Feed Manual of Official Controls

This section deals first with the use of:

• Feed Business Emergency Prohibition Procedures and Notices under Regulation 22 of the Hygiene Regulation;
  • Feed Business Prohibition Orders under Regulation 21.

Unless voluntary procedures, as described in this document in Paragraph 7.10, are more appropriate in the circumstances, Feed Business Emergency Prohibition procedures (under Regulation 22 of the Hygiene Regulation) should be used if an Authorised Officer has evidence that the ‘health risk condition’ is fulfilled and that this risk is imminent. If the appropriate evidence is found, a Feed Business Emergency Prohibition Notice (FBEPN) may be served on the feed business operator, followed by an application to a Sheriff for a Feed Business Emergency Prohibition Order (FBEPO).

The Feed Business Emergency Prohibition Notice can be found at Annex 7.2.

The effect of the notice is to immediately close the premises or part of the premises or prevent the use of equipment or a process.

The Authorised Officer must apply to a Sheriff for a FBEPO within three days of a FBEPN being served, the day of service of the Notice being Day 1. The Authorised Officer must serve notice on the FeBO at least one complete day (24 hours) before the day upon which the Authorised Officer intends to make the application to the court.

Although there is no legal requirement for the application to be heard within the three days, the Court should be asked to list the application for hearing at the earliest opportunity.

Where a delay occurs between the inspection / service of the FBEPN and the hearing of the FBEPO application by the Sheriff, a further inspection should take place prior to the hearing to ensure evidence of any current risk to health is available. Failure to gather such evidence may prevent the Sheriff in making an informed decision on whether the health risk condition still exists.

If an officer conducts a further inspection before the Sheriff hearing and they are satisfied that the health risk condition no longer exists, they must lift the FBEPN (Paragraph 7.15.1). FSS may still wish to continue with the application to request the FBEPO as the granting of the order effectively endorses the issue of the notice which may lessen the possibilities of a claim for compensation by the FeBO. The FDB will ensure that the court is informed in this situation.  

Once made, a FBEPO supersedes a FBEPN.

There must always be an imminent risk of injury to health before a FBEPN can be served. The injury itself may occur sometime in the future, but it is essential to show that it could occur for the action to succeed. Not every animal exposed to the risk of injury to health would need to suffer the injury for there to be considered an imminent risk. It is the exposure to the risk of injury that enables action to be taken.  

The application is made by the Authorised Officer and therefore the burden of proof lies with the authority applying for the order.  The circumstances must be discussed with the FDB, who will decide whether the premises, process, treatment or piece of equipment or its use involves an imminent risk of injury to health and application for an order is appropriate. 

The following paragraphs provide examples of circumstances that may show that the health risk condition exists as defined by regulation 21(2) of the Hygiene Regulation i.e. there is an imminent risk of injury to health, and where an Authorised Officer may therefore consider the use of such prohibition powers. These examples are in no way prescriptive or exhaustive and are for illustrative purposes only.

 Examples include:

• infestation by rats, mice, cockroaches or other vermin, serious enough to result in the actual contamination of feed or a significant risk of contamination
• very poor structural condition and poor equipment and/or poor maintenance or routine cleaning and/or serious accumulations of refuse, filth or other extraneous matter resulting in the actual contamination of feed or a significant risk of feed contamination
• drainage defects or flooding of the establishment, serious enough to result in the actual contamination of feed or a significant risk of feed contamination
• inadequate storage conditions or poor cleaning procedures which create a significant risk of contamination or cross contamination of the feed posing an actual risk to the health of animals, or through the products of such animals, to human health or
• any combination of the above, or the cumulative effect of contraventions which, taken together, represent the fulfilment of the health risk condition.

Examples include:

• use of defective equipment, e.g. a mixer which is incapable of achieving the required blend of ration or
• use of equipment for the processing of high-risk feeds that has been inadequately cleaned or disinfected, or which is grossly contaminated and can no longer be properly cleaned

Examples include:

• serious risk of cross contamination with undesirable substances; or
• the use of a process for a product for which it is inappropriate.

Voluntary procedures to remove a health risk condition may be used, at the instigation of the proprietor or a manager of the business, when the feed business operator agrees that a health risk condition exists. An officer may suggest this option to the feed business operator but only when they are able to use emergency prohibition powers in the Hygiene Regulation. If in doubt, the FeBO should be advised to take legal advice.

Any voluntary closure agreement should be confirmed in writing by the feed business operator and the Authorised Officer, with an undertaking by the feed business operator or manager not to re-open without the officer’s (and FDBs) prior approval.

If the manager of a feed business offers to close the business voluntarily, the Authorised Officer should obtain written confirmation from the manager that he or she has the authority to agree to such action. The officer should ensure that frequent checks are made on the establishment to ensure that it is not re-opened.

If the feed business operator offers to close voluntarily, the Authorised Officer must:

• consider whether there is a risk of the establishment being re-opened without the officer’s or FDB’s knowledge and/or agreement
• recognise that there is no legal sanction against a feed business operator who re-opens for business after offering to close, although enforcement action for the actual breaches e.g.unsafe feed, similar processing as before, etc. remains available and
• explain to the feed business operator that, by making the offer to close, any compensation if a court subsequently declines to make a feed business emergency prohibition order may be less likely to be awarded.

It should be noted that Prohibition Order Procedures under the Hygiene Regulation are rarely used. 

A Sheriff can make a Feed Business Prohibition Order (FBPO) under Regulation 21 of the Hygiene Regulation after a FeBO has been convicted of an offence under specified feed law to:

• close feed premises
• prohibit premises from being used for kinds of feed business
• prevent the use of equipment for any feed business, or a particular feed business
• prohibit a particular process or
• prohibit the proprietor from managing any feed business.

The Court can also make a FBPO prohibiting a proprietor or manager from managing a feed business. In Scotland, it is essential for Authorised Officers to attend court to advise the Procurator Fiscal and to provide any further evidence or opinion the court may require.

A FBPO, served under Regulation 21(4) of the Hygiene Regulation can only be fully effective if other Competent Authorities are notified, as the individual concerned may try to start a feed business in another area. FSS shall notify FSA as soon as possible after an Order is made against a person prohibiting them from running a feed business, provided the order is not the subject of an appeal and the period allowed for appeal has expired. 

A FBIN can be served on a FeBO outside of Scotland or outside the area for which the officer is authorised, provided there is contravention inside the area covered by the officer. Such circumstances shall be discussed with FSS.

Depending on the circumstances, feed businesses may choose to act with their competent authority (if outside of Scotland), the Authorised Officer or FSS, to avoid reputational damage associated with non-compliant feed.

Every effort should be made to serve FBIN, FBEPN, FBPO or a FBEPO by delivering it by hand to the FeBO, or each of the operators/proprietors in the case of a partnership etc. If a notice or order cannot be handed to the FeBO in person, a copy of the document should be handed to a responsible person at the feed business establishment e.g. the manager.

The service of the notice or order on several partners can present difficulties, particularly where a partner is not in the United Kingdom at the time. As soon as the notice or order is properly served on any one of the partners, it takes effect.

If it is not possible to serve the document by hand then the officer should serve the document by a postal or courier service that includes proof of posting or despatch and, ideally, proof of delivery. The document can be emailed to the operator / proprietor for information in advance of its formal service, but a hard copy must follow for it to be properly served.  The date and time of the service must be recorded, even when the postal or a courier service is used.

Notices and orders need not necessarily be served by the Authorised Officer who initiated the action. It should, however, be served by an Authorised Officer who is competent to explain the purpose of the notice, the necessary steps to be taken by the FeBO and be able to deal with obstruction. The Authorised Officer should ensure that the FeBO is aware of the matters that constitute an imminent risk. Although the model FBEPN requires these details, the FeBO may not understand what steps need to be taken to remove the imminent risk and further explanation may be necessary.

In the case of a FBEPO or FBPO, the Authorised Officer can, if necessary, consult with the Sheriff’s Clerk to request the service of the Order before the operator/proprietor leaves the Court, where they are present.

Immediately after the document has been legally served by one of the methods mentioned in Regulation 26 of the Hygiene Regulation, the prohibition on the use of the premises, or equipment for the purposes of any feed business, or a particular type of feed business, or prohibition on a process or treatment, becomes effective under the Order and the FBEPN ceases to have effect.

Regulations 21(5) and 22(5) of the Hygiene Regulation directs, as soon as practicable after the making of an order or the service of a notice, a copy of the order or notice should be affixed in a conspicuous position on the premises by the officer.

The purpose of this is to inform the public, which includes anyone who may use the premises or equipment, that the premises have been closed or a process or piece of equipment prohibited from being used. An officer, who is competent to explain the meaning and importance of the notice, should take the action to affix a copy of the order or notice on the premises. The Authorised Officer who initiated the action need not necessarily be involved.

The Authorised Officer must firmly affix the document inside the premises, but in a position where it can clearly be seen and read from the outside, and which is preferably on the inside of the glass of a front display window. If such a position is unavailable, the officer should use professional judgement as to the best place available and if necessary, affix a second copy of the document to the outside of the premises, making sure, as far as possible, that it is protected from the weather and possible vandalism. It may be appropriate to attach a notice to any equipment to which the order or notice applies.

The Authorised Officer should arrange for periodic checks to be made on the document(s) to establish that it is still there.

The Hygiene Regulation does not make any reference to defacing or removing a prohibition order or a FBEPN. Such action should be considered as obstruction under Regulation 27 of the Hygiene Regulation, as removing or defacing a notice or order can be considered an act that "wilfully obstructs an Authorised Officer in the exercise of the officer’s powers under these Regulations…".

The defacement of the notice or order is an offence under Section 52 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995.

It should be clear to the recipient of a notice that there is a right of appeal against a notice.The notice templates (Annex 7) include details of the right of appeal. Court proceedings against a FeBO, including appeals, are brought in the sheriffdom in which the FeBO is resident. Therefore the Authorised Officer shall provide the appropriate contact information for the Sheriff  local to the business.   

The FeBO should also be asked to notify the FDB if an appeal is lodged. The Authorised Officer should be prepared to discuss the:

• notice and its requirements informally with the FeBO if they wish to do so; and
• requirements of any letter or other enforcement action.

In the event of an appeal, the Authorised Officer is required to discuss with the FDB who will arrange legal representation through FSS Legal for the appeal hearing. 

Where a notice or order is breached, the following offences may apply:

• A person who fails to comply with a FBIN is guilty of an offence under Regulation 17(2) of the Hygiene Regulation;
• A person who knowingly contravenes a FEPO is guilty of an offence under Regulation 21(5) of the Hygiene Regulation; or
• A person who knowingly contravenes a FBEPN or FBEPO is guilty of an offence under Regulation 22(5) and 22(6) of the Hygiene Regulation, respectively.

Where a Notice is breached, the offences relate to the breach of the Regulations and the breach of the notice requiring the non-compliance to be addressed. The officer should submit details of any contravention to FDB in order that FDB can prepare a report to the Procurator Fiscal. 

If the Authorised Officer believes that there is sufficient evidence to show that the proprietor is unlikely to respond to a summons, application should be made for a warrant rather than a summons. The Court will decide if the circumstances justify this action and may ask the Authorised Officer for their view as to whether to endorse the warrant with bail. The Authorised Officer should discuss with the FDB and consider all relevant circumstances in the decision making. 

FSS has contingency arrangements in place with Scottish Government lawyers so that in the event of the breach of a notice or order, there is no delay in making a report to the Procurator Fiscal.

In respect of FEPO, FBEPN and FBEPO, by virtue of Regulations 21(7) and 22(9) of the Hygiene Regulation respectively, the Authorised Officer must issue a certificate to the feed business operator within three days of being satisfied that the health risk condition no longer exists (Annex 7.6). If the feed business operator applies for such a certificate, the Authorised Officer must determine the position as soon as is reasonably practicable and in any event within a period of no longer than fourteen days.

The FeBO is required to apply in writing to the competent authority for a certificate lifting a FBPO, a FBEPN or FBEPO (Regulations 21(7) and 22(9) of the Hygiene Regulation respectively). This shall be sent to the officer that issued the notice. 

On receiving such a request, theofficer should re-inspect the premises as soon as possible and determine as soon as is reasonably practicable, or in any event within 14 days, whether the health risk condition no longer exists, and the notice or order can be lifted.The recommendation on whether to issue the certificate to lift the notice or order should be made by the officer who initiated the action if this is possible or, if it is not, by another Authorised Officer with the relevant qualifications and experience. Such recommendation should be made to the FDB. 

If the opinion of the FDB is that the health risk condition no longer exists, arrangements should be made for a certificate (Annex 7.6) to be issued as quickly as possible, and within 3 days. The certificate can be sent by email, although the proprietor may also be informed of the decision verbally, thus allowing the premises to re-open immediately.

If the opinion of the FDB is that the health risk condition still exists, arrangements should be made for the Authorised Officer to issue a notification of continuing risk to health as quickly as possible. The Authorised Officer must give reasons why they are not satisfied that the health risk condition has been removed.

Although a certificate lifting a FBEPN can be issued before the application for a FBEPO can be heard, the operator / proprietor can still be prosecuted for offence(s) against the Hygiene Regulation. The FDB will ensure that the court is informed in this situation.

A FBPO against a person imposed under regulation 21(4) of the Hygiene Regulation will only cease to have effect if, on an application by the feed business operator,:

• the court gives a direction to that effect; or
  • the Authorised Officer has lifted a FBPO, because of evidence that the health risk condition has been removed, at a re-inspection of premises.

An application to the court can only be heard where 6 months has passed since the making of the FBPO. 

The Authorised Officer should discuss with FSS at the earliest opportunity after they learn that a FBPO against a person in their area ceases to have effect. FSS shall notify FSA.

Although a certificate lifting a FBEPN can be issued before the application for a FBEPO can be heard, the operator / proprietor can still be prosecuted for offence(s) against the Hygiene Regulation.

The FDB will ensure that the court is informed in this situation.

A FBPO on a person can only be lifted on application by the person to the Court that made the order.

When an officer has inspected or sampled any feed material and where it appears from such inspection or analysis of the sample taken that the material fails to comply with the requirements of a specified feed, the officer may detain or seize the feed under Regulation 25 of the Hygiene Regulation.

The purpose of detention is to ensure feed is not used or supplied whilst it is being determined if the material complies with specified feed law. Feed can only be detained for 21 days, after which the notice must be withdrawn or the matter referred to the sheriff for destruction or disposal. In all cases, but especially with highly perishable feed, the officer should act expeditiously at every stage and provide full information to the Agricultural Analyst to carry out analysis or examination of samples of the feed in a suitable timeframe.

Unless the circumstances require immediate action, a decision to detain feed should only normally be taken if it has been discussed with the owner or person in charge of the feed and, if appropriate, with the manufacturer. 

When the officer in consultation with FDB determines it is appropriate to serve a detention of feed notice, professional judgement shall be used to determine whether feed should be detained where it is or moved elsewhere. If the officer has any doubts about the security or physical care of the feed, this should be discussed with the FDB as soon as possible to determine whether the feed should be moved and agree a site to be specified in the notice. Regard should be had to the nature of the feed, the quantity, any health hazard that it represents and the ownership of the establishment where it is located. The risk of leaving feed in the charge of, or in an establishment owned by, any person who may be prosecuted for an offence under feed law needs to be considered. FDB will decide for its uplift and transport to this location.

In all cases, but especially with highly perishable feed, the officer should act expeditiously at every stage and provide full information to the Analyst to carry out analysis or examination of samples of the feed.

The FDB will organise periodic monitoring of the feed throughout the period of detention.

The decision to detain a whole batch, lot, or consignment needs careful consideration before a notice is served (see Paragraph 7.19).

A Detention of Feed Notice (DFN) must be signed by the officer who takes the decision to detain the feed.  A model notice can be found at Annex 7.3.

If there is evidence that feed fails to comply with specified feed law, it may be seized to be dealt with by the sheriff. The sheriff can condemn the feed and order that it be destroyed of disposed of, so it is not used as food or feed. 

When considering whether to seize feed, Authorised Officers should consider whether the feed in question can be treated or processed to enable it to satisfy feed safety requirements. The blending down of feed to reduce high levels of undesirable substances is not permitted by Regulation 9(3) of Article 5 of the Animal Feed (Scotland) Regulations 2010.

Arrangements for the treatment or processing of feed in these circumstances should be agreed by the officer and the owner or the person in control of the feed and are subject to a signed, written undertaking.

FDB shall put in place arrangements for feed being moved elsewhere. They shall notify FSA where feed is it to be moved to another part of the UK for treatment or processing. This should be accepted by FSA and arrangements agreed for the FSA or enforcement authorities in England, Wales or Northern Ireland to ensure the processing or treatment has been carried out appropriately. Such arrangements must be finalised before agreement to the undertaking is concluded. If the receiving LA/DAERA or FSA is unable to accept responsibility for ensuring that the feed is properly processed or treated, the arrangement should not proceed unless there is no other way of rectifying the problem with the feed product.

If within Scotland, FSS shall ensure that steps are taken to ensure the processing or treatment is carried out appropriately, including the service of a detention of feed notice, where necessary. 

Unless the preceding paragraphs of this section apply, or the use of voluntary procedures is more appropriate, feed should be seized if an Authorised Officer has evidence that the material fails to comply with the requirements of specified feed law. If evidence or information indicates that feed has already been detained or seized, the officer should serve a feed condemnation notification, warning of the intention to take the feed before the Sheriff and apply for its condemnation.

When feed is seized (Annex 7.5), a seizure notice must be issued as soon as is reasonably practicable, advising that the matter will be brought to the sheriff for the feed to be condemned. Feed that has been seized should be dealt with by the Sheriff as soon as is reasonably practicable. The owner or person responsible for the feed must be informed of the intention to apply for a condemnation order, although action should not be delayed if the owner or person responsible cannot be traced or contacted. The Hygiene Regulation requires that anyone who may be liable to prosecution is entitled to attend before the Sheriff by whom the material falls to be dealt with, be entitled to be heard and to call witnesses. Service of notice of the hearing should be documented and retained to show the Court that was the case.

The Authorised Officer should ensure continuity of evidence whether there may be a subsequent prosecution and ensure the feed is secure whilst awaiting the Sheriff’s decision.

The Authorised Officer should act as quickly as possible when information indicates that detained feed can be released, and in any case within 21 days of the service of the detention notice. 

Where the evidence shows that the reason for detaining the feed as non-compliant is no longer valid a Withdrawal of Detention of Feed Notice (WDFN) should be served (Annex 7.4). The decision to issue a WDFN should be taken either by the officer who originally issued the notice or initiated the action or by another officer with the relevant experience. A WDFN should be served as soon as possible to prevent possible deterioration of the feed and to minimise exposure to compensation claims under regulation 25(6) of the Hygiene Regulation. The notice need not be served by the officer who made the decision but may be served by any Authorised Officer.  

Voluntary procedures for the disposal of feed, that is not suitable for consumption by animals, may be used either at the instigation of the owner of the feed or at the suggestion of the officer when the owner of the feed agrees the feed is not suitable. 

Where the owner agrees to destroy the feed, evidence of that destruction must be provided. 

Where FSS agrees to voluntarily surrender feed for destruction, a receipt should be issued to the owner of the. The receipt should indicate that the feed has been voluntarily surrendered to the officer for destruction and be signed by theofficer and counter-signed by the person surrendering the feed agreeing to pay the reasonable expenses arising from the destruction or disposal. 

FSS shall arrange for uplift and destruction of the feed. The receipt shall be emailed to FSS who will complete the time, place and method of destruction of the feed. 

FSS is responsible for the arrangements for seized feed that is subsequently condemned for destruction by the sheriff or feed voluntarily surrendered to FSS. The feed will need to be supervised by the Authorised Officer until it can be uplifted and dealt with by FSS. If possible and if there is likely to be some delay before destruction, the feed should be disfigured to prevent any possibility of it being returned to the feed chain or being diverted for human consumption e.g.  addition of dye. 

FSS shall appoint a waste disposal company to ensure the destructionof the feed by incineration or some other appropriate method having regard to the requirements of relevant waste disposal legislation and in the case of feed of animal origin, animal by-products legislation. 

Article 15(3) of  Regulation (EC) 178/2002 stipulates that where a feed, which has been identified as not satisfying the feed safety requirement, is part of a batch, lot or consignment of feed of the same class or description, it shall be presumed that all of the feed in that batch, lot or consignment is so affected, unless following a detailed assessment there is no evidence that the rest of the batch, lot or consignment fails to satisfy the feed safety requirement.

If a quantity of feed of different types or batches is being detained, the officer should issue a separate detention of feed notice in respect of each type or batch.

When considering whether to seize or detain a batch, lot or consignment the officer should consider the following:

• the evidence available
• the nature of the contamination
• the nature and condition of any container holding the feed.
• the risk to health and
• the quantity of feed involved in relation to any sampling which has been undertaken.

The officer should use professional judgement to decide whether to detain or seize the whole of the batch, lot or consignment. 

If a whole batch, lot or consignment is detained and it subsequently becomes clear that only part of the detained feed is affected and needs to be seized, the remainder of the batch etc. may be released. The FeBO may therefore be able to seek compensation for the depreciation in value of the released feed under Regulation 25(6) of the Hygiene Regulation.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is the prosecuting authority in Scotland. Procurators Fiscal receive reports from the police and over 50 specialist reporting agencies (including FSS) amounting to many thousands of reports annually.

Reports to the Procurator Fiscal (PF) shall only be prepared by FSS, although input from the relevant Authorised Officer will be required. The decision to submit a report to the PF should be taken at the earliest opportunity and in consideration of the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy. 

Before deciding whether a report should be made to the PF, the FSS will consider several factors: 

• The hierarchy of enforcement structure indicates that a report to the PF is appropriate as opposed to use of, for example, informal action or an enforcement notice.
• The likely cogency of any important witness, and their willingness to co-operate
• The alleged person or persons responsible have been identified
• Any explanation offered by the suspect
• The likelihood of the suspect being able to establish a defence - in particular a due diligence defence
• The public interest test has been satisfied. 

Examples of factors impacting on a decision to submit a report to the PF:

• Seriousness of the offence
• Suspects previous convictions
• Continual failure to comply with the requirements of Regulation(s)
• Contravention relates to a deliberate act to mislead or defraud consumers or other FeBO’s 

Examples of factors against a decision to submit a report to the PF:

• The offence was committed because of a genuine mistake or misunderstanding (this must be balanced against the seriousness of the offence)
• Whether any other enforcement action would be more appropriate

FSS and the Authorised Officer should collect sufficient evidence to produce to the Court to substantiate any proceedings. In Scotland, any evidence intended to be placed before a court requires to be corroborated therefore a witness will be necessary. 

Witnesses may be cited to attend a trial to give evidence at an appointed time, date and court and will receive notification from the Procurator Fiscal if they are no longer required to attend. Any Authorised Officer unfamiliar with court procedure may benefit from some discussion with their manager or the FCIB before giving evidence in court. Arrangements can also be made for a visit to the court before the trial takes place. 

With few exceptions, witnesses are not permitted to read from their prepared statement when giving evidence in court. 

Whilst the Procurator Fiscal does not routinely expect notebooks to be referred to when giving evidence in court, there are occasions when it is permitted to do so with leave of the court to clarify or provide accurate information that they have recorded.  In doing so, the Authorised Officer will be referring to their own notebook and not that of another and be required to speak to accurate notes, confirm they had made the notes and where and when.   

It is important that contemporaneous notes, including sketches and photographs, are taken during an inspection, as they may need to be used in evidence to a Court. The notes must be accurate and factual, so that they may be used in Court.

Note: where an officer refers to their notebook when giving evidence in court, the defence is entitled to see what has been written and it is important that notes are concise, accurate and relevant to the case.

There is no provision for compensation in the Hygiene Regulation in respect of FBINs. If a FBIN is served in error and, as a result, a feed business suffers financial loss due to being unable to sell the feed due to its perishable nature, they may pursue compensation through a civil negligence claim against the Competent Authority, FSS. 

Regulation 22(10) of the Hygiene Regulation provides for the Competent Authority (FSS) to compensate the FeBO in respect of any loss which is directly attributable to the wrongful service of the notice. Any disputed question as to the right to or the amount of any compensation payable is to be determined by arbitration.

Regulation 22(6) of the Hygiene Regulation provides for the Competent Authority (FSS) to compensate the FeBO in respect of any depreciation in the value of feed which is detained and subsequently the detention is withdrawn or the sheriff refuses to condemn the feed.  Any disputed question as to the right to or the amount of any compensation payable is to be determined by arbitration.

Enforcement options in establishments subject to registration and approval are provided in Paragraph 5.3.15. 

Officers have powers available to them under the Official Feed and Food Control (Scotland) Regulations 2009as amended, to ensure that imported feed of non- animal origin that does not comply with feed law does not enter into circulation. These powers can be used at the point of entry and for imported goods identified as non-compliant inland. 

Article 66(1) of  Regulation (EC) 2017/625 requires that feed which does not comply with feed law is detained and refused entry into Great Britain. Before ordering the operator to take any action the officer must hear the operator in accordance with Article 66(3), unless immediate action is required to respond to a risk. The actions that must be taken depend on whether the non-compliance means that the feed presents a risk to humans, animals or the environment. 

Where a decision is taken to reject a consignment, the Authorised Officer should email the Feed Delivery Branch.The officer should update on the measures or action taken in relation to the consignment detained. 

A Detention Notice, under Regulation 32 of The Official Feed and Food Controls (Scotland) Regulations 2009 must be served.

Article 67 of  Regulation (EU) 2017/625 requires that where feed presents a risk to human or animal health, animal welfare or as regards GMOs, also to the environment, the operator must without delay be ordered to destroy the consignment or subject it to special treatment. Such measures are at the expense of the operator. 

A notice must be served on the FeBO stating the action to be taken.

Such consignments of feed must be detained and then either:

• ordered to be destroyed
• subject to special treatments detailed in Article 71 of  Regulation (EU) 2017/625 or
• re-dispatched.

FSS, in collaboration with the Authorised Officer, if necessary, shall agree and implement appropriate action.

A notice must be served on the FeBO stating the action to be taken. 

Special treatments can consist of:

• treatment or processing including decontamination, where appropriate, but excluding dilution, so that the consignment complies with the requirements of feed law or with the requirements of the third country of re-dispatch; or
• processing in any other suitable manner for purposes other than animal or human consumption.

The treatment or processing is to be effective in eliminating any risk to human, animal health, animal welfare or, as regards GMOs and plant protection products, also to the environment and be documented and carried out under the control of the FSS.

FSS can agree to re-dispatch only if:

• the feed business operator has informed FSS, in writing, that the Competent Authorities of the country of origin or the country of destination (if different) has been advised of the reasons and circumstances for the refusal of the entry into GB

and

• where the country of destination is not the country of origin, the Competent Authorities of the country of destination have notified FSS that they are prepared to accept the consignment.

Article 69 requires that re-dispatch generally takes place no more than 60 days after FSS has agreed on the destination of the consignment, unless legal action has been undertaken, or the delay is justified. Otherwise, the consignment will be destroyed.

There is a right of appeal against decisions provided by Regulation 33 of the Official Feed and Food Control (Scotland) Regulations 2009. Appeals against the notice must be made within one month of the notice being served.