Guideline Feed Monitoring
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Guideline
Feed Monitoring
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Status: • Release
Contents
1 Fundamentals............................................................................................ 4
1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 Responsibilities ................................................................................................ 4
1.2.1 Feed sector .................................................................................................................. 4
1.2.2 Agriculture ................................................................................................................... 4
2 Sampling ................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Requirements for the sampler .......................................................................... 5
2.2 Sampling at compound feed producers ............................................................. 5
2.3 Sampling at Agricultural Businesses ................................................................. 5
2.4 Sampling at mobile feed milling and mixing plants ........................................... 5
2.5 Sampling at delivery by ship ............................................................................. 6
2.6 Sampling report ................................................................................................ 6
2.7 Packaging and Transport of the laboratory sample ........................................... 6
3 Requirements for laboratories .................................................................. 6
3.1 Pre-conditions for QS approval ......................................................................... 6
3.1.1 Accreditation in accordance with DIN EN ISO/IEC 17025 ................................................... 6
3.1.2 Minimum Analysis Capability Requirements ...................................................................... 7
3.1.3 Participation in ring tests ............................................................................................... 7
3.1.4 Subcontracting ............................................................................................................. 7
3.2 Maintenance of QS approval ............................................................................. 8
3.2.1 QS laboratory performance assessment ........................................................................... 8
3.2.2 Laboratory proficiency tests ........................................................................................... 8
3.3 Loss of QS approval .......................................................................................... 8
3.4 Obligation to enter results into the QS feed monitoring database .................... 8
3.4.1 Sample receipt ............................................................................................................. 8
3.4.2 Timely input of analysis results ....................................................................................... 9
3.5 Access authorisation and perusal of documents ............................................... 9
4 Exceedance of limit or guidance values ..................................................... 9
4.1 Incident- and crisis management ..................................................................... 9
4.2 Residues of plant protection products in feed oils/fats or fatty acids ............. 10
5 Feed monitoring database ....................................................................... 10
5.1 Entry of sample related data by feed companies ............................................ 10
5.2 Entry of analysis results by labs ..................................................................... 11
5.3 Evaluation options .......................................................................................... 13
6 Feed control plans in the QS-System ....................................................... 13
6.1 Control plans agriculture ................................................................................ 14
6.1.1 Control plan Agriculture (Pigs) ...................................................................................... 15
6.1.2 Control plan Agriculture (Cattle) ................................................................................... 16
6.1.3 Control Plan Agriculture (Poultry).................................................................................. 18
6.1.4 Control plan Agriculture Bakery Products ....................................................................... 20
6.2 Control plans Compound feed producers ........................................................ 20
6.2.1 Control plan Pig-, Cattle- and Poultry feed ..................................................................... 22
6.2.2 Control plan laying hen feed ......................................................................................... 24
6.2.3 Control plan Mineral feed producers .............................................................................. 24
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 2 of 51
6.2.4 Control plan Substitute milk products producers ............................................................. 25
6.2.5 Positive release sampling of blended fats and blended fatty acids (with processed fatty acids
and blended fatty acids) .............................................................................................. 25
6.2.6 Control plan for blends of oils and blends of fats (blends of vegetable oils respectively fats) . 26
6.3 Control plan Premixes and Feed additives ...................................................... 26
6.3.1 Control plan Premixes and Feed additives ...................................................................... 26
6.4 Control plans Feed material producers ........................................................... 27
6.4.1 Control plan Grains, their products and by-products ........................................................ 27
6.4.2 Control plan for Starch Production, their products and by-products ................................... 29
6.4.3 Control plan oil seeds, oil fruits and other oil-supplying plants, their products and by-products
as well as feed fats ..................................................................................................... 31
6.4.4 Control plan Tubers, roots, their products and by-products as well as for (Cane) sugar
molasses and Vinasse ................................................................................................. 34
6.4.5 Control plan By-products of fermentation- and distillation industry.................................... 35
6.4.6 Control plan Minerals .................................................................................................. 37
6.4.7 Control plan Former foods, products and by-products of food production ........................... 37
6.4.8 Control plan Fish and other marine animals, their products and by-products ...................... 39
6.4.9 Control plan Milk products ........................................................................................... 40
6.4.10 Control plan Glycerine as by-product of the processing of vegetable oil ............................. 40
6.4.11 Control plan dried grass meal ....................................................................................... 41
6.4.12 Control plan dried products (drying plants) .................................................................... 41
6.4.13 Control plan for By-products from fruit and vegetable processing...................................... 44
6.4.14 Control plan for Pulses, their products and by-products ................................................... 44
6.5 Control Plan for Traders ................................................................................. 45
6.5.1 Control plan for traders of feed material ........................................................................ 45
6.5.2 Positive release sampling ............................................................................................. 47
7 Definitions............................................................................................... 48
7.1 Explanation of Symbols .................................................................................. 48
7.2 Abbreviations ................................................................................................. 48
8 Annexes .................................................................................................. 50
8.1 Table of Parameters and Methods Table ......................................................... 50
8.2 Table of Limit-/QS Guidance Values ............................................................... 50
8.3 Designations of Compound Feed and Self-mix (agricultural sector) in the
database ......................................................................................................... 50
8.4 Designations of Premixes and Feed Additives in the database ........................ 50
8.5 Analysis spectrum for Pesticides .................................................................... 50
8.6 Registration form for laboratories .................................................................. 50
8.7 Additional control plans .................................................................................. 50
8.8 Ad-hoc monitoring plans................................................................................. 50
8.9 Evaluation criteria laboratory performance assessment ................................. 50
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 3 of 511 Fundamentals
The feed monitoring is designed for the monitoring of the quality assurance for feed out of the QS
scheme to ensure compliance with the maximum content, action thresholds and guidance values for
mycotoxins, environmental toxins, plant protection products, microorganisms, heavy metals, animal
components, and polycyclic hydrocarbons (PAHs) amongst others at the feed sector and agriculture
stage.
This guideline regulates standardised procedures and requirements for feed monitoring and forms the
basis for a permanent control of production, trade and storage of QS feed. The aim is to identify
exceeding’s and their cause in QS goods as well as initiating effective measures for prevention and
reduction.
1.1 Scope
Feed sector:
Feed additive production
Premix production
Compound feed production
Feed material production
Trade
Private Labeller
Small scale feed material producers
Mobile feed milling and mixing plant
System coordinators
Agriculture:
Cattle farming
Pig farming
Poultry production
QS approved laboratories
1.2 Responsibilities
The company must comply with the requirements of the QS scheme and be able to prove its compliance
at all times. The company must ensure compliance not only with the requirements of this guideline and
other related documents (e.g. Guideline Feed Sector, Guidelines Agriculture) but also with the applicable
legal provisions both within the country in which the QS products are produced as well as the country in
which they will be marketed by the scheme participant.
1.2.1 Feed sector
The responsibility for realizing the analysis including entering the sample related data and analysis results
in the feed monitoring data base and if applicable taking the required measures lies with the scheme
participants, small scale feed material producers and operator of mobile feed milling and mixing plants
respectively.
1.2.2 Agriculture
Each company using primary products for feed or self-mixing companies are subject to the feed
monitoring. The organisation of feed monitoring, including the establishment of the test plan to control
the feed as well as selection of the farms where the feed samples shall be drawn, is the responsibility of
the coordinator who also performs the checks.
Livstock farmers who only use purchased QS complete feeds do not have to participate in QS feed
monitoring. With businesses which are certified for QS crop farming, grassland use or forage production,
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 4 of 51the self-produced feed quantity is not taken into consideration when calculating the control plan, but
samples for feed monitoring can be taken in businesses of this kind nevertheless.
2 Sampling
The scheme participant (producer, system coordinator, agricultural coordinator, trader, small scale feed
material producer and - for the mobile feed milling and mixing plant - certification body) is responsible
for the planning and implementation of sampling. Sampling may be outsourced to an external sampler
from a lab or sampling institution (PNI). Location, method and frequency of the sampling must be
documented and suited for the products.
The sampler must draw a representative sample. Therefor incremental samples must be taken from
various different points of a batch. These incremental samples have to be blended, then turned into an
aggregate sample, which is divided to obtain representative samples for the lab. It is not allowed to
prepare average samples from different batches.
The volume of a sample must be sufficient to do second or third examinations by further laboratories.
If the sampling method does not explicitly require something else, glass bottles and other glassware are
excluded for use as sample container.
2.1 Requirements for the sampler
The sample must be taken by a qualified person, who is trained and experienced in the sampling of feed
and can take the appropriate care when sampling. The qualification is to be documented by records of
education, experience and training of the sampler.
2.2 Sampling at compound feed producers
To obtain a representative compound feed production sample, samples should be taken straight from
product circulating during the production process. In case of pelleted compound feedstuffs, the sample is
taken at the infeed point of the final product cell, in the case of floury and liquid compound feed, samples
are taken following the point at which all components of the recipe were apportioned and mixed. After
completion of the production process, possible further influences on quality (e.g. due to storage) must be
considered HACCP-based. This may require further sampling.
2.3 Sampling at Agricultural Businesses
The sample must be taken by third parties (e.g. within the audit) or by a competent person appointed by
the coordinator in the presence of the farmer. Sample taking by the farmer or employees of the farm is
not allowed.
In the case of silage feed, samples are taken at least three different points of the fresh cutting face and
combined into one aggregate sample. The sample is not to be taken from the edge area of the silage
feed. Alternatively, a drill (sampling probe) may be used to take the sample. In the case of feed stored
open, an aggregate sample has to be taken from at least five points.
In the case of feed stored in closed and inaccessible areas, the sample has to be taken at the withdrawal
point.
2.4 Sampling at mobile feed milling and mixing plants
The sample must be taken by the auditor. Random samples of feed components (fats, oils and blends of
fats/ oils) need to be taken.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 5 of 51For analysis of the positive release sampling the operator of the facility must take samples itself. Facility
operators, who trade
fatty acids from chemical refining
fatty acid distillates from physical refining
salts from fatty acid
fish oil (including refined fish oil, hydrogenized)
crude coconut oil or raw cocoa butter
mono and diglycerides of fatty acids
must conduct a positive release sampling for their products before they are marketed.
2.5 Sampling at delivery by ship
For producers and traders, it has to be ensured that at least one sample for every sea ship and every
kind of raw material (e.g. maize and wheat) is taken into account for the respective valid control plan.
During sampling all parts of the load (hold respectively loading space) have to be considered.
2.6 Sampling report
After the sample was taken, the sampler has to promptly prepare and print a sampling protocol. Therefor
a new sample related data set (sample related data) has to be entered in the feed monitoring database.
Further information for entering sample related data within the database can be found in chapter 5.1.
2.7 Packaging and Transport of the laboratory sample
Neither the container nor the process of transport to the lab must be allowed to influence any of the
parameters to be analysed in the sample. Containers must be closed and sealed to prevent from any
unauthorised opening and closing. Labelling must ensure sustained traceability.
The sample should be sent to the laboratory ten working days after sampling at the latest. If necessary,
products that change with time have to be stored and shipped under appropriate refrigerated or frozen
condition.
3 Requirements for laboratories
The analyses within the QS feed monitoring can only be carried out by QS approved labs. The approval of
laboratories by QS is necessary to ensure compliance with the QS requirements and thus to ensure the
comparability of analytical results between laboratories on a uniformly high level.
The application for the QS approval for feed monitoring is to be submitted directly to the QS Qualität und
Sicherheit GmbH ("Registration form for laboratories", see Annex 8.6). Each application will be assessed
individually by QS. Upon request by QS additional further documentation necessary for the approval are
to be transmitted to QS. In case of a positive assessment, a framework agreement between the QS
Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH and the lab will be concluded.
The approved laboratories will be published on the website www.q-s.de and can be selected in the feed
monitoring database within the sample related data.
3.1 Pre-conditions for QS approval
3.1.1 Accreditation in accordance with DIN EN ISO/IEC 17025
The laboratories must be accredited according to DIN EN ISO/IEC 17025 in the currently valid version
for the scope of feed analyses..
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 6 of 51In addition, QS specifies certain test methods for the analysis of the individual parameters (annex 8.1:
Table parameters and methods). Laboratories with an area accreditation must submit the validation
documentation on the methods required by QS.
Upon request additional further documentation necessary for the approval are to be transmittedto QS.
A distinction is made between reference, alternative and screening methods. Reference and screening
methods are the standard methods used for the analysis of parameters. Additionally, laboratories have
the possibility to apply for the QS approval of an alternative method for the analysis of a parameter. This
can be approved by QS as alternative method for the laboratory, if the equivalence can be proven to QS
by means of suitable validation documents including measurement uncertainties and ring test results. QS
decides on the equivalence of an alternative method.
When the test methods as listed are implemented, but the accreditation certificate of the laboratory does
not yet contain them, a preliminary approval can be declared, providing that these test methods are
accredited within the next 12 months.
3.1.2 Minimum Analysis Capability Requirements
The laboratory is obliged to provide QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH with a list of all parameters that
can be determined by the laboratory in the feed area including limits of quantification and measurement
uncertainty where necessary. This list has to be structured in accordance with the methods required.
If active substances (parent substances) with a complex residue definition and findings are determined,
an appropriate special method for the precise determination of the metabolites must be used in order to
satisfy Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005. The finding of the special method should be listed in the
report.
3.1.3 Participation in ring tests
A participation in external ring tests for each applied parameter within the last year prior to the
application is a prerequisite for the QS approval. The individual results of the ring tests have to be
submitted to QS for inspection as well as the spectrum of analysis. When there are no ring test results for
a specific parameter, due to the fact that no ring tests for this parameter are available in a feed relevant
matrix, it is up to QS to decide whether a comparable inter-laboratory test can be acknowledged.
Laboratories still in the approval procedure must also participate successfully in the laboratory
performance assessments organized by QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH. If the participation in the
laboratory performance assessments is not successful, QS decides individually on the further steps for
every case.
3.1.4 Subcontracting
QS approved laboratories have the possibility to subcontract individual parameters to another QS
approved laboratory. A subcontract can only be assigned to laboratories that have a QS approval for the
corresponding parameter themselves. The subcontract has to be fulfilled by this laboratory and cannot be
subcontracted to a third laboratory.
Subcontracting is only approved by QS, if at least one parameter is analysed by the laboratory itself. The
following documents have to be submitted to QS by the instructing laboratory for laboratories that
analyse QS samples in subcontract (see “Registration form for laboratories”):
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 7 of 51Name of the laboratory
Subcontracting agreement between the two laboratories including information about the parameters
that will be determined
Corresponding accreditation documents or validation documents when the relevant methods have not
yet been accredited. If the subcontract is given to a laboratory already QS approved for the feed
monitoring, a documentary check is not applicable.
After the release of the subcontract, the entry of the analysis results in the feed monitoring database is
carried out by the commissioning laboratory.
A parameter can only be subcontracted to one laboratory at a time. QS must be informed without asking,
when there are any changes in a subcontract.
3.2 Maintenance of QS approval
3.2.1 QS laboratory performance assessment
All laboratories approved by QS are obliged to participate in the laboratory performance assessments
organized or specified by QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH. The obligation to participate applies both to
laboratories performing the analysis on the relevant parameters themselves and to laboratories
subcontracting the analysis.
In the scope of the laboratory performance assessment, subcontracted test methods have to be
submitted to the subcontracted laboratory previously approved by QS. The sample has to be marked as
test material in the scope of the laboratory performance assessment and may only be analyzed for the
subcontracted parameters. The analysis must be performed within the period defined in the test. The
laboratory participating in the laboratory performance assessment must submit the results of the
subcontracted analysis to QS.
Annex 8.9 Evaluation criteria laboratory performance assessment
3.2.2 Laboratory proficiency tests
The regular participation on further ring tests dealing with feed relevant matrices for the approved
parameters must be verified to QS as follows:
Annual list of planned inter-laboratory tests for the current calendar year (by 15 March of the current
year)
Annual list (at the latest by 15 March of the following year) of the suitability tests actually passed in
the previous calendar year with results and, as a possible consequence, any measures introduced.
Participation in ring trials must be verified for each parameter every year.
3.3 Loss of QS approval
If a laboratory loses its approval, existing orders can be worked off and the results entered into the QS
database for a maximum of four weeks from the date approval was lost. A new application for approval is
only possible after six months at the earliest provided that
a new check of documents has been completed
a laboratory audit was conducted by QS at the expense of the laboratory
3.4 Obligation to enter results into the QS feed monitoring database
3.4.1 Sample receipt
Only samples marked as QS samples on the accompanying sample protocol and listed as such in the QS
database are to be tested by the laboratories as QS samples.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 8 of 51A sufficiently large reference sample has to be formed from each sample that will be analysed in a
laboratory. This reference sample has to be stored for at least three months after the end of analysis,
unless legal specifications impose a longer storage.
3.4.2 Timely input of analysis results
The analysis results of the corresponding sample ID have to be entered by the laboratories in the feed
monitoring database. For the filing of the results the following deadlines apply:
The latest submission deadline after sample receipt is 30 working days.
The entry has to be done within ten working days after the end of the complete analysis.
Complaints noticed by the laboratory have to be entered immediately into the QS database by the
next working day after the end of the analysis.
If a data record has to be reset in the QS database due to erroneous entries, the laboratory must
complete it again within three working days after the reset.
3.5 Access authorisation and perusal of documents
QS reserves the right to either check compliance with the accreditation requirements and regulations
within the scope of a laboratory audit by itself or have them checked by a commissioned per-
son/organisation. The laboratory is obliged to grant QS, or a person/organisation commissioned by QS
access to all documentation relating to its activities within QS Feed Monitoring. In addition to this, QS or
authorised third parties can commission analyses from the laboratory. If necessary, this can also be done
with regard to concealed samples.
4 Exceedance of limit or guidance values
If a sample is found to exceed the maximum level, action threshold or QS guidance value by the lab, the
result needs to be verified lab-internally at first. If the result was verified, the scheme participant must
immediately be notified. The scheme participant may have another lab double-check the first test result,
if necessary. The same sample material (part of the entire sample) is to be used for this further analysis
in a different laboratory. More information on the procedure when commissioning a second lab is
contained in Chapter 5.2.
4.1 Incident- and crisis management
When a maximum level, action threshold or QS guidance value is exceeded, the scheme participant is
obliged to notify QS immediately (notification via paper of incident). QS supports the scheme participant
in clarification of the issue and the initiation of measures. QS does not take over informing the competent
authorities. The company itself must undertake that action.
When the QS guidance value for aflatoxin B1 is exceeded in feed for companies participating in the QM
milk scheme, the QS head office as well as QM milk have to be informed. If use of the feed in QM milk
companies cannot be excluded, inform your customer about the exceedance of the QS guidance value
and the use of the feed (e.g. "Product is not suited for feeding dairy cows. ").
With an exceedance of the EU-orientation values with the parameters DON, ZEA and OTA no requirement
to inform QS exists. However, company internal measures for dealing with the goods have to be
determined and documented.
Note: In the Software Platform a plausibility check of the analysis value and the maximum level, action
threshold or QS guidance value stored within is performed automatically. In case of an exceedance, the
feed company receives a notification by email (to the legal representative).
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 9 of 514.2 Residues of plant protection products in feed oils/fats or fatty acids
Residues of plant protection products in feed oils/fats or fatty acids have to be evaluated by the
laboratory according to the following inspection cascade:
First, it must be checked whether there is a maximum level for the detected plant protection active
substance defined in the directive on undesirable substances in animal feed (2002/32/EG and
resale rights).
If there are no levels defined, the maximum residue levels of the regulation on maximum residue
levels apply (Regulation 396/2005).
For products made of vegetable oilseeds we recommend to consult the document "GMP+ BA1 Specific
Feed Safety Limits" (cf. pp. 78 ff) by GMP + Int.
The regulation on maximum residue levels allows to take processing factors into account when evaluating
residues of plant protection active substances. In addition, the German Federal Institute for Risk
assessment (BfR) defined processing factors that can be taken into account for a number of products and
plant protection active substances’ residues. However, for the final analysis, the company’s individual
production methods have to be taken into consideration.
The maximum levels must be entered into the QS database by the laboratories. Where required, the
necessary information regarding the company’s individual production methods needs to be communicated
to the laboratory commissioned by the company (client) in order to make a correct evaluation of analysis
results possible.
5 Feed monitoring database
Within the feed monitoring database all sample analysis results of the feed monitoring are collected.
The registered data serves as a basis for documenting the feed sector's performance in the area of self-
assessment. This dedicated knowledge base will help to adapt the type and quantity of testing specified
in the control plans to risk minimisation necessities.
Data security
Each scheme participant has free access to data they stored in the database. The data are subject to the
"Database privacy policy statement of May 2018" (www.qs-plattform.de) to protect the data from
persons not expressly authorised by QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH.
5.1 Entry of sample related data by feed companies
The sample related data must be entered in the feed monitoring database. The entry should be made
before the sample has been sent to the laboratory. By entering into the feed monitoring database, the
sample receives a unique sample ID, which has to be provided to the Laboratory. Therefor the sample
report has to be printed out after entering the sample related data and added to the sample.
When entering the sample related data, the following sample types have to be distinguished:
Regular samples: Sample taken within the scope of the regular sector-specific monitoring of QS.
Gate-Keeping: Sample taken within the scope of gate-keeping for a non-certified supplier.
Positive release sampling: Sample taken within the scope of positive release sampling of certain fats
and oils.
Special release: Sample taken company-specifically within the scope of a special release granted by
QS.
Additional control plan: Sample taken within the scope of an additional control plan.
Ad-hoc plan: Sample taken within the scope of an ad-hoc plan.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 10 of 51Further information about the handling of the feed monitoring database and entry of the sample related
data is available on the Software Platform (www.qs-plattform.de) within the menu item "Support".
There manuals can be found on how to use the database and how to enter sample related data for feed
companies and agricultural coordinators (Database instructions - Feed monitoring Feed sector and
agricultural coordinators). After the client has finished the data entry, the lab gets access to the data and
the right to provide the lab related data and enter analysis results and evaluation. As soon as the
laboratory has entered the analysis result the client can review the analysis result.
It is not allowed to entrust the laboratory in the feed monitoring database after the analysis of the
sample has been completed. The data records are automatically deleted.
5.2 Entry of analysis results by labs
Only QS approved labs are able to perform analysis for the QS feed monitoring. Therefor they must be
enabled for an analysis by the scheme participants in the feed monitoring data base. Afterwards they can
view the sample related data entered by the client (data from the sampling protocol).
When the lab gets the sample, the lab will first of all enter the sample number to verify whether their
client correctly and completely entered all sample data. If the client did not yet input the required data,
the lab has to ask him to do so. The lab must not start analysing until all relevant data is available. The
lab will then examine the sample for the parameters specified on the travelling sample ticket.
If pesticides are found above the limits of detection or quantification, which are not included in the
commissioned spectrum, the client must be informed in any case. Pesticides, which are not shown in the
database spectrum, but which are recorded during the analysis, must be entered in the remark field of
the laboratory related data.
If no exceedance is found, the lab must enter the analysis result in the feed monitoring database. If an
exceedance is found, the lab is obligated to send the client their analysis results in advance. In case the
client accepts the result "as is", the lab has to enter the analysis result in the feed monitoring database.
Besides the determined value the lab adds the maximum level, action threshold or QS guidance value, if
not present with a value in the database.
In case the client does not accept the analysis result, they may obtain a second opinion from another lab.
If they do, the first lab must tick the "Tbd" ("Klärung erforderlich) option instead. The client entrusts a
second lab for a second analysis via the feed monitoring database. The second laboratory then examines
the sample for parameters, where "Klärung erforderlich" was chosen. Once the laboratory has the result
it informs the client. The lab is not able to enter the result (and its evaluation) into the feed monitoring
database. The laboratory merely makes an entry that a result is available. The scheme participant must
contact QS and submits the results of the first and second examinations to the office. Together with the
scheme participant QS will clarify the facts. Should the final result be accepted, the corresponding data is
then entered into the feed monitoring database by QS. Should no agreement be reached, a third
laboratory may be called in in order to establish a definitive result through a corresponding follow-up
examination (see figure 1 "Decision tree to handle analysis results").
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 11 of 511st analysis: Did the analysis result exceed a statutory maximum level, action
threshold or QS guidance value?
NO YES
Lab inserts the result in the Lab informs scheme participant
database
Acceptance by scheme Rejection by scheme
participant participant
Lab inserts the result in scheme participant
the database entrusts 2nd lab with
2nd analysis of the
original sample
1st lab does not insert
QS receives
the result, but push the
information with
button "Tbd" ("Klärung
automatic alert
erforderlich") in the
email
database
scheme participant
scheme participant
informs QS with
entrusts 2nd lab (also in
paper of incident
the database)
QS clarifies further
scheme participant
steps with scheme
informs QS about Tbd
participant
sample
------------------------ Continue via 2nd
analysis
2nd analysis: Does the scheme participant accept the result of the 2nd analysis?
NO YES
scheme participant informs QS lab sets data set in status "Ergebnis liegt vor“
about result of 1st and 2nd scheme participant informs QS about result of 1st
analysis and 2nd analysis
optionally 3rd lab has to be QS clarifies with scheme participant, which result will
entrusted for analysis be inserted in the QS database; entry of result by QS
Figure 1: Decision tree to handle analysis results1
1The information about an exceedance given to QS does not excuse the company from the obligation to
notify the competent authorities.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 12 of 515.3 Evaluation options
Participants in the feed monitoring can evaluate their company-owned data (e.g. by results for each
location, results of the entire company or differentiated by products).
QS has the possibility to make evaluations in addition referring to all analysis results available. Such
validation is based on the mandatory assumption that the companies involved remain anonymous and
that all data is comparable.
6 Feed control plans in the QS-System
Control plans in general
The performed requirements of the control plans in this guideline are minimum requirements. Within the
company’s duty to take care and legal regulations more frequent analyses on certain parameters can be
necessary. This has to be determined and ascertained by the company within the scope of his internal
risk analysis.
The control plans list the minimum parameters the feedstuffs are to be examined for with respect to
every industry and type of animal concerned. Inspections should be systematically spread across the
year. For feed material producers and traders whose product group is not covered by a sector-specific
control plan yet, a company-specific control plan must be submitted to QS for approval. For this purpose
the template "Clearance request Company Specific Control Plan" (see www.q-s.de, Documents and
More) can be used. A company-specific control plan is issued for a limited period of time and is valid for a
year at most.
The information on the tonnage in the control plans refers to the fresh mass or the "commercial state" of
the respective products (e.g. according to description in the positive list), unless dry mass is expressly
given.
If necessary additional control plans exist as an annex to the Guideline Feed Monitoring. If relevant for
the company, it must implement these additional measures. This may also concern delivery trader.
With increased positive findings (exceedance of QS guidance values or maximum levels) QS can react
directly – and independently from any revisions of the guideline – by setting up a binding ad-hoc
monitoring plan. Within this plan, QS can increase the number of analyses of the affected products
deviating from the Guideline Feed Monitoring. As far as relevant for the company, the company is obliged
to additionally implement the ad-hoc monitoring plan (Ad-hoc monitoring plans). This may also affect
pure delivery trader.
Note: The parameters Dioxinand Dioxinlike PCB can be analysed using a combined test. If this is desired,
the corresponding parameter (Summation of Dioxin and Dioxinlike PCB) must be activated in the Feed
monitoring database. Then the parameters Dioxin and Dioxinlike PCB are automatically selected
additionally, so that the lab can deposit the result for all parameters.
Control plans for the feed stage
The control plans refer to each plant location (site specific). The frequency of analysis depends on the
annual quantity (tonnage) of QS feed per plant location. The tonnage applies to all feed, that is given in
the respective control plan.
The parameters refer to a single analysis. Several single analyses can be performed in one sample.
However, the analyses are to be systematically distributed over the year and all QS feed named in the
control plan.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 13 of 51Up to 50 % of the prescribed final product checks for the parameters to be examined can be performed
on the raw products or intermediate products, provided that contamination and the concentration of
undesired substances can be excluded during the production process.
The analysis for residues of plant protection products must always be conducted on the unprocessed
primary product respectively the raw products with all compound feed.
If any parameter in the control plan does not need to be examined (e.g. if the number of analyses can be
determined according to a HACCP-based risk evaluation), the number of analyses (in the specified sum)
reduces accordingly.
Note: If fewer batches than required individual analyses are produced per year, the number of analyses
shall be reduced according to the batches produced.
Entry into the feed monitoring database
The sample related data and analysis results for all required analyses in the QS feed monitoring -
including the gate-keeping, the release sampling, the additional control plans as well as the ad-hoc
monitoring plans – in the final product or raw material have to be deposited in the Software Platform.
6.1 Control plans agriculture
At a certain deadline, the coordinator yearly calculates the number of raw material analyses for each
substance to be made annually by every coordinator. This calculation is based on the feed quantity the
coordinated farmers produce on their farms or purchase as an agricultural primary product in the course
of one year. If the feed quantity is unknown, the number of animals per type of animal produced, can
serve as a calculation basis for estimating the feed quantity. In case the coordinator does not know how
many animals are kept by every on-farm mixer, the average number of livestock kept in the federal state
(e.g. derived from the net market position of the ZMP (the central agricultural market and pricing
reporting body) for livestock and meat and animal husbandry on farms) is used. The estimated feed
quantity then results from the number of animals multiplied by the calculation factor for the annual feed
quantity per type of animal produced (see chapter 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3). The number of analyses that an
agricultural coordinator has to comply with for the particular control plan should be spread as widely as
possible over the coordinated companies/farms. It is not permissible to examine one sample for all
required parameters, instead as many individual samples as possible should be drawn so that as many
consolidated companies/farms as possible can be taken into consideration.
The coordinator has to distribute the flexible portion among the specified parameters, taking into account
regional as well as seasonal variances with regard to the occurrence of single harmful parameters,
unwanted materials and organisms.
Analyses on Antibiotic active substances are conducted in the final self-mix (sample of the final ration). If
the analysis on Antibiotic active substances shows a positive result by means of the inhibitor test, single
substances ( annex 8.2) must be always examined. The control plans in chapter 6.1.1 to 6.1.4 are to
be established and adhered to separately per species (pigs, cattle, poultry) to all self-mixing livestock
owners.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 14 of 516.1.1 Control plan Agriculture (Pigs)
Table 1: Minimum number of feed analysis
Total feed quantity per species [t] Number of analyses per year
less than 10,000 one examination per 250 t
more than 10,000 to 50,000 55
more than 50,000 to 100,000 78
more than 100,000 to 200,000 113
more than 200,000 186
Table 2: Frequency of annual analyses - pig producing self-mixing farms
Parameter Ratio (%) Recommended for
feed materials
Dioxin 4 All
Dioxinlike PCB 2 All
Non-dioxinlike PCB 2 All
Heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg, As) 6 All
Pesticides 6 Grain (unprocessed)
Salmonella 25 All
Mycotoxins
Aflatoxin B1 -
DON 25 Grain, corn, CCM (Corn
ZEA 15 Cop mix)
Antibiotic active substances 5 Self-mix
Animal components - -
Flexible portion of the coordinator 10 All
Total 100
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 15 of 51Table 3: Template for feed quantity estimation
Type of agricultural Scope Number of used Annual feed Estimated feed
business1 animal space quantity calculation quantity per
(year) factor species [t]
(animals x calculation
factor)
- Pig fattening 2001 Fattening 0.625
- Gilt / boar rearing 2002 Rearing 0.625
- Sow production and 2004 Sows 1.1
piglets up until
weaning
- Piglet rearing 2008 Piglet rearing 0.25
------------------
Total
1
If an operation belongs to more than one type the feed quantity is computed by adding up the calculation factors of
all types concerned.
6.1.2 Control plan Agriculture (Cattle)
Table 4: Minimum number of feed analyses
Total feed quantity per species [t] Number of analyses per year
less than 10,000 one examination per 250 t
more than 10,000 to 50,000 55
more than 50,000 to 100,000 78
more than 100,000 to 200,000 113
more than 200,000 186
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 16 of 51Table 5: Frequency of annual analyses - cattle producing self-mixing farms
Parameter Ratio (%) Recommended for feed
material
Dioxin 4 All
Dioxinlike PCB 2 All
Non-dioxinlike PCB 2 All
Heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg, As) 6 All
Pesticides 6 Grain (unprocessed)
Salmonella - -
Mycotoxins
Aflatoxin B1 15 All
ZEA 10 Grain, corn, silage corn
DON 10 Grain, corn, silage corn
Antibiotic active substances 10 Self-mix
Animal components 10 Self-mix
Flexible portion of the
25 All
coordinator
Total 100
Table 6: Template for feed quantity estimation
Type of Scope Number of Calculation factor Estimated feed
agricultural used annual feed quantity quantity per species
business1 animal [t]
space (animal x calculation
(year) factor)
- Cattle fattening 1001 6.5
- Calf fattening (on 1002 -²
milk substitutes)
- Feeder production 1004 1.3
- Calf rearing 1004 1
- Dairy farming 1008 5
- Suckling / nursing 1016 5
cow production
----------
Total
1
If an operation belongs to more than one type the feed quantity is computed by adding up the calculation factors of
all types concerned.
2
Examinations to include the forage used together with milk substitutes.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 17 of 516.1.3 Control Plan Agriculture (Poultry)
Table 7: Minimum number of feed analyses
Total feed quantity per species [t] Number of analyses per year
less than 10,000 one examination per 250 t
more than 10,000 to 50,000 55
more than 50,000 to 100,000 78
more than 100,000 to 200,000 113
more than 200,000 186
Table 8: Frequency of annual analyses - poultry producing self-mixing farms
Parameter Ratio (%) Recommended for
feed materials
Dioxin 4 All
Dioxinlike PCB 2 All
Non-dioxinlike PCB 2 All
Heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg, As) 6 All
Pesticides 6 Grain (unprocessed)
Salmonella 50 All
Mycotoxins
Aflatoxin B1 -
-
ZEA -
DON -
Antibiotic active substances 5 Self-mix
Animal components - -
Flexible portion of the coordinator 25 All
Total 100
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 18 of 51Table 9: Template for feed quantity estimation
Type of agricultural Scope Number of Annual feed Estimated feed quantity
business1 used animal calculation per species [t]
space (year) factor1 (animals x calculation factor)
Broiler fattening 3001 0.0025
Turkey rearing 3002 0.042
Turkey fattening 3004 0.042
Peking duck rearing 3008 0.004
Peking duck fattening 3016 0.004
Laying hen farming 3032 0.042
Poultry for multiplying 301 0.042
broiler
Poultry for multiplying 304 0.042
fattening turkey ---------------------
Total
1
If an operation belongs to more than one type the feed quantity is computed by adding up the calculation factors of
all types concerned.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 19 of 516.1.4 Control plan Agriculture Bakery Products
This control plan has to be implemented for all animal species and has to be applied in addition to the
control plans in the chapters 0 to 6.1.3.
There is at least one sample per farm and year to analyse.
Table 10: Minimum number of annual analyses
Amount ≥10,000
in tCompound feed producers, which use these products for their compound feed, have the option to
purchase products, which have no positive release sampling. But they have then to take over the positive
release sampling of their suppliers prior to the processing of these products. This possibility does only
exist if there is a special release for the compound feed producer and does not exist for QS goods or
goods from QS recognized standards.
Compound feed producers, who buy feed material, premixes or additives from non-certified suppliers in
addition to the manufactured products and want to perform positive release sampling, have to apply the
Gate-Keeping regulation according to Annex 9.2 of the Guideline Feed Sector. The analyses in the
framework of positive release sampling have to be performed additionally to the analyses of own
products. The monitoring has to be performed for each supplier separately.
Table 11: Control plan systematic for compound feed producers
Compound feed
types RMF/ SF/FF/ MGF/
MLF LHF MIN MAT MFS²
KF MSF GEF
Parameter
Aflatoxin B1 - - - X - - - -
DON - X - - - - - -
ZEA - X - - - - - -
OTA - X - - - - - -
Dioxin X X X X X X X X
Dioxinlike PCB X X X X X X X X
Non-dioxinlike PCB X X X X X X X X
Salmonella X X X X X - X -
Heavy metals (Pb, As,
X X X X X X - -
Hg, Cd)
Nickel1 - - - - - - - X
Animal components The number of analyses should be determined with regard to risks
-
within the scope of the company’s own QM system.
Antibiotic active
- - - - - - - -
substances
PAH - - - - - - - X
Ergot Examinations within the inspection of the incoming raw materials in -
the unprocessed primary product
Pesticides Examinations within the inspection of the incoming raw materials in X
the unprocessed primary productrespectively raw materials
Relevant Tables for Table 20,
determining Table Table Table Table Table Table Table positive
examination frequency 12, 14 12, 15 12, 16 12, 13 17 18 19 release
sampling
1
Only to be analysed, when nickel is used in the production process.
2
Respectively blends of oils and blends of fats (blends of vegetable oils and fats respectively).
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 21 of 51Up to 50 % of the prescribed final product checks for the parameters to be examined can be performed
on the raw products or intermediate products, provided that contamination and the concentration of
undesired substances can be excluded during the production process.
The explanation of the abbreviations can be found in Chapter 7.2.
RMF/KF Cattle fattening feed/calf feed
SF/FF/MSF Sow feed/Piglet feed/ Pig fattening feed
MGF Poultry fattening feed
GEF Poultry for multiplying feed
MLF Milk performance feed
LHF Laying hen feed
MIN Mineral feed
VM/ZS Premixes/Feed Additives
MAT Substitute milk products
MFS Blends of fat and blends of fatty acids
6.2.1 Control plan Pig-, Cattle- and Poultry feed
In Table 12 it is determined how many annual analyses per parameter are to be conducted, depending
on the annual tonnage (t) of pig, cattle and poultry feed. These analyses must therefore be distributed
over pig, cattle and poultry feed.
In addition to the analyses required in Table 12, additional analyses must be conducted specifically for
each species. Which compound feed types are to be analysed every year for additional parameters can be
taken from Table 13 to Table 16.
For laying hen feed, only the separate control plan applies ( chapter 6.2.2).
In addition to this control plan, the additional control plan Aflatoxin B1 (annex 8.7) may need to be
considered.
Table 12: Analyses for pig, cattle and poultry feed
Amount ≥2,000 ≥5,000 ≥10,000 ≥50,000 ≥100,000
in t1
Examinations (optical controls) on ergot (claviceps purpurea) are to be conducted and documented by the company
itself as an incoming goods inspection in unground grain. If ergot is found, subsequent count and documentation take
place (no entry in QS database).
Table 13: Additional analyses for milk performance feed
Amount ≥2,000 ≥5,000 ≥10,000 ≥50,000 ≥100,000
in t6.2.2 Control plan laying hen feed
In Table 17 it is determined how many annual analyses per parameter are to be conducted depending
on the annual tonnage (t) of laying hen feed. For producers of laying hen feed only this control plan
applies (6.2.2).
Table 17: Analyses for laying hen feed
Amount in t ≥5,000 ≥20,000 ≥40,000
Parameter6.2.4 Control plan Substitute milk products producers
These analyses are to be conducted in addition to the analyses outlined in Table 12 - Table 15 for milk
substitutes. For companies that only produce QS substitute milk products,
Table 19 applies exclusively.
Table 19: Analyses for substitute milk products
Amount in t ≥1,000
Parameter6.2.6 Control plan for blends of oils and blends of fats (blends of vegetable oils respectively
fats)
Table 20 determines how many annual analyses per parameter are to be examined, depending on the
annual tonnage (t) of blends of oils and blends of fats, which do not contain fatty acids and mixed fatty
acids.
These analyses are to be conducted in addition to the analyses outlined in Table 12 - Table 16 for
blends of oils and blends of fats. For companies that only produce QS blends of oils and blends of fat,
Table 20 applies exclusively.
Table 20: Analyses for blends of oils and blends of fats
Amount in t ≥1,000 ≥5,000 ≥10,000 ≥100,0001
Investigation with fermentation products.
6.4 Control plans Feed material producers
The control plans for the feed material production are divided into the individual industries.
The column "small scale feed material producers" refers only to those feed material producers, which
were audited according to the requirements of the guideline "QS inspection for small scale feed material
producers".
The number of analyses for pesticides and animal components, is not stipulated in several control plans,
but is to be determined here by the companies on a risk-oriented basis.
Unless otherwise specified in the control plan, the examinations for pesticide residues are carried out at
the raw product receiving inspection on unprocessed (primary) products.
Explanations on the determination of analysis frequency with the control plans of the feed
material producer
The control plans of the feed material industry allow for a variable determination of the number of
analyses with several parameters. The number of analyses to be conducted depends on the risk
assessment of the farm or company (HACCP) and examinations already performed. Separate company-
internal analyses may also be used. If it can be shown on the basis of representative, feed material-
specific analysis results that a parameter does not constitute any significant risk, the number of samples
can be reduced to the lowest value within the range. Otherwise, the upper value is to be used.
If the number of analyses should be reduced, the company must be able to plausibly justify the selected
scope of analyses on the basis of its risk assessment and available analysis results and document this. In
the event that positive findings (e.g. salmonella) are made, or exceeding’s of a statutory maximum level,
action threshold or QS guidance value or, where applicable, existing company-internal intervention
values are established, the feed company must undertake a new risk assessment and adapt the
examination frequency as necessary. The scope of the examinations and risk analysis are checked in the
audit.
The time period considered for the previously conducted examinations must be sufficient for the
assessment of the risk and adjusted to match each respective contamination risk. If there are no
previous analysis results, the highest number of analyses listed in each respective control plan must be
conducted.
With the parameters Dioxins, Dioxinlike PCB, Non-dioxinlike PCB and PAH there is to consider, that the
number of analyses cannot be reduced if a feed material was subjected to drying per direct firing, unless
the company can prove in the form of a risk assessment (e.g. drying with natural gas, propane gas,
Liquid Natural Gas (LNG)) and on the basis of previous analysis results that the quantity of undesired
substances in the feed does not exceed statutory maximum levels or action threshold during the drying
process.
6.4.1 Control plan Grains, their products and by-products
Position Positive List, Group 1: "Cereal grains, their products and by-products" (e.g. Wheat, Barley, Rye,
Maize, Wheat screenings, Oat hulls and bran, Maize germ expeller): 1.01.01 to 1.10.10 (except the
positions of control plans of the starch production), 7.03.01 (Cereal plants) and 7.06.01 (Maize plants)
In addition to this control plan, the additional control plan Aflatoxin B1 (annex 8.7) may need to be
considered.
Version: 01.01.2019rev02
(rev02 as of 01.08.2019)
Guideline Feed Monitoring Status: • Release
Page 27 of 51You can also read
