What is TraceabilityDes Bowler

Management for Technology Pty Ltd30th June 2006

Traceability Means? Proof of Origin – What am I made from?

Trace Forward – Where have I gone?

Track Back – Where did I come from?

Market Requirement – EU, Japan, US

Product Recall – AFANZ Chapter 3 Food Standards Code

Traceability - National Performance Standards (NPS)

for Traceability Biosecurity - DAFF, AQIS, State Depts

EU Requirement - 1 Up/ 1 Down Rule

US 2002 Bioterrorism Act

What Causes a Traceability Event Product contamination detected by

export customer during routine testing

Domestic consumer complaints creating a product recall.

Auditing of system by Company for QA purpose.

Animal/ Product issues detected during product processing (e.g. sick animals found on arrival at slaughter)

What Causes a Traceability Event Product contamination detected by export

customer during routine testing – 70%

Domestic consumer complaints creating a product

recall – 25%

Auditing of system by Company for QA purpose –

4%

Animal/ Product issues detected during product processing (e.g. sick animals found on arrival at

slaughter) – 1%

However!!!!!

Export or Domestic instigated recall – mostly only effects a batch or group of product.

Large likelihood but isolated impact!

Disease incident may effect whole market –

Very small likelihood but large impact!

Product Recall – Store Level

Pork mince

Date: 29/05/2006

Supplier Name: Woolworths SupermarketsProduct Info: Use by date 27/05/06 Black tray with clear plastic overwrap. Random weights between 494 gm and 520gm Product manufactured on site. 10 packets manufactured and 6 have been retrieved.Defect Details:  Metal and plastic fragment contaminationConsumer action: Return to place of purchase for a full refundMarket Coverage: Woolworths Shellharbour NSW storeRecall Coverage: Woolworths Shellharbour NSW storeThe following link will open in a new window and take you out of the Product Recalls Australia site.The Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has overall policy responsibility for monitoring the conduct and outcomes of food safety recalls in Australia.

http://www.recalls.gov.au

Normal level of Consumer Complaints

Product Problem - Customer Complaints

Process Problem - Customer Complaints

Traceability, a Moment in Time. Products 1 to 4 are feed, grass from properties, veterinary drugs,

exposure to agrichemicals. Products 5 and 6 are livestock from different sources. Product 7 is the processing plant where the cattle/sheep/pigs are

slaughtered and broken down in to products. Products 8 to 11 are various possible products such as:

Primal cuts 16%, Offal 6%, Hide 10%, Rendered meat/ bone meal 10%, Tallow 7.5%, Bones 10%, Trim 25%, Waste (water loss, blood, etc) 10%, Foetal blood 0.5%, Pet food 5%

Products 12 to ‘n’ are the further processed products such as: Retail steaks on a tray pack, Sausage casing created from the collagen scraped from the underside of

the hides, Growth medium for vaccines made from the foetal blood, 80 cl cartons of trim sent to the US for grinding, Leather shoes made in Italy from the hides, Bone meal used as commercial fish food base.

Movements of Animals4 days before discovery3 days before discovery2 days before discovery1 days before discoveryDisease discoveryNotification to CVO Plus 1 day Plus 2 days Plus 3 days

Disease Verses Contamination? Prevalence of Food poisoning: Although most

food borne infections are undiagnosed and unreported, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that every year about 76 million people in the United States become ill from pathogens in food. Of these, up to 5,000 die. ... An estimated 76 million cases of food borne disease occur each year in the United States. ... Estimated to cause 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,200 deaths in the United States each year.

A new report has revealed 11,500 Australians become ill each day from food poisoning.

The Australia New Zealand Food Authority researched the extent of food poisoning, as part of its review of food safety standards.

Cost for Traceability

Complex System Single Body Boning Primal Labels/ Single Body

batch size Live ID to Primal High capital and operating

costs Low cost for DNA analysis [Pay now save later]

Simple System Single Day Batch Lot Based Live ID Production Date Batch size Low capital and operating

costs High cost For DNA analysis [Save now pay later]

Hypothetical Example

A US Customer discovers unacceptable levels of a banned chemical in the random testing of the 80CL trim carton.

What would happen?

The First Step All product from the same shipment to be tested. Product from many production dates and plants. The shipper and plant notified and told of the

problem: Which carton(s) is it that has the problem? Product from the same plant and same day? How do the US testing people tell the cartons

apart, how do they know which are different plants, different dates, etc?

Are there serial numbers or just batch codes

After Review

Review found that the problem was with several cartons in the shipment but not all the cartons.

Identified as coming from one plant across a few production days.

The trim was frozen and over 6 months old.

The chilled meat that was produced all sold.

What does the company do? What production batches are effected? What recall protocol should be implemented? Where have all the other cartons from the

production dates gone? Distribution companies used to pick and send

products around the world. Do each of the cartons have serial numbers? Does the distribution company track the

serial numbers or just the product types? Does the company recall the tallow, meat

meal, pet food, foetal blood?

Company Placed into Receivership Once made public liability and recall costs

were so high company was no longer solvent. Problem was over 3 consecutive days

production days from 1000 head per day. Trim was frozen and over six months old. Had the NLIS tag records as well as the NVDs. Cattle came from saleyards, feedlot and

direct consignment from 120 properties. Not all trim product effected, only some. Company thought that the problem was from

a few contaminated cattle out of the 3000 possible, but which cattle?

Few weeks later …. Same chemical found in shipment to the US of

frozen trim from a different plant. The production dates different to first company

but also over 6 months old. This company has the systems in place to

identify and track each carton through supply chain.

Distribution was done by scanning each carton. The product identified and the specific

production dates and time determined. Effected product all came from one specific

production line even though different lines processed the same batch of cattle.

After Review Chemical was not found in any product from

the other production lines. Reviewed the maintenance records for

production equipment and found a service had been done on the one plastic bulk liner packaging machine for that line.

The records identified the batch codes of the materials used for the maintenance.

A specific lubricant was used on the machine for producing the plastic carton liners. That lubricant batch was not used on any other machine.

Tracked and Traced Product The company’s production records identified and

traced forward specific cartons of trim produced before the service and after the service.

Some carton serial numbers were traced to specific cold storage facilities and tests conducted.

The product produced before the maintenance showed no contamination, the product produced after the maintenance showed the contamination.

The amount of contamination decreased over two days of production. No contamination was found by the middle of the second day.

Who was Liable? The brand, type and batch code for the

lubricate were referred to the manufacturer. Manufacturer identified the chemical as being

used in very small quantities in the lubricant. Specific batch was an old batch and had been

withdrawn. Maintenance company that did the service had

used the old lubricant without knowing the recall.

Company’s insurance company started legal action against the maintenance company and lubricate manufacturer for damages.

What did we Learn? Company One

Thought problem was contaminated cattle. Could not track and trace even with

individual animal ID. Recalled large volumes and went broke.

Company Two Good track and trace along whole supply

chain. Correctly identified source of contamination. Contained size of recall. Started legal action to recover losses.

Was this a Theoretical Example? Most widely sold mineral water is

Perrier. In 1990 minute traces of benzene

were found in samples of Perrier. 280-million bottles of Perrier recalled

from store shelves. Because traces of benzene got into

one batch from a faulty filter. Crisis cost one billion francs (€152.5-

million, US$186.6-million).

Where to from here? Traceability Systems must integrate

along the whole supply chain. Each input to the process must be

recorded, not just the major items. Track and trace must be transparent

along the supply chain. Where did I come from and where are all the companions?

Systems must be standards based to work across multiple industry sections. Retail, grocery, transport, manufacturing, feed production, etc.

Thank You!Des Bowler