORING BY IMPORTERS AND VERIFICATION BY THE CONTROL
AUTHORITIES ......................................................................................................8

CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................11

DEVELOPMENT OF OFFICIAL CONTROLS.............................................................. 11

CONTROLS OF IMPORTED FOODSTUFFS OF NON-ANIMAL ORIGIN.......................... 11

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE SECOND SERIES OF VISITS
BY COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES TO THE MEMBER STATES
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 5 OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/99/EEC WITH A
VIEW TO EVALUATING THE NATIONAL SYSTEMS FOR THE OFFICIAL
CONTROL OF FOODSTUFFS

1.

INTRODUCTION

Article 5 of Council Directive 93/99/EEC on the subject of additional measures
concerning the official control of foodstuffs provides that the Commission shall
monitor and evaluate the equivalence and effectiveness of official food control
systems operated by the competent authorities of the Member States.

Following the initial visits which led to a report being drawn up in 1997, it was
decided that the second series of visits would focus on updating the information
gathered during the initial visits and examining the special subject of controls on
imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin.

The Directives on the official control of foodstuffs (89/397/EEC and 93/99/EEC)
were the principal basis of the search for information.

Precise information was provided by the food control services on the following areas:

I.

developments since the initial visits with regard to the official control of
foodstuffs;

II.

control of imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin.

The visits took place between February 1998 and March 1999 and usually lasted a
week in each Member State. They were carried out by two Commission officials
(from DG XXIV - Consumer Policy and Consumer Health Protection) accompanied
in most cases by a national expert from a State other than the host State, selected
from lists supplied by the Member States.

Preliminary information was obtained from the Member States on the areas
mentioned
the Permanent
questionnaire
Representations.

addressed

through

above

to

a

All the visits were organised on the same lines, viz.:

I.

II.

III.

IV.

initial meeting with the competent central authority; visit
laboratories;

to the central

meeting with regional and local control authorities (depending on the
country’s administrative structure); visit to ports, airports, road border posts
and laboratories, visit to importers;

final appraisal meeting with the competent authorities;

drawing up of a draft report submitted to the competent authorities of the
Member State concerned;

3

V.

report published on DG XXIV's Internet site. The conclusions of the reports
on each country are annexed to the present document.

The information was collected during the meetings and visits on the basis of a
questionnaire for use by Commission officials.

The visits were facilitated by the full collaboration of all the authorities involved

2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE OFFICIAL CONTROL OF FOODSTUFFS

SINCE THE INITIAL VISITS

The observations relate to different aspects of official control dealt with in the report
on the initial visits.

2.1.

Control structures

Although half the Member States had not carried out any substantial
reorganisation of their food control authorities, the other Member States
introduced the following key changes designed to reallocate, coordinate and
amalgamate existing control authorities and improve their performance:

I.

II.

III.

IV.

V.

bringing the monitoring of the different food sectors within one
ministry;

reinforcing cooperation between ministries at central, regional and
local level;

setting up a new single food control body amalgamating the existing
services;

setting up a food safety agency whose main task is to evaluate control
bodies and assess risks;

transferring responsibility for food control from local authorities to
central authorities.

2.2. HACCP in firms, guide on good hygiene practices: training and activities

of the control authorities

The report on the initial visits indicated that there had been a delay in the
implementation by firms of the HACCP system for food safety.

During the second series of visits, it was evident that some progress had been
made in this area, albeit to a limited extent.

The HACCP training of control officials continues to be a priority for the
Member States, which have organised courses in this regard. In some
Member States, these courses are nevertheless limited to basic principles
while other Member States have organised specific multidisciplinary courses
relating to different branches of the food industry.

4

The fact that several Member States have been late in transposing Directive
93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs into national law, including the
Directive's provisions on HACCP, explains to some extent the delay in the
implementation of the HACCP system by firms.

large firms have made more
The information gathered still shows that
progress with regard to implementing the system and that this is also often
the case in catering establishments and large-scale distributors. On the other
hand, it is acknowledged that small and medium-sized enterprises and, in
particular, the retail sector have made less progress in this regard.

The Member States are making progress at different rates with regard to
drawing up guides on good hygiene practices, seen as an important
instrument for implementing the HACCP system.

So far, the control authorities do not in general appear to be penalising firms
for failing to implement the HACCP system.

2.3.

Accreditation of analysis laboratories

More progress has been made in some Member States than in others with
regard to the laboratory accreditation process. The deadline of 1 November
1998 laid down in Directive 93/99/EEC for the accreditation of all official
control laboratories has been met by several Member States; in other Member
States, only some laboratories have been accredited and the process was
under way in others.

2.4.

Registration and authorisation of establishments

Improvements have been noted in this area, particularly in one Member State
where authorisation is now required for all establishments dealing with
foodstuffs, as well as in other Member States where computerised lists of
establishments are progressively being introduced.

2.5.

Staff resources

At least one country has recruited supplementary control staff, while another
has amalgamated services and thus made additional controllers available.

On the other hand, budget restraints have prevented some countries from
increasing staff levels, in spite of their limited numbers.

3. CONTROLS OF IMPORTED FOODSTUFFS OF NON-ANIMAL ORIGIN

It became evident from the initial visits that three different methods were used by the
Member States for conducting these controls:

I.

II.

controls at entry points into the European Union;

controls of these foodstuffs on the market;

5

III.

application of the principle whereby the importer is primarily responsible for
controlling foodstuffs, with the checking of self-monitoring by importers.

3.1.

Controls at entry points

This method has been adopted in its entirety by five Member States (and in part by a
sixth). It does not rule out controls of imported foodstuffs once they are for sale,
nor does it rule out controls conducted on importers' premises.

It involves close cooperation between the food control services and the customs
services, the latter being responsible themselves for controls in a Member State.

In two Member States, where the control of foodstuffs is organised on a regional
basis, responsibility for controls at borders has remained within the remit of the
Ministry of Health, which has installed peripheral health control points (in one
Member State, these include border veterinary inspection posts). In the other two
Member States, the decentralised services of one ministry (agriculture) or two
ministries (agriculture and finance, according to the type of foodstuffs concerned)
are responsible for these controls.

five countries, controls are conducted because importers

their
In all
representatives) are required to submit
to the control authorities an import
declaration for foodstuffs (except for the Member State in which the customs
authorities are responsible for controls), in order to acquire an authorisation (or
refusal) as a result of the control. This authorisation is then required from the
customs authorities so that they can release the goods for free circulation.

(or

Although in three countries an import declaration is required for all foodstuffs, this
does not appear to be the case for cereals, alcoholic beverages in the fourth country
and materials in contact with foodstuffs in the fifth.

The obligation on the part of importers to provide an import declaration leads to
systematic document controls and,
to visual checks
accompanied, where necessary, by the taking of samples and laboratory tests. The
decisions relating to the inspection/sampling/tests are based on a risk analysis taking
account of inspection data (concerning the product, the manufacturer, the country of
origin and the importer) which come from the national services as well as from the
Community's rapid alert system.

to a varying degree,

Depending on the country concerned and the inspection posts, inspection rates
(visual checks) vary between 35% and 100%, and the rates of sampling for tests (or
simple examinations) between 4% and 25%. Between 0.5% and 1% of goods, taking
all declared goods as a whole, are refused entry in the various countries. The
differences which have been recorded may be linked, to some degree, to the number
of staff at the inspection posts, which, in some cases, is considered insufficient.
Moreover, the cost of inspections and tests is usually borne by the official authorities
(a modest set fee is nevertheless charged in one country).

As a result of the risk analysis already mentioned, which forms part of the controls,
all the countries concerned have set inspection priorities linked to certain criteria
which are quite closely related in the various Member States. In addition to the
obligations resulting from Community legislation (concerning specific foodstuffs

6

such as Iranian pistachios), most of the countries have made the testing of nuts for
aflatoxins one of their main priorities (sampling rates nevertheless vary according to
the type of nut concerned - most attention being paid to groundnuts - between the
Member States and sometimes between the inspection posts). To a lesser extent, the
countries concerned have focused on the testing of coffee and apple juice for
mycotoxins and on the identification of pesticide residues in fruit and vegetables
(this control does not mean that the release of the product is suspended at the first
opportunity until the laboratory results are obtained, unlike the other controls).

The visits showed that in three countries inspections and sampling were not, in most
cases, conducted under satisfactory conditions which allowed the goods to be
viewed properly, protected from bad weather or representative samples to be taken.
In fact, most controls are conducted on the quays (where containers are stored) and
relate to those items which are immediately accessible when the container is opened.
Even in the country where staff are also responsible for border veterinary inspection
posts, controls are also conducted on the quays; in another country, the equipment
at these inspection posts (where separate facilities have been installed) are used but
the containers are only unloaded completely as a last resort. On the other hand,
controls in two countries, in agreement with the customs authorities, are conducted
on the importers' premises under better conditions, after the containers have been
unloaded. In one of the two countries, this option is subject to certain conditions,
however, which means that it is not employed systematically.

The fact that controls are conducted at entry points does not rule out the possibility
that, following document or visual controls, inspections or controls of foodstuffs
with regard to their conformity with the legislation (such as labelling) are conducted
at the place of final destination by the competent controlling authority according to
an entry pass system. However, the expertise of the competent authority at the place
of destination and the information it possesses may not always be of the same
quality as those of the authorities at the entry points.

There is a varying degree of communication between the various border inspection
posts depending on the country concerned. One country has the most advanced
information available, as it has installed a computer system linking the central
service with all the inspection posts. All the alert messages concerning products and
the characteristics of refused products are fed into the system, thereby making it
possible to screen all import applications.

The customs services work with the food control authorities to the extent that they
require an authorisation from these authorities in order to release products for free
circulation. It does not appear, however, that they intervene on their own initiative
in order to suspend the release of a product in keeping with Article 2 of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 on checks for conformity with the rules on product
safety in the case of products imported from third countries, except in the country
where the customs services are themselves responsible for controls. The customs
services justify this situation primarily by referring to their inadequate in-depth
expertise and the lack of specific food safety information from the control
authorities. The control authorities do not have access to computerised customs
declaration systems or computerised systems used for messages reporting ship (or
aircraft) manifests for foodstuffs. One country is taking steps to allow such access.

7

Foodstuffs which enter a country under the external transit procedure and are
destined for a Member State other than the State of the point of entry are not in
principle checked by the authorities at the point of entry.

3.2.

Controls of foodstuffs for sale (market controls)

The visits showed that among the seven Member States (and in particular the eighth
Member State mentioned also in point 3.1) which primarily use this method, four
nevertheless conduct, albeit to a lesser extent, targeted checks of some imported
foodstuffs at entry points.

In several Member States, such market controls on foodstuffs for sale are primarily
conducted on importers' premises and on wholesale markets.

Targeted checks at entry points preferably involve an agreement
to have been
concluded between the control authorities and the customs services for the specific
foodstuffs (in addition to existing agreements concerning checks which have
become compulsory as a result of specific Community decisions); an agreement of
this kind has been reached in three countries, while in a fourth the agreement has
been concluded between importers and food control authorities. The foodstuffs
targeted generally consist of those mentioned in point 3.1;
i.e. mainly nuts
(particularly groundnuts, but samples of these are taken less frequently than for
countries which concentrate controls on entry points), but also dried figs, which are
tested for aflatoxins; in one country, paprika from one source is checked for
aflatoxins and wild mushrooms from Eastern Europe are checked for radioactivity.
Checks for pesticide residues are also conducted on fruit and vegetables. One of the
four countries has made it compulsory for importers wishing to import foodstuffs
considered to pose a risk (nuts, dried figs, and in particular, powdered coconut and
powdered cocoa (tested for salmonella)) to obtain a permit from the control
authorities. To obtain this they must, among other things, submit certificates of
analysis for aflatoxins conducted in the exporting country or bacteriological analyses
(for salmonella) conducted when the goods are imported.

Apart from the cooperation mentioned above, the customs services of Member
States which prefer to carry out checks on foodstuffs already on the market do not
appear to intervene on their own initiative under Regulation (EEC) No 339/99, with
regard to imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin, for the same reasons as
mentioned above. The food control authorities do not have access to the
computerised customs declaration and manifest reporting systems for foodstuffs.
However, in one country referred to also in point 3.1, the Ministry of Trade and
Industry has launched an initiative, which is, however, confined to ports, to allow
access to such information with a view to improving the flow of goods and decision-
making in the field of health controls.

3.3.

Self-monitoring by importers and verification by the control authorities

The principle whereby the importer is primarily responsible for checking foodstuffs
has been adopted as the mainstay of control arrangements in two Member States.

This principle nevertheless does not rule out official controls carried out on imported
products (in one country, these controls are conducted on goods for sale with

8

information being sent back to the competent control authorities at the importer's
place of establishment and, in the other, in the importers' warehouses). Specific
campaigns for conducting checks on products can also be organised.

Both Member States recognise, however, that self-monitoring is being implemented
progressively by importers at different rates; they may be induced to do so by
consumers' or professional associations' requirements. The local control authorities
in one of the two countries have made it known that they would like to receive more
substantial assistance from the central authority in order to assess self-monitoring by
importers.

The customs services of the two countries concerned do not appear to intervene on
their own initiative under Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 with regard to imported
foodstuffs of non-animal origin, for the same reasons as mentioned in 3.1. The
control authorities do not have access to the computerised customs declaration and
manifest reporting systems for foodstuffs. In one of the two countries, however, the
customs services forward import statistics to the central control authorities every
three months.

It was also possible during the visits to gather information on self-monitoring by
importers in the other Member States. It would appear that in many Member States
controls of this kind already form part of commercial transactions by large firms.
However, the methods used for the analyses and the frequency with which such
analyses are conducted vary from one firm to another; the analyses are often limited
to consignments at the beginning of the harvest season, and from new exporters and
non-member countries. The principle of
trust often comes into play. The
introduction of HACCP systems has been patchy, as the range of risks is in most
cases only partly covered due to the lack of a comprehensive risk analysis. The
initiative launched in one Member State by an association of importers and
distributors of fruit and vegetables to organise and supervise the self-monitoring
required from its members was judged to be a positive development. On the other
hand, it would appear that the self-monitoring carried out by firms which import
smaller volumes of goods is usually very limited. In this regard, the delay in drawing
up guides on good hygiene practices for imported foodstuffs, which would serve as
an important tool for self-monitoring in this sector, is most regrettable.

_________________________

9

The table below shows the methods used by each Member State when conducting
controls of imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin.

Member State

Controls at entry
points

Market controls

Checking of self-
monitoring by
importers

XX

X

XX

X

X

XX

XX

X

XX

XX

XX

X

X

XX

XX

X

XX

X

X

X

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

-

X

XX

XX

-

X

XX

-

X

-

XX

XX

X

XX

BELGIUM

DENMARK

GERMANY

GREECE

SPAIN

FRANCE

IRELAND

ITALY

LUXEMBOURG

NETHERLANDS

AUSTRIA

PORTUGAL

FINLAND

SWEDEN

UNITED
KINGDOM

XX= Primary method
X = Secondary method
- = Method not used

The table does not take account of compulsory checks at entry points provided for
in specific Commission decisions (e.g. Iranian pistachios).

10

4. CONCLUSIONS

The visits in the Member States focussed on two main areas, from which the
following conclusions may be drawn:

4.1.

Development of official controls

The visits showed that progress still needs to be made by firms in the food sector
(particularly small and medium-sized enterprises) with regard to setting up HACCP
systems and that this is an issue which should be resolved as a matter of priority by
the Member States.

So far, the accreditation of official control laboratories has not been given the same
degree of attention in all the Member States.

The evaluation visits laid down in Article 5 of Council Directive 93/99/EEC should
be pursued along the lines mentioned in the 1997 report on the initial visits.

4.2.

Controls of imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin

Three main approaches have been adopted by the Member States: official controls at
entry points, controls of food for sale and official checks of self-monitoring by
importers, although these approaches are not mutually exclusive.

Controls conducted at points of entry are undoubtedly the most reliable method
when it comes to food safety, as they prevent foodstuffs which do not conform to
the Directive from being released for free circulation throughout the European
Union. However, due to different situations noted in the Member States the
following proposals may be made concerning the way in which such controls are
carried out:

-

-

-

In view of the risks posed by products of non-animal and of animal origin, the
instructions concerning controls for importing both types of product should be
brought closer together to form a general control framework for foodstuffs
involving the following arrangements in particular:

It is essential that the food control authorities work together with the customs
services, as the latter are responsible for releasing goods for free circulation
after receiving the necessary declarations, especially in the context of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 339/93. The control authorities should possibly be
given access to the computerised customs declaration and manifest reporting
systems for foodstuffs.

Physical checks and laboratory tests should be conducted on the basis of a list
of priority foodstuffs drawn up according to a risk analysis (which already
exists in several Member States), without excluding the other foodstuffs. A
list of this kind would be compiled from notifications sent via the rapid alert
system for foodstuffs and resulting from checks of this kind as well as from
the results of national and Community control programmes. Notifications

11

could be transmitted by computer to all the control authorities at entry points.
The conformity checks already conducted at entry points on products to
which quality standards apply pursuant to Commission Regulation (EEC) No
2251/92 on quality inspection of fresh fruit and vegetables could, where
appropriate, be used as an opportunity for taking samples.

Physical checks and sampling should be carried out under satisfactory
conditions which allow investigations
to be conducted correctly and
representative samples to be taken. Importers' storage facilities would seem to
provide the best conditions for this. The consent of the customs services
should be sought, however, so that the products can be transferred to these
facilities under customs control, in line with procedures applicable to the entry
of goods into the customs territory. The transfer of foodstuffs to the final
destination after samples have been taken and before the results have been
obtained cannot be ruled out, provided that the competent control authorities
take action at the final destination.

The official control authorities of exporting non-member countries should
provide guarantees that the foodstuffs concerned comply with Community
quality standards. The relevant authorities should be contacted at official level
in this regard and, where necessary, certain foodstuffs should be certified. It
should also be possible for Commission staff to conduct appraisal missions for
official control systems in non-member countries.

-

-

The implementation of these recommendations would, however, require Community
legislation currently in force to be strengthened as part of the process currently
under way to simplify the rules on hygiene and food controls.

The surveillance by the control authorities of safety procedures implemented by
importers is still an important element of food control. The visits have shown how
much still needs to be done in many cases on this subject. The registering of
importers should be a prerequisite for all Community States.

___________________________

12

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL FOODSTUFFS CONTROL
SYSTEM IN
THE UNITED KINGDOM
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

02 – 06 FEBRUARY 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

New developments concerning legislation and policy on food control since the
initial assessment visit of the Commission.

Several changes have occurred, many of them following the Pennington report. Consumer
Protection is now the main goal of the Government. A joint group combining the food
services of both the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Department of
Health (JFSSG) has been established, as a first step towards the creation of the Food
Standards Agency foreseen for late 1999. This organisation would be an independent
body reporting to Department of Health Ministers and would have the power to audit
food safety enforcement in local authorities.

Several codes of practice have been amended or issued in order to strengthen food safety
and controls and improve information (notably of the consumer). The Imported Food
Regulations have been revised.

2.

Food import control

The Imported Food Regulations constitute the basic legislation. Specific regulations are in
place for the control of aflatoxins in certain products. The other regulations in the area of
import control relate to food additives, colours and labelling.

The controls, though not systematic, are supposed to be based on risk analysis, mainly at
the discretion of each control authority using its own experience and the information
disseminated.

Although a system for food import control has been in place for at long time, the controls
may not be evenly applied throughout the country, depending on the authority in charge
and some other factors:

-
The controls under the responsibility of the Port Health Authorities (Seaports)
seem to give satisfactory guarantees. The personnel is well trained and informed. The
system for the collation of information on incoming products seems satisfactory and is
being facilitated and enhanced by the use of an electronic system set up by the trade and
used also by the customs. The premises used for control are part of the veterinary border
inspection posts. The Association of Port Health Authorities (APHA) plays an important
role via the dissemination of useful information on controls.

The controls under the responsibility of the Airport Health Authorities, which
-
themselves have personnel just as qualified as the Port Health Authorities and are
members of APHA, are unfortunately hindered by some factors linked to trade and to the
transmission of data. In the absence of a computerised system (in place only for customs)

13

for the collation of information before arrival and in the absence of a notification
obligation, the Health Authorities are not aware of the arrival of many products, which
consequently are not controlled by them. An important proportion of these products go to
Enhanced Remote Transit Sheds (ERTS) outside the airport and possibly outside the Port
Health enforcement area.

-
Products not controlled at the ports or airports of entry may be controlled inland
at the place of destination under the deferred examination regime. This system is easier to
monitor for Port Health Authorities than for Airport Health Authorities, because, as
previously mentioned, many products are not notified to Airport Health Authorities. The
Commission team was not able to assess the import controls (including their funding)
performed by an inland local authority.

-
The costs of chemical analyses (charged by the Public Analyst laboratories) may be
a determining factor in the controls. However, bacteriological examinations are free up to
a certain number of samples. The control budget for each control authority is funded
partly by central government and the rest by local taxes, each local authority being free to
decide how the money will be spent.

Official controls of imported goods are free of charge for the importers.

______________________

14

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN SPAIN BY THE EUROPEAN
COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

23 - 27 February 1998

5. CONCLUSIONS

Royal Decree 1418/1986, which specifies the functions of the Ministry of Health and
Consumer Affairs as regards health controls at borders, together with the Ministry of
Health and Consumer Affairs Order of 20 January 1994 constitute the basic legislation for
health controls on imported food products. Community legislation (both horizontal and
vertical) is also applied, as are national health regulations relating to products where there
is no harmonised legislation at EU level.

Materials in contact with foodstuffs are not covered by the controls. It is hoped to include
them, as well as bulk products, when the Order of 20 January 1994 is amended.

The system of import controls applies to all types of foodstuffs, whether they are of
animal origin or not, and the checks themselves are carried out by the same staff and with
the same facilities as those available to the services responsible for health controls at
borders. The existing facilities at border inspection posts (BIPs) are not used for
inspecting products of non-animal origin. These inspections are carried out on containers
in the open air, which means it is difficult to have access to the whole load and the
product may deteriorate. The control services are free to establish their own priorities
even though the main determining factor is the existence of alerts and previous refusals.

Control staff are well trained and systematically receive all relevant information (circulars,
instructions, etc.) and legislation (both national and EU legislation). The computerised
SISAEX system is a very useful tool for permanent communication between the various
control units and the central departments. SISAEX is used to establish a number of
priorities (alerts) and filters (refusals), thus enabling checks to be more uniform. The
system, which has been operating for four years, is now being improved and extended (to
set sampling levels).

Given the large amount of products to be checked, there may not be enough staff (15
inspectors are being recruited).

The accreditation of the laboratories involved in border health checks is now under way,
although it would appear that in some cases this will take longer than planned.

From what we observed, import checks are carried out in a uniform manner at all the
border inspection posts. The fact that such checks take place at the border is a positive
factor. Existing links with the customs authorities make it easier to carry out checks in the
proper way since products cannot be released until the border health control authorities
have given their approval. In this way, any decision by the customs authorities depends on
a decision concerning health aspects.

The Spanish authorities pointed out that, since the EU has no harmonised system of public
health control and consumer protection concerning imported foodstuffs of non-animal

15

origin, the fact that these checks are carried out systematically by Spain means that such
products are being diverted to countries where there are no border controls.

______________________

16

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL FOODSTUFFS

CONTROL SYSTEM IN BELGIUM
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM
23 – 27 MARCH 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1996 (legislation, policy, IGDA activities)

Several changes concerning the legislation and the policy for food control (non-veterinary
products) in Belgium have occurred since the initial Commission visit in 1996.

The transposition of Directive 93/43/EEC made HACCP compulsory in food
establishments. Guides to good hygiene practice have been sent to the IGDA by several
professional organisations for assessment.

The requirement for all food establishments to be approved is seen as a positive element,
increasing the degree of control over establishments and improving compliance with
hygiene standards. Nevertheless, many establishments have not met
the deadline for
submitting a request for approval. A priority ranking for visits to establishments yet to be
approved should be established according to the risk they present. This should also be
done for routine visits.

The recruitment of 40 new controllers with a “BAC+3” degree represents an important
advance for food control, allowing the number of controls in establishments to be tripled.
The new staff have received in-house training. Nevertheless, in spite of the staff increase,
two years will be necessary to perform the inspections to meet the requests for approval
by establishments.

A continuing professional education programme is provided, in collaboration with other
ministerial services, while the quality manual of the IGDA, available to all staff members,
is continuously updated.

The accreditation of testing laboratories is progressing, with 20 accredited at the moment
(including the Institut scientifique de la santé publique – Louis Pasteur).

2.

-

Role of other control services

Municipalities

5 big cities (as mentioned in 1996), as well as 20 smaller ones, perform hygiene controls in
food retail and catering premises. Their controllers (except
the Laboratoire
intercommunal de Bruxelles) are not entitled to take samples but the help and expertise of
the IGDA (or the IEV) may be requested if necessary.

for

Relations between the IGDA and the municipalities are being strengthened: the municipal
controllers are invited to the training courses organised by the IGDA and the
municipalities are asked to collaborate in food poisoning declarations and investigations
the
and in providing information for the rapid alert system for food. Nevertheless,

17

standards for the recruitment of controllers do not conform to those applied by the IGDA,
and the IGDA quality manual does not apply to the municipalities, which retain a degree
of autonomy.

-

Ministry of Agriculture

It runs a control programme for nitrate and pesticide residues in fruit and vegetables
(more at the production level) and will start with an import programme in 1998, while the
IGDA runs a programme for pesticide residues and nitrate in foods on the market
importers, processors and retailers). An agreement has been
(auctions, wholesalers,
concluded between the Ministry of Agriculture and the IGDA concerning inspection in the
dairy and egg sectors.

-

Ministry of Economic Affairs

Its agents perform controls on the labelling of foodstuffs, in collaboration with the IGDA.

-

Institut d’expertise vétérinaire (IEV)

In collaboration with the IGDA, its controllers perform inspections in butcher shops.

An agreement has been reached between the IEV and the IGDA concerning the inspection
of meat product establishments.

The requirement for recruitment with a “BAC+3” degree does not apply yet to the IEV
controllers but is planned.

3.

Food Import Control

3. a) Activities of the IGDA

The IGDA does not place a particular emphasis on the control of imported foodstuffs at
their point of entry. These are more liable to fall under the general control of foodstuffs on
the market.

import are limited to those imposed by specific Community decisions
Controls at
(pistachio nuts from Iran, fruit and vegetables from East Africa) and to some specific
products (pistachio and groundnuts, herbs and spices, dried figs) under a FLEP Import
Control Programme started in 1995, which importers at the port of Antwerp have to
declare in advance to the IGDA. Nevertheless, the number of samples taken of these
specific products for analysis (aflatoxins, salmonella) is limited (a total of 5 in 1997, and 5
out of 71 consignments of 192 containers for the first 10 weeks of 1998). The staff
responsible for these import controls have to undertake many other food control tasks in
their respective districts, which could be a reason for the limited number of import
controls.

3. b) Role of the customs service

The customs service has a key role in import controls. Under the Royal Decree of 9
February 1981 on the supervision of the import of foodstuffs and under Regulation EEC
No 339/93, the customs service may inform the IGDA about any suspicion regarding a
particular foodstuff. Nevertheless, it would seem that very few cases are reported by the
customs to the IGDA (there are more communications for cosmetics).

18

The adoption of Community decisions on specific food import controls gives rise to
customs service instructions from the central service to the border posts, with some delay
in the case of the last Commission decision on fruit and vegetables from East Africa.

The efficiency of the collaboration between the customs service and the IGDA would be
enhanced if the IGDA had access to the computerised SATBEL system, giving it a more
thorough knowledge of imported foods and more opportunity to perform controls. Access
for the customs service to the IGDA's Videotex and Infana Systems would in turn
strengthen communication. The transmission of the rapid alert system notifications
concerning imported foodstuffs to the customs service would allow tighter import control
at the points of entry.

_______________________

19

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE

THE OFFICIAL FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN

THE NETHERLANDS

BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

20 - 24 April 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1995:

An important restructuring of the inspection services is under way and should be effective
from 1st September 1998, when both inspection departments of the Ministry of Health, the
IGB and the Veterinary Inspectorate VI, merge together to form the IW&V, which will
cover the whole food chain. The number of regional offices (including inspection and
laboratory activities) will be reduced to five (two of them will have to be established),
each one with a specialisation. The benefit of this merger should be synergy from both
existing departments, with the availability of more controllers for inspections and the
creation of specific multidisciplinary inspection teams for large, more complex food
establishments. Teams will also be set up in each office to maintain scientific contacts with
universities, draw up reports of programmes and develop methods of analyses for the 5
laboratories.

The accreditation in February 1998 of the whole network of food testing laboratories (13
sites) under the IGB by the Dutch accreditation body STERLAB, with the Quality
Assurance department of the IGB performing second-party auditing, should be regarded
as a particularity of the Dutch system, which in any event has met the deadline imposed by
Directive 93/99/EEC.

The progress of the implementation of the HACCP system in food establishments (with
the exception of smaller establishments selling directly to the consumer, including the
hotel and catering sector, which should follow the specific hygienic codes of practice
already approved by the Minister of Health) is closely followed by the IGB. Progress is
rather slow, with 23% of the companies visited not having started to develop a food safety
plan; moreover, HACCP certificates granted by certification bodies to food establishments
have been found to be unsatisfactory by the IGB. Official warnings are sent by the IGB to
companies that have not started to prepare a food safety plan.

2.

Food import control

The IGB does not put a particular emphasis on the control of imported foodstuffs at their
point of entry; they are more liable to fall under the general control of foodstuffs on the
market. The 2 main points of entry into the Netherlands for foodstuffs from third
countries, the port of Rotterdam and the airport of Amsterdam, were visited by the

20

Commission assessment team. This allowed a satisfactory overview of the procedures in
place.

The controls by the IGB at the points of entry are limited to a few selection profiles based
on a risk analysis, including the obligations resulting from Community decisions (pistachio
nuts from Iran, fruit and vegetables from East Africa), established by the authority
responsible for the point of entry. In Rotterdam, the profiles originated from a FLEP
import control programme initiated in 1995 and concern mostly nuts from some specific
countries. At Amsterdam airport, on top of the controls for Vibrio cholerae, samples of
fruit and vegetables are taken twice a month to test for the presence of pesticide residues
(10% of results so far over the MRL). Except for pistachio nuts, sampled products are
usually not held back.

Collaboration with the customs service is necessary in order to perform these controls, as
no declaration from the importers to the IGB is required. Agreements have been reached
between the customs service at
the points of entry and the IGB, under which the
Rotterdam IGB is informed of all declarations for products meeting the selection profiles.
A decision on whether or not to control has to be given within three hours. At Amsterdam
airport, the IGB is informed, upon request, of the arrival of fruit and vegetables by the
customs service. Products entering with a T1 declaration are not controlled.

It would seem that no suspicion concerning food consignments is ever reported by the
customs services to the IGB. The customs informed the Commission assessment team of
some difficulties related to the CN codes for imported foodstuffs and to the possibilities of
changing the destination of a product (from an animal feed to a foodstuff). The assessment
team considers that access by the IGB to the computerised system of the customs service
for declarations would give it a better grip on import control.

The visits revealed a shortage of personnel for food import control (considering in
particular the fact
the sampling of nuts in Rotterdam is already performed in
accordance with the forthcoming Commission Directive). It was stated that controls are
always performed under cover, in warehouses.

that

The visit to a fruit and vegetable importer did not reveal the existence of an HACCP plan,
including guarantees for imported products.

______________________

21

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN DENMARK BY THE EUROPEAN
COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

CONCLUSIONS

27 - 30 April 1998

The Commission assessment team highly appreciated the spirit of co-operation of the
Government of Denmark, its central as well as its local officials, in enabling the mission to
Denmark to proceed successfully. The visit was well organised and all information
requested was duly made available without any reservation.

It was particularly appreciated that, although public transport and several services were
hampered by a general strike, all visits were duly organised with no delays.

1. STRUCTURE

A fundamental amendment has been introduced since the last assessment mission of May
1996. Whereas food control used to come under the Ministry of Health, it now comes
under the new Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries. We were informed of the
establishment of the new Veterinary and Food Administration (VFA) in 1997.

However, further structural changes are planned. A proposal has been presented to
parliament. This would give more power to the central services. It could bring a more
harmonised approach to food control.

The flow of information and instructions between central and local authorities is
sometimes delayed. Commission Decision 98/116/EEC of 4 February 1998 (cholera:
sampling on import of fruit and vegetables airfreighted into the EU from Kenya, Uganda,
Mozambique and Tanzania) took a long time to reach the local authorities. The central
services forwarded the above-mentioned Decision, as implemented in Danish legislation,
on 8 April 1998. The date of entry into force was 21 April 1998. The preamble to
Commission Decision 98/116/EEC had not been taken up by the Danish implementation,
thereby deleting the reference to airfreighted foodstuffs (10-day clause). More guidance
from the central to the local authorities would have been helpful.

2. AFLATOXINS – PISTACHIOS SHIPPED OR CONSIGNED FROM IRAN

On 8 September 1997, Commission Decision 97/613/EC introduced an initial ban on the
import of pistachios and pistachio products from Iran. On 11 December 1997, the ban was
amended by Commission Decision 97/830/EC, introducing the concept of certification by
the Iranian authorities. Implementation at Danish national level of the initial ban was duly
carried out by the VFA at central level.

Implementation of the second Decision (97/830/EEC) took 5 weeks (13 January 1998).
During the visit, Århus LMK local control unit said, however, that it had not been
informed about certification by the Iranian authorities, as communicated in the letter of 13
January 1998. The entry into force at Danish national level was first mentioned on 1

22

February 1998. We welcome however the later communication containing the additional
guidance note of 7 April 1998, giving extra information to all concerned.

During the visit by the Glostrup inspector to a local storage company, four pallets of 1000
kg of pistachio nuts from Iran and well over 1000 kg of unlabelled pistachio nuts of
unknown origin were found to be stored in a haphazard condition. They had been at the
premises for the last 6 months, i.e. after the embargo on pistachio nuts from Iran had
come into effect. No sampling had since been carried out, although the Glostrup unit had
called known importers of this commodity. Shared responsibility between different local
control units compounded the problem.

It was unclear from the visit to a large wholesaler whether, upon bringing the pistachio
nuts into Denmark from the Netherlands, the retailer was compelled to inform the food
control authorities of this event. Clearly, goods imported into the EU through another
Member State and brought into free circulation are regarded as foodstuffs coming from
another Member State in accordance with the principles of the internal market.

3. AUTO CONTROL / HACCP / IMPORT CONTROL

During the first assessment of May 1996, it was felt that further training in the application
of the principles of auto-control to the range and type of premises covered by the Hygiene
of Foodstuffs Directive 93/43/EEC was necessary.

In particular, it was considered that the inspectors should play a role in the evaluation of
auto-controls in catering and retail premises, although the assessment team appreciated
that detailed information on these types of premises would be produced.

Since then, a series of auto-control codes have been developed by industry. Codes for
supermarkets and fish retailers are about to be adopted by the VFA. Other sectors such as
food transportation, bakeries, restaurants and public catering (hospitals, schools, etc.) are
being developed.

During the period 1996-1997, a number of HACCP training courses were organised.
During 1998, a further 7 two-day courses were to be held.

Out of a grand total of 700 potential trainees, 350 have already been HACCP-trained.

Nevertheless, the training of the staff in HACCP during a two-day course is not enough to
cover this complicated matter. More time should be spent on practice and case studies.
When the staff of the local control units have to deal with the auto-control systems of
large enterprises, they will need specialist training requiring a considerable investment in
time and budgetary resources.

Directive 93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs was implemented at national Danish
level in 1995. A joint consolidated set of regulations, encompassing five food hygiene
Directives, was to be published by VFA in the course of 1998. The local LMK control
unit at Århus stated that, for several years,
they had scheduled a budget for the
implementation of HACCP. Although several requests had been made to central level, the
local control units as well as the trade companies are still waiting for proper guidance on
this subject from the central authorities.

23

The philosophy of the Danish food control services is based on the system of auto-control
rather than on border control of imported products. It thus relies on the responsibility of
the importer, who has to establish a proper auto-control system.

During the different visits, however, it became clear that only a tiny minority had already
implemented an approved system of auto-control. It is up to the central food control
service to provide guidance to make the Danish system of import control through auto-
control fully effective.

The Danish customs service seems not to be involved on a routine basis in the official
control of imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin. Council Regulation (EEC) No 339/93
of 8 February 1993, on checks for conformity with the rules on product safety in the case
of products imported from third countries, provides in its Article 2 that if, in the context
of checks which they carry out
in respect of goods declared for release for free
circulation, the customs authorities find that a product or batch of products display certain
characteristics which would give rise to a serious doubt as to the existence of a serious
and immediate risk to health or safety in the event of that product being used under
normal and foreseeable conditions, they shall suspend the release of the product and notify
the national authority responsible for monitoring the market. These provisions were
implemented in Danish legislation by Circular Letter No. 144 of 14 September 1995.

The central authorities receive import data that are 3 months old; while the local units
only receive information once a year. These figures therefore only give information on
what has happened in the past but not on what is happening at the moment. Nevertheless,
the customs service can be asked to notify the food control authorities before release for
free circulation or if certain products (identified by their CN codes) are imported. An on-
line service between customs services and control authorities, possibly limited to specific
products or product categories based on KN/CN codes, would vastly improve this
situation. The handling of cases such as the cholera-East Africa case would require close
and swift co-operation between customs and food control to be fully effective.

4. LABORATORIES – ACCREDITATION

The laboratories visited in Glostrup and Århus were found to be well equipped. Ample
staff levels with sufficient training and expertise to carry out the food control analyses
(chemical and microbiological) were encountered.

30 out of 32 official laboratories have already achieved accreditation EN 45001. The
other are expected to be granted accreditation in the near future. This is a very positive
situation.

The Glostrup chemical laboratory, however, is currently only accredited for environmental
analyses and not for food control analyses. Glostrup is waiting for the announced
restructuring of the food control services at central and local level before the investment
can be made by local authorities. Where food control analyses are concerned, they are
only handling about 100 analyses a year.

______________________

24

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN ITALY

BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

11–15 MAY 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1995 (legislation, policy)

Since the initial visit, several pieces of legislation on food control (including hygiene) have
been promulgated, mainly to transpose Community Directives.

The aim of the Presidential Decree of 14 July 1995 is to guide the regions in
-
drawing up annual food control programmes, recommending a minimum frequency of
inspections for various food establishments, the minimum number of samples from all
establishments and in the context of import controls (5%, except in suspect cases) and the
priorities for analysing various foodstuffs. The criteria are scheduled to be reviewed every
three years.

The Legislative Decree of 26 May 1997, No 156,

transposed Directive
-
93/99/EEC, including the requirement for the accreditation of food testing laboratories. It
would appear that the accreditation process is experiencing some delay in the majority of
laboratories, and there is some controversy about the appointment of official accreditation
bodies (SINAL being the only one at present). (Update: as of 12 May 1999, the Istituto
Superiore di Sanità is the official accreditation body; however, previous accreditations
remain valid.)

-
The Legislative Decree of 26 May 1997, No 155, transposed Directive 93/43/EEC
and should be mandatory as of 26 May 1998 for all food establishments (except for
market places, for which the implementation date was December 1998). This delay in
implementation would explain the slow progress in introducing the HACCP system in
food establishments (except in large companies, which would now be well advanced). One
region has published a guide to the HACCP system for establishments. A number of
guides to good hygiene practice have been prepared by professional associations in the
food sector, some of which are still being assessed by the Ministry of Health.

2.

Import controls

Controls on imported foodstuffs primarily take place at the point of entry into Italy and
are performed by a network of 33 branch offices (USMA) which are under the Ministry of
Health. A study is under way to coordinate these offices with the veterinary inspection
posts. There is also the possibility of transferring imported products to the final place of
destination under health bond, where they are controlled by the competent local authority
(ASL).

The controls form also part of general food controls on the market.

25

The clearance procedure for imported foodstuffs is based on the presentation to the
customs authorities of a document ("Nulla Osta Sanitario") issued by the Ministry of
Health's branch offices. In many places, customs declarations are still processed in paper
form, but electronic forwarding is starting to become established.

In addition to the mandatory controls resulting from Community Decisions, some
priorities for analysing foodstuffs have been determined centrally on the basis of previous
experience and of information provided by the EU rapid alert system: these are essentially
analyses for aflatoxins in nuts (dry hard-shelled fruit); in some cases, 100% of peanuts and
pistachios are sampled and analysed, whatever their origin. Pesticides in fruit and
vegetables and microbiological analyses are also covered to a lesser extent, in so far as
checks are also performed on the market.

Communication between Office V of the Ministry of Health at central level and the branch
offices includes the forwarding of Community legislation, specific decisions on imports,
notifications from the EU rapid alert system and information on consignments rejected and
destroyed by the offices which is redistributed to the other Ministry of Health branch
offices. It was noted that the Commission Decisions concerning the import of pistachio
nuts from Iran were quickly forwarded to the offices, while Commission Decision
98/116/EC concerning checks for Vibrio cholerae on fruit and vegetables from East
African countries suffered delays.

The site visits have enabled observation of the implementation of procedures determined
at central level, with some variations relating to the percentage of visual examination of
foodstuffs, the percentage of samples of nuts taken for aflatoxins analysis, the number of
samples per consignment and relationships with the customs authorities, in so far as
cooperation between customs and control authorities did not appear to be at the same
level in all places visited. The variations noted may lead to an imbalance in the pressure of
official controls, which was pointed out by economic operators. Moreover, staffing was
not considered sufficient, particularly in Venice, given the number of tasks and the
geographical area to be covered.

The procedures for health checks on containers (in the open, by “tail inspection”) do not
provide easy access to all the contents of the consignment, nor do they ensure an adequate
level of hygiene, since the contents may deteriorate owing to the weather conditions. It
was noted that sampling could in some cases take place in customs warehouses, allowing
for more efficient control, but that there were usually no provisions for allowing official
controls to be carried out in the importer's warehouses, where conditions for inspection
and sampling would be better. The official analyses have to be performed in official
laboratories specifically assigned to the USMA, which may lead to delays in obtaining the
analytical results.

Information gathered during the visit showed that the operation of HACCP systems by
importers, particularly the smaller ones, still required major improvement.

______________________

26

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE
THE OFFICIAL FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN FRANCE
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

2 - 5 JUNE 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

UPDATING OF THE 1996 REPORT

1.1

Bill for the creation of a Food Health Safety Agency

The bill is nearing completion. Four public bodies are to be created, including the Food
Sanitary Safety Agency, attached to the Ministries of Agriculture, the Economy and
Health, and responsible for evaluating all three ministries’ monitoring services and for risk
assessment. However, it will have no direct powers as regards food control.

1.2

Role of the Ministry of Health in food control

Besides evaluating health hazards, health monitoring and organising one-off surveillance
programmes,
(exclusive
responsibilities) and, to a lesser degree, the hygiene of premises used by restaurants and
bakeries/confectioners.

activities mainly concern drinking water

control

the

1.3
Points) in establishments and guides on Good Hygiene Practices

Progress in introducing HACCP (Hazard Analysis - Critical Control

Statistics are not yet available concerning the implementation of HACCP by the
establishments. The agents of the monitoring services (DGCCRF and DGAL) are
receiving HACCP training.

Decrees transposing Directive 93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs have since been
published, each for a specific food sector. They prescribe the use of HACCP principles
and compliance with a guide on good hygiene practices or the application of safety
procedures specific to the establishment. For the moment the absence of HACCP has not
led to complaints being filed, except in the case of hygiene deficiencies.

Food professionals are making good progress in preparing guides on good hygiene
practices and 11 have already been validated by the authorities, who are encouraging their
adoption.

1.4

Progress in laboratory accreditation

Currently, many DGCCRF laboratories are accredited by COFRAC for essential
determinations. The number of working laboratories is to be reduced, with analyses being
concentrated in certain laboratories. The time limits (which are still excessive in some
cases) for performing the analyses will be shortened.

27

2.

CONTROLS AT IMPORTATION

2.1

DGCCRF activities

The DGCCRF services are the services responsible for import controls pursuant
Council Directive 89/397/EEC.

to

The DGCCRF does not generally perform controls at the place of importation. Rather, it
is responsible for two types of surveillance:

– controls in the general context of monitoring products on the market, at

the
distribution stage, supplemented by information which, if necessary, is sent to the
DGCCRF regional services where the importer is based;

– controls of import firms as regards compliance with quality and safety requirements
(self-monitoring). Evaluation of progress made in self-monitoring is part of the annual
activity plan for the DGCCRF in 1998.

Besides, the DGCCRF may investigate food imports in the context of its scheduled
quarterly surveys. The supervisory authorities also collaborate on a cross-border basis in
monitoring food imports.

The DGCCRF is the body responsible for checking the conformity of fruit and vegetables
pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 2251/92 on quality inspection; these controls are
performed systematically at the importation stage. In connection with these controls
samples are taken wuith a view to detecting pesticide residues as provided for in the
European legislation, according to an established plan. However, the time limits for
obtaining the analysis results are felt to be excessive. In the same context, certain labelling
and radioactivity controls are carried out, but they do not concern other contaminants
(bacteriological, chemical).

At the time of the Community mission the importation of Iranian pistachios was still
prohibited in France. Controls on imports of vibrio cholerae in respect of East African
fruit and vegetables had been mandated by an administrative order issued more than two
months after the adoption of Decision 98/116/EEC.

2.2

Role of the customs authorities

It seems that the customs authorities are not involved in detecting foodstuffs which may
present serious health hazards (as provided for by Council Regulation No 339/93), their
involvement being limited to cases in which a specific document (mainly veterinary or
plant health documents or quality certificates) is required.

In monitoring food imports, it might be useful for the DGCCRF to have access to the
customs authorities’ SOFI database, which contains all the relevant data.

2.3

Self-monitoring by importers

The fruit and vegetable import firms selected for the visit had already introduced self-
monitoring with an eye in particular to the market in one of the Member States, in
response to pressure from purchasers, notably as regards the conditions under which
imported food is produced and including analyses of pesticide residues. The Federation of

28

Fruit and Vegetable Importers has been urging its members to introduce such self-
monitoring systems.

However it seems that this concept is relatively new for importers and that the DGCCRF
is encouraging the progressive implementation of
self-monitoring, while buyers'
rquirements also play a role.

A self-monitoring agreement has already been signed between the Federation of Food
Importers and the DGCCRF, notably for fruit and vegetable preserves; however, these
self-monitoring arrangements do not cover all the main health risks.

___________________

29

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN LUXEMBOURG BY THE EUROPEAN
COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

CONCLUSIONS

29 June - 2 July 1998

The number of people involved in controls is inadequate to cover all the tasks assigned to
them in the legislation. The probable figure of 3500 establishments and the need to
introduce the HACCP system highlight this lack of staff. The inclusion of the motorised
units from the Customs and Excise Service in the control of foodstuffs seems very
positive; however, specific training must be continued and stepped up if this reinforcement
of food control is to be effective.

Training for inspectors is still needed, in particular with regard to the HACCP system.
The limited number of staff prevents inspectors from being absent for long periods in
order to follow training courses. The long periods of training under the Karolus
programme are also preventing Luxembourg inspectors from participating in this
programme.

The introduction of the HACCP system in companies is quite limited, the system having
been introduced in only a few large companies. In the specific case of the establishment
visited, structural and hygiene improvements were necessary before a self-monitoring
system could be considered.

Because of the involvement of various bodies in the official control of foodstuffs (DIS,
LNS, motorised units, revenue offices), it seems necessary to improve coordination
between them in order to avoid overlapping or shortcomings in the control system. This
coordination would also make it possible to define priorities (list of establishments
classified according to the level of health risk, control or approval of establishments prior
to their opening).

Since the visit in 1996, an improvement in cooperation between the customs services and
the control services has been observed.

In the case of the LNS, the problem of staff shortages in relation to the tasks it is required
to perform is still present. The accreditation procedure will not be completed by the
November 1998 deadline. In view of the growing sophistication of analyses, the budget
seems inadequate to cover the whole range of analyses required. Owing to the lack of
staff, training and retraining are inadequate.

Import controls at the Cargocentre are based on quality and visual checking of residues.
Analytical back-up should be envisaged.

The interest shown by the staff at the Croix de Gasperich customs centre was considered
to be very positive. Special training in the field of foodstuffs and analytical back-up should
be considered.

______________________

30

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN SWEDEN
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

21 - 25 September 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1996

No significant changes have occurred in the Swedish food control system since the
initial Commission visit in 1996, responsibilities being shared between the National
Food Administration (NFA) and the 288 municipalities.

Nevertheless, changes are envisaged and are expected to be implemented by a
government bill presented to the Swedish Parliament in 1999 which would result
in the possibility of cooperation on food control between municipalities. The
responsibility for import controls of foodstuffs would be transferred from the
municipalities to the state, while the fees for food controls would rise (charges for
resampling). Food establishments' in-house control systems would be exempted
from approval by the food control authorities.

The NFA is making progress with its three-year programme of auditing the
municipal authorities, and also with a training course for these authorities which
includes the HACCP concept.

Progress with implementing the HACCP system in companies seems to be far
more advanced in large industrial establishments than in the restaurant/retail
sector.

The guides to good hygiene practices in use in Sweden have been issued either by
the NFA (six of them, relating mainly to the retail sector and products of animal
origin) or by European professional organisations (in the industrial sectors).

All official food control laboratories, which are privately owned, have received EN
45001 accreditation.

2.

Food import controls

The control of imported foods of non-animal origin combines several means:

•

It falls primarily under the general official control of foodstuffs on the market,
performed by the local authorities.

• Selection of certain profiles, based on risk analysis, leading to the imposition of

import permits by the NFA.

• Specific official controls required by Commission decisions (pistachio nuts

from Iran; fruit and vegetables from East Africa).

31

• Official sampling programme for pesticide residues in imported fruit and
vegetables, cereals, cereal products and oilseeds, the samples being taken at
importers’ premises.

• Register of importers kept by the NFA.

•

In-house controls, based on HACCP, put in place by importers and supervised
by the NFA or local authorities.

The on-the-spot visits allowed the Commission's assessment team to obtain a more
precise view of these different means of control:

• Commission decisions

requiring specific controls at

the place of entry are
communicated by the NFA to the customs service, which must inform the competent
local food control authority of the arrival of the foodstuffs concerned. Such
information exchange was observed at the Stockholm Arlanda airport.

• The imposition of import permits concerns peanuts (and peanut butter), brazil nuts,
dried figs, coconut flakes, cacao powder, products containing soya protein, and spring
water. Permits are linked to the presentation of satisfactory certificates of analysis for
aflatoxins for some products or the need for an analysis (salmonellae, aflatoxins) by
the local food control authority at the point where the product is declared to customs.
The customs authorities are aware of these requirements and act accordingly in
checking import permits and informing the competent food control authority.

• The pesticide residue control programme, covering imported foodstuffs, is a well-
balanced programme based on criteria relating to the consumption and origin of
products and past experience with them. The establishment of a black-list of exporters
represents an efficient preventive measure.

• The requirement for importers to be registered with the NFA is a positive factor
allowing transmission of information and supervision by the NFA or local authorities.

• Cooperation between the customs and the food control authorities is effective in the
specific cases mentioned above. The register of importers is transmitted to the
customs service (quarterly updates). Outside the field of cooperation, however, it
seems that no cases of suspicion concerning imported foodstuffs are reported by
customs to the food control authorities. Communication to the customs service of the
black-list of exporters involved in pesticide residue violations could strengthen the
grip on import controls. The same applies to access for the food control authorities to
the customs service's computerised system for imported goods.

• The in-house controls of the two importers selected for

the visit were quite
sophisticated, but it appeared that not all health aspects (hazards) were covered in the
HACCP system, in respect of the analyses performed. It would seem, however, that
such controls are far less extensive in the case of small importers (ethnic foods
particularly), the implementation of HACCP principles being problematic.

______________________

32

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN FINLAND
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

28 SEPTEMBER - 2 OCTOBER 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

UPDATING THE 1996 REPORT

• The assessment team noted the possibility of an amalgamation between the NFA and

the National Veterinary Research Institute.

• The assessment team was informed that a joint group had been founded in 1997,
combining the NFA and provincial and municipal authorities, to improve the flow of
documentation and information. We noted that feedback may bypass the provincial
in food
level. This lack of information and guidance (e.g. HACCP) could result
controls being applied in different ways at municipal level (see 1996 EU report,
page 21, paragraph 6).

• For the second year running a testing and cooperation agreement between the NFA and
the customs administration is being implemented. However, there is still a potential risk
of duplication between customs laboratory sampling on the one hand and market
control sampling at municipal level on the other hand.

• The forwarding throughout Finland of messages from the Rapid Alert System has been
noted with interest. Conversely, however, feedback and input from Finland could be
improved. For instance, messages concerning excessive levels of ochratoxine in coffee
beans detected by the customs laboratory never seem to be passed on to the European
Commission.

1.1

Progress in introducing HACCP (Hazard Analysis - Critical Control Points)
in establishments and guides to good hygiene practices

• The assessment team welcomes the training organised and coordinated by the NFA
concerning HACCP. However, there is no evidence to show that all the staff concerned
have received proper guidance regarding HACCP (“total number of food controllers
unlisted”).

• Experience acquired by some municipal environmental units (Helsinki) could be of use

to other municipalities if coordinated centrally (NFA).

• Article 5 of the Food Hygiene Directive (93/43/EEC) requires Member States to
encourage the development of guides to good hygiene practice. No developments have
taken place since the last evaluation visit in September 1996.

33

1.2

Progress in laboratory accreditation

• Municipal environmental laboratories are allowed to carry out both official and private
laboratory analyses. This might lead to a situation in which the same laboratory acts in
an official capacity whilst also providing advisory services for the same food business
operators. This may jeopardise the independence of the municipal environmental health
unit.

• The same remark is applicable to the customs laboratory, which offers guidance to
private customers (importers) on in-house controls and is prepared to carry out pre-
assessments of new products introduced onto the Finnish market (for the benefit of the
importer). This also may lead to a conflict of interests.

• Considerable progress has been made in the accreditation of recognised food control
laboratories, and Finland will meet the deadline of 1 November 1998 laid down in
Articles 3 and 9 of Council Directive 93/99/EEC on the subject of additional measures
concerning the official control of foodstuffs.

2.

IMPORT CONTROLS

2.1

Role of the customs authorities

• The procedure applied by the customs authorities on the arrival of foodstuffs of non-
animal origin in Finland is well organised. The draft sampling manual in use at
Sompasaari port will need further development, requiring the adoption of inspection
procedures. The manual will have to be distributed to all points of entry.

• The sampling procedures applied at present by the customs laboratory make provision
only for a closed (and unsealed) counter-sample. No safeguard measures are listed to
preserve the integrity of the sample itself.

2.2

Self-monitoring by importers

• The information given by the environmental health unit of Helsinki City on the
implementation of in-house control plans indicates that more than half the food
business operators have submitted such a plan. No assessment of the quality of these
plans has been carried out,
though Helsinki City intends to complete such an
assessment by mid-1999. Its environmental health unit appears to be aware of the
number of food establishments, keeps inspection records on computer and maintains a
constant watch over the application of foodstuffs legislation.

• The assessment team has noted, as a result of a questionnaire sent out by the NFA,
through the provincial authorities, to the municipal level, that a success rate of 64%
(national average) has been achieved in the application of in-house control plans.
However, in 1999, phase 2 of the survey will have to establish the quality of the in-
house control plans submitted at municipal level.

34

• The initiatives taken by some of the larger Finnish food business operators concerning
the provisions of Article 3 of Directive 93/43/EEC testify to their willingness to
implement the Finnish concept of in-house control plans.

• Formal enforcement action is seldom taken, since the preferred way of dealing with
infringements is the educational approach (this is similar to the findings of the 1996
visit to the municipal units of Hämeenlinna and Ilomantsi).

______________________

35

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN
THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

19 - 23 October 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1995:

Both Directive 93/99/EEC on the subject of additional measures concerning the official
control of foodstuffs and Directive 93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs have been
transposed into German law. The transposition of Directive 93/43/EEC led to the
replacement of 16 different federal state laws by one single food hygiene regulation.
Nevertheless, Article 3 of Directive 93/43/EEC on HACCP did not enter into force in
Germany until August 1998, which would partly explain the lack of awareness and the
delay in implementing the HACCP system in certain parts of the food sector.

It has been mentioned that large concerns and supermarkets have made considerable
progress in implementing quality management systems including HACCP, with customer
and market requirements playing a significant role. On the other hand, it was noted that
progress with HACCP implementation is much slower in small and medium-sized
businesses (e.g. retail sector).

The help provided for the implementation of HACCP by guides to good hygiene practice,
which include HACCP principles, remains limited, as only two guides have been
produced. However, several guides for different sectors are being assessed by the food
control authorities (in the federal states) and should constitute valuable tools at a later
date.

The German authorities consider that the duty of care long imposed on companies in the
food sector under German law already in a certain way covers the HACCP requirement.

For their part, the food control authorities in the federal states have given priority to
continuing training programmes for their officials covering the HACCP system and its
assessment, through the organisation of pilot projects (for particular food sectors) as part
of integrated training courses (teamwork).

The Commission's assessment team was informed of the growing use of risk analysis by
the official food control authorities in determining their inspection priorities, with a view
to the more efficient use of staff resources within the constraints of the available budget.

The transposition of Directive 93/99/EEC has led to rapid progress in the accreditation of
official testing laboratories. Two official accreditation bodies have been created, each of
which is responsible for eight federal states. Accreditation is based on groups of tests.
According to the information received, all official laboratories in Germany should have
the deadline specified in Directive
received accreditation by 1 November 1998,
93/99/EEC. A regulation on the accreditation of private laboratories used for official
counter-sample analysis has been submitted to the Bundesrat for approval.

36

2.

Food import controls:

Checks are in the hands of each federal state. The emphasis - rather than on checking
imported foodstuffs at their point of entry - tends to be on the general monitoring of
foodstuffs on the market, in particular at wholesale markets.

Nevertheless, certain specific foodstuffs must be checked at their point of entry, pursuant
to Commission decisions (pistachio nuts from Iran, fruit and vegetables from East Africa)
or Federal Health Ministry regulations, on the basis of a risk analysis, with involvement of
the customs authorities, and in accordance with section 48 of the Foodstuffs and
Commodities Act (mushrooms from Eastern Europe have been systematically checked for
radioactivity since 23 July 1998, and paprika from Turkey has had to be presented to the
food control authorities for checking for aflatoxins since 1994).

Apart from official checks, the German authorities emphasised the important role played
by importers through their own checks, as part of their duty of care.

Site visits to Frankfurt am Main (airport), Hamburg (port) and Frankfurt an der Oder
(border post, road transport) allowed the Commission's assessment
team to obtain
detailed information on the various checks,
including the activities of the customs
services.

The visit to Hamburg port confirmed its leading role in the import of pistachio nuts from
Iran into Europe. The Hygiene Institute is the official food control authority responsible
for the release of these pistachio nuts on the basis of satisfactory laboratory results. The
very heavy workload may result in analysis being carried out by private laboratories
instead of the Hygiene Institute. The Commission's assessment team is concerned by the
fact that the accuracy of analysis results from a number of private laboratories has been
questioned by the Hygiene Institute, as a result of significantly lower levels of aflatoxins
being recorded by those laboratories. An inquiry has been started with a view to
withdrawing the accreditation of one of the private laboratories.

The visit to the Frankfurt an der Oder border post revealed the major efforts being made
by the local food control authorities as regards radioactivity checks on mushrooms from
Eastern Europe prior to import. These have led to a significant fall in the number of
rejected consignments.

The visit to Frankfurt am Main airport found that only the compulsory checks on fruit and
vegetables from East Africa are performed there; official sampling for pesticide residues in
imported fruit and vegetables takes place at the central market rather than the point of
entry. During the visit the Commission's assessment team was also informed about the
vegetable
two
activities of one
wholesalers/importers. Those activities were seen as positive,
importers are
responsible for carrying out their own checks. A programme for sampling and analysis for
residues is run by the association, which has close contacts with the Federal Health
Ministry.

associations of German fruit

in that

and

the

of

Importers and wholesalers,
like other food industry concerns, should implement an
HACCP system, and it is the responsibility of the food control authorities to inspect and
evaluate compliance with the duty of care and application of HACCP systems. Little
progress seems to have been made by importers of foodstuffs in general to implement
HACCP as part of their duty of care. It was explained to the team, however, that sampling

37

is undertaken by importers, especially in the case of new suppliers and new third
countries.

Cooperation between the customs services and the food control authorities seems to be
limited to the above-mentioned compulsory checks at
the point of entry. The
team was informed that not a single case of suspicion
Commission's assessment
concerning food consignments had been reported by the customs services to the food
control authorities,
in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 concerning
conformity checks on imported products. The assessment team feels that the efficiency of
import checks would be increased if the food control authorities had access to the
computerised system used by the customs services for the processing of declarations.

______________________

38

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE
THE OFFICIAL FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN PORTUGAL
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

16 – 20 November 1998

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1997

1.1

Competent authorities

The same three Ministries of Agriculture, Economy and Health and their corresponding
regional administrative units, as well as municipal authorities, remain competent for food
control, with a redistribution of sectors.

Organic Laws governing the Ministry of Agriculture and its Regional Directorates have
been adopted with a view to defining the responsibilities of the various departments, but
there is still no list of official positions within the Ministry and recruitment is still blocked,
with resulting staff shortages (particularly evident in Porto), compensated to some extent
by the involvement of staff from the central office in campaigns in the regions.

An increasing emphasis has been put on co-ordination between Ministries (including the
Customs services of the Ministry of Finance), via regular meetings promoted at central
level by the DGCFQA of the Ministry of Agriculture and the transmission of EU rapid
alert system notifications. The same applies to co-ordination between the DGCFQA and
the Regional Directorates of the Ministry of Agriculture.

According to Resolution 104/98, a working group within the Ministries concerned should
be created soon with a view to examining within six months the possibility of
redistributing responsibilities in food control and setting up an agency.

1.2

Progress of HACCP in food premises and guides to good hygiene practice;
listing of establishments

Directive 93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs was not transposed in Portugal until
1998, and a transition period of one year (ending in March 1999) has been granted for the
enforcement of
for HACCP implementation. As a consequence,
implementation is still minimal in small and medium-sized enterprises, while in the large
industries sector more progress has been made. The number of sectors for which guides
to good hygiene practice have been prepared is limited so far to 5.

the requirement

Food controllers have already received basic training in HACCP, but more specific
preparation (relating to different sectors) is still needed.

The responsibility of the relevant department within the DGCFQA and the Regional
Directorates for the enforcement of the HACCP requirement in food premises has yet to
be clarified.

39

The listing of food establishments is still incomplete. To improve this situation, the
legislation concerning the licensing of premises in Portugal is in the process of being
amended in order to simplify and harmonize the procedures at central and regional levels.
Provisions concerning the registration of premises selling directly to consumers will be
published soon.

1.3

Progress of the accreditation of official laboratories

The central laboratory of the DGCFQA and the laboratory of the Port Wine Institute have
so far been accredited. The accreditation of individual tests is applied in Portugal.
Preparatory work has started in the regional laboratories of the Ministry of Agriculture.
The laboratories of the other Ministries have not yet been accredited.

2.

Import controls

2.1

Role of the official authorities

Controls on imported foodstuffs of non-animal origin in Portugal combine controls at
import (performed by the Ministry of Agriculture, with the co-operation of the Customs
services) and market controls (performed by the Ministries of Economy – IGAE – and
Agriculture).

Controls at the points of entry are prescribed by an Ordinance for an exhaustive official
list of products (but not including cereals and alcoholic beverages) prepared by the
Ministry of Agriculture – DGCFQA – and communicated to the Customs services. This
list
is updated with the inclusion of Community Decisions on compulsory controls
(pistachio nuts from Iran, with the omission, however, of the Decision concerning
analyses for Vibrio cholerae on fruit and vegetables from East Africa, no imports of
which had, in any case, taken place during the period of validity of the Decision).
Notifications via the EU rapid alert system for food are communicated by the DGCFQA
to the Customs services. Visits on the spot found a satisfactory degree of co-operation
between the food control and Customs services. It would seem, in any case, that Customs
services do not play a role in the detection of products which may present a serious risk
for health (pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) n° 339/93). The DGCFQA does not
have access to the Customs import services' computerized system.

The controls at import are based on a risk analysis and may be limited to documentary
checks (which are systematic) or include physical checks (with possible sampling for
analyses) on specific products such as dried fruit and nuts (for aflatoxins), grated coco
nuts (for salmonella), canned fruit and vegetables (for additives), pulses and dried fruit
(for parasites), taking into account the country of origin, the importers’ records and the
rapid alert system notifications. The physical checks are not systematic (except in Porto)
but have been facilitated by the conclusion of a recent agreement between the Agriculture
and Customs services which allows inspection at the importer’s premises, under certain
conditions, due to the unsatisfactory inspection facilities in the harbours. This agreement
allows the containers to be unloaded, resulting in a satisfactory examination of the
products. It was admitted, in Porto, that prior to that agreement no samples were taken
from imported products at their point of entry.

40

2.2

Own-checks performed by importers – implementation of HACCP

The visits to the three importers showed the implementation of own-checks on imported
foodstuffs to be inconsistent. Some privates analyses were performed on some products
by two of them and certificates of analyses for pistachio nuts and peanuts (for aflatoxins)
required by one of them, but the third did not carry out any laboratory tests or require any
form of certificate (analyses being performed by the purchasers). Confidence in the
exporters and the opinion that the official controls should prevail seem to play a major
role.

Implementation of an HACCP system had been initiated by one importer only and the
other two appeared to be unaware of the requirement.

______________________

41

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE
THE OFFICIAL FOOD CONTROL SYSTEM IN THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

18 JANUARY / 22 JANUARY 1999

CONCLUSIONS

1.

1.1

Update since 1996.

New developments in legislation and policy on food control since the initial
assessment visit by the Commission

There has been a fundamental change since the last assessment visit in March 1996. The
Irish government has established the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI). This new
FSAI came into formal existence in January 1999. FSAI will co-ordinate the food-related
work of all the agencies (50) involved in food control.

The main remarks made in the last report were that the central authority was not in a
position to monitor the effectiveness of the local services (8 Health Boards), no guidance
was available for officials carrying out inspections and there was a need for improved
setting of priorities. Now, with the FSAI in place and a food quality assurance system
having been launched by three Regional Health Boards (quality manual system, standard
operating procedures), this situation is set to improve. Nevertheless, due to the recent
creation of the FSAI, a definitive assessment of future food control in Ireland will only be
possible after the co-operation agreement between the different departments has been
implemented at operational level. A future visit will be necessary to assess the functioning
of the FSAI.

The flow of information and instructions between central and local authorities can be
slow. Commission Decision 98/116/EEC of 4 February 1998 on cholera sampling on
import of fruit and vegetables entering the EU from Kenya, Uganda, Mozambique and
Tanzania appears not to have been communicated to the regions.

Of particular note is the current work on setting up a single food control body for Ireland
as a whole.

1.2

Laboratory accreditation

The laboratories visited in Cork and Limerick were found to be well equipped, with
sufficient training and expertise to carry out the food control analyses (chemical and
microbiological).

The 11 official laboratories already have EN 45001 accreditation. This is a very positive
situation. The Commission team has noted that the Irish authorities have put a lot of effort
and resources into improving conditions and equipment in laboratories. However, it seems
that the workload is increasing faster than the staff resources can cope with. There is still
room for improvement in co-ordination between laboratories and the central authorities
on the sampling programme.

42

1.3

HACCP training

Ongoing training is being provided for staff. All EHO's have received an HACCP course,
and an auditing course for 50% of inspectors is planned for 1999.

Directive 93/43 on the hygiene of foodstuffs has been implemented since 1 April 1998,
although it transpired during the inspection visit that only a tiny minority already have an
approved self-monitoring system. Implementation of the HACCP system in companies is
apparently far more advanced in large industrial establishments than in small and medium-
sized businesses. Local authorities are drawing up an auditing plan for businesses.

2.

Food import control

Because of the location and size of the country, the importation of non-animal food
products into Ireland is limited in both variety and quantity. Even if there is already close
co-operation between the customs and port health authorities, this relationship should be
formalised.

Harmonised procedures should be brought in as one of the new responsibilities of the
FSAI, perhaps by means of a service contract with the customs authorities.

______________________

43

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN
THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA
BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

08 - 12 February 1999

CONCLUSIONS

1.

Update since 1997.

There has been no change since 1997 concerning the competences for food law
implementation and enforcement
in Austria, or coordination between the Federal
Chancellery and the administrations of the Federal States.

Since the initial visit, Directive 93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs has been
transposed into Austrian law. Article 3 on HACCP only came into force in Austria on 1
March 1999, which explains the lack of awareness and the delay in implementing the
HACCP system in some food sectors.

the industrial and catering sectors are advanced in the
It was mentioned that
implementation of HACCP principles, the requirements of clients and the market playing a
role. On the other hand, progress on HACCP implementation is much slower in the small
and medium-sized enterprises (e.g. the retail sector). The trade associations do, however,
promote the adoption of HACCP by their members.

The help given on the implementation of HACCP by guides to good hygiene practice,
which include HACCP principles, is limited for the moment, as only one guide has been
established. Three others are, however, currently being assessed by the Federal
Chancellery and should be valuable tools later on.

Since 1997, training courses on HACCP in the food sector have been organised by the
Federal Chancellery on a yearly basis for inspectors working in the Federal States; some
Federal States have also taken this initiative. Although these courses combine lectures and
visits to establishments, the Commission assessment team considers that they should
include more practical workshops.

All official food-testing laboratories have already been accredited or are in the process of
receiving the final accreditation after a favourable audit. Two accreditation bodies have
accredited the Federal laboratories, while a single body has accredited the Federal State
and Municipal laboratories. The principle of accreditation of groups of tests has been
applied.

Budgetary restrictions or political priorities do not always allow the recruitment by
Federal States of a sufficient number of food inspectors to meet the targets of the
coordinated annual inspection, and sampling plans drawn up by the Federal Chancellery
for each Federal State. Consequently, priorities have to be given to certain food sectors to
remedy this situation.

2.

Food import control

The controls are in the hands of the Federal States, which follow the procedures
special measures
established by the Federal Chancellery and may also adopt

44

for

the obligations

independently. Except
resulting from Commission Decisions
(monitoring of pistachio nuts from Iran and, previously, of fruit and vegetables from East
Africa), no particular emphasis is put on the control of imported foodstuffs at their point
of entry. It is considered preferable for these controls to be carried out at the importers’
and wholesalers’ premises, which is considered as the most effective system; they form
part of the general market controls on foodstuffs within the annual sampling plans, and
vary according to the season.

Commission Decisions on compulsory import controls are communicated by the Federal
Chancellery to the customs authorities, which incorporate them into their regulations,
using a computerised system available to all customs posts. Pistachio nuts from Iran have
so far entered only in transit to other Member States, but recently they have started to be
imported directly into Austria; this has led to difficulties for the official laboratories in
performing the compulsory analyses for aflatoxins in reasonable time. On the other hand,
checks for Vibrio cholerae on fruit and vegetables from East Africa have been performed.

Two Federal States apply special control priorities on imported products for the moment:
nuts for aflatoxin contamination in the Land of Vienna, and mushrooms from Belarus for
radioactivity at one importer in the Land of Styria. No other import control priority has
been mentioned.

Visits on the spot in Vienna (airport + wholesale market), Nickelsdorf (land-border, truck
transport), Graz (laboratory + importer) and Spielfeld (land-border,
truck transport)
allowed the Commission assessment team to obtain detailed information on the various
controls, including the participation of the Customs Department. An important part of the
sampling on imported foodstuffs is linked to the plan for the detection of pesticide
residues in fruit and vegetables. In this field, it would seem that in the event of excessive
pesticide residue levels being detected, the powers of detention by the control authorities
of a future consignment of the same origin are limited.

Importers and wholesale companies, as other food business operators, are expected to
implement an HACCP system and it is the responsibility of the food control authorities to
inspect and evaluate the results from the duty of care and HACCP systems. The
requirement for the importers of foodstuffs in general, as food business operators, to
implement HACCP within their duty of care, seems so far to have made limited progress.
The point was made that
the
beginning of the production season and in the case of new suppliers and new third
countries.

importers would take samples anyway, especially at

Co-operation between the Customs services and the food control authorities seems
usually to be limited to the above-mentioned compulsory checks at the point of entry. It is
apparently rare that any suspicion concerning food consignments is communicated by the
Customs services to the food control authorities, as laid down in Regulation (EEC) N°
339/93 concerning conformity checks on imported products. The Commission assessment
team considers that access by the competent food control authorities to the Customs
Declarations Department's computerised system would allow a better grip on import
control; moreover, communication of the Rapid Alert System for Foods notifications to
the customs authorities would tighten import controls. The customs authorities have
stated that from 1999 they will put a particular emphasis on foodstuffs within their import
controls.

______________________
45

REPORT

RESULTS OF THE SECOND VISIT TO EVALUATE THE OFFICIAL
FOODSTUFFS CONTROL SYSTEM IN GREECE BY THE EUROPEAN
COMMISSION FOODSTUFFS ASSESSMENT TEAM

15 - 19 MARCH 1999

CONCLUSIONS

1. UPDATE SINCE 1996

1.1 COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

The same 5 Ministries of Agriculture, Development, Finance, Health and Public order
maintain their share of competences for food legislation and food control, including the
representations at regional and prefecture levels.

The functioning at prefecture level of co-ordination committees (with the participation of
the different administrations) has started, with a view, through meetings, to planification
and co-ordination of controls.

The General Chemical State Laboratory has recently put
in place an integrated
information technology system linking all the laboratories of its network, improving
planification and efficiency of controls.

An interesting development is the creation in a near future (law to be voted in June 1999)
of a single body for food control, under the Ministry of Development, responsible i.a. of
food control at consumers’ level. The body would include several existing departments of
the competent ministries but would not have its own laboratories (external public and
private laboratories would be used).

1.2 PROGRESS OF HACCP IN FOOD PREMISES AND GUIDES TO GOOD
HYGIENE PRACTICE

The non transposition of Directive 93/43/EEC up to the date of the visit has represented a
retarding factor in the matter. No estimate on the progress of HACCP implementation
could be given. Nevertheless control personnel of the Ministries of Finance and
Agriculture has received training on the subject.

The number of guides to good hygiene practice prepared by the professional branches of
the industry is still limited.

1.3 PROGRESS OF THE ACCREDITATION OF OFFICIAL LABORATORIES

The deadline set up for laboratory accreditation has not been fulfilled. Nevertheless
progress is being made for the laboratories of the Ministry of Finance (GCSL) among
which the Athens laboratory has already received a pre-audit visit of the United Kingdom

46

accreditation service and the Thessaloniki laboratory is completing the documentation for
the quality assurance system.

The status of the Greek accreditation body must be defined in order for the laboratories of
the Ministry of Agriculture to apply for accreditation.

2. IMPORT CONTROLS

2.1 ROLE OF THE OFFICIAL AUTHORITIES

Import controls are performed in Greece mainly at authorized points of entry, and at a
lesser degree at the importers’ premises and on the market.

The controls at the points of entry result from a collaboration between the services of
Customs, of the Ministry of Agriculture and of the General Chemical State Laboratory
(GCSL) (as well as,
in some cases, of the Ministry of Health, for microbiological
controls). The Ministry of Agriculture performs controls on raw and processed products
(in addition to quality controls of normalised products and phytosanitary controls). The
GCSL performs controls on processed and particularly packaged products, as well as
controls for customs tariff determination. The liberation of a product by the Customs
services is pendant on the agreement issued by the Ministry of Agriculture or the GCSL
resulting from the controls.

All products are submitted to a visual examination by the control services, which have
moreover established priorities for analytical controls of specific products. The priorities
for the Ministry of Agriculture are primarily the detection of mycotoxins: 100 % of
sampling for aflatoxins in pistachio nuts from Iran (in accordance with the existing
in peanuts and raisins of all origins, 10 % of sampling for
Commission Decision),
ochratoxin in coffee and patulin in apple juice. Sampling for pesticide residues in fruit and
vegetables as well as for radioactivity in mushrooms from Eastern Europe forms also part
of the priorities, at a lesser degree. Instructions exist for the sampling of nuts, which are
not in line yet with the methods which will apply at Community level. Nevertheless the
sampling inside the containers in the harbours does not allow an easy access to the load
and an adequately representative sampling.

The priorities for the GCSL derive partly from the notifications of the EU rapid alert
system (which are distributed by the GCSL to the different ministries) and include heavy
metals (cadmium) in fish products, additives, alcoholic drinks and materials in contact.

The Ministry of Health performs in particular controls for salmonella in grated coconut
and for Vibrio cholerae.

2.2 OWN-CHECKS PERFORMED BY IMPORTERS

The own-checks performed by importers, within their obligation for product safety, are
also part of the import controls. Their extent was explained in the case of one importer
but further information would be desirable.

________________________

47