EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

Transcription

1 Ref. Ares(2011) /07/2011 EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate F - Food and Veterinary Office DG(SANCO) MR FINAL FINAL REPORT OF AN AUDIT CARRIED OUT IN BELGIUM FROM 17 TO 21 JANUARY 2011 IN ORDER TO EVALUATE IMPORT CONTROLS ON FOOD OF NON-ANIMAL ORIGIN In response to information provided by the Competent Authority, any factual error noted in the draft report has been corrected; any clarification appears in the form of a footnote.

2 Executive Summary This report describes the outcome of a Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) audit in Belgium carried out between 17 to 21 January 2011, under the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 on official food and feed controls. The objective of the audit was to evaluate the control systems put in place in Belgium for import of food of non-animal origin. In Belgium an adequate system of import controls on food of non-animal origin is established. The Competent Authorities (CAs) are designated and they cooperate well. Documented procedures are in place and the sampling frequency was followed for products subject to specific legislation. In general, the import controls are organised in accordance with the EU legislation. The recommendation from the previous FVO mission concerning documentary checks for products subject to Decision 2008/47/EC has been adequately addressed. Shortcomings were identified, including a few cases of release of products by the Customs without CAs' checks, deficiencies in internal coordination within the Customs, onward transportation and re-dispatch of rejected consignments. The lack of training of staff at some Designated Points of Entry was identified. The report makes a number of recommendations to the Belgian CAs, aimed at rectifying the shortcomings identified and enhancing the implementing of control measures in place. I

3 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES OF THE MISSION LEGAL BASIS FOR THE MISSION LEGAL BASIS FOR THE AUDIT RELEVANT LEGISLATION BACKGROUND AUDIT SERIES COUNTRY PROFILE INCREASED LEVEL OF OFFICIAL CONTROLS EMERGENCY MEASURES FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS RELEVANT NATIONAL LEGISLATION COMPETENT AUTHORITIES DESIGNATION OF COMPETENT AUTHORITIES RESOURCES FOR PERFORMANCE OF CONTROLS ORGANISATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICIAL CONTROLS DESIGNATED PLACES OF IMPORT PRIOR NOTIFICATION OF CONSIGNMENTS PROCEDURES FOR IMPORT CONTROLS SPLITTING OF CONSIGNMENTS FEES AND COSTS PRIORITISATION OF OFFICIAL CONTROLS SAMPLING LABORATORY PERFORMANCE PROCEDURES FOR PERFORMANCE AND REPORTING OF CONTROL ACTIVITIES CO-OPERATION, ENFORCEMENT AND VERIFICATION CO-OPERATION BETWEEN AND WITHIN COMPETENT AUTHORITIES PROCEDURES FOR NON-COMPLIANT LOTS VERIFICATION PROCEDURES AND AUDIT RAPID ALERT SYSTEM FOR FOOD AND FEED OUTSTANDING FVO RECOMMENDATIONS OVERALL CONCLUSIONS CLOSING MEETING RECOMMENDATIONS...19 ANNEX 1 - LEGAL REFERENCES...20 II

4 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS USED IN THIS REPORT Abbreviation ARfD BIP BTSF CA CCA CED CP DG (SANCO) DPE DPI EC EU FASFC FBO FNAO FSA FVO GHP ISO MANCP MRL MS(s) NCTS NRL PAH PCP PCU RASFF TC(s) TARIC Explanation Acute Reference Dose Border Inspection Post 'Better Training for Safer Food' Initiative Competent Authority Central Competent Authority Common Entry Document Control Point Health and Consumers Directorate-General Designated Point of Entry Designated Point of Import European Community European Union Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain Food Business Operator Food of Non Animal Origin Food Standards Agency Food and Veterinary Office Good Hygiene Practice International Organisation for Standardisation Single Integrated Multi-Annual National Control Plan Maximum Residue Level Member State(s) New Computerised Transit System National Reference Laboratory Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Pentachlorophenol Provincial Control Units Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed Third Country(ies) Integrated Tariff of the European Community III

5 1 INTRODUCTION The audit formed part of the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) planned audit programme and was carried out in accordance with Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules. The audit took place in Belgium from 17 to 21 January The team comprised three auditors from the FVO. Representatives from the central competent authority (CCA) accompanied the team for the duration of the audit. An opening meeting was held on 17 January 2011 with the CCA and the Customs. At this meeting, the objectives of, and itinerary for, the audit were confirmed by the team and the control systems were described by the authorities. 2 OBJECTIVES OF THE MISSION The objective of the audit was to evaluate the implementation of EU legislation in relation to import controls of food of non-animal origin (FNAO). In pursuit of these objectives, the following sites were visited: Visits/meetings No. Comments Competent Authorities Central 2 The Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain, Central Office of the Customs and Excise Administration Visits Designated points of entry/ designated points of import/ control points 4 Zaventem airport, Antwerp port, Zeebrugge port, Ostend airport Food importers 2 Importer of nuts and dried fruits Importer of fruits and vegetables 3 LEGAL BASIS FOR THE MISSION 3.1 LEGAL BASIS FOR THE AUDIT The audit was carried out under the general provisions of EU legislation, in particular: Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Legal acts quoted in this report refer, where applicable, to the last amended version. Full references to the acts quoted in this report are given in Annex 1. 1

6 3.2 RELEVANT LEGISLATION The audit was carried out in the framework of the following EU legislation: Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety; Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules; Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 implementing Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the increased level of official controls on imports of certain feed and FNAO and amending Decision 2006/504/EC; Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 imposing special conditions governing the import of certain foodstuffs from certain third countries due to contamination risk by aflatoxins and repealing Decision 2006/504/EC; Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009 imposing special conditions governing the import of sunflower oil originating in or consigned from Ukraine due to contamination risks by mineral oil and repealing Decision 2008/433/EC; Regulation (EC) No 258/2010 imposing special conditions on the imports of guar gum originating in or consigned from India due to contamination risks by pentachlorophenol and dioxins, and repealing Decision 2008/352/EC. Further relevant legislation is listed in Annex 1. 4 BACKGROUND 4.1 AUDIT SERIES A series of missions on import control of FNAO was carried out by the FVO between 2002 and 2004 to major importing Member States (MSs), to assess controls at import on food products of non-animal origin. The second series of missions was undertaken between 2006 and 2008 and it covered MSs not included in the first series and follow-up of the previous missions. The scope of these series of missions covered the implementation of Regulations (EC) No 882/2004 and No 178/2002, and the implementation of Commission Decisions imposing special conditions on the import of certain products concerning mycotoxin contamination and Sudan dye adulteration. The overview report of the last series of missions is available on the Health and Consumers Directorate-General (DG SANCO) Internet site at: The current series of audits has started in year The scope covers Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 adopted on the basis of Art 15(5) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 as well as emergency measures adopted during the last few years (Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009, Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009, and Regulation (EC) No 258/2010). The last FVO report on import controls on FNAO and food hygiene from a mission carried out in Belgium from 3 to 11 September 2009, with the reference DG(SANCO) , can be found at: 2

7 4.2 COUNTRY PROFILE The FVO has published a country profile for Belgium, which summarises the control systems for food and feed safety, animal health, animal welfare and plant health and gives an overview on the state of play of the recommendations of the previous FVO missions. The country profile for Belgium can be found at: INCREASED LEVEL OF OFFICIAL CONTROLS Article 15(5) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 empowers the Commission, on the basis of known or emerging risk, to establish a list of feed and food of non-animal origin that is subject to an increased level of official controls at the point of entry into the EU. This list has been established by Regulation (EC) No 669/2009, and is reviewed quarterly, based on data resulting from notifications received through the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), and on reports and information from other sources, including the FVO, Third Countries (TCs), MSs, and the European Food Safety Authority. The list includes, inter alia, food and feed from different TCs with the following risks: Mycotoxins in groundnuts, dried spices, rice and dried grapes. Mycotoxins are naturally occurring metabolites produced by certain species of moulds (e.g. Aspergillus spp, Fusarium spp); Pesticide residues in fresh herbs and specified fruit and vegetables; Adulteration of dried spices and red palm oil with Sudan Dyes. 4.4 EMERGENCY MEASURES Article 53(1)(b)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 empowers the Commission to take emergency measures, where it is evident that food or feed imported from a TC is likely to constitute a serious risk to human health. Emergency measures taken under this Article have specified conditions of import, pre-notification of consignments arrival and official controls to be carried out by MSs such as documentary, identity and physical checks including sampling with a specific frequency. Emergency measures have been taken in relation to: Mycotoxins in different foodstuffs such as pistachios, hazelnuts, almonds, dried fruits and derived products from different TCs; Sunflower oil from Ukraine contaminated by mineral oil; Guar gum and its food and feed compounds from India; contaminated by pentachlorophenol (PCP) and dioxins. 3

8 5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 RELEVANT NATIONAL LEGISLATION EU Decisions and Regulations are applicable in Belgium from the date of publication. They are notified in the Belgian Official Gazette by title for transparency. There are also several legal acts applicable to the scope of the audit: Royal Decree of 14 January 2010 concerning an increased level of official controls of the import of certain foodstuffs and amending the Royal Decree of 1 March 2009 on official controls of feedingstuffs. Royal Decree of 10 November 2005 concerning the levies referred to in Article 4 of the Act of 9 December 2004 on the financing of the Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain and establishing the levies to be borne by the importer. Royal Decree of 10 November 2005 fixing the payments referred to in Article 5 of the Act of 9 December 2004 on the financing of the Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain and establishing, in Annex 1 section II, the fees and costs for official controls, including FNAO import controls. Royal Decree of 15 April 2005 concerning the appointment of official laboratories, establishing the procedure and accreditation requirements for laboratories carrying out tests as part of the audit task of the FASFC, whereby external laboratories are approved for official controls, including laboratories involved in import controls. There is no other additional national legislation on import controls of FNAO in respect of food safety requirements. A link to EU legislation is available on the FASFC website and intranet. There is additional national legislation in place, which complements implementation of EU legislation in relation to FNAO import controls. Legislation is disseminated and publicly available. 5.2 COMPETENT AUTHORITIES Designation of Competent Authorities Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires MSs to designate the Competent Authorities (CAs) responsible for official controls. The responsibilities and organisation of official controls are described in the FVO's country profile: and in the Multi-Annual National Control Plan (MANCP) which is available on the FASFC website: Since the last mission on import controls of FNAO there have been no changes in the organisation of CAs. The FASFC is the responsible CA for import controls of FNAO and feed. Each of the 4

9 Directorates at the CCA: Control Policy, Control, General Services and Laboratories are involved in import controls of FNAO. FASFC has 11 Provincial Control Units (PCUs). The Customs and Excise Administration of the Federal Public Service for Finance is responsible for clearance of consignments. The service consists of the Central Office which coordinates one National Research Directorate and six local Directorates located in Brussels, Antwerp, Ghent, Hasselt, Mons and Liēge. Directorates supervise local customs offices. The system for laboratories is the same as for other official controls and is described in the previous missions, Country Profile and the MANCP. See also section CAs responsible for official controls of imported FNAO have been designated as required by Article 4 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/ Resources for Performance of Controls Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires the CA to ensure that they have access to a sufficient number of suitably qualified and experienced staff; that appropriate and properly maintained facilities and equipment are available. Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires CAs to ensure that staff receive appropriate training, and are kept up-to-date in their competencies. At the DPEs/Designated Points of Entry (DPIs) 50 staff members are employed by the PCUs, including inspectors employed in Gent PCU, where DPE and DPI staff are located (see section 5.3.1). The DPEs are at the same time veterinary Border Inspection Posts (BIPs) and Border Inspection Posts for phytosanitary controls (Ministerial Decree of 23 December 2004 establishing the procedure for undertaking phytosanitary controls for imports, and the requirements relating thereto Annex I). The staff consists of civil servants and independent veterinary practitioners. At the DPE in Zaventem nine people are involved in the FNAO import controls. At the DPE in Antwerp, which serves in the same time DPI, the staff is divided in two teams. One team has nine employees for the control of fresh products (including vegetables); the other team has seven employees dealing with dry FNAO. At the DPE/DPI Zeebrugge and DPE Ostend there are two inspectors specialised in FNAO, who are coordinating and performing the controls in these two ports. Furthermore, at the DPE in Ostend four and in Zeebrugge six staff are involved in FNAO controls. The same qualification requirements apply for the DPE staff as for other inspectors. The independent veterinary practitioners are employed on a contract basis and they are in charge of FNAO import controls at the DPEs. Their responsibilities are described in contracts which are renewed annually based on an assessment of their performance by the Director of the PCU. The training followed by the independent veterinary practitioners on their own initiative is assessed by the Director of the PCU. The independent veterinary practitioners should participate in 50 hours training within three years, but not less then 12 hours/year. There are also internal trainings organised at the DPE level. At the DPE in Antwerp the inspectors and staff members did not participate in external training on import controls of FNAO during the last two years, but they 5

10 followed internal training concerning sampling of FNAO and new EU legislation. The coordinator of the DPE in Antwerp participates in the central meetings. He trains inspection staff on-the spot and by internal meetings. The audit team obtained documentary evidence of such internal trainings organised in A similar system was implemented at the DPE in Zaventem, but the audit team noted that most of the training of independent veterinary practitioners focused on phytosanitary and veterinary issues. The DPE/DPI in Zeebrugge organised one internal training on Regulation (EC) No 669/2009. The audit team noted that the independent veterinary practitioner who took most of the samples of products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 and Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 did not participate in any training on this subject. At the DPE in Ostend the independent veterinary practitioner demonstrating sampling for pesticides was an experienced member of staff involved in sampling activities during the last five years. He was aware of the internal procedures and he followed the written instructions of FASFC for pesticides sampling (see section.5.3.7). However, the identity checks performed by this independent veterinary practitioner did not include verification of the consignment quantity, and he was not aware of this requirement. Some missing packages of the consignment did not raise any concerns to the independent veterinary practitioner. He did not participate in training courses on sampling or other FNAO import controls. In 2009 he did not obtain the minimum number of 12 training hours required for independent veterinary practitioners. In 2010 four staff members from the CCA (FASFC) participated in workshops on FNAO import controls organised by the 'Better Training for Safer Food' Initiative (BTSF). There was no cascade training organised for staff at DPEs, but the presentations were made available on the BIPs' online network. Adequate inspection facilities and sampling equipment were available for the staff at the visited DPEs/DPIs. There were sufficient staffing provisions, facilities and equipment available at the DPEs/DPIs visited by the audit team (see also section 5.3.1). Some members of staff at the two DPEs/DPIs visited did not receive up-to-date training on import controls and sampling techniques (Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, Article 6 (1) (a) of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 and Annex point 3 of Directive 2002/63/EC). 5.3 ORGANISATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICIAL CONTROLS Designated places of import Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires performing official controls at an appropriate place, including Point of Entry of goods, point of release for free circulation, warehouses, the premises of the importing food business operators, or other points of the food chain. Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, Article 3(b) and 5 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 establish definition and specific requirements for designation of designated points of entry (DPEs) by MSs. Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 provides minimum requirements for DPEs. When a DPE is not adequately equipped with all the facilities, another Control Point(s) can be authorised by the MS for a transitional period of five years. 6

11 According to Article 16(3) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 MSs shall ensure that physical checks are carried out under appropriate conditions and at a place with access to appropriate control facilities allowing investigations to be conducted properly. Under Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009, on a request of the MS, the Commission may authorise the CA of the certain DPE operating under specific geographical constraints to carry out physical checks at the premises of food business operators. Article 2(a) and Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 establish definition and specific requirements for Designated Points of Import for products subject to this Regulation. According to Article 5(4) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 258/2010 the checks of products subject to this Regulation shall be carried out at control points specifically designated by the MSs for that purpose and the list of control points shall be made available to the public and communicated to the Commission. According to the Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009 controls should be performed on consignments presented for import before release. Article 4 of Commission Decision 2008/47/EC requires that the documentary check, as referred to in Article 16(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, shall be performed at the point of first arrival in the EU and evidence of this check will accompany the consignment. There are ten DPEs designated for import controls of products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009: four ports (Antwerp, Gent, Ostend, Zeebrugge) and five airports (Deurne, Ostend, Bierset, Gosselies, Zaventem). Also one logistic service is designated as a DPE for mail delivery. The list of DPEs with all contact details is published on the FASFC website. In case of the DPE in Ghent there is no office located in the port, therefore the PCU office in Ghent is designated in the contact list. In Belgium, DPEs consist of the DPE office where the documentary checks are done, and the warehouses located in the customs territory of the DPE. Sampling and storage of FNAO takes place at these warehouses. Depending on the local situation at the DPE, BIPs' facilities can also be used for sampling. DPEs are also Control Points (CPs) under Regulation (EC) No 258/2010, and places of importation where checks may be carried out for Ukrainian sunflower oil subject to Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009. This information is published on the FASFC website. Concerning Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 DPIs are designated in Aalst, Antwerp, Zeebrugge and Brussels. In Aalst controls are carried out at the FBO who imports products subject to this regulation. The audit team noted that the list of DPIs available on the FASFC website does not contain contact details. Designated point of entry/import/control points visited Four DPEs were visited by the audit team: Zaventem and Ostend airports and the ports of Antwerp and Zeebrugge. Each of the visited DPEs is also designated as CP under Regulation (EC) No 258/2010 and place of importation of products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009. The ports visited by the audit team are also DPIs for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1152/

12 At airports mainly fruit and vegetables subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 are imported. The highest number of imports of foodstuffs subject to mycotoxin sampling and guar gum was observed in the DPE at Antwerp port. The staffing provisions at the DPEs/DPIs visited was satisfactory, however, some shortcomings were identified concerning the training of staff at the DPE/DPI Zeebrugge and Ostend (see section 5.2.2). At the visited DPEs, updated legislation, procedures concerning import controls and sampling instructions (described in section 5.3.9) were available to the inspectors. Unloading and sampling equipment was in place. At the DPE/DPI located in ports an equipment to sample dry products in big amounts was present (spire samplers). At some DPEs visited there are specialised facilities for sampling and storage of FNAO (ports in Zeebrugge and Antwerp - left bank). Also warehouses (FBOs, forwarding agents, facilities owned by the port), are used for sampling and storage of FNAO (Antwerp right - bank, Ostend, Zaventem). In case of airports visited onward transportation is often allowed after sampling. The hygienic conditions at the dedicated facilities for FNAO were adequate. The circumstances at transit warehouses at the airports were less satisfactory. A cold store occasionally used for storage at a transit warehouse at the DPE in Zaventem contained waste and dirt. At each DPE laboratories performing analytical tests on imported products are available as described in section Shared use of facilities at the BIPs/DPEs All administrative offices at DPEs/DPIs/CPs were shared with the inspection posts responsible for veterinary and phytosanitary controls. In most cases inspectors and staff responsible for FNAO import controls are also involved in controls on food of animal and non-animal origin, feed and plant health. As mentioned before, depending on the local situation at the DPE, facilities of BIPs can also be used for sampling. At the visited DPEs only in Zaventem airport the BIP for foodstuffs of animal origin can be used for sampling of FNAO and only in exceptional cases. DPEs, DPIs and CPs have been designated by the CA. The DPEs/DPIs and warehouses visited do comply in general with the requirements laid down in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 and Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009. There were some deficiencies in training of staff at the DPEs/DPIs (see conclusions in section 5.2.2). At the DPE in Zaventem deficiencies in hygiene conditions were observed by the audit team (Article 16 (3) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004) Prior notification of consignments According to Article 17(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, for the organisation of official controls subject to Article 15(5), MSs shall require from food business operators responsible for consignments to give a prior notification of their arrival and nature. 8

13 Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009, Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 and Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1151/1009 establish detailed rules of prior notification requirements for products subject to these Regulations. Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 requires FBOs responsible for consignments of products subject to this Regulation to provide prior notification to the CA of the MS before their physical arrival. For products subject to Regulations (EC) No 1152/2009 and 669/2009, a system for prior notification is in place. The Common Entry Document (CED) can be sent by and the electronic version is available on the FASFC website. The audit team noted that at the DPEs in Zaventem and Ostend products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 are often prior-notified few hours before arrival at the moment the aircraft leaves the country of dispatch. In Antwerp port there were cases when consignments were notified after the arrival. To simplify the prior notification, the CED can also be used by the FBOs for products subject to Regulations (EC) No 1151/2009, 258/2010 and Decision 2008/47/EC. This procedure is introduced in the electronic version of the CED available on the FASFC website. In addition to the official languages of Belgium (Dutch, French and German) the CEDs are accepted in English. The importing companies visited by the audit team were aware of the prior notification requirements. Prior notification procedures are in place for FNAO subject to Regulations (EC) No 669/2009, 1152/2009, 1151/2009 and 258/2009. However, the prior notification procedures for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 are not always followed Procedures for import controls Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 establishes that CA shall carry out regular official controls on food and feed of non-animal origin imported into the EU. Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009, Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009, Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1151/2009 specify official controls to be carried out by the CA on products subject to these Regulations before products are released for free circulation. According to Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 release for free circulation of consignments shall be subject to the presentation by the FBOs or their representatives to the custom authorities of a CED dully completed by the CA and favourable results from physical checks, where such checks are required, are known. Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 specify checks to be carried out by the CA on products covered by this Regulation presented for first placing on the market. 9

14 Import procedures for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 The procedures for Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 are described in the service note CONT/2010/06/ The documentary checks on consignments are carried out within two working days from the arrival of the consignment, after receiving the original CED. Documentary checks include the verification of phytosanitary certificates, certificates of conformity with quality standards, bills of lading, air way bill, invoices and packing lists. The usual period of delivery of analytical results for pesticides residues analysis is between one and two working days. In the case of aflatoxins and Sudan dyes the period is around ten days. At the DPE in Zaventem and Ostend the onward transportation procedure is commonly applied for consignments subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009. In ports visited onward transportation was less common. These consignments are intended for importers in Belgium and in other MSs, mainly in the Netherlands, France and Germany. The service note CONT/2010/06/ requires a certified copy of the CED to accompany the consignment to the place of destination. A scanned version of the partially completed original is sent to the CA responsible for the FBO at the final destination awaiting the analytical results. The original CED stays at the DPE, and it is not handed out to the FBO. The certified copy is expected to be finalised at the place of destination, after the analytical results are sent by the DPE. This applies to the onward transportation within Belgium and with a final destination in other MSs. The service note on Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 does not oblige the CA at the final destination to report to the DPE about the consignment, even in the case of non-compliance. In such cases the CCA is also informed about the onward transportation procedures. Specific control procedure for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 The audit team verified some examples of controls of products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009. The controls followed the EU legislation. Inspectors and members of staff at the DPIs in Antwerp and Zeebrugge were aware of the specific requirements for health certificates for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009. The audit team obtained examples of consignments of Iranian pistachios exported from Turkey via the DPI in Antwerp. The health certificate was issued by the CA of the exporting country (Turkey) and also the analytical report of analyses performed in Turkey. This health certificate did not include all the information required by the Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 such as reference to official sampling in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 401/2006, date of sampling, validity of the certificate as required by the Regulation. The inspectors and members of staff informed the audit team, that such certificates are acceptable for them. Controls of products subject to Regulation (EC) No 258/2010 and Decision 2008/47/EC The audit team verified some files of guar gum and peanuts from USA imported via Antwerp port. The controls of these products complied with the EU legislation, and the CED was used by the FBOs for prior notification. In Antwerp 23 consignments of peanuts from USA subject to Decision 2008/47/EC were subject to documentary checks in Release for free circulation For transit of goods under the T1 procedure the New Computerised Transit System (NCTS) is used by the importers. In such cases the TARIC code need not be declared by the importer at the first Customs' office related to the DPE. The Customs expects that consignments of FNAO, which were not prior-notified to a DPE in Belgium, should not be released by the Customs at the final destination (in Belgium or other MS) without adequate checks required by EU Regulations. If FNAO had entered the Belgium territory without checks required by EU legislation, the Customs would have to contact FASFC to seek its advice how to proceed in such circumstances. 10

15 In 2010, however, there were single cases when the Customs have released products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 and 1152/2009 without adequate CAs checks. The audit team was informed by the FBO visited that in May 2010 two of their imported consignments of peppers from Turkey subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 were released without the CEDs by Customs in Rekkem. The CCA also informed the audit team about the case when Turkish products, falling under the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009, arrived at the FBO which was not designated by the CA as a DPI. The goods had entered via Bulgaria into the EU. The Customs in Genk released this consignment without the completed CED. The FASFC was involved in this case, and letters requesting adequate controls in the future were sent to the Customs and Bulgarian CAs. The audit team was informed by the CCA that no Ukrainian sunflower oil falling under Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009 was imported via Belgium. However, the CCA also informed the audit team about one case when consignments of Ukrainian sunflower oil imported via the Netherlands (T1 transit) were released by the Customs in Belgium. The audit team did not obtain proofs of checks performed by the CAs (neither Belgian nor Dutch) before the Customs release. The documents presented to the audit team did not allow tracing the consignments to the health certificates and analytical results. The CCA stated they would expect these products to be checked upon the arrival in the Netherlands by the Dutch CAs. During the closing meeting the CCA stated that they would discuss this issue with the Customs to ensure that products are always subject to CAs checks required by Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1151/2009. Sampling frequency The DPEs/DPIs select the consignments for sampling and are responsible for the adequate frequency of physical checks. As a general rule every X th consignment is selected for physical check, depending on the frequency required by the legislation. A special database system for registration of consignments and the controls carried out was available in the DPEs. The frequency of sampling for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 was generally followed. In the DPEs visited no significant shortcomings concerning the sampling frequency were identified. In Antwerp, the audit team obtained an example of verification of the sampling frequency for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 by the CCA, when some incorrect data had been reported by the DPE. The data on importation and sampling for products subject to emergency measures were presented in the table below. The sampling frequency was generally followed, but for pistachios from Turkey it was lower than required during the first quarter of 2010 (40 % instead of 50 %) because the DPI in Brussels did not take any samples of eight imported consignments. In the next quarters sampling frequency has improved. The CCA informed the audit team that a specific procedure for verification of the sampling frequency has been introduced in In 2010, since the application of Regulation (EC) No 258/2010 nine out of the 170 consignments of guar gum from India had been sampled (5.3 % frequency). The sampling plan for 2011 requires the 5 % sampling frequency should be achieved within the year. 11

16 Table Import and sampling data for 2010 (January to December) for products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 Product Country of origin Number of consignments imported Number of consignments sampled Peanuts and peanut products EGYPT 0 0 Peanuts and peanut products CHINA Pistachios IRAN Dried figs and fig products TURKEY Hazelnuts and hazelnuts products Pistachios and pistachios products TURKEY TURKEY Brazil nuts in shell BRAZIL 0 0 Almonds (subject to Voluntary Aflatoxin Sampling Plan(VASP) Almonds (not subject to VASP) USA USA In general the control procedures required by Regulations (EC) No 669/2009 and 1152/2009 are followed. In case of onward transportation, part II of the original CED is not issued by the DPE to the FBO, contrary to Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009. The documentary checks on products subject to Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 are not always carried out properly (Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009). Release for free circulation does not in each case comply with Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009, Article 7 (8) of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 and Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1151/2009. The sampling frequency for products subject to specific EU legislation was generally followed Splitting of consignments Regulations (EC) No 669/2009, 1151/2009, 1152/2009 and 258/2010 provide provisions for the splitting of consignments. At the visited DPEs the audit team was informed that there was no splitting of consignments subject to specific import legislation. 12

17 In DPEs/DPIs visited no subsequent splitting of consignments is undertaken by the FBOs Fees and costs Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 establishes that MSs shall ensure the collection of fees occasioned by the increased level of official controls provided for in this Regulation in accordance with Article 27(4) and criteria laid down in Annex VI of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 establishes that all costs resulting from the official controls referred to in Article 5(1), including sampling, analysis, storage and any measures taken following non-compliance, shall be borne by the feed and food business operator. According to Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1151/2009 and Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1152/2009 all costs resulting from the official controls including sampling, analysis, storage and any measures taken following non-compliance shall be borne by the FBO. As provided in the Royal Decree of 2005 setting payments and levies for importers, FBOs must pay for the controls performed on the consignments. For the first ½ hour EUR is charged of the inspector's work, plus EUR per each additional ½ hour. This includes documentary, identity and physical checks. Prices for laboratory analyses are established and collected by the laboratories. For pesticides analyses fees are charged from 35 EUR to 175 EUR. Sudan dyes analysis costs around 100 EUR; for mycotoxins analysis approximately 125 EUR (in the FASFC laboratories). To examine cadmium and lead content it costs from 35 EUR to 100 EUR. In case of a fast procedure (results of analyses within 2-3 working days) fees are increased by 50 %. The costs related to import controls such as unloading of consignments, storage and delivery of samples to the laboratory by a courier are covered by the FBOs. Costs and fees concerning import controls on FNAO are established in compliance with the specific EU legislation Prioritisation of official controls Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that official controls are carried out regularly, on a risk basis and with appropriate frequency, taking account of (a) identified risks; (b) the food business operators past record as regards compliance; (c) the reliability of any own checks that have already been carried out; and (d) any information that might indicate non-compliance. Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that physical checks on import of food of nonanimal origin shall be carried out at frequency depending on the risk associated with different types of feed and food. 13

18 There is an annual sampling plan which includes imported products. This sampling plan is coordinated by the FASFC and it is based on the results of the previous years and RASFF notifications. This plan includes samples taken on the market and before release at the import points (ports and airports) samples were taken for different analyses (mainly mycotoxins, pesticides, additives, PAH, radioactive contamination) in The plan includes also samples taken for products subject to EU legislation. The selection for sampling of the consignments at the import points is based on preceding phytosanitary controls and checks on manifests of upcoming vessels at the ports and at the airports. Products from TCs are sampled for different contaminants and pesticide residues. In the case of products not subject to EU legislation, the plan does not specify the country of origin. In the scope of this audit official controls are organised in accordance with the requirements and criteria of Article 3 and 16 of Regulation (EC) No 882/ Sampling Commission Regulation (EC) No 401/2006 lays down the methods of sampling and analysis for the official control of the levels of mycotoxins in foodstuffs. Commission Directive 2002/63/EC establishes methods of sampling for the official control of pesticide residues. Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 establishes requirements for sampling and analysis. Sampling for pesticide residues on strawberries from Egypt was observed by the audit team at the DPE in Ostend. The sampling was performed by an independent veterinary practitioner employed at the DPE. The independent veterinary practitioner followed the written instruction for pesticide sampling of products subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009. In principal, the requirements for random sampling were followed, the lot number was correctly identified by the inspector, and the requirements on the minimum weight and number of units required by EU legislation were complied with. Two samples were taken, one for the first analysis, and the second for a for a crosscheck. They were correctly sealed and labelled. A standard sampling report was completed and numbered. Some problems with identity checks and training of the ndependent veterinary practitioner were noted by the audit team (see section 5.2.2). Sampling observed at the DPE in Ostend followed requirements of Directive 2002/63/EC (see conclusions in section 5.2.2) Laboratory performance Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that CAs only designate laboratories that operate and are assessed and accredited in accordance with the standards EN ISO/IEC and EN ISO/IEC Article 33 of the Regulation requires MSs to designate National Reference 14

19 Laboratories (NRL) for each EU reference laboratory, and specifies tasks for the NRL. Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 requires that the methods of analysis of pesticide residues shall comply with the criteria set out in the relevant provisions of EU law relating to official controls for food and feed, and that all laboratories analysing samples for the official controls on pesticide residues participate in the EU proficiency tests for pesticide residues organised by the Commission. Two official laboratories and seven private laboratories, all of which had been approved by the FASFC in accordance with the Royal Decree of 15 April 2005 on the approval of laboratories for official controls, were involved in the testing of products falling within the scope of EU regulations on import of FNAO. Two of the private laboratories are located in the Netherlands, one in Germany and one in France. Laboratories abroad were subjected to an audit prior to FASFC approval. As regards Belgian laboratories, the FASFC is informed by an accreditation body (BELAC) about the findings of the latter's audits. Furthermore, the FASFC has the opportunity to attend these audits. All approved laboratories must be accredited in accordance with standard EN ISO/IEC/ According to point of the service note on Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 the owner of the consignment sampled, or his representative, may choose one of these laboratories in consultation with the DPE. The sealed samples are then delivered to the chosen laboratory. The FBO covers costs of transport of samples by courier and the analyses. The FBO can transport the official samples by himself to the laboratories. If the FBO does not choose a laboratory, the samples are sent by the CA to the dispatching centre, and then to an official laboratory of its choice. If testing can in such cases be carried out by an official FASFC laboratory, then this laboratory will be assigned to carry out the tests. If this is not possible, testing will be assigned to an external accredited laboratory. In these cases the FBO does not pay for the delivery of the samples. The FBO can also choose the laboratory for the counter sample to be analysed. This may lead to the situation that the first sample and the counter sample are examined by the same laboratory. One such case was examined by the audit team in Zeebrugge, when both analyses were done by the same designated private laboratory. The designation of the NRLs is described in the MANCP in the Annex 3 and in the previous FVO reports on pesticide residues and import controls. The Veterinary and Agrochemical Research Centre is the NRL for mycotoxins and the Scientific Institute of Public Health is the NRL for pesticide residues analyses. During the previous FVO missions some of the laboratories for mycotoxins and pesticides listed above were visited and their performance was in general considered satisfactory. The laboratories for import controls were designated by the CAs as required by Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2009. The NRLs were designated as required by Article 33 of Regulation (EC) No 882/ Procedures for performance and reporting of control activities Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that CAs carry out their official controls in accordance with documented procedures, containing information and instructions for staff 15

20 performing official controls. Article 9 of the above Regulation requires CAs to draw up reports on the official controls carried out, including a description of the purpose of official controls, the methods applied, the results obtained and any action to be taken by the business operator concerned. FASFC developed specific service notes and written instructions for Regulations (EC) No 669/2009, 258/2010, 1152/ /2009 and Decision 2008/47/EC. They include sampling and import control procedures, and are updated for recent legislative amendments. These internal instructions were available via the intranet for the inspectors and members of staff at the DPEs/DPIs/CPs visited. In some DPEs additional internal instructions were developed by the coordinators. In the visited DPEs/DPIs procedures were available for import controls and sampling. 5.4 CO-OPERATION, ENFORCEMENT AND VERIFICATION Co-operation between and within competent authorities Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 provides for efficient and effective co-ordination and co-operation between CAs. Article 4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that, when, within a CA, more than one unit is competent to carry out official controls, efficient and effective co-ordination and co-operation shall be ensured between the different units. Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that CAs and Customs should cooperate closely. There is a co-operation protocol between the FASFC and the Customs. The audit team was informed by the FASFC that the protocol was updated in 2010 and includes all relevant EU Regulations concerning FNAO and Decision 2008/47/EC. Annex 3 of this Protocol provides for cooperation between these two CAs regarding import controls of FNAO. The Coordination Cell includes representatives of both services. Two meetings were organised in 2010 and FNAO import controls were discussed including Regulation (EC) No 669/2009. There is also ongoing exchange of information via phone and s between the FASFC and the Customs. The FASFC communicates changes of the EU legislation to the Customs. The recent amendment of Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 with updated list of products with TARIC codes was sent to the Customs in Internal communication within the FASFC is established based on letters, s, phone, intranet and meetings of the Technical Consultation Committee for BIPs. Coordinators of BIPs/DPEs 16

21 participate in these meetings. The minutes of these meetings contain the updates of the relevant EU legislation, discussions and planned actions on implementation measures. The local offices report the sampling frequency to FASFC on a quarterly basis if required by EU legislation. Within the Customs, internal communication is in the form of instructions which set out the controls to be carried out for the said products. The controls are carried out on, among other things, FNAO declared for free circulation through customs declarations. The customs declaration must be submitted by the importer/declarant of the FNAO using the Customs electronic declaration system (the PLDA system). The declarations, which are submitted electronically, must meet the applicable validation rules. This means that declarations must contain all the required information before the PLDA system can validate them. Where conditions and/or limitations apply for the import of certain products, this is entered in the PLDA so that the declaration is only validated when the conditions are met (for example, a CED is required for the import of peanuts from Brazil, thus the customs declaration for goods can only be validated in the PLDA if the CED code is entered in the system). As all the conditions for import and export for specific products (codes) are applicable and are entered in TARBEL, a link between TARBEL and the PLDA is planned. TARBEL can also be consulted by operators. As TARBEL is part of TARIC (the European Commission s system), Customs are dependent (at national level) on the European Commission. There may be a time-lag between the Regulation entering into force and measures being entered in TARIC. Since the end of 2010, Customs has used the electronic selection tool CSPbis to automatically select declarations in the PLDA for consignments which the Customs wishes to check. The declarations selected are those for consignments where a possible risk exists in respect of the import or export (risk profile) or where a check is required under particular legislation. Declarations for consignments for which no risk is established will not be selected by the selection tool and are therefore immediately cleared. The selection tool is linked to a kind of risk profile database which is regularly updated when new risks appear or disappear. The CA informed the audit team, that Customs are working on updating this as quickly as possible but, given the number of control measures (for all categories of goods) and regular changes, this is not always easy and sometimes means that a measure is not entered in the system immediately. During the visits in the Customs offices, the audit team noted deficiencies of the systems' performance: a missing profile on SPS for Turkish vegetables subject to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009; a missing link between PLDA and SPS (for beans from Egypt PLDA gives information that for (SPS) the selection is based on a technical error ). The TARBEL system did not contain information for some products recently included in amendment for Regulation (EC) No 669/2009. In two of the four Customs offices visited the PLDA was very slow. There were single events of Customs release of consignments without the checks of CAs (see section 5.3.3). There are adequate arrangements in place to ensure co-operation between FASFC and Customs. In relation to FNAO import controls, adequate coordination within the FASFC is established, but efficient coordination is not in all cases ensured within the Customs (Article 4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004). 17