The structure of the European compound feed industry

1
The structure of the European compound feed
industry
Maintaining market confidence and restoring
comptetiveness46th general assembly of
a.v.e.c Alexander Döring Secretary General of
FEFAC
2
EU Livestock sourcing in feedingstuffs - 394 mio.
t in 2002
125
35
45
189
Forages
Home grown cereals
Purchased straight feedingstuffs
Industrial compound feed
3
Comparison between prices for animal products and
for feedingstuffs (Index 1990100)
4
Livestock population in the EU
5
Meat consumption in the EU per category
including offals (96.8 kg/hab/year in 2001)
6
Meat consumption development in the EU-15 per
category
7
Key figures of the European compound feed industry
8
Turn-over of the compound feed industry
9
Number and average size of feed production units
in the EU-15
10
Industrial compound feed production per country
125 mio. t in 2002
11
Industrial compound feed production in the EU-15
in 2002 125.0 mio. t (per category)
OTHERS
MILK REPLACERS
8.0 Mio. t / 6
1.8 Mio. t / 1
CATTLE
33.2 Mio. t / 27
POULTRY
38.5 Mio. t / 31
PIGS
43.5 Mio. t / 35
12
Evolution of compound feed production between
2001 and 2002 per country and per category
13
Compound feed production development in the EU
per category
14
Raw materials consumption by the compound feed
industry in the EU-15 in 2001 (excl. EL L)
Feed cereals
42
All others
Tapioca
5
3
Mineral salts, Additives
Vitamins 3
Co-products from
Dried forage
Food Industry
2
13
Dairy products
Oils Fats
1
2
Pulses
Cakes Meals
2
27
15
Some data on CEECs
16
Compound feed production in EU neighbouring
countries in 2001
17
Evolution of compound feed production in new EU
Member States and some candidate countries
18
Building up a QA system all along the feed chain
19
Too many mistakes, too many frauds

• Unsufficient attention paid to natural
  contamination
• Dioxin in kaolinitic clay
• Iodin or dioxin in lime
• Uncontrolled process
• MeatBone Meal Processing (BSE)
• Organic wheat (Nitrofen)
• Misappropriate (fraudulent) behaviour
• Mixture of used cooking oils with mineral oil
  (PCB)
• Mixture of hazardous waste (MPA) with glucose
  syrup

20
Background

• We have lost consumers confidence
• Distrust among partners in the chain
• No individual sector is protected against any
  feed safety incident
• ? We are expected to provide a strong efficient
  response as to
• Reduce the scope of risks in the feed chain
• Propose practical solutions to minimise the
  impact of incidents

21
FEFACs proposal for an action plan on feed safety

• Building up a QA system all along the feed chain
• Making sure that any operator in the feed chain
  is under control (role of the legislator)
• Promoting the system vis-à-vis downstream partners

22
QA system all along the feed chain

• Risk analysis (based on HACCP) at each step of
  the chain, including suppliers of feed materials
• Implementation of Codes of good practices at each
  step of the chain
• Ensuring a liaison between suppliers and
  customers codes.

23
QA systems at feed compounder level Main features
of FEFAC guidelines

• Covers all stages of production including
  sourcing of quality feed materials, production,
  storage, transport and delivery of compound feed
• Goes beyond the legislation
• Reviewed in April 2001 to require
• the undertaking of a risk analysis based on HACCP
  principles (contaminants, incidental presence of
  prohibited products and substances, additives,
  veterinary drugs, pathogens, )
• authorisation procedure for the purchase of feed
  materials (codes of practice)
• procedure in case of contamination (product
  recall, co-operation with public authorities)
• Next review June 2003

24
The Guidelines approach
Guidelines for Feed compounders developed by FEFAC
National Codes of Practice developed by FEFAC
Member Associations
Individual Code of Practice developed by companies
25
Building up a QA systemThe benchmark approach
for the European compound feed industry (Ctd)
FEFAC standard compound feed
Independent certification body
Benchmarking of national Codes of
Practice developed by FEFAC Member Associations
Individual Code of Practice developed by companies
26
Main features of harmonised requirements for
suppliers of feed materials
27
Scope

• All steps under the responsibility of the
  operator from intake of raw materials to storage
  / delivery of feed material
• All feed materials produced regardless the
  destination

28
QA system

• Good manufacturing practice developed in
  accordance with ISO 90012000
• HACCP for risk management covering biological,
  physical and chemical hazards presenting a risk
  for animal and/or public health
• Certification by ISO 19011-accredited bodies
• Alternatively, audit by customers

29
Good operational practice

• Flow chart with identification of intermediary
  products and waste
• Specifications for each feed material produced
  (name, nutritional and analytical
  characteristics, processing stages, etc.)
• Food grade status
• Raw materials sourced from operators having in
  place a HACCP-based QA system subject to
  independent certification
• Good hygiene practice and training of personnel

30
Quality control

• Quality control plan for raw materials and feed
  materials
• Focusing on contaminants and product
  specifications
• Sampling plan
• Analytical methods
• Corrective action(s) in case of non- compliance

31
Traceability / Record keeping

• Traceability (purchase of raw materials /delivery
  of feed materials)
• Record keeping of manufacturing process
• Record keeping 2 years
• Sample keeping 6 months

32
Customers information

• Data sheet flow chart, product specifications,
  outline of the control plan
• Proper labeling of feed materials
• Information of customers in case of non-
  compliance
• Product recall procedure
• Contingency plan

33
The key to success a feed legislation embracing
the overall feed chain
34
New approach for feed safety

• General Food Law (Reg. 178/2002) principle of
  integrated approach to feed and food safety
  legislation as from 2005
• Official feed food controls (COM (2003) 52)
• GM feed and food (COM (2001) 425)
• Food Hygiene / Feed Hygiene (COM (2003) 180)

35
Comparison Food / Feed Hygiene

• Common points
• Registration of all feed food business operators
  (from primary production to distribution)
• Implementation of Good Practices
• Implementation of HACCP (except for primary
  production)
• Development of national / EU Codes of Practice
• Certain operations subject to approval (same
  scope as in Directive 95/69/EC may be extended
  to certain feed materials
• Main difference
• Financial guarantees required for feed operators

36
Other major changes in the EU feed legislation

• Positive list of feed materials
• Report on the feasibility study adopted on 24
  April 2003
• The establishment of an exhaustive list of feed
  materials is time consuming and useless in terms
  of feed safety
• The favored approach is a better control on feed
  business operators through the proposal on feed
  hygiene

37
Other major changes in the EU feed legislation

• Undesirable substances (Directive 2002/32) ban
  on dilution as from 1.8.2003 Adaptation of
  current limits before August 2003
• Recast of the legislation on the marketing of
  feed materials and compound feed (Dirextives
  96/25/EC and 79/373/EC)
• Extension of the positive list of feed materials
• Extension of the list of prohibited ingredients
• Review of labelling requirements
• Extension of approval requirements to producers
  of certain feed materials

38
FEFACs position on the reform of the EU feed
legislation

• FEFAC supports
• The mandatory registration of all feed business
  operators
• The implementation of good practice incorporating
  HACCP principles
• The extension of approval requirements to
  suppliers of feed materials
• FEFAC opposes
• The positive list of feed materials

39
FEFACs policySecuring and promoting

• Secure the feed chain
• QA systems all along the feed chain
• Better control from authorities to prevent
  misappropriate / fraudulents acts
• Promotion of our quality systems vis-a-vis
  downstream partners (meeting scheduled on 12
  March 2003)
• Livestock farmers
• Meat dairy industry

40
Conclusions

• Where do we come from?
• Feed safety animal health economic issue
• Ruled by contractual terms
• Where are we?
• Feed safety food safety
• Mistrust among partners in the chain
• Ongoing implementation of codes of practice but
  lack of harmonisation
• Where do we want to go?
• Feed safety food safety shared responsibility
• Legislation embracing the feed chain at large
• Mutual recognition of codes of practice