natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Special Report No 14/2012 – Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004 21 DEFICIENCIES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OWN CONTROL PROGRAMME 32. 
Special Report No 14/2012 – Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004 21 DEFICIENCIES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OWN CONTROL PROGRAMME 32.
The legislation requires FBOs to perform an own control programme involving sampling of carcasses for microbiological contamination at least once per week, except in certain cases where the veterinary authorities may allow sampling to be performed on a fortnightly basis. 
The legislation requires FBOs to perform an own control programme involving sampling of carcasses for microbiological contamination at least once per week, except in certain cases where the veterinary authorities may allow sampling to be performed on a fortnightly basis.
In five of the slaughterhouses visited in three Member States, the sampling frequency or the handling of samples was not carried out in accordance with the requirements. 
In five of the slaughterhouses visited in three Member States, the sampling frequency or the handling of samples was not carried out in accordance with the requirements.
In four cases, where the veterinary authorities approved sampling on a fortnightly basis, the actual sampling was performed at less frequent intervals. 
In four cases, where the veterinary authorities approved sampling on a fortnightly basis, the actual sampling was performed at less frequent intervals.
In one case the results of the testing were not available (see Box 4). 
In one case the results of the testing were not available (see Box 4).
BOX 4 SAMPLING OF CARCASSES NOT ALWAYS CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES The FBOs of slaughterhouses shall take samples for microbiological analysis at least once a week. 
BOX 4 SAMPLING OF CARCASSES NOT ALWAYS CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES The FBOs of slaughterhouses shall take samples for microbiological analysis at least once a week.
In two slaughterhouses visited in Romania, sampling for salmonella by the FBO was reduced below the legal requirements without appropriate prior approval by the veterinary authorities. 
In two slaughterhouses visited in Romania, sampling for salmonella by the FBO was reduced below the legal requirements without appropriate prior approval by the veterinary authorities.
In addition, the official veterinarian took the samples although this is the responsibility of the FBO. 
In addition, the official veterinarian took the samples although this is the responsibility of the FBO.
In one slaughterhouse visited in Poland, sampling by the FBO was reduced in some cases to once a month. 
In one slaughterhouse visited in Poland, sampling by the FBO was reduced in some cases to once a month.
In another slaughterhouse, there was no evidence that all the required tests are carried out. 
In another slaughterhouse, there was no evidence that all the required tests are carried out.
In one slaughterhouse visited in the Czech Republic, while the FBO complied with the sampling frequency, samples were only sent to the laboratory once a month or even less. 
In one slaughterhouse visited in the Czech Republic, while the FBO complied with the sampling frequency, samples were only sent to the laboratory once a month or even less.
This practice constituted a risk to production process hygiene as it would have been impossible to take immediate corrective measures in case positive sample results of microbiological analysis were not known quickly. 
This practice constituted a risk to production process hygiene as it would have been impossible to take immediate corrective measures in case positive sample results of microbiological analysis were not known quickly.
22 LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS 33. 
22 LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS 33.
Food and feed which may be sold in the EU should be adequately labelled or identified to facilitate its traceability, through relevant documentation or information26. 
Food and feed which may be sold in the EU should be adequately labelled or identified to facilitate its traceability, through relevant documentation or information26.
The audit noted weaknesses in six of the 25 slaughterhouses visited. 
The audit noted weaknesses in six of the 25 slaughterhouses visited.
These related to inappropriate systems for the identification of carcasses and flocks and incomplete systems to trace the processing of live animals to carcasses in the food chain (see Box 5). 
These related to inappropriate systems for the identification of carcasses and flocks and incomplete systems to trace the processing of live animals to carcasses in the food chain (see Box 5).
26 Article 18(4) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002. 
26 Article 18(4) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002.
BOX 5 LACK OF TRACEABILITY INFORMATION Slaughterhouse operators must not accept animals on the slaughterhouse premises unless they have been provided with relevant food safety information contained in the records kept at the holding of origin. 
BOX 5 LACK OF TRACEABILITY INFORMATION Slaughterhouse operators must not accept animals on the slaughterhouse premises unless they have been provided with relevant food safety information contained in the records kept at the holding of origin.
In two slaughterhouses visited in Poland, no food chain information was available for cows slaughtered during the visit. 
In two slaughterhouses visited in Poland, no food chain information was available for cows slaughtered during the visit.
In two pig slaughterhouses visited in Romania, and one in the Czech Republic, the rules regarding the identification of the carcasses, in view of ensuring traceability, were insufficient. 
In two pig slaughterhouses visited in Romania, and one in the Czech Republic, the rules regarding the identification of the carcasses, in view of ensuring traceability, were insufficient.
In both Romanian cases, the FBO stated that the date of slaughter was the batch number. 
In both Romanian cases, the FBO stated that the date of slaughter was the batch number.
In the cold storage room of the first slaughterhouse, pig heads with no identification were seen during the on-the-spot visit. 
In the cold storage room of the first slaughterhouse, pig heads with no identification were seen during the on-the-spot visit.
The absence of specific information for the identification of the parts of carcasses or the batch could then represent a risk to assuring traceability. 
The absence of specific information for the identification of the parts of carcasses or the batch could then represent a risk to assuring traceability.
In the case for the Czech Republic, the carcasses were numbered only with the order number of the slaughter and the date of slaughter was not recorded. 
In the case for the Czech Republic, the carcasses were numbered only with the order number of the slaughter and the date of slaughter was not recorded.
This would hinder the rapid traceability of meat to farm in the event of a crisis. 
This would hinder the rapid traceability of meat to farm in the event of a crisis.
In two poultry slaughterhouses visited in Poland, there was no reconciliation between the number of delivered and slaughtered birds. 
In two poultry slaughterhouses visited in Poland, there was no reconciliation between the number of delivered and slaughtered birds.
In one of the slaughterhouses there were differences between the number of birds confirmed for slaughter by the ante-mortem veterinary inspection on the farm holding, and the number of birds delivered to the slaughterhouse. 
In one of the slaughterhouses there were differences between the number of birds confirmed for slaughter by the ante-mortem veterinary inspection on the farm holding, and the number of birds delivered to the slaughterhouse.
In the second slaughterhouse, there was not a physical count of slaughtered birds. 
In the second slaughterhouse, there was not a physical count of slaughtered birds.
Furthermore, in this case, the identification documents accompanying birds for slaughter identified the farm but information regarding the identification of the flock was missing. 
Furthermore, in this case, the identification documents accompanying birds for slaughter identified the farm but information regarding the identification of the flock was missing.
Where farms have more than one flock this leads to a lack of traceability between the flock checked and the flock slaughtered. 
Where farms have more than one flock this leads to a lack of traceability between the flock checked and the flock slaughtered.
A similar lack of identification of flocks was noted at a poultry slaughterhouse visited in Hungary. 
A similar lack of identification of flocks was noted at a poultry slaughterhouse visited in Hungary.
23 INCOMPATIBILITY OF RULES REGARDING FLEXIBILITY 34. 
23 INCOMPATIBILITY OF RULES REGARDING FLEXIBILITY 34.
As outlined in paragraph 11, FBOs are required to perform microbiological sampling at slaughterhouses. 
As outlined in paragraph 11, FBOs are required to perform microbiological sampling at slaughterhouses.
The legislation27 provides for exemptions from the sampling frequencies in the case of small slaughterhouses, provided a risk analysis is performed which indicates that the reduction is justified. 
The legislation27 provides for exemptions from the sampling frequencies in the case of small slaughterhouses, provided a risk analysis is performed which indicates that the reduction is justified.
There is no definition of small food businesses in the EU hygiene legislation. 
There is no definition of small food businesses in the EU hygiene legislation.
Furthermore, there is an inconsistency in the requirement that all establishments, irrespective of their size, have to apply the hygiene legislation in force and Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 which allows derogations for small slaughterhouses. 
Furthermore, there is an inconsistency in the requirement that all establishments, irrespective of their size, have to apply the hygiene legislation in force and Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 which allows derogations for small slaughterhouses.
GUIDANCE AND TRAINING 36. 
GUIDANCE AND TRAINING 36.
The audit examined whether the Commission and Member States developed relevant guidelines and promoted appropriate training for the interested stakeholders. 
The audit examined whether the Commission and Member States developed relevant guidelines and promoted appropriate training for the interested stakeholders.
While guidelines are established at Commission level, few guidelines for hygiene practices at slaughterhouses were developed by the national professional sectors (paragraphs 37 to 38). 
While guidelines are established at Commission level, few guidelines for hygiene practices at slaughterhouses were developed by the national professional sectors (paragraphs 37 to 38).
The training programme organised by the Commission was considered by the Member States visited as very useful, but the audit noted that there was scope for improvement (paragraphs 39 to 44). 
The training programme organised by the Commission was considered by the Member States visited as very useful, but the audit noted that there was scope for improvement (paragraphs 39 to 44).
LIMITED GUIDANCE BY THE MEMBER STATES ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGISLATION 37. 
LIMITED GUIDANCE BY THE MEMBER STATES ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGISLATION 37.
The Commission is required by the food safety regulations to establish guidelines for official controls28 and guides to good practice29 for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles, and should ensure that they are developed and disseminated. 
The Commission is required by the food safety regulations to establish guidelines for official controls28 and guides to good practice29 for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles, and should ensure that they are developed and disseminated.
For that purpose the Commission publishes and updates relevant guidelines after consultation with Member States and other stakeholders. 
For that purpose the Commission pub-lishes and updates relevant guidelines after consultation with Member States and other stakeholders.
27 Annex I to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs (OJ L 338, 22.12.2005, p. 
27 Annex I to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs (OJ L 338, 22.12.2005, p.
28 Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. 
28 Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004.
29 Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004. 
29 Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004.
Member States should also encourage the development by food business sectors of national guides to good practice for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles30. 
Member States should also encourage the development by food business sectors of national guides to good practice for hygiene and for the application of HACCP principles30.
These guides would be an important tool to prevent the situations described in the Court’s audit findings at Member State level, as well as weaknesses identified by the FVO inspections. 
These guides would be an important tool to prevent the situations described in the Court’s audit findings at Member State level, as well as weaknesses identified by the FVO inspec-tions.
However, in three Member States audited (Poland, Romania, Slovenia), no such guides had been established by the national professional associations. 
However, in three Member States audited (Poland, Romania, Slovenia), no such guides had been established by the national professional associations.
LACK OF SYSTEMATIC CONSULTATION BETWEEN THE HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DG AND THE EAHC 39. 
LACK OF SYSTEMATIC CONSULTATION BETWEEN THE HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DG AND THE EAHC 39.
Topics for training and the design of BTSF training courses are selected by the Health and Consumers DG and provided in a very detailed manner to the EAHC. 
Topics for training and the design of BTSF training courses are selected by the Health and Consumers DG and provided in a very detailed manner to the EAHC.
For the period under review (based on audit visits up to January 2011), there was a lack of systematic consultation between the EAHC and the Health and Consumers DG on the design of these training courses, which created a risk that the knowledge which the agency has gained in implementing the programmes was not exploited. 
For the period under review (based on audit visits up to January 2011), there was a lack of systematic consultation between the EAHC and the Health and Consumers DG on the design of these training courses, which created a risk that the knowledge which the agency has gained in implementing the programmes was not exploited.
SHORTCOMINGS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BTSF 40. 
SHORTCOMINGS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BTSF 40.
In order to harmonise official veterinary controls by Member States, the Commission may organise training courses for Member States’ staff31. 
In order to harmonise official veterinary controls by Member States, the Commission may organise training courses for Member States’ staff31.
The BTSF training initiative was developed by the Health and Consumers DG and is implemented by the EAHC. 
The BTSF training initiative was developed by the Health and Consumers DG and is implemented by the EAHC.
In order to ensure better communication with the Member States, regular meetings are organised between the Commission and Member States’ national contact points. 
In order to ensure better communication with the Member States, regular meetings are organised between the Commission and Member States’ national contact points.
One basic principle of the BTSF training courses is not to replace national training programmes or to train all staff of competent authorities but to promote a ‘train-the-trainer’ approach whereby Member States should pass on the information received by participants at BTSF training sessions to their veterinary services. 
One basic principle of the BTSF training courses is not to replace national training programmes or to train all staff of competent authorities but to promote a ‘train-the-trainer’ approach whereby Member States should pass on the information received by participants at BTSF training sessions to their veterinary services.
The ‘train-the-trainer’ approach is not yet fully implemented at EU level. 
The ‘train-the-trainer’ approach is not yet fully implemented at EU level.
Currently there is no common framework for the manner in which the dissemination activities are to be performed and no criteria for monitoring the dissemination results at Member State level in order to carry out a follow-up of these activities. 
Currently there is no common framework for the manner in which the dissemination activities are to be performed and no criteria for monitoring the dissemination results at Member State level in order to carry out a follow-up of these activities.
30 Article 7 and Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004. 
30 Article 7 and Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004.
31 Article 51(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. 
31 Article 51(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004.
24 Special Report No 14/2012 – Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004 
24 Special Report No 14/2012 – Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004
In Hungary and Romania, the role of the national contact points of the BTSF is limited to the transmission of information about the progress of the actions to the Commission and is not sufficient to monitor the training programme, provide feedback and disseminate the related information. 
In Hungary and Romania, the role of the national contact points of the BTSF is limited to the transmission of information about the progress of the actions to the Commission and is not sufficient to monitor the training programme, provide feedback and disseminate the related information.
The intermediate evaluation of BTSF32 showed that the participants consider that the training activities were too theoretical and lacked sufficient practical demonstrations. 
The intermediate evaluation of BTSF32 showed that the participants consider that the training activities were too theoretical and lacked sufficient practical demonstrations.
Furthermore the Court’s audit in Member States noted that the dissemination of information in Member States after participation on BTSF courses lacked sufficient practical demonstrations which would improve the results and impact of dissemination activities at Member State level (see Box 6). 
Furthermore the Court’s audit in Member States noted that the dissemination of information in Member States after participation on BTSF courses lacked sufficient practical demonstrations which would improve the results and impact of dissemination activities at Member State level (see Box 6).
A subsequent evaluation of the BTSF, which was initially planned for 2011, was delayed and is expected to be completed in 2012. 
A subsequent evaluation of the BTSF, which was initially planned for 2011, was delayed and is expected to be completed in 2012.
32 Intermediate evaluation of the ‘Better Training for Safer Food’ training activities, final report, food chain — Evaluation Consortium, for the Health and Consumers DG, 4 April 2009. 
32 Intermediate evaluation of the ‘Better Training for Safer Food’ training activities, final report, food chain — Evaluation Consortium, for the Health and Consumers DG, 4 April 2009.
25 BOX 6 TRAINING IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED In the Member States visited during the audit, the competent veterinary authorities consider the BTSF initiative very useful, although they suggested improvements regarding: (a) renewal of topics for BTSF training, as most of their central level inspectors already participated in existing training courses and there were other topics relating to current issues that needed to be covered to ensure a harmonised approach of official controls; (b) revision of training languages, as the training courses are normally provided only in English, French or German. 
25 BOX 6 TRAINING IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED In the Member States visited during the audit, the competent veterinary authorities consider the BTSF initiative very useful, although they suggested improvements regarding: (a) renewal of topics for BTSF training, as most of their central level inspectors already participated in existing training courses and there were other topics relating to current issues that needed to be covered to ensure a harmonised approach of official controls; (b) revision of training languages, as the training courses are normally provided only in English, French or German.
The authorities underlined the difficulty in finding inspectors with sufficient language skills to participate in these courses. 
The authorities underlined the difficulty in finding inspectors with sufficient language skills to participate in these courses.
Moreover, not all the establishments selected to be visited by the participants in training courses were considered compliant with current hygiene requirements or provided examples of best practices. 
Moreover, not all the establishments selected to be visited by the participants in training courses were considered compliant with current hygiene requirements or provided examples of best practices.
In Romania and Hungary, due to lack of exchange of information between the national contact point and the veterinary authorities, proposals for improvements to training courses were not considered. 
In Romania and Hungary, due to lack of exchange of information between the national contact point and the veterinary authorities, proposals for improvements to training courses were not considered.
PROCEDURES FOR THE USE OF EU FUNDS 45. 
PROCEDURES FOR THE USE OF EU FUNDS 45.
The audit examined the procedures to provide EU funding to slaughterhouses in order to facilitate the implementation of hygiene requirements. 
The audit examined the procedures to provide EU funding to slaughterhouses in order to facilitate the implementation of hygiene requirements.
The Court identified weaknesses related to the sustainability and selection of projects (paragraphs 46 to 50). 
The Court identified weaknesses related to the sustainability and selection of projects (paragraphs 46 to 50).
The Table shows the financing made available by Sapard to slaughterhouses aimed at bringing them up to EU hygiene standards. 
The Table shows the financing made available by Sapard to slaughterhouses aimed at bringing them up to EU hygiene standards.
These operations are currently being supported by the measure ‘Adding value to agricultural and forestry products’ of the EAFRD33. 
These operations are currently being supported by the measure ‘Adding value to agricultural and forestry products’ of the EAFRD33.
TABLE 33 Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. 
TABLE 33 Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.
In total this measure contributed 1 025 million euro to 1 936 projects. 
In total this measure contributed 1 025 million euro to 1 936 projects.