1. Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed
RASFF
Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed

2. Rapid Alert System Food and Feed (RASFF)
When a member of the RASFF network has any information relating to existence of serious risk to human health deriving from food or feed it shall immediately notify it to the Commission
In 2014 RASFF was activated 9067 times (3157 original and 5910 follow-up notifications – never more follow-up in the past! )
information on RASFF notifications published:
RASFF Portal
Consumer recall:
Annual Report
The RASFF Members are 32 European countries: 28 MS; 3 EFTA/EEA countries (IS, LI, NO); Switzerland plus European Commission; EFSA and EFTA Surveillance Authority
Legal basis: Council Regulation 178/2002 (General Food law) and Commission Regulation 16/2011 (Implementing Measures)
RASFF Portal: an interactive searchable online RASFF database; the most recently transmitted RASFF notifications as well as any notification issued in the past. Only non-confidential information is displayed (product, hazard, country of origin) i.e. name of companies and brands are excluded.
If dangerous products need to be recalled from the market, MS ensure that the product is removed, including providing all the necessary information to consumers.

3. RASFF: strong in IT!
iRASFF: real time, interactively collecting and sharing information on hazards, risks, products, lots and measures taken
RASFF Window: tool to distribute notifications "outside the system": in Commission, MS and TC Competent Authorities
RASFF Portal and RASFF Consumers' Portal: provide information on RASFF notifications to the general public and stakeholders

6. Add to bookmarks

7. Rapid Alert System Food and Feed (RASFF)
New website
to inform the consumer about recalls made within the last month in their country
The aim of this website is that a consumer can see what recalls were made the last month within their country.
It also shows much more details than RASFF Portal.

10. RASFF at the border and on the market
44%
Border rejections at the borders of the EEA
56%
Products that are circulating on the EEA market and need to be traced
What triggers notifications?
82% of the original RASFF notifications are triggered by official checks.
18 are triggered by operator own-checks, consumer complaints and cases of food poisoning.
46% of the notifications report about batches rejected at the EU border while 54% of the notifications concern products placed on the market in the EU that need to be traced.

11. Follow-up = collaboration of Member States on notifications
What is follow-up: Follow-up are reactions to original notifications reporting about investigation results and actions that have been taken following reception of an original notification. They provide detailed information on hazards, risk, product and traceability.
Follow-up is most important for alerts. Alerts get the most follow-ups (first column in red). This is where it matters most because in case of RASFF alerts, rapid action is required. Member States work together through follow-up notifications to enable this rapid action i.e. product withdrawal and/or recall.

13. RASFF early days
Created to report "serious and immediate dangers to food"
However first notifications about "total volatile basic nitrogen"! A practice that was later set into the framework of EU food legislation: RASFF can be used for direct or indirect health risks.
Hazards were'nt always well defined
No differentiation in seriousness or priority
Very low notification numbers

14. General food law: a milestone
RASFF received its own legal basis and is extended to food and feed for direct and indirect risks to human health
Notifications on border rejections become mandatory
GFL boosts RASFF numbers > 1000
Context:
food safety = responsibility of FBO
Requirements for traceability and recall
Foundation of EFSA, member of RASFF

15. Further developments 2008: 2011:
Before 669/2009 and TRACES, RASFF border rejections enabled a form of reinforced checks at the border and on the market
2008:
alerts are based on risk
border rejections as a separate class
2011:
RASFF implementing Regulation
Alert definition: notification of a risk that requires or might require rapid action in another member country
Deadlines: 48 hours NCP / 24 hours ECCP

16. RASFF SOPs: completed in 2014
Codify the experience gained by members of the network regarding the following key elements:
types of notifications
duties of the members of the network?
requirements for transmitting the different types of notifications?
Commission's contact point's specific tasks?
withdrawal and amendment of a notification?
exchange of information with third countries?

17. RASFF SOPs clarify the scope of RASFF
The scope of RASFF covers direct or indirect risks to human health in relation to food, food contact material or feed as well as serious risks to human health, animal health or the environment in relation to a specific feed.

18. Risk decision diagram Risk evaluation Non-compliance? Risk?
Serious Risk?

19. Assessment: is the issue within the scope of RASFF?
The assessment whether or not there is a risk involved in non-compliant food/feed, and whether the risk is such as to require the notification to the RASFF is the responsibility of the members of the network.
A list of cases where MS have considered that the risk was not such as to require a notification to the RASFF is provided (heading A).

20. Cases where a risk requires or possibly requires rapid action in another member country (alert notifications)
This is the case where rapid action is needed to counter a serious risk.
list of cases where MS have considered that the risk was such as to require rapid action
cases where MS have considered that the risk was such as to possibly require rapid action (in some cases following an ad hoc risk evaluation)
- As regards food
- As regards feed

21. Risk decision
WI 2.1 and 2.2 in preparation to guide members of the network to a harmonised risk decision, which is:
Taken on the basis of the information present in the RASFF notification - hazards detected and the nature of the product (risk evaluation)
Defines, together with distribution status, the notification classification and type of flags

22. RASFF notifications as a basis for planning inspections?
Number of notifications = what? – what defines a notification?
Border control: 1 consignment = 1 notification
Consignment size may vary from few kilos to >1000 tonnes
Market control: notifications may have a very different "weight"
Need to compare to other data such as
Number of controls, % of non compliances
Data on trade, import
Audit reports (FVO)
These data are not real-time…!

23. Challenges for the future
Complete and implement RASFF Standard Operating Procedures
RASFF REFIT: is the RASFF legal basis still fit for purpose? (as part of the GFL REFIT exercise)
RASFF linking and integrating with other systems
IMSOC
EWRS
Food fraud/AAC
Crisis preparedness:
Improved data collection for foodborne outbreaks
Improved traceability data