GMP d41 - en 20131115 PDF

D
4.1
EN

GMP+ D4.1
Safety of processing aids in feed

Version: 15 November 2013

GMP+ International B.V.

All rights reserved. The information in this publicati-
on may be consulted on the screen, downloaded
and printed as long as this is done for your own,
non-commercial use. For other desired uses, prior
written permission should be obtained from the
GMP+ International B.V.

GMP+ D4.1 Safety of processing aids in feed 2/48
Version: 15 November 2013 GMP+ International
INDEX
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 4
1.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................... 4
1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE GMP+ FEED CERTIFICATION SCHEME ........................... 4
2 FOREWORD .......................................................................................... 6
2.1 USE OF PROCESSING AIDS DURING THE PRODUCTION OF FOODSTUFFS .......... 6
2.2 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PROCESSING AIDS ............................................. 6
2.3 RISK TO FOODSTUFFS INDUSTRY BY-PRODUCTS ........................................... 6
2.4 PRELIMINARY RESEARCH ............................................................................ 7
2.5 RESULTS ................................................................................................... 7
INVENTORY OF PROCESSING AIDS IN THE FOODSTUFFS INDUSTRY
WITH RESPECT TO THE SAFETY OF FEED FLOWS ............................... 8
1 SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 10
2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 12
3 BRANCHES STUDIED ........................................................................ 13
4 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY ............................................................ 14
5 USE OF PROCESSING AIDS PER BRANCH ..................................... 16
5.1 POTATO INDUSTRY ................................................................................... 16
5.2 POTATO STARCH ...................................................................................... 18
5.3 GRAIN AND STARCH INDUSTRY .................................................................. 19
5.3.1 Flour preparation................................................................................. 20
5.3.2 Starch preparation .............................................................................. 21
5.4 SUGAR INDUSTRY ..................................................................................... 24
5.5 BREWERIES ............................................................................................. 25
5.6 DAIRY INDUSTRY ...................................................................................... 27
5.7 OIL (FROM SOY BEANS) ............................................................................. 30
5.8 RENDERING COMPANIES ........................................................................... 31
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 34
6.1 GENERAL DOCUMENTS ............................................................................. 34
6.2 CONCLUSIONS PER BRANCH...................................................................... 35
6.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 38

APPENDIX 1 : LIST OF PROCESSING AIDS IN THE BRANCHES
EXAMINED ................................................................................................. 39
APPENDIX 2: FEED PRODUCTS PROCESSING AIDS AND
PROCESSING AIDS QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................... 43

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General

The GMP+ Feed Certification scheme was initiated and developed in 1992 by the
Dutch feed industry in response to various more or less serious incidents involving
contamination in feed materials. Although it started as a national scheme, it has
developed to become an international scheme that is managed by GMP+
International in collaboration with various international stakeholders.

Even though the GMP+ Feed Certification scheme originated from a feed safety
perspective, in 2013 the first feed responsibility standard has been published. For
this purpose, two modules are created: GMP+ Feed Safety Assurance (focussed
on feed safety) and GMP+ Feed Responsibility Assurance (focussed on
responsible feed).

GMP+ Feed Safety Assurance is a complete module for the assurance of feed
safety in all the links of the feed chain. Demonstrable assurance of feed safety is a
'license to sell in many countries and markets and participation in the GMP+ FSA
module can facilitate this excellently. Based on needs in practice, multiple
components have been integrated into the GMP+ FSA module, such as
requirements for the quality management system (ISO 9001), HACCP, product
standards, traceability, monitoring, prerequisites programmes, chain approach and
the Early Warning System.

With the development of the GMP+ Feed Responsibility Assurance module, GMP+
International is responding to requests by GMP+ participants. The animal feed sec-
tor is confronted with requests on working responsibly. This includes, for example,
the use of soy (including soy derivatives and soy products) and fishmeal which are
produced and traded with respect for humans, animals and the environment. In
order to demonstrate responsible production and trade, a company can get certified
for the GMP+ Feed Responsibility Assurance.
Together with the GMP+ partners, GMP+ International transparently sets clear re-
quirements to guarantee feed safety & responsibility. Certification bodies are able
to carry out GMP+ certification independently.
GMP+ International supports the GMP+ participants with useful and practical infor-
mation by way of a number of guidance documents, databases, newsletters, Q&A
lists and seminars.
1.2 Structure of the GMP+ Feed Certification scheme
The documents within the GMP+ Feed Certification scheme are subdivided into a
number of series. The next page shows a schematic representation of the content
of the GMP+ Feed Certification scheme:

B documents
Normative documents, appendices and country notes
A documents
General requirements for participation in the GMP+ FC scheme
GMP+ Feed Certification scheme
Feed Safety Assurance Feed Responsibility Assurance
C documents
Certification requirements of the GMP+ FC scheme
D documents
Guidelines to help companies with the implementation
of the GMP+ requirements

All these documents are available through the website of GMP+ International
(www.gmpplus.org) .

This document is designated as GMP+ D4.1 Safety of processing aids in feed. It is
not a norm document but research at that time carried out in collaboration with the
Product Board Animal Feed.

Use is made in this document of the original text of the report. The information in
this research can be used to give a better implementation of the GMP+ FSA re-
quirements.

2 Foreword
Safety of processing aids in feed
2.1 Use of processing aids during the production of foodstuffs
Companies use all kinds of processing aids during the production of (raw materials
for) foodstuffs. Companies use these processing aids at certain moments in the
production process to assist the production process, to make it easier or to bring
about a particular feature of the product. There are also other reasons for using
processing aids.
Examples of such substances are:
- anti-foaming agent
- flocculants.
- acids and salts to regulate the pH value
- preservatives
- extraction agents such as hexane

We can subdivide all these processing aids into three main groups:
- processing aids such as a anti-foaming agent or a flocculant
- utilities such as coolants, fuels and cleaning agents
- additives such as a preservative for storage life.

2.2 Legal requirements for processing aids
The Directive 70/524/EEC, the so-called Additives Directive, also addresses the
use of processing aids. In article 1, section 2, this directive states that it does not
apply to processing aids:

This Directive shall not apply to processing aids used deliberately as sub-
stances in the processing of feed materials or of feedingstuffs in order to
achieve a certain technological objective during treatment or processing
which may result in the unintentional but technically unavoidable presence
of residues of the substances or their derivatives in the final product, provid-
ed that these residues do not present any health risk and do not have any
technological effect on the finished product.

Processing aids are therefore not designated as additives. There are no other regu-
lations for these products. This does not of course mean that companies do not
have to set requirements for these products and their use.

2.3 Risk to foodstuffs industry by-products
It is known that many feed raw materials are created as a by-product of foodstuffs
production. The processing aids used by foodstuff manufacturers in the production
process for foodstuffs may get wholly or in part into the by-product, the feed raw
material.

Within the framework of the safety and risk control of feeds, it is therefore important
to pay attention to the safety and quality of the processing aids used.

The idea that these processing aids cannot represent a hazard because they are
used during the production of foodstuffs intended for human consumption is not
wholly correct. At the beginning of 2000, for example, there was the beet pulp af-
fair. It was established that because of contamination of the processing aids used
in sugar recovery, undesirable substances got into the by-product, beet pulp.

2.4 Preliminary research
The Product Board decided to have a study carried out in order to find out what the
risks are to by-products in which processing aids might possibly be found and
which control measures could be taken. This research was carried out within the
framework of the Quality Assurance Improvement Plan for the Feed Sector in which
research was carried out in many sub-areas of the feed sector with respect to the
safety of feeds.

You will find the results of this research in this report. The report provides an over-
view of the production processes in a number of foodstuff sectors and the pro-
cessing aids which are used. The report also provides an answer to the question of
whether, and how, foodstuff companies control the quality and safety of the pro-
cessing aids used.

2.5 Results
The major findings are:
- The companies studied were so-called A companies, leading companies in their
sector. The results and findings cannot be applied generally as they are to all
companies.
- The level of quality assurance in the companies studied is high. The processing
aids used also fall within the quality assurance of the companies although they
could expand this quality assurance further in this respect.
- This research shows that there are almost no risks to waste flows due to the
use of processing aids.
- The companies studied have no overview of the risks which may occur in the
subsequent links. This is, however, not their responsibility but that of their cus-
tomer.

Feed companies or traders which obtain products (waste flows) of foodstuff prod-
ucts can, for example, use the results and conclusions in the carrying out of the
HACCP analysis. The way in which Tebodin carried out the research among food-
stuff manufacturers can serve as an example to customers of waste flows for use
with other foodstuff manufacturers.


Inventory of processing aids
in the foodstuffs industry with
respect to the safety of feed flows

client Product Board Animal Feed

project Preliminary study of processing aids in feed products
order number 27142
report number 3212000
revision 1
date 22 September 2000
authors A.J. Rottier, M.E. Heijbrock, E.A. Maarseveen

Tebodin B.V.

Laan van Nieuw Oost-Indi 25
2593 BJ The Hague
P.O. Box 16029
2500 BA The Hague

telephone 070 - 3480 294
fax 070 - 3480 591
E-mail a.rottier@tebodin.nl


authorisation
author: release approval:
A.J. Rottier, M.E. Heijbrock,
E.A. Maarseveen
F. van Woerden
Senior Consultant /
Consultants
Head of the Department of Environment
and Safety
The Hague, 22 September 2000

1 Summary
Research is currently being carried out within the framework of the Quality Assur-
ance Improvement Plan for the Feed Sector in many sub-areas of the feed sector
with respect to the safety of feeds. One of the studies is focused on the safety and
quality of processing aids and processing aids which are used in production pro-
cesses in the foodstuffs industry.

In this regard a study was carried out among 13 foodstuff companies in various
sectors into the use and risks of processing aids, additives and utilities with respect
to feed flows. A questionnaire was used during the visit to the company. Use was
made of the same questionnaire during each company visit. Table 1 shows a sum-
mary of the results.

Table 1 Branches studied and their products and hazards
Branch Feed flows / products possible risks
Potato Peel, parings and pro-
duction waste, starch
- grey starch
- internal transport containers
- processing at clients
Potato
Starch
Fibres, concentrated
juice and protein.
- forming of nitroso-amines (via NOx) dur-
ing the drying of protein and Protapec.
Flour Wheat feed meal pellets,
wheat feed flour pellets,
maize feed meal
- contamination of raw material with my-
cotoxins (moulds)

Starch from
wheat
Wet wheat feed
Wheat gluten feed
Vital gluten
- contamination in auxiliary agent wood
flour
- conversion process in wet wheat feed
Starch from
maize
Maize gluten feed
Maize protein
Crushed maize
Maize solubles
- no identifiable risks
Sugar Press pulp
Pulp blocks
- contamination of the auxiliary agent
gypsum with fluorine and heavy metals
- use oil as fuel during direct drying
- further processing in chain
Beer Brewers grains
Yeast
Malt substance
Return beer
- further processing of brewersgrains
(mixing in beet / citrus pulp)

Dairy Mix of products / water
flow
- in the event of contamination of one
flow, everything is contaminated
- error during cleaning procedure
- use sludge of physical chemical purifica-
tion
Soya oil Soya extract - hexane in feed
- Salmonella
- other undesirable substances
DIGES-
TION
Meat meal
Feather meal
Animal fat
Blood meal
- Salmonella
- chemical contamination in corpses

The quality awareness among the companies studied appeared to be high. The use
of processing aids is limited. No processing aids at all are used in some branches.
In the companies studied there were generally no complicated further processing
steps carried out on the co-products for the feed.

The released feed flows are mixed by the feed manufacturers into compound feeds
and also fall within the responsibility of these clients. The responsibility of the food-
stuffs companies usually ends at the storage in the silos on their own terrain.

The foodstuffs industry has good quality assurance as far as its own processes are
concerned. The processing aids supply sector has not yet got full control of the
foodstuffs companies. Product control lies in many cases exclusively with these
suppliers.

It is recommended that the feed companies (as waste flow clients) regularly audit
the released feed flows in the foodstuffs industry. In turn, the foodstuffs companies
could regularly audit the suppliers of processing aids. The foodstuffs companies
could expand their HACCP quality systems to include the processing aids and feed
flows.

It is recommended that the compound feed companies experience of foodstuffs
companies should be examined and used to visit a number of foodstuffs compa-
nies. Some divisions of the companies visited have been left out of consideration
within the framework of this study. It is advisable also to carry out research here.

2 Introduction
The Product Board Animal Feed is a semi-governmental body which is tasked with,
among other things, the quality of feed products. Research is currently being car-
ried out within the framework of the Quality Assurance Improvement Plan for the
Feed Sector in many sub-areas of the feed sector with respect to the safety of
feeds. One of the studies is focused on the safety and quality of processing aids
used in production processes in the foodstuffs industry. These processing aids are
materials which are used directly or indirectly in the production process and which
can get into the waste flows which are destined for feed without the intention of
adding them to the final products or by-products. Examples are product drying with
combustion gases or dosage with gypsum to improve the press quality (dry matter
content) of beet pulp.

A number of recent incidents have shown that contaminants in processing aids and
processing aids can lead to quality problems in the (waste) product, the feed.

The Product Board decided to have a study carried out in order to find out what the
risks are which are associated with the use of processing aids in food materials
production where feeds or feed raw materials are created as a waste flow and
which control measures can be taken. The Product Board Animal Feed engaged
Tebodin to carry out the study.

The first phase of the study was a global inventory of the processes in a number of
branches. On the basis of the results an assessment can be made of whether it is
necessary to take technical and organisational measures in the feed production
chain in question. The follow-up studies are not part of the first phase of the study.

3 Branches studied
The inventory was drawn up among a number of companies in the feed materials
industry which may be considered to be model companies in a branch. The food-
stuff branches and companies were selected in consultation with the Product
Board.

Table 2 Branches selected for the study

Branch
Potato industry
Potato starch
Grain and starch industry
Sugar industry
Breweries
Milk-processing
Soya oil industry
Rendering industry

A total of 13 companies were visited. The foodstuffs processes in the Netherlands
were examined per company. In most cases this involved a number of sites with
different processes per site.

These companies were examined to see which additives are used in particular pro-
duction steps and whether these may possibly lead to contamination of the feed
product.

4 Structure of the study
The following method was used in the study:

Tebodin created a questionnaire for use during the interview with the compa-
nies. The questionnaire was discussed with the Product Board Animal Feed,
the comments were incorporated and a final questionnaire was drawn up. The
same questionnaire was used for all the companies.
Tebodin contacted the companies to establish the correct contact person for the
interview. The contact person can be roughly classified into three groups: pro-
duction managers, quality managers and environment managers. The Product
Board presented the existing contact persons for feed for a number of compa-
nies and in other companies Tebodin found a contact person.
The Product Board sent a letter to all the contact persons in which the Tebodin
study was officially announced.
Tebodin contacted the contact persons to make an appointment.
The questionnaire was sent in advance to the contact persons so that they
could prepare properly for the meeting.
The questionnaire was handled during the meeting. In most cases one of the
production sites at which the feed flow was released was also visited.
The finished survey was fed back to the company for comments.
The report was drawn up on the basis of the details provided by the company
with an overview and an evaluation of the results in which there was an investi-
gation of in which branches risks were present when using processing aids.
The report may be considered to be a quick scan of the use of processing aids
and utilities in the foodstuffs industry with respect to feeds.

The foodstuffs processes in the Netherlands were examined per company. In most
cases this involved a number of sites with different processes per site. During the
company visits, the following were examined (see the survey questions in appendix
2):

1. Main and by-products of the processes.
2. Use of substances in the processes:
a) use of raw materials
b) use of processing aids
c) use of utilities such as coolants, combustion gases, fuels, steam, lubricants,
inert rendering gases and cleaning agents
d) additives (for example preservative for the storage life of the feed).
3. Sub-stages of the foodstuffs process with attention to the point where the pro-
cessing aids are used and where the feed flows are released.
4. Quality Assurance.
5. Transport and responsibilities for the feed product.

Use is made of a single survey with the same questions for each company. The
answers were provided in confidence by the companies to the Product Board Ani-
mal Feed.

All the companies cooperated with the study. In most cases there was an extensive
prior discussion with Tebodin about whether to participate. An extra visit was some-
times necessary to get the company to decide to participate.

The companies cooperated on the basis of the confidentiality of the study and on
the data being known only internally at the Product Board. One company wished to
cooperate with the survey only on the basis of anonymity. No company visit was
carried out in this case. The company provided its answers in writing.

5 Use of processing aids per branch
A section follows for each branch with an evaluation of the findings. If various dif-
ferent companies were examined within the branch then the companies are speci-
fied separately. Appendix 1 contains a summary diagram with an overview of the
results of the inventory at the companies in question.

5.1 Potato industry
Two companies were visited in the potato industry. The raw material is of course
the potatoes which are obtained from contracted suppliers and through purchasing
on the European potato market. The business processes are particularly focused
on products for the consumer: deep-frozen fries and potato specialities. Feed flows
are a co-product in which there is no further handling of these flows. The size of the
feed flows is considerable and, depending on the season, amounts to 25% to 40%
of the ingoing potato flow.

Washing of
potatoes
Peeling Grading cutting Blanching Drying Frying Freezing
Dirct steam Anti-foam
Indirect steam
dextrose acid soium
pyrophosphate
Frying vat
herbs
Steam peelings
cuttings
Production wast
Frying fat
Packaging
Fine grinding Sieving
Storage of feed product
Indirect steam
Process water from
production Concentration
stach
Heat treatment
Feed storage

Figure 1 Potato products flow chart.

The co-products which are released during the production processes (see Figure 1)
and are processed as feed, are:
Steam peelings which are sold after fine grinding (14-16% dry matter).
Potato cuttings where excess moisture is first separated using curved screens
(20% dry matter).
Grey starch which is obtained through the evaporation of released process wa-
ter from the various process stages and then heated using indirect steam.
Production waste and potato products which are not eligible for consumer sale
due to quality requirements. Production waste refers especially to deviations in
colour, length, taste and an excess of eyes' in the potato products.
White starch which is obtained from the water after the cutting of the potatoes.

Steam peelings, wet parings and grey starch are the major flows and amount to
circa 80% of the released feed flows.

The processing aids used in the processing are an anti-foaming agent and salt. The
anti-foaming agent is used during the grading and cutting of the potatoes. Salt is
used to be able to separate the potatoes on the basis of their specific gravity.

Sodium pyrophosphate and dextrose are used as product additives during the
blanching of the potatoes. The purpose of sodium pyrophosphate is to prevent the
grey colouring after the deep-freeze process. Dextrose is for colouring so that the
product has the same colour throughout the year.

There is a selection procedure for all processing aids and additives in which the
supplier and the product are subjected to a check of their specifications and prod-
uct characteristics. Once the supplier/product combination has been chosen then
this product is then used in production. Purchasing is done centrally with a contract
being entered into for a number of years with a leading trading company in the
Netherlands. Deliveries are made in portions within the framework of the estab-
lished rules and quality requirements (delivery certificate).

The utilities used are primarily steam (steam peelings), freon and ammonia (deep-
freeze end products) and thermal oil (heating of ovens and driers). Only steam
comes into direct contact with the product.

The storage of additives, processing aids and other agents is done in strict separa-
tion where the various product groups cannot come into contact with one another.
No internal checks are done on the delivery of these substances after the certifica-
tion of a supplier or a product.

All wet' feed flows are pump through a closed circuit and stored whereas the dry'
products are stored in containers.
The responsibility for the feed flows is transferred to the processor at the manufac-
turers site. In general a company will work with a single client or carrier. The meth-
od of working of this processor was not examined within the framework of this as-
signment.

At one of the companies questioned they worked in accordance with the ISO 9000
standards for the consumer product. Procedures and working methods have been
laid down in an own quality system for the handling of the feed containers.

At another company the production process for the consumer products was quality
assured under HACCP. The feed product was quality assured under GMP because
of the carrier / client selected.

The frying fat was specified as another additive or auxiliary agent (and waste flow).
The same rules apply to the disposal of this fat as described above. The finished
frying fat is picked up by a fat processing company.

5.2 Potato starch
In the production of potato starch, the feed flows amount to about 30% of the total
output.

The following products are produced as feed:
Potato pulp
Concentrated juice
Protein.

Figure 2 Potato starch flowchart.

The feed raw materials are extracted during the starch production and further pro-
cessed separately into feed products.

washing
fibre
extractio
n
Vegetable
water
extraction
Further processing
into starch
grinding
fibre
dewatering
De-
foaming
Water SO2 Anti-foam
fibres
Coagulatio
n
protein
seperation
Filtrate
concentration
Mixing
Protein
protei
n drying
Drying
Protapec
Water
Natural
gas
Soya bean
hulls
SO2, Steam
Anti-foam
Potato
es
Natural
gas
Specific for feed

The potato pulp is dewatered and then stored in containers. The extracted vegeta-
ble water is further processed after coagulation for protein production. The potato
juices which are released during protein separation are mixed with soya bean hulls,
dried and stored.

The following processing aids are used during the production of starch and feeds:
SO
2

Anti-foaming agent
Natural gas
Water

SO
2
and anti-foaming agent are obtained from suppliers in the market. Suppliers
are selected in advance and guarantee the best quality with a delivery certificate
supplied.

Low-NO
x
burners are used during the drying process. The burners work on natural
gas which is obtained via the national natural gas network. The water used during
the processes is purified surface water. The water is of drinking quality, free of mi-
crobiological and organic substances. Soya bean hulls are added as an additive
during the processing of the concentrated juice and the soya bean hulls are
checked per consignment for moisture and protein content.

SO
2
is stored in liquid form in tanks, the anti-foaming agent is stored in closed
tanks, the soya bean hulls are stored in silos on the terrain.

Continuous process checks are carried out during the production of the main and
by-products. Work is done in accordance with the ISO 9000 standard for the pro-
duction of protein, concentrated juice and soya bean hulls. Additional GMP rules
apply for the processing of potato pulp. Quality rules apply to both the processing
aids and the end product and checks are carried out to prevent any harmful conse-
quences.

There are possible risks in the drying process. Nitroso-amines can be formed in the
low-NO
x
burners (from NO
x
). The safety of the feed is guaranteed by sampling.

5.3 Grain and starch industry
Two companies were visited from the grain-processing industry. Flour preparation
took place at one of the companies. The other company makes starch from wheat
and maize.

5.3.1 Flour preparation

Figure 3 shows the general production process for flour preparation.

pelleting
conditioning
supply cleaning griding sieving
flour
/ meal
steam,
vinasse
pellets
water

Figure 3 Grain-processing industry flow chart
The most important raw material is wheat (95% of turnover). In addition, maize, rye,
barley and rice are processed. The by-products come from the wheat and the
maize. The husks are separated from the flour during sieving. To simplify the
transport of the by-product, it is pelleted using (direct) steam and vinasse. The vi-
nasse comes from the sugar industry and contains a minimum dosage of the end
product.

The feed products released are:
wheat feed middlings pellets
wheat feed flour pellets
maize feed meal.

The requirements of GMP, HAZOP and GMP+ apply for the lubrication of moving
equipment parts which can come in contact with the product.

The cleaning of equipment is usually done dry mechanically because moisture can
lead to contamination. If contamination is observed then spot cleaning is applied.
There are other reasons apart from mould for rejection such as the product being
too wet or there being too much flour. If the product is too wet then the pellets are
dried again. If there is too much flour then the starch and protein levels are higher
than described in the specifications. This has no consequences for health but it
does for the compound feed industry which bases its production and specifications
on the lower starch and protein levels.

The feed product is transported by truck or vessel to the clients. Vehicles are used
only for the transport of feed and are checked for contamination on a random sam-
ple basis. Vessels are always checked either when loading or when unloading.

The risks consist of contamination with mycotoxins which are checked for before
the cargo is unloaded. If there is contamination then the load is destroyed. As no
harmful processing aids are used and the transport is checked, there are no identi-
fiable risks..

5.3.2 Starch preparation
Starch is obtained from two raw materials: wheat or maize. These are separate
processes with many processing steps in which a whole range of feed flows are
released. Roughly 30% of the raw material is sold as feed. Two types of feed flows
are created during production:
specific feed product (regular feed flow)
incidental feed flow (during the starting and stopping of production, product de-
viations, etc.).

A simplified flow chart for the production of starch from wheat is shown in figure 4.

dry
grinding
Wheat
Vital glutens
food + feed

Mixen
delite
dough
Vital gluten
screen
wet
separation
washing
Dewater
Drying
mixing
centrifuging
Inculation
evaporation
Filtration
starch
rafinery
Drying
Washing Mexing
Drying
pelletising
cooling
Cellulose
Water
Condensate
Water
Condensate
25% NaOH
Hot air
woodmeal
Glucose
(food)
HCl 33%
Wheat starch
Concentrate
Solubles
flour
Bran
Mud
-amylase
Liquid feed
( Wet wheat feed )

Wheat gluten feed

Figure 4 Flowchart for the starch industry using wheat as raw material

After the flour preparation the first step is dough preparation. Vital glutens are re-
covered from the dough. This product is used for both human consumption and for
feed. It is the same product in both cases.
The remaining dough flow is used for the production of starch and glucose. During
wet separation a separate flow is further processed into feed products, wet wheat
feed and wheat gluten feed.

In the process various flows are mixed for the production of the released feed flows
(see figure 4)
wet wheat feed: solubles which are released during the centrifuging and wheat
starch
wheat gluten feed: bran which is released during dry grinding, the auxiliary
agent wood flour mud released during the filtration of glucose and concentrate
released during centrifuging.
vital glutens: no internal mixing of process flows.
The mixing of the flows does not involve specific risks. The flows come from the
same wheat grains.

The processing aids used are:
the enzymes cellulase and -amylase
hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide solution
wood flour during the filtration of glucose (absorbs proteins, minerals and glu-
cose)
preservative propionic acid for wet wheat feed.

Drying takes place at various points in the process. The wheat gluten feed is indi-
rectly dried with steam. The vital glutens are directly dried, first with air heated by
steam and then using combustion air from a heat coupling plant where natural gas
is used for combustion.

The lubricants used are mainly food grade. The process equipment is cleaned once
every 2 months using cleaning-in-place with cleaning agents. The section for dry
grinding is only mechanically cleaned.

The risks in this process lie in the wet wheat feed and in the auxiliary agent wood
flour mud. Conversion processes could occur in the event of longer storage of wet
wheat feed. The company will examine this in a study by an internal working group.
All the wood flour goes into the feed product wheat gluten feed. Fresh wood flour is
currently used. Theoretically there is a risk of contaminated wood flour being used
on occasion.

The simplified flow chart for the recovery of starch from maize is shown in Figure 5.
The food products released are starch and maize germ. Unlike the process for
wheat, no glucose is produced in this process. The major feed flows released are:
maize gluten feed
maize protein
crushed maize
maize solubles.


Sieving Maiz
e
Soaking vats
Maize crushers
DSM-tank Centrifuging
Bran wash -
steps
Dewater
Drying
Pelletising
germ
drying
Soadingwat
er
verdamper
Concentration
Sodium
bisulphite
Process
water
Hot air
Maize germ (food)
flour
Mais gluten feed

Mais protein
Crushed maize
Maize soluble
proteins Water, starch
protein
Starch (food)
Modified
starch (food)
acids &

bases
Gluten drier
Specifically for feed Specif ically f or f eed

Figure 5 Flow chart for the starch industry using maize as raw material
Only one auxiliary agent is used in the process: sodium bisulphite solution during
the soaking of the maize. Some of the sulphur gets into the products. Starch (for
human consumption) may contain a maximum of 50 ppm SO
2
.

During the modification of the starch use is made of processing aids such as sul-
phuric acid and sodium hydroxide solution. The process for modified starch was not
analysed further because no regular feed flows are released as a co-product here.

The feed products are dried using direct drying:
maize gluten feed using a natural gas fired drum drier
maize protein (gluten drier) with a combination of combustion gases from a nat-
ural gas fired heat and power plant and a natural gas fired drum drier.

The lubricants used are food grade where necessary. The process equipment is
cleaned only with water and every two months. The germ drier and the feed drier
are only dry cleaned.

As only one auxiliary agent which is approved for human consumption is used and
as natural gas is used for drying, there are no identifiable risks. There may be risks
in the further processing by clients.

The feed flows from the wheat and maize processes are collected for 70-80% by
the clients themselves. The clients themselves are responsible for this. The com-
pany has a contract with a single company for the remaining flows. The feed flows
are removed in bins on trucks with a canvas over them. Wet flows are transported
using tankers.

The company is ISO 9002 certified and is currently implementing GMP and
HACCP. A working group has also been established for GMP / HACCP which is
focused on feed. This working group is currently working on maize and a start will
be made on wheat shortly.

5.4 Sugar industry
Two companies in the Netherlands were visited for the sugar industry. Both have a
number of production sites in the Netherlands with regional differences in the pro-
cessing. Figure 6 is a global production scheme. The raw material is the sugar beet
which is processed during a campaign of about 100 days. The main product is sug-
ar (in all its variations). Press pulp and pulp blocks are released as feed product.
Sugar beets
supply
washing sutting
Scalding trough +
diffusion
Juixe purification concetnration cooking
Anti-foaming agent
Formalin, calcium
sulphate, sulphate
Pulp pressing
Pulp drying
Pelleting
Molesses, sugar
Kalkwater gips
driers
Molasses, steam
Pressed pulp
Pulp lumps
Specifically for feed

Figure 6 Sugar industry flow chart

An anti-foaming agent is added to the washing water during washing. The washing
water is partly condensate and partly purified, recirculated washing water. In some
sites an anti-foaming agent is also added during the cutting of the beets.

In the extraction phase (scalding trough and diffusion towers) formalin shots are
added to keep infection under control. In addition, calcium sulphate and sulphuric
acid (or sulphite) are used to regulate the pH level. Milk of lime or gypsum is added
during pulp pressing to increase the dry matter level. Gypsum has a higher dry mat-
ter level than milk of lime. The milk of lime is made by the companies themselves
from burnt lime. The pulp can be sold if the dry matter content is about 18%. Pulp
blocks are created by then drying the pulp (in gas burners) and pelleting it (using
molasses from its own process).

The agents which are used are FDA approved or comply with other requirements
set by the foodstuffs industry. The only entry requirements are for the limestone
which forms the basis for the milk of lime (must contain at least 96% calcium car-
bonate). Gypsum is checked for the level of heavy metals and fluorine. The end
products are regularly sampled for any harmful substances.

The by-products are sold ex works. The clients hire a carrier whereby the sugar
manufacturers require that the carriers be GMP certified. Press pulp is sometimes
removed in the same trucks which supplied beet in which case the trucks must be
brush cleaned.

The risks lie in the use of gypsum which can be contaminated as was shown from
incidents in the past. Currently, apart from a single location, the gypsum (calcium
sulphate) is made from limestone and sulphuric acid by the company. Gypsum is
sampled per consignment for heavy metals and fluorine. The risk is therefore cov-
ered.

The risks at manufacturers are covered in this branch by the HACCP and GMP
which are in use. There is no insight into the further processing carried out at sub-
sequent links in the chain. This could be a source of risks. The use of oil during
drying can also be a risk. This could lead to contamination of the product.

5.5 Breweries
Two companies were visited for the beer brewing branch which both have various
production locations.

Beer is made from malt by brewing (mashing, clarification), after which the sugars
are converted by yeast into alcohol (see figure 7). The following feed flows are re-
leased during the production of beer:
Brewers grains (the insoluble part of the clarification),
Yeast,
Malt substance,
Return beer.

The brewers grains are a particularly large flow.


Malt flakes
Malt
substance
Water Beslaan
50 - 75 C
Acid clarification
Brewers grain
75 - 80 C
Boiling
100 C
cooling
5 - 8 C
Deyeast yeast
Beer yeast
0 10 C
Kiezelguhr Fiklter
Tannin 0 C
PVPP
Beer topping up
0 - 2 C

Figure 7 Beer brewing flow chart

Processing aids used in production are:
Hydrochloric acid or lactic acid
Calcium sulphate and calcium chloride for source water treatment);
Kieselguhr (silica);
Tannin (tannic acid);
Polyvinyl polypyrolidon (absorbents for polyvinols).

Only the hydrochloric acid (or lactic acid) and the calcium salts can get into the
feed. As this acid gets into the beer primarily intended for human consumption,
there is no risk. The other processing aids are used after the last feed flow has
been separated off.
The calcium salts occur naturally in water and are only added because the water
used is treated by micro-filtration whereby the desired components are also re-
moved.

Precautionary measures are taken to prevent components of utilities getting into
the product. Steam is used indirectly and coolants are also used indirectly. An al-
cohol and water mix is used indirectly as a coolant (common in the foodstuffs in-
dustry) which is in turn indirectly cooled by ammonia. In the event of a leak only
alcohol / water can get into the beer. Also, only foodgrade lubricants are used.
Cleaning agents are primarily sodium hydroxide solution and sometimes acid. In
the event of production errors cleaning agents will usually get into the beer and not
so much the feed flows.

The processes in the breweries examined were generally comparable. The number
of feed flows is limited. Processing aids are bought in accordance with a specifica-
tion.

The quality assurance for the feed at the companies examined is regulated via
GMP or ISO 9002. The responsibility for removal and further processing lies with
the clients. This is generally a limited number. There is no insight into the further
processing carried out at subsequent links in the chain. For brewers grains beet or
citrus pulp is mixed in. This could be a source of risks.

5.6 Dairy industry
One company in the dairy industry was visited. This concern has 3 product groups:
drinking milk and consumption products
cheese
refinery products from milk; feed is also produced here as a product: rearing
powders.

The company was examined for the product group drinking milk and consumption
products. Two more interviews would have been necessary for the other product
groups with the employees from the product groups in question. In view of the
scope of the current scan the cheese and refinery product groups were not exam-
ined. It is advisable to arrange these interviews. The company is prepared to coop-
erate in this.

In the product group drinking milk and consumption products, it is the raw material
milk which is pasteurised and possibly further processed into drinking milk products
such as custard, yoghurt, buttermilk, etc. During product all the flows which are
suitable for feed are collected into a single tank and removed as one flow. The size
of the feed flow is very small in comparison to the processed raw material milk be-
ing about one promille.

The origins of the flows which are mixed are (see figure 8):
Product remains: when switching from one product to another, production
faults, return products from clients
Water mix with product: during cleaning the water/product mix is released
Sludge from physical chemical purification (only at one location, see figure 9).

water
Product remains in
object (tank,
pasteuriser, cooler)
Product / water mix (from cleaning objects) (Products can be custartd, yoghurt,
buttermilk, porridge)
2-3% d.s.
Production faults
Tapped product from filter machines
Product / water mix (cleaning) product /
product mix (changeover)
Return product from clients press Sieve
Feed tanks Feed

Figure 8 Dairy industry feed flows flow chart

No processing aids are used during the production of drinking milk or consumer
products. Additives are, however, added including lactic acid bacteria, thickening
agents, aromas, fruit preparations and colouring agents These also get into the
feed product but they are all suitable for human consumption.

With respect to utilities, use is made of steam (generally indirect), cooling (indirectly
with water which is in turn indirectly cooled with ammonia) and foodgrade lubri-
cants. These are in anticipation of the prevention of emergences.

Acids and bases are used as cleaning agents. The procedure for cleaning objects
(once per 24 hours) is that first the product remains are removed from the object
and rinsed with water. This goes to the feed tanks. Cleaning is then done with a
solution of sodium hydroxide / potassium hydroxide or nitric acid and then rinsed
with water. This flow goes to the sewers. The first product / water mix goes back to
the feed tanks. Cleaning agents could theoretically get into the feed flow if the pro-
cedure was wrongly applied. The chance of this is however very small. The clean-
ing and production processes are kept strictly separate from one another for the
sake of product quality. In addition, various safeguards have also been incorpo-
rated into the automatic process (such as reporting the equipment empty).

HACCP is applied to the feed flow except for the processing of returned products.
The feed product is removed by tanker as drink for pigs (4% dry matter) and the
client is responsible for this. One client is used per location.

At one of the locations all the waste flows are processed in one physical chemical
purification. Use is made during the purification process of the processing aids sul-
phuric acid and a flocculant on a cellulose basis. The sludge which is formed is sold
by the client as a separate flow.

Process water with process
remains
Ph = 4
H2SO4
Flotaion
Flocculant
Aereate
Scrape off sludge
layer
Feed tank

Figure 9 Flow chart for the physical chemical purification in the dairy indus-
try feed flow
As no processing aids are used the risks in the dairy industry do not lie in the pro-
cessing aids. There is a risk in the fact that all the flows are mixed into a single
flow. If a risk substance gets into the feed then the whole flow is contaminated.
There is however a high dilution effect. Risk substances can theoretically get into
the sludge such as in the case of power failure or an interruption to the automatic
process programmes. There is always however an error message. Precautionary
measures can be taken for this to have the sludge taken away separately.

The mixing of the sludge takes place at the clients beyond the responsibility of the
company.

The product groups cheese and milk refinery products were not examined. The
risks here may be different.

5.7 Oil (from soy beans)
One company was visited for this branch and another company cooperated anon-
ymously. The anonymous company makes oil from soya beans and from oil seeds.
The following relates specifically to the process in which soya oil is recovered from
soya beans.

A large quantity of waste products is released during the production of soya oil.
These waste products are processed into soya bean meal and are supplied to feed
companies. The production of feed raw material is thus part of the primary process.
The sales relationship in kilos between the consumer product (oil) and the feed
(soya meal) is 1 : 4. The extract' is further processed into feed raw material.
In addition, very small quantities of oil intended for the consumer market are sup-
plied to compound feed companies.

Figure 10 Soya oil and soya bean meal flow chart.

Sieve Cool
Extract
oil
Process inot
Oil and lecithin
Break and
cruch
Evaporate
Hexane
Steam
air
air
Drying
Grinding
Soja bean meal
Add
Anti-dust
agent
Hexane
Soya bean hulls
Soya bean
Velasse
Lime
Steam
Steam
air
Extraced

The following processing aids and utilities are used in the pre-treatment of soya
beans:
steam
air
hexane

During the further processing into soya bean meal, steam and air are used in addi-
tion to anti-dust agents as an auxiliary agent or product additive for better product
handling.
These are:
lime
molasses.

The water for steam generation is treated with lye (NaOH) and phosphate to bind
the remaining hardness of the water in the steam boilers. These substances com-
ply with the requirements set in the food processing industry. The air is extracted to
the outside via filters. Hexane is supplied in accordance with the specifications in
dedicated tankers and internal regeneration takes place. Lime and molasses are
supplied via a broker with a quality guarantee from the supplier. The lime must
comply with a CaCO3 content of 97%, the molasses is checked by an external la-
boratory against the specification provided.
Extra soya bean hulls are also added to the soya bean meal. Deliveries of these
soya bean hulls are checked per consignment against the specifications provided.

All the processes in the feed production comply with the requirements set by GMP
as established by the Product Board Animal Feed. A quality manual is complied
with internally and operator manuals have been drawn up. These describe, among
other things, the process checks to be carried out, the taking of samples of the end
product and a check on the cleanliness of the means of transport.

5.8 Rendering companies
One rendering company was visited. Rendering companies process slaughter-
house waste, bodies, blood and feathers into meat meal, animal fat, blood meal
and feather meal. Feather meal is the only one of these that may be supplied to the
cattle industry. The incoming material comprises 70% water. After cleaning in a
biological purification plant this is discharged into the surface water. Another flow is
SRM (specified risk material such as BSE material). This is collected via rendering
companies, processed into dry material and then incinerated.

Figure 11 shows the process description for the production of meat meal. The anti-
oxidant BHT is dosaged in the raw waste just before the crusher. This gives the
best mix of fat and the antioxidant. Before crushing a return flow fat is added to
make the product liquid so that crushing is made easier. The blood meal which is
added in the standardisation step to correct the protein content comes from their
own production. Pelleting is done using steam and serves primarily to improve the
running characteristics of the product.

It is obligatory to process all HR (high risk) materials into feed ingredients. The
quality of the slaughterhouse waste is guaranteed by the slaughterhouses via
HACCP. The hazards are of a microbiological nature so in practice this is not a
hazard due to the pasteurisation and sterilisation steps.


Raw Materials
Supply
crush
Pasteuise
and sterilise
Grinding
Evaporation and
decanting
Fat pressing
Standardise
Grinding
Pelleting
mixing Grinding
Pellet meat meal Animal fat
Cleaning
Water
Blood meal
BHT

Figure 11 Rendering companies flow chart

Blood and feathers are also processed in addition to the slaughterhouse waste.
Blood is delivered separately by the slaughterhouses. It is coagulated (heated), the
proteins are decanted and the serum protein goes to the water purification. The
blood cake goes to the drier and is sterilised. Feathers are hydrolysed due to iner-
tia. The drying takes place in disc driers using indirect steam.

There is strict zoning on the site to prevent cross-contamination. This zoning is in
accordance with the type of material (feathers / other) and process steps (raw /
sterilised). People and vehicles are cleaned and disinfected.

The risks do not lie in the use of processing aids but in the raw materials used. If
there are chemical contaminants in the bodies then these also get into the feed
product.

6 Conclusions and recommendations

6.1 General documents
The following general conclusions may be drawn for the foodstuffs industry sector
as a whole:

1. Quality awareness is high within the first links in the chain, the foodstuffs com-
panies visited. The companies visited have a good name in the market, they
treat the feed flows during the greatest part of the process in the same way as
the main flow. This is also because of the position in the process where the
feed flow is separated from the primary process flows. During a great part of the
processes, the feed product goes the same as for the primary food products for
human consumption. At some companies the feed flows belong to their main
products which are sold in the market. The feed flows are also sizeable as co-
products for which a (small) financial payment is received. As a waste flow they
would be a major expense item.

2. The use of processing aids is limited. In some sectors no processing aids seem
to be used at all such as the dairy companies during the preparation of drinking
milk and consumption products and rendering companies. At other companies
the use of processing aids is limited to a small number which are often the fa-
miliar acids or bases or small quantities of permitted processing aids for food
products intended for human consumption.

3. The companies visited can be divided into 3 groups with respect to the feed
flows produced:
companies with one feed flow where all the flows are mixed (dairy industry)
limited number of feed flows (for example breweries, potato industry)
large number of feed flows (starch industry on the basis of wheat and
maize).

4. In the companies visited there were generally no complicated further pro-
cessing steps carried out on the by-products intended for feed. This makes it
relatively easy to use or extend the HACCP and GMP system used for the
foodstuffs to include the feed flows. The clients for the feed flows at the compa-
nies visited are generally limited to a number of brokers and feed manufactur-
ers. There is often just one and not more than three clients who are contracted.
Occasionally there are deliveries direct to farmers.

5. The feed manufacturers mix together the various feed flows which are released
by the foodstuff companies into compound feeds. The responsibility of the
foodstuffs companies usually ends at the storage in the silos on their own ter-
rain. During further processing there may be possible risks due to the risk of
cross-contamination.

6. In general the foodstuffs companies use processing aids with care. This is also
because of the strong interaction with the process flows for human food prod-
ucts.

The processing aids are supplied by a limited number of well-known suppliers
with whom long contracts have usually been entered into varying from one to
three years (sometimes purchasing is arranged centrally by one company for all
the branches in the Netherlands). The processing aids are usually used directly
in the process without any further processing.

7. The foodstuffs industry has good quality assurance as far as its own processes
are concerned (and where sampling takes place). The suppliers of processing
aids are not yet fully controlled. Product control lies in many cases exclusively
with the suppliers.

8. Incorrect operations during the cleaning or maintenance of the machines re-
mains risky. (Approved) cleaning agents or lubricants could get into the feed
flow. This risk applies to the same extent as for human food and much proce-
dural attention is paid to this.

9. Most of the feed flows fall under GMP with respect to quality assurance. One or
two work only with ISO 9002. Some are advanced in that the feed flows also fall
under HACCP.

10. The risks for the manufacturers examined lie not so much in the processes but
more in the subsequent links at the clients for the feed products and/or waste
flows.

6.2 Conclusions per branch
The table shows, for the individual branches in the foodstuffs industry, a summary
of the released feed flows and the possible risks with respect to the use of pro-
cessing aids in the processes.

Table 3 Branches studied and their products and risks

Branch Feed flows / products possible risks
Potato Peel, parings and produc-
tion waste, starch
- grey starch
- internal transport containers
- processing at clients
Potato
Starch
Fibres, concentrated juice
and protein.
- forming of nitroso-amines (via NOx)
during the drying of protein and
Protapec.
Flour Wheat feed meal pellets,
wheat feed flour pellets,
maize feed meal
- contamination of raw material with
mycotoxins (moulds)

Starch from
wheat
Wet wheat feed
Wheat gluten feed
Vital gluten
- contamination in auxiliary agent wood
flour
- conversion process in wet wheat feed
Starch from
maize
Maize gluten feed
Maize protein
Crushed maize
Maize solubles
- no identifiable risks

Sugar Press pulp
Pulp blocks
- contamination of the auxiliary agent
gypsum with fluorine and heavy met-
als
- use oil as fuel during direct drying
- further processing in chain
Beer Brewers grains
Yeast
Malt substance
Return beer
- further processing of brewers grains
(mixing in beet pulp)

Dairy Mix of products / water flow - in the event of contamination of one
flow, everything is contaminated
- error during cleaning procedure
- use sludge of physical chemical puri-
fication
Oil Soya extract - contamination from hexane in feed
product
- Salmonella
- other undesirable substances
DIGESTION Meat meal
Feather meal
Animal fat
Blood meal
- Salmonella
- chemical contamination in corpses

The specified risks in the table can be explained as follows per branch:

1. Potato industry.
The possible risks in this branch do not lie in the use of processing aids. Possi-
ble risks are however acknowledged in the grey starch flow which is recovered
from a mix of various waste water flows from the production factory. The waste
water flows come from various locations in the factory and unwanted compo-
nents may get into them. There are also risks in the internal processes of the
customers for the feed products as well as the internal transport of production
waste in containers.

2. Potato starch.
There are possible risks in the drying process. Nitroso-amines can be formed in
the low-NO
x
burners (from NO
x
). The safety of the feed is guaranteed by sam-
pling.

3. Flour.
The risks consist of contamination with mycotoxins which are checked for be-
fore the cargo is unloaded. If there is contamination then the load is destroyed.
As no harmful processing aids are used and the transport is checked, there are
no identifiable risks..

4. Starch.
Starch can be prepared using two processes and, depending on the raw mate-
rial, these are the wheat [process or the maize process
The risks in the wheat process lie with respect to the released feeds in the
wet wheat feed and in the auxiliary agent wood flour mud. All the wood flour
goes into the feed product wheat gluten feed. Fresh wood flour is currently
used. Theoretically there is a risk of contaminated wood flour being used.

Also in the released flow of wet flour there may be conversion processes in
the event of longer storage. This is currently being examined in the sector.

There are no identifiable risks in the maize process. There is one auxiliary
agent used which is approved for human consumption and natural gas is
used for drying. There may be risks in the further processing by clients.

5. Sugar.
The risks lie in the use of gypsum which can be contaminated as was shown
from incidents in the past. Currently, apart from a single location, the gypsum
(calcium sulphate) is made from limestone and sulphuric acid by the company.
Gypsum is sampled per consignment for heavy metals and fluorine. The risk is
therefore covered.

The risks at manufacturers are covered in this branch by the HACCP and GMP
which are in use. There is no insight into the further processing carried out at
subsequent links in the chain. This could be a source of risks. The use of oil
during drying can also be a risk. This could lead to contamination of the prod-
uct.

6. Beer.
Only the hydrochloric acid (or lactic acid) and the calcium salts added during
clarification can get into the feed. As this acid gets into the beer primarily in-
tended for human consumption, there is no risk for the by-products.
There is no insight into the further processing in the feed flows carried out at
subsequent links in the chain. For brewers grains beet or citrus pulp is mixed
in. This could be a source of risks.

7. Milk.
As no processing aids are used the risks in the dairy industry do not lie in the
processing aids. There is a risk of contamination of the feed product in the fact
that all the flows are mixed into a single flow. If a risk substance gets into the
feed then the whole flow is contaminated. There is however a high dilution ef-
fect.

Risk substances can theoretically get into the sludge as a result of a fault.
The mixing of the sludge takes place at the clients beyond the responsibility
of the company.

In the dairy industry in particular, there is a risk due to the method of operation
with various products in sequence and interrupted by cleaning operations, that
cleaning agents could get into the feed flow if the procedure is applied wrongly.
The chance of this is however very small.

8. Soya oil.
Hexane is used as an extraction agent in soya oil preparation. There is a risk of
hexane being contaminated by other components (such as benzene). After
evaporation of the hexane these components could be compounded in the feed
product.

9. Rendering.
No use is made of processing aids in this branch. There could be a risk of
chemical contaminants in the bodies which then get into the feed product.

6.3 Recommendations
1. There are generally sufficient control measures by the manufacturers of feed to
guarantee the quality of the feed. The next step could be to follow the chain up
to the user in order to inventory all the hazards in each link and on this basis to
set extra requirements if necessary for the control measures.

2. It is advisable for feed clients regularly to audit the previous link where the raw
materials are released (the foodstuffs industry). This is already usual in some
companies. In turn, the foodstuffs industry can audit its prior links including the
manufacturers of processing aids. This is already being done by a number of
foodstuffs companies.

3. Depending on their size, control measures and procedures are also applied to
the feed flows and in general the same rules are applied as for the foodstuffs
processes for human consumption. If the feed products are only' a waste flow
then there is little checking. Checking at the client is then of extra importance
and should be improved.

4. With respect to processing aids the foodstuffs industry should not just trust the
checks by the suppliers but also take on its own responsibility and demonstra-
bly include this in its own quality assurance.

5. A limited number of foodstuffs manufacturers have currently been examined.
The question is in how far they are representative. The companies visited have
a good name in the market. It is advisable also to visit other companies. As
preparation for the selection the experiences with compound feeds and food-
stuffs companies could be checked.

6. Only the drinking milk division was visited in the dairy industry. Other divisions
such as cheese preparation and milk refinery could be examined.

7. It is advisable to extend the quality systems of the foodstuffs companies
(HACCP) for the foodstuff products to include the processing aids and the feed
flows.

APPENDIX 1 : List of processing aids in the branches examined
Branch Raw
materials
Products Feed flows Processing
aids
Own
processing
aids
Entry check
processing
aids
Feed
quality
assurance
Utilities Additives
Potato
industry
Table pota-
toes, herbs,
fat and starch
Deep-freeze
fries and
quick-frozen
potato
specialities
Peel waste, wet
parings, reject
potatoes, fried
waste, starch
(white), crumbs,
waste fat, pure,
combination of
fat and pure,
starch (grey)
Anti-foaming
agent and salt
Specifica-
tions and
certification
Check a
number of
times per
year
GMP Broxo,
ammonia
and freon,
oxytreat,
food-grade
lubricants,
thermal oil
Sodium
pyrophos-
phate,
dextrose
Table pota-
toes, frying fat
Deep-freeze
fries, quick-
frozen potato
specialities
and potato
flakes
Peel, parings and
production waste,
starch
Anti-foaming
agent
AVIKO
quality
requirements
No None Cleaning
agents
Herbs,
sodium
pyrophos-
phate and
dextrose
Potato
starch
Starch
potatoes
Potato starch Fibres, concen-
trated juice
(Protapec) and
protein.
Sulphur dioxide Specifica-
tions and
certification
Yes,
sampling or
control label
HACCP Natural gas
combustion
gases, sur-
face water
for cooling
Soya bean
hulls
Grain and
starch
industry
Wheat, maize,
rye and barley
Flour (300
varieties)
Wheat feed
middlings pellets,
wheat feed flour
pellets and maize
feed meal.
Vinasse Specifica-
tions and
approved
suppliers
Vinasse for
DS level,
protein and
potassium
GMP, in the
process of
HACCP
certification
within the
framework of
GMP+
Lubricating
oil
Enzymes,
emulsifiers
and salt

Branch Raw
materials
aids
Own
processing
aids
Entry check
processing
aids
Feed
quality
assurance
Utilities Additives
Maize Starch,
modified
starch, wheat
proteins
Maize gluten
feed, maize
protein, crushed
maize, maize
solubles
Sodium
bisulphite solu-
tion
Specification
sheet
Visual in-
spection
ISO 9002,
engaged in
GMP and
HACCP
Steam,
combustion
gas from
natural gas,
lubricants,
cleaning
agents
None
Wheat Glucose,
starch,
modified
starch, wheat
proteins
Wheat gluten
feed, wet wheat
feed, vital gluten,
partly hydrolysed
wheat gluten,
concentrated
wheat solubles
Cellulase, sodi-
um
hydroxide solu-
tion, wood flour,
alpha-amylase,
propionic acid,
hydrochloric
acid
Specification
sheet
Limited
Control
according to
schedule
ISO 9002,
engaged in
GMP and
HACCP
Steam,
combustion
gas from
natural gas,
lubricants,
cleaning
agents
Ascorbic
acid
Sugar Sugar beets Sugar and
sugar
specialities
Beet tails, press
pulp and pelleted
pulp
Water,
formalin,
gypsum or milk
of lime, sul-
phuric acid and
sulphite, molas-
ses, sodium
hydroxide solu-
tion
For own
production of
milk of lime:
FDA raw
materials
Limestone
should
contain at
least 96%
calcium
carbonate
GMP+ Steam and
combustion
gases from
natural gas,
lubricants
None

Branch Raw
materials
aids
Own
processing
aids
Entry check
processing
aids
Feed
quality
assurance
Utilities Additives
Sugar beets Sugar and
sugar
specialities
Press pulp and
pulp blocks
Anti-foaming
agent, water,
gypsum, calci-
um sulphate,
limestone, for-
malin, molas-
ses, possibly a
pressing auxilia-
ry agent from
the positive list
Delivery in
accordance
with specifi-
cation
Gypsum is
only ana-
lysed exter-
nally per
consignment
for heavy
metals and
fluorine.
GMP and
ISO 9001 /
9002.
HACCP from
autumn
2000
Combustion
gases from
oil and natu-
ral gas, food
and feed
grade lubri-
cants
None
Breweries Water, malt
and hops
Beer Brewers' grains,
yeast and malt
substance
Hydrochloric
acid, kieselguhr,
tannin, polyvinyl
polypirolidon
Specifica-
tions and
HACCP
requirements
By function-
ality
ISO 9002 Coolants,
steam, lubri-
cants, clean-
ing agents
Lactic acid
and nitrogen
gases
Water, malt,
maltose syrup,
hops
Beer Brewers' grains,
yeast, malt
substance and
returned beer
Yeast, calcium
sulphate, calci-
um chloride,
lactic acid bac-
teria, kiesel-
guhr, polyvinyl
polypirolidon
Specification
and certified
processing
aids
Not for
processing
aids in
general
GMP Coolants,
steam,
lubricants,
inert render-
ing gases,
cleaning
agents
Herbs
Dairy Milk, sugar,
starch, milk
protein pow-
der
Drinking milk
and consump-
tion milk
products
(custard,
yoghurt, etc.)
One animal feed
flow of production
waste + prod-
uct/water mix+ (in
some cases
sludge from phys-
ical chemical
purification)
None Not
applicable
Not applica-
ble
HACCP Pasteurising,
chilling,
lubricants,
cleaning
agents
Lactic acid
bacteria,
thickening
agents,
aromas, fruit
preparations

Branch Raw
materials
aids
Own
processing
aids
Entry check
processing
aids
Feed
quality
assurance
Utilities Additives
Oil Soya beans Soya oil and
lecithins
Soya extract Hexane Delivery in
accordance
with specifi-
cation
In accord-
ance with
GMP guide-
line
HACCP Steam and
cooling
water
Soya bean
hulls,
molasses
and lime
Soya beans Soya meal
and soya
bean oil
Soya bean hulls Hexane and
steam
Delivery in
accordance
with
specification
Limited HACCP +
GMP from
1 Oct 2000
(is this
combination
correct?)
Cooling
water,
combustion
gas, steam,
lubricants,
nitrogen and
absorption
oil
Talc, ligno
sulphonate,
gums, clay &
emulsion
Sunflower
seed and
rapeseed
Sunflower
seed and
rapeseed oil
Sunflower meal
pellets and rape-
seed meal pellets
Hexane and
steam
Specifica-
tion, if
possible with
hold-clean
and vito
certificate
Limited HACCP +
GMP from 1
Oct 2000
Steam, out-
side air,
lubricants,
absorption
oil, water
Water,
emulsion /
soap
DIGES-
TION
Bodies,
slaughter-
house waste,
blood and
feathers
Only feed
flows
Meat meal,
feather meal,
animal fat and
blood meal
None Not
applicable
Not
applicable
GMP Steam Anti-oxidant
BHT

APPENDIX 2: Feed products processing aids and processing
aids questionnaire

Product Board Animal Feed

Tebodin Consultants
P.O. Box 16029
2500 BA THE HAGUE
telephone 070 3480911

1. General details

1.1 Name of questioner

1.2 Date of interview

1.3 Location of interview

1.4 Existing Tebodin contact person (if applicable)

2. Company details

2.1 Company name

2.2 Address

2.3 Place

2.4 Telephone
Fax
E-mail address

2.5 Contact person
Function

2.6 Number of employees

2.7 Turnover per calendar year

2.8 Branch and SBI code

2.9 (Primary) products
Nature of the production

3. Use of substances (raw materials, processing aids, product additives,
utilities)

3.1 Which raw materials are used?

3.2 Which processing aids and processing aids are used? (These are materials which
are added to the substance flows to improve process effectiveness such as for
product clarification or filtration without the intention of having them as part of the
product.)

3.3 Which utilities are used? (In this, substances are used in the process but without
coming into contact with the products and these include coolants, combustion gas-
es (in direct or indirect contact), fuels, steam, lubricants, inert rendering gases and
cleaning agents).

3.4 Which (product) additives are used?
3.5 What is the source of raw materials, processing aids, utilities and additives?

3.6 What (quality) requirements do you set for these materials?

3.7 To what extent do suppliers guarantee the correct quality and composition of the
substances supplied? What quality control is carried out in this respect and what
guarantee is there?

3.8 Do you take samples especially of the processing aids? If so, for what product
characteristics, how frequently and using what method?

3.9 What previous treatment has there been of the processing aids either externally or
internally?

3.10 Where and for how long are these processing aids stored?

3.11 Is there a chance that the processing aids might come into contact with contagious
or toxic substances?

4. Process

4.1 Out of which sub-stages is the production process constructed? Are there PFDs
/ block diagrams available which clearly show which process steps there are and
which substances are included and where (raw materials, processing aids and
additives)?

4.2 Give for each sub-process the nature (chemical, thermal, physical, biological)
and type (batch, continuous).

4.3 Primary process data such as temperatures and pressures

4.4 Where are utilities used (for example drying using combustion gases, chilling)?

4.5 Which cleaning methods are used and where?

4.6 Where and how is the feed product released?

4.7 Are there opportunities for cross-contamination?

4.8 Is there any further treatment of the feed flow?

4.9 What happens to off-spec or returned products?

4.10 Can undesired reactions or conversions take place in the process and can this
have an effect on the feed product?

5. Quality Assurance

5.1 Is there a GMP/QM certificate or a quality management system for the feed pro-
duction?

5.2 Do you (also) apply HACCP to the production of feed?

5.3 Which relevant requirements are specified in the permits?

5.4 Does the purchase or use of processing aids or processing aids and their moni-
toring fall within any of your quality regimes?

5.5 Are there any other special physical, chemical or biological safety requirements
established? For example under the Commodities Act, hygiene codes or by the
client?

6. Main and by-products

6.1 What are the main and by-products?

6.2 How is the feed product transported?

6.3 Who is responsible for this transport?

6.4 Is packaging used and, if so, which?

6.5 Control measures and procedures

GMP d41 - en 20131115 PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

GMP d41 - en 20131115 PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

D

Anda mungkin juga menyukai