Appendix 3 – Animal Welfare at Slaughter PCI Operational Guidance

On this page

Note: In order to demonstrate compliance with the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR), licence holders may follow the interpretive guidelines and industry guidance. This operational guidance document summarizes the expected performance criteria available in animal welfare at slaughter interpretive guidelines and industry guidance.

When the licence holders do not follow the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) guidance mentioned below and present a different means of meeting SFCR requirements, they are required to present scientific evidence that their preventive measures are effective; the inspectorate may consult with their Area Operational specialists to verify the validity of the approach and request guidance from the Operational Guidance and Expertise (OGE) Subject Matter Experts (SME).

As per SFCR paragraph 89 (1) (d), all licence holders are required to identify and analyze animal welfare risks and demonstrate adequate management of those risks.

Under the SFCR, licence holders who handle (including receive) and slaughter food animals are required to prepare, keep, maintain and implement a written Preventive Control Plan (PCP) for animal welfare.

The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to CFIA inspection staff on Preventive Control Inspection (PCI) procedures related to verifying that licence holders meet the regulatory requirements related to animal welfare at slaughter.

Table 1: Recording inspection data in the Digital Service Delivery Platform (DSDP)
Inspection trigger

Choose appropriate selection from the following:

  • Preventive Control Inspection plan
  • Incident response
Business line Food
Program Meat hygiene
Commodity group Leave it blank
Commodity sub-group Leave it blank
Commodity type Leave it blank
Product Leave it blank
Inspection case Preventive Control Inspection plan
Task type Preventive Control Inspections
Inspection task level 1 Compliance Verification of a System
Inspection task level 2

Choose appropriate sub-element from the following:

  • 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs
  • 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation and specification/processing
  • 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance
  • 5.2: Buildings
  • 5.3: Water, ice and steam
Inspection task details Leave it blank

To ensure accuracy on the risk assessment of establishments done by the Establishment-based Risk Assessment (ERA)-Food model, inspectors need to be mindful when populating key data fields within inspection tasks that are not related to food safety (meaning, animal welfare, economic, trade or environmental). Refer to table 2 below for direction on how to populate key fields.

Table 2: Recording non-compliance in DSDP
Is non-compliance observed Choose "Yes" if non-compliance is observed
Impact assessment Table Notea Choose one of the following:
  • "No Impact": if non-compliance observed related solely to animal welfare portion of the sub-element
  • "Direct" or "Potential": if non-compliance observed related to animal welfare as well as food safety portion of the sub-element
  • "Direct" or "Potential": if non-compliance observed related solely to food safety portion of the sub-element
Rest of the fields Complete using the DSDP data-entry guidance in the Operational guidance (OG) Standard Inspection Process (SIP) and Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system

PCI for sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs

This section applies to the humane handling (including receiving) of food animals before slaughter:

  • receiving and assessing the food animals in the conveyance or in crates on the conveyance upon arrival at the establishment and monitoring the conditions and the food animals while they are waiting to be slaughtered outside the facility
  • unloading of the food animals or the crates containing the food animals into the facility
  • handling of the food animals or the crates containing the food animals at the establishment (handling begins outside the facility in some cases, for example some horses slaughter establishment)
  • moving/driving food animals through the facility
  • if applicable, removing the food animals from the crates

Legal authorities

SFCR 49, 75, 86 (1), 88, 89 (1) (d) (e), (2) (3), 127, 135 (1) (a), 166 (1) (b) (i) (ii) (2)

Reference documents

Outcome

Refer to the "Outcome" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs.

Under the SFCR, the licence holders who handle (including receive) food animals are required to prepare, keep, maintain and implement a written PCP for animal welfare; this one will have to be complete and effective to prevent the risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death to any food animal during these activities.

Rationale

Refer to the "Rationale" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs.

An effective PCP for animal welfare will prevent and eliminate the risks of avoidable suffering, injury or death for the food animals during receiving and handling activities at the establishment, both within and outside of the facility, taking into account identified gaps and problematic areas that may be specific or unique to that establishment.

Performance criteria

Refer to the "Performance criteria" in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs.

In addition, the following criteria are met:

  • the licence holder has prepared, is keeping, maintaining and implementing a written PCP for animal welfare for any activity identified in their licence that they conduct in respect of handling (including receiving) of food animals
  • as per the requirements of paragraph 89 (1) (d), the PCP for animal welfare includes the following:
    • in relation to the applicable requirements of SFCR 128 to 136 and 140 (b):
      •  a description of the measures for preventing or eliminating a risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animals during their handling (including their receiving), and of the evidence that those measures are effective
      • a description of the performance criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of each of those measures
      • the procedures for monitoring each of those measures
      • the corrective action procedures for each of those measures
      • the procedures for verifying that the implementation of the PCP results in compliance with the provisions of the act and these regulations
      • the procedures for auditing, on a regular basis, the outcome of the implementation of the PCP
      • documents that substantiate that the PCP has been implemented with respect to SFCR 89 (1) (d)
    • supporting documents (for example, internationally recognized peer review scientific literature, validation proving that alternative control measures are effective) that show evidence of the information recorded
  • each document referred above must be kept for a minimum of 2 years after the day on which it is prepared

Verification activities

Refer to the "Verification activities" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs.

In addition, the following verifications are done:

  • request the licence holder's PCP for animal welfare written program and records
  • review the licence holder's PCP for animal welfare written program and CFIA reference material related to receiving and handling prior to conducting the verification
  • verify that the measures, procedures and performance criteria stated in the licence holder's PCP for animal welfare meet any applicable requirements stated in the SFCR 89 (1) (d) and are effective to control animal welfare risks

Document/record review

Refer to the "Document/record review" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification  system: sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs.

In addition, the document/records for animal welfare are available, complete, up-to-date, legible and accurate and meet the following:

Documents

Food animals found dead on arrival at the establishment or that died at the establishment

In the case of a food animal that is found dead at the time of its arrival at the establishment or that dies at the establishment; the date and time that the food animal was found dead, its identification number or any other information that identifies it.

Competencies and qualification

Animal handlers have the competencies and qualification to receive and handle food animals in the establishment, including by handling crates containing a food animals, without causing avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animals.

Monitoring records

  • The monitoring procedures and frequencies specified in the licence holder's written program are acceptable and effective to detect when the preventive measures are not eliminating or mitigating animal welfare risks of avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animals and include a description of the performance criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of each of those measures
  • The monitoring results are documented, including the recording of detailed observations, when applicable
  • The monitoring results reflect unacceptable conditions observed by the CFIA

Corrective action records

  • Effective corrective action procedures are implemented in a timely manner when a required outcome is not met (deviation)
  • The following information is documented on corrective action records:
    • a description of the deviation and its root cause
    • corrective actions taken
    • verification of effectiveness of corrective actions taken
    • additional measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence of the deviation, and verification of effectiveness of these preventive measures

Verification records

  • Verification frequencies for record reviews, on-site reviews and other activities specified in the licence holder's written program is adhered to
  • Verification procedures are effective meaning they identify when monitoring and deviation procedures were not conducted according to the licence holder's written program
  • Corrective action procedures are implemented when verification procedures identify that monitoring and/or deviation procedures were not conducted according to the licence holder's written program

Internal audit records

  • Internal audits are conducted on a regular basis and the frequency is specified in the written program
  • Internal audit results are based on the CFIA Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter at a minimum
  • Sample size and procedures for assessing adherence to performance criteria are appropriate for the production volume, line-speed, species slaughtered and compliance history
  • Any failed internal audits and trends of failed internal audits are reported to the establishment management with the reasons clearly stated
  • Appropriate corrective measures are taken in a timely manner when an internal audit has failed

On-site: observation and interviews

Refer to the "On-site: observations and interview" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (a): Incoming inputs.

In addition the following are met:

  • observe that the PCP for animal welfare is being implemented
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for each of the following activities to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder:
    • monitoring activities
    • verification activities
    • internal audit activities
    • initiating efficient corrective and preventive measures to bring animal welfare risks, found during monitoring, verification and internal audit, back under control

PCI for sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing

This section applies to humane slaughter of food animals:

  • restraining of the food animals (including suspension of the conscious birds, other than ostriches, rheas or emus, immediately before stunning)
  • stunning of the food animals
  • suspending of the unconscious food animals
  • slaughtering/bleeding of the food animals until its death and before the start of dressing procedures (including the entry into the scald tank)

Legal authorities

SFCR 49, 75, 86 (1), 88,  89 (1) (d) (e), (2) (3), 127, 135 (1) (a), 166 (1) (b) (i) (ii) (2) 

Reference documents

Outcome

Refer to the "Outcome" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing.

Under the SFCR, the licence holders who slaughter food animals are required to prepare, keep, maintain and implement a written PCP for animal welfare; this one will have to be complete and effective to prevent the risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death to any food animal during these activities.

Rationale

Refer to the "Rationale" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing.

An effective PCP for animal welfare will prevent and eliminate risks of avoidable suffering, injury or death for the food animals during any of the slaughter activities in the establishment, both within and outside of the facility, taking into account identified gaps and problematic areas that may be specific or unique to that establishment.

Performance criteria

Refer to the "Performance criteria" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing.

In addition, the following criteria are met:

  • the licence holder has prepared, is keeping, maintaining and implementing a written PCP for animal welfare for any activity identified in their licence that they conduct in respect of slaughtering (including humanely killing) of food animals
  • as per the requirements of paragraph 89 (1) (d), the PCP for animal welfare includes the following:
    • in relation to the applicable requirements of SFCR 128 to 136 and 140 (c):
      •  a description of the measures for preventing or eliminating a risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animals during their slaughtering (including humanely killing), and of the evidence that those measures are effective,
      • a description of the performance criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of each of those measures
      • the procedures for monitoring each of those measures
      • the corrective action procedures for each of those measures
      • the procedures for verifying that the implementation of the PCP results in compliance with the provisions of the act and these regulations,
      • the procedures for auditing, on a regular basis, the outcome of the implementation of the PCP
      • documents that substantiate that the PCP has been implemented with respect to SFCR 89 (1) (d)
    • supporting documents (for example, internationally recognized peer review scientific literature, validation proving that alternative control measures are effective) that show evidence of the information recorded
  • each document referred above must be kept for a minimum of 2 years after the day on which it is prepared

Verification activities

Refer to the "Verification activities" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing.

In addition, the following verifications are performed:

  • request the licence holder's PCP for animal welfare written program and records
  • review the licence holder's PCP for animal welfare written program and CFIA reference material prior to conducting the verification
  • verify that the measures, procedures and performance criteria stated in the licence holder's PCP for animal welfare meet any applicable requirements stated in the SFCR 89 (1) (d) or are supported by validation documentation and are effective to control animal welfare risks

Document/record review

Refer to the "Document/record review" section "Processing" in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability inspection – Compliance verification of a system: sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing.

In addition, the document/records for animal welfare are available, complete, up-to-date, legible and accurate and meet the following:

Documents

Food animals humanely killed at the establishment

In the case of a food animal that was humanely killed at the establishment; the date and time that the food animal was humanely killed, its identification number or any other information that identifies it.

Competencies and qualification

Animal handlers meaning any person who is involved in the restraining, stunning and bleeding and in the ritual slaughtering without pre-slaughter stunning have the competencies and qualification to handle food animals at the establishment without causing avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animals.

Monitoring records

  • The monitoring procedures and frequencies specified in the licence holder's written program are acceptable and effective to detect when the preventive measures are not eliminating or mitigating animal welfare risks of avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animals and include a description of the performance criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of each of those measures
  • The monitoring results are documented, including the recording of detailed observations, when applicable
  • The monitoring results reflect unacceptable conditions observed by the CFIA

Corrective action records

  • Effective corrective action procedures are implemented in a timely manner when a required outcome is not met (deviation)
  • The following information is documented on corrective action records:
    • a description of the deviation and its root cause
    • corrective actions taken
    • verification of effectiveness of corrective actions taken
    • additional measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence of the deviation, and verification of effectiveness of these preventive measures

Verification records

  • Verification frequencies for record reviews, on-site reviews and other activities specified in the licence holder's written program is adhered to
  • Verification procedures are effective meaning they identify when monitoring and deviation procedures were not conducted according to the licence holder's written program
  • Corrective action procedures are implemented when verification procedures identify that monitoring and/or deviation procedures were not conducted according to the licence holder's written program

Internal audit records

  • Internal audits are conducted on a regular basis and the frequency is specified in the written program
  • Internal audit results are based on the CFIA Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter at a minimum
  • Sample size and procedures for assessing adherence to performance criteria are appropriate for the production volume, line-speed, species slaughtered and compliance history
  • Any failed internal audits and trends of failed internal audits are reported to the establishment management with the reasons clearly stated
  • Appropriate corrective measures are taken in a timely manner when an internal audits has failed

On-site: observation and interview

Refer to the "On-site: observations and interview" section "Processing" in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability inspection – Compliance verification of a system: sub-element 1.1 (b) (c): Product formulation, specifications and processing.

In addition, the following are met:

  • observe that the PCP for animal welfare is being implemented
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for each of the following activities to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder:
    • monitoring activities
    • verification activities
    • internal audit activities
    • initiating efficient corrective and preventive measures to bring animal welfare risks, found during monitoring, verification and internal audit, back under control

PCI sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance

This section applies to the equipment used during humane receiving, handling and slaughtering of food animals.

Legal authorities

SFCR 49, 53 (a) (c) (e) (f), 55, 86 (1), 88, 89 (1) (d) (2) (3), 127, 128, 135 (1) (b), 135 (2)

Reference documents

Outcome

Refer to the "Outcome" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification  system: sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance.

Under the SFCR, licence holders who handle (including receive) and slaughter food animals are required to have a complete and effective written PCP for animal welfare in place that is maintained and implemented to prevent the risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death where:

  • equipment (including conveyances where food animals are slaughtered) and containers are:
    • designed, constructed, maintained and used in a manner and under circumstances and conditions that do not result in avoidable suffering, injury or death of the food animals
    • effective for the purpose for which they are intended
  • controlling or measuring devices used to meet regulatory requirements are calibrated for accuracy

Rationale

Refer to the "Rationale" in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification  system: sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance.

Considering as well that:

  • poor design, construction and installation can impair maintenance of equipment and may lead to avoidable suffering, injury or death of the food animals
  • improper maintenance and use of equipment may lead to avoidable suffering, injury or death of the food animals
  • improper calibration of controlling/measuring devices may lead to inadequate processing and avoidable suffering, injury or death of the food animals

Performance criteria

Refer to the "Performance criteria" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification  system: sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance.

The licence holder must ensure that all equipment (including conveyances where food animals are slaughtered) used for the pre-slaughter and slaughter activities (including ritual slaughter without pre-slaughter stunning, if applicable) are in accordance with the animal welfare regulatory requirements and guidance documents.

Conveyance or equipment

The term "conveyance or equipment" is not specifically defined in the SFCA nor in the SFCR. In general terms, "conveyance or equipment " when used in Part 4 – Preventive Control (PC) of the SFCR, refers to anything that is used within the establishment to handle (including receive) or slaughter a food animal.

  • Examples of conveyances or equipment include:
    • mobile ramps, gangways and chutes used within the facility
    • handling equipment
    • restraining equipment
    • slaughter equipment such as stunning devices
    • containers used for gas stunning
    • rails, rail supports and conveyors
    • physical structure or means of transport within the establishment facilities where food animals are slaughtered

To meet the performance criteria, the licence holder must demonstrate the following:

for all species

  • Any conveyance or equipment that is used for the pre-slaughter and slaughter activities of food animals must:
    • be appropriate for the food animal and for the activity being conducted
    • be constructed of, and maintained using, materials that are suitable for their intended use
    • function as intended
    • be accessible and, if necessary for its cleaning, sanitizing, maintenance or inspection, able to be easily disassembled
  • Each food animal is not subjected to any condition related to an equipment used during pre-slaughter and slaughter activities that may cause it avoidable suffering, injury or death
  • A licence holder who handles a food animal during any pre-slaughter and slaughter activities they conduct in the establishment do so under circumstances in which the equipment that is used will not cause avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animal
  • During pre-slaughter and slaughter activities, only equipment that are designed, constructed and maintained in such a manner that they will not cause avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animal, are used

for mammalians and ratites excluding rabbits

Equipment for restraining food animals during their handling, their assessment, their ante-mortem examination and their inspection is present.

for all species excluding birds and rabbits in containers

Mobile ramps, gangways and chutes that are used by food animals in the establishment during pre-slaughter activities must provide secure footing and must not present a risk of injury to the food animals during movement.

Verification activities

Refer to the "Verification activities" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance.

In addition, the following verifications are done:

  • review the licence holder's written PCP  for equipment design and maintenance to verify compliance to regulatory requirements, including applicable PCP for animal welfare requirements set out in SFCR 89 and performance criteria
  • verify the following:
    • any associated documents and records, including verification records, can demonstrate that the PCs are effectively implemented
    • non-compliant situations have been effectively addressed
    • documents and records reflect the conditions observed on-site
    • the list of all equipment and controlling or measuring devices  requiring maintenance and/or calibration is kept current

Document/records review

Refer to the "Document/record review" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance.

On-site: observation and interview

Refer to the "On-site: observations and interview" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 4.1: Equipment design and maintenance.

In addition, the following apply:

  • select at least 2 pieces of equipment used for pre-slaughter and/or slaughter animal welfare activities and verify if the performance criteria are met
  • observe that control measures for animal welfare equipment monitoring during pre-slaughter and/or slaughter activities are being implemented
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for each of the following activities to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder:
    • equipment monitoring during pre-slaughter and/or slaughter activities
    • equipment verification during pre-slaughter and/or slaughter activities
    • initiating efficient corrective and preventive measures to bring animal welfare risks, found during monitoring and verification, back under control

PCI for sub-element 5.2: Buildings

Note: buildings include the slaughter establishments which may include their land and surroundings and the facilities where regulated activities are conducted (as stipulated in the licence).

Legal authorities

SFCR 49, 57 (b) (i) (iv) (c) (i) (ii) (d), 58 (1) (3), 63 (1), 64 (a) (d), 65 (1) (2) (d), 86 (1), 88, 89 (1) (d) (2) (3), 127, 128, 134, 135 (1) (b), 135 (2)

Reference documents

Outcome

Refer to the "Outcome" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.2: Buildings.

In addition, buildings used for pre-slaughter and slaughter activities are designed, constructed and maintained to support the activity being conducted and prevent avoidable suffering, injury or death of food animals.

Rationale

Refer to the "Rationale" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.2: Buildings.

Considering as well that:

  • proper building design, construction and maintenance prevent or mitigate the risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death of food animals during pre-slaughter and slaughter activities
  • separation or control between incompatible animals helps to prevent the risk of avoidable suffering, injury or death of food animals

Performance criteria

Refer to the "Performance criteria" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.2: Buildings.

The licence holder must ensure that the buildings used for pre-slaughter and slaughter activities are designed, constructed, maintained and used to meet regulatory requirements.

To meet the performance criteria, the licence holder must demonstrate the following:

all species

  • The interior of any facility or conveyance where a food animal is intended to be slaughtered and slaughtered must be:
    • designed, constructed and maintained in such a manner that
      • the size and layout is adequate to accommodate the activity being conducted and the equipment used in the activity
    • constructed of, and maintained using, materials that are
      • suitable for their intended use
      • appropriate for the food animal and for the activity being conducted
    • of sound construction and in good repair
  • There are separate areas in the establishment for:
    • keeping, examining and inspecting food animals
    • humanely killing food animals when these animals are condemned
  • An establishment where a food animal is intended to be slaughtered and slaughtered is equipped with natural or artificial lighting that is appropriate for the food animal and the activity being conducted
  • The facility or conveyance where a food animal is intended to be slaughtered and slaughtered is equipped with a ventilation system that
    • provides natural or mechanical ventilation with sufficient air exchange to provide clean air and to remove unclean air and odours that might affect the food; and,
    • functions as intended
  • The temperature and humidity level in a facility or conveyance where a food animal is intended to be slaughtered and slaughtered must be maintained at levels that are appropriate for the food animal and for the activity being conducted
  • If the facility or conveyance is equipped with a heating, cooling or humidity-control system, the system must function as intended
  • Each food animal is not subjected to any condition at the establishment (which may include the premises, the surroundings and the facilities) that may cause it avoidable suffering, injury or death
  • During pre-slaughter and slaughter activities, only areas of an establishment that are designed, constructed and maintained in such a manner that they will not cause avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animal, are used

all species except birds and rabbits in containers

  • The interior of any facility or conveyance where a food animal is intended to be slaughtered and slaughtered must be:
    • designed, constructed and maintained in such a manner that
      • any floors provide or permit good drainage, except if there is no risk of liquid accumulation
  • There are separate areas in the establishment for:
    • segregating food animals of different species
    • segregating a sick or injured food animals with other sick or injured food animals or isolate a sick or injured food animal if, because of its condition, it presents a risk to other food animals or it requires protection from other food animals
    • isolating a food animal that may cause suffering, injury or death to other food animals because of its nature, temperament, gender, weight, age or any other cause
    • holding food animals that show a deviation from normal behavior, physiology or appearance
    • segregating the food animal with other condemned food animals or isolate the food animal if, because of its condition, it presents a risk to other food animals or it requires protection from other food animals
  • Floors and fixed ramps, gangways and chutes that are used by food animals in the establishment must provide secure footing and must not present a risk of injury to the food animals during movement

Verification activities

Refer to the "Verification activities" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.2: Buildings.

In addition, the following verifications are performed:

  • review the licence holder's written PCs for exterior and/or interior building structures, lighting, ventilation and temperature and humidity control system to verify compliance to regulatory requirements, including applicable PCP for animal welfare requirements set out in SFCR 89 and performance criteria
  • verify the following:
    • any associated documents and records, including verification records, can demonstrate that the PCs are effectively implemented
    • non-compliant situations have been effectively addressed
    • documents and records reflect the conditions observed on-site

Document/records review

Refer to the "Document/record review" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.2: Buildings.

On-site: observation and interview

Refer to the "On-site: observations and interview" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.2: Buildings.

Go outside:

  • observe building exterior and surroundings and verify that the performance criteria are met.

Go inside:

  • select at least 1 room/area used for pre-slaughter or slaughter activities with the highest impact on animal welfare and 1 other room/area used for animal welfare activities and verify that the performance criteria are met
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for exterior and/or interior building structures, lighting, ventilation, temperature and humidity control to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for verification of exterior and/or interior building structures to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for initiating actions to bring animal welfare risks back under control to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder

PCI for sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam

Legal authorities

SFCR 49, 70 (4), 71 (1) (a), 127, 128, 135 (2)

Reference documents

Outcome

Refer to the "Outcome" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam.

Water, or any other source of hydration, provided to the food animals is safe and in adequate quantity, temperature, pH and pressure for the species it is intended to.

Rationale

Refer to the "Rationale" section in the Operational guideline –  Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam.

Considering as well that:

  • water, or any other source of hydration, is provided to livestock and may be provided to poultry; it is essential that water provided to food animals be safe and adequate for its intended use
  • water, or any other source of hydration, can be a source of biological, chemical or physical hazards so could present a risk of injury to the health of the food animals

Performance criteria

Refer to the "Performance criteria" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam.

The licence holder must ensure that water, or any other source of hydration, provided to food animals is in accordance with the regulatory requirements and animal welfare guidance documents.

To meet the performance criteria, the licence holder must demonstrate the following:

  • water or any other source of hydration that is provided to food animals that are intended to be slaughtered in an establishment must not present a risk of injury to the health of those animals
  • the establishment must be supplied, as appropriate for the food animal that is intended to be slaughtered and the activity being conducted, with water that is adequate in quantity, temperature, pH and pressure to meet the needs of the establishment
  • each food animal is not subjected to any condition at the establishment that may cause it avoidable suffering, injury or death
  • during pre-slaughter and slaughter activities, only areas of an establishment that are designed, constructed and maintained in such a manner that they will not cause avoidable suffering, injury or death to the food animal, are used

Verification activities

Refer to the "Verification activities" section in the Operational guideline –  Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam.

Document/records review

Refer to the "Document/record review" section in the Operational guideline –  Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam.

Review the licence holder's written PCs for water provided to food animals to verify compliance to regulatory requirements, including applicable PCP for animal welfare requirements set out in SFCR 89 and performance criteria.

  • Verify the following:
    • any associated documents, including verification records, can demonstrate that the PCs are effectively implemented
    • non-compliant situations have been effectively addressed
    • documents reflect the conditions observed on-site
  • Confirm the safety and suitability for its intended use of:
    • source water (for example, municipal water, well water, holding tank)
    • water at its point of use
  • If water is treated, confirm that any chemicals used are accepted for that use and that appropriate procedures are followed.
  • Review facility schematics and records to confirm:
    • there is no cross-contamination between safe and unsafe water supplies unless measures are taken to mitigate the risks

On-site: observation and interview

Refer to the "On-site: observations and interview" section in the Operational guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system: sub-element 5.3: Water, ice and steam.

Verify the following:

  • all hoses, taps or other similar sources of possible contamination are designed to prevent the risk of contamination (for example, back flow or back siphoning)
  • the volume, temperature and pressure of the safe water are adequate
  • any treatment of water must be applied in a manner that does not present a risk of injury to the health of the food animals
  • if the establishment's water supply is from a private well or holding tank, adequate protection is afforded to prevent the risk of contamination
  • if the establishment has any water filters on water lines or in equipment, select at least 1 water filter and verify the following:
    • the licence holder can demonstrate that the filter has been changed as per the filter manufacturer's recommendations or equivalent or the licence holder can demonstrate the reasons for the variation from the published recommendation
    • the filter is installed
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for water provided to food animals to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for verification of water provided to food animals to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder
  • interview at least 1 person responsible for initiating measures to bring animal welfare risks back under control to determine if they understand and are following procedures as set out by the licence holder

Additional information for the inspectors

The PCP for animal welfare of the licence holder must include the measures in place at the slaughter establishment to control the identified animal welfare risks (avoidable suffering, injury and death other than by humane slaughter or killing) for each activity and each type of food animal handled (including received) and slaughtered and must provide evidence of the effectiveness of these measures and the performance criteria used. The licence holder is encouraged to follow the CFIA guidelines to meet the regulatory requirements. If the licence holder choose to adopt a different practice to meet the outcome, the PCP for animal welfare must include the scientific evidences and  supporting documents used which may include:

  • peer-reviewed scientific literature reviews, studies and research that provide evidence of internationally recognized and accepted best practices and standards and good performance outcomes for animal welfare
  • results of a validation conducted by the licence holder or a validation previously conducted by industry and/or equipment manufacturers that provides evidence as to its effectiveness at the establishment

In general, the PCP for animal welfare must include:

  • specific methods and procedures that will be implemented to identify all the animal welfare risks and any recurring problems in the establishment, both within and outside of the facility, for any receiving, handling and slaughter activity and the outcome standards expected
  • names or position of the persons who are responsible for each activity
  • description of animal welfare risks in the establishment
  • employee training, competence and supervision required to perform the activity
  • name or position of the persons who are responsible for monitoring, verification and internal audit, including evidence of their training and competencies
  • procedures to record training and evidence of competency for a given activity, monitoring procedures, verification procedures and internal audit program
  • procedures to record non-compliances and corrective action procedures that will have been taken as required immediately and those to prevent recurrences of the non-compliance
  • the frequency and method of checking areas where animal welfare activities are performed in both the facility interior and exterior
  • checking equipment, including its maintenance
  • animal welfare contingency plans [Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)] that address predictable and unpredictable but possible events and emergencies that may have arisen during staging of the load, loading, transportation, the time spent waiting to unload, unloading, handling while in lairage, preparation for and/or restraint for stunning, stunning, shackling, and bleeding
  • information and documents for any equipment used during animal welfare activities that may carry an animal welfare risk, for example:
    • initial validation of captive bolt equipment efficacy for all species, including nonconventional species of animals, such as farmed game, may be conducted on cadavers or commercially available test models, since testing new equipment on the live animal carries an increased animal welfare risk:
      • when testing on cadavers, split the head to verify if the brainstem is damaged sufficiently as a test to validate that the captive bolt length used and the angle of the shot are sufficient to reach the target to cause effective stunning

The areas of highest animal welfare risks for suffering include the following activities (in order of consecutive slaughter steps):

  • receiving and assessing the food animals in the conveyance or in containers on the conveyance upon arrival at the establishment and monitoring the conditions and the food animals while they are waiting to be slaughtered outside the facility
  • unloading of the food animals or the containers containing the food animals into the facility
  • handling of the food animals or the crates containing the food animals at the establishment (handling begins outside the facility in some cases, for example some horses slaughter establishment)  
  • moving/driving animals through the facility
  • if applicable, removing of the food animals from the crates
  • restraining of the food animals (including suspension of the conscious birds, other than ostriches, rheas or emus, immediately before stunning)
  • stunning of the food animals
  • suspending of the unconscious food animals
  • slaughtering/bleeding of the food animals until its death and before the start of dressing procedures (including the entry into the scald tank)

The inspector will conduct an animal welfare PCI case either as a "planned case" or as an "as required" case. More specifically, when performing the animal welfare PCI inspection case of a sub-element, the inspector will have to look at the following:

humane receiving and handling of food animals at slaughter (part of sub-elements 1.1 (a), 4.1, 5.2 and 5.3)

Specifications on good animal welfare practices for producers, poultry catchers and transporters; employee competencies, qualification and training at the establishment; assessment, monitoring, handling and care while the animals are in lairage and prior to slaughter and overnight as applicable; management of ambulatory, non-ambulatory, unfit and compromised animals; handling and moving food animals, including food animals in containers at unloading and into the facility; suspension of conscious birds immediately before slaughter, if applicable, water and feed provide to the food animal, as applicable, and emergency contingency planning.

humane slaughter of food animals (part of sub-elements 1.1 (b) (c), 4.1 and 5.2)

Specifications on employee competencies, qualification and training at the establishment; captive bolt equipment; firearms; electrical stunning systems for mammals and avian species; controlled atmosphere stunning systems for pigs and poultry; parameters used for the stunning equipment, monitoring stunning effectiveness and methods used for ensuring all animals are effectively stunned, do not return to sensibility, are well bled and are dead before entering the scalder or dressing procedures begin.

ritual slaughter of food animals without pre-slaughter stunning (part of sub-elements 1.1 (b) (c), 4.1 and 5.2)

Specifications on employee competencies, qualification and training at the establishment including the employee doing the ritual slaughter; animal handling prior to the cut; restraining, cutting technique; assessing sensibility after the cut; knife and equipment maintenance; ensuring unconscious animals are suspended on the slaughter line and that they remain unconscious until death; humane handling of animals that are rejected as not acceptable for ritual slaughter.

Repeat failures (patterns of failure)

  • If an animal welfare issue keeps reoccurring despite corrective actions and preventive measures, this can represent a pattern of failure, or it may indicate the preventive measures were ineffective
    • the PCP for animal welfare must include performance criteria and take measures to remain within these limits
    • an inspection report may be issued for repeat failures even when the licence holder identifies the failure and initiates corrective action, because repeat failures indicate an inability to consistently meet acceptable performance
  • A licence holder may be tempted to remove preventive measures that were previously implemented once an issue appears to be resolved
    • if removal of the preventive measure causes the issue to reoccur, this signifies that the preventive measure either has to be permanent, or different

Zero tolerance versus "tolerance" levels

During internal audits, the term "zero tolerance" means that the only way each of the criteria listed below can pass is if they have a perfect score.

The zero tolerance criteria are:

  • 100% of mammalian and avian food animals (including ratites) are insensible on the bleed rail
  • there are 0 uncut birds entering the scalder
  • immediate corrective measure is taken for any animal experiencing avoidable suffering
  • there is no deliberate act of cruelty observed

Most internal audit tools assign an automatic audit failure for these criteria. Other criteria have a "tolerance", for example, 96% for captive bolt stunning or 98% for electric or gas stunning, in recognition of the fact that humans and equipment do not function perfectly at all times. The more automated a procedure is (electrical or gas stunning versus captive bolt stunning), the more effective it is expected to be.

A less than perfect procedure can be tolerated, but animal suffering must never be tolerated. The equipment itself does not require corrective action unless performance falls below the objective performance criteria, but corrective action is mandatory for each and every animal affected by poor equipment performance. Therefore if performance is within acceptable criteria, the equipment does not require adjustment, but each affected animal requires immediate re-stunning or immediate killing as the case may be. If performance is below acceptable criteria, corrective action must be taken for both equipment and affected animals.

Assigning compliance level

Assess deficiencies identified while completing SIP PCI case and assign a compliance level (compliant or non-compliant) based on the extent, severity and impact of these deficiencies on the integrity of the PCP for animal welfare.

Assign a non-compliant level and issue an inspection report when:

  • significant PCP for animal welfare elements are missing or incomplete (for example, 1 element having an impact on regulations or numerous minor elements missing)
  • the licence holder is not following the PCP for animal welfare, resulting in loss of control
  • the licence holder is following the PCP for animal welfare but it is not effective at controlling animal welfare risks
  • the licence holder's controls fail to identify problems
  • the licence holder's controls have identified problems but effective corrective actions have not been implemented
  • there is zero tolerance issues or deliberate acts of cruelty observed. In this case, enforcement action (INCR) can also be taken
  • the licence holder is not conducting monitoring, verification or internal audits at a reasonable frequency, or is not maintaining records for 1 or more of these elements
  • controls outlined in the PCP for animal welfare fail to prevent repeat failures
  • the entire PCP for animal welfare is not reassessed on an annual basis, or is not maintained following changes in procedures, equipment, facilities, etc.

Determining the impact assessment and the severity of consequence(s)

The Impact assessment is a field in the DSDP used to gather inspection task data that is required for the ERA model. It is one of the compliance factors used in the calculation of the establishment risk result. The impact assessment is only completed for the PCI task type and is found in the inspection task record.

Non-compliances associated to food safety will be used by the ERA-Food model in the calculation of the risk assessment result while the animal welfare non-compliances will not. See section 6.2.3 Impact assessment of the Food Preventive Control Inspection of the OG Operational Guideline – Food preventive control and traceability – Compliance verification system. Thereby, animal welfare related non-compliances are not considered by the ERA-Food model in the calculation of the food safety impact assessment/risk associated with an establishment. Thus, inspectors will have to identify the impact of the animal welfare non-compliance on food safety (none, direct or potential) and record it in DSDP. See Table 2.

The Category of non-compliance is a field in the DSDP used to determine the potential consequences of the non-compliance and the likelihood of occurrence. The non-compliance categorization determines the level of response the CFIA needs to take to mitigate risk and restore compliance. The Category of non-compliance field is found in the non-compliance record. The impact assessment is not to be considered during the categorization of the non-compliance. See section 4.7 Categorize the non-compliance of the Standard Inspection Process (SIP). animal welfare is considered as an animal health risk related to conditions of the environment or situations/practices that may cause avoidable injury, suffering or death of animals. If a non-compliance requiring immediate action is identified to the Regulated Party (RP), it must be addressed with an interim or permanent corrective action. If an interim measure is put in place, the inspector may allow up to 10 days for the RP to complete the permanent corrective action. The timeframe is at the discretion of the inspector, based on sound judgement and on a case-by-case basis, but  since animal welfare non-compliance are often categorized as severe, they usually require a very short timeframe for resolution (up to calendar 5 days).

Internal audits

The CFIA must ensure that industry regularly conducts internal audits and reviews records when performing the task related to completing the animal welfare PCI of sub-element 1.1(a) and 1.1 (b) (c) of the SIP. CFIA is not required to perform internal audits, nor to correlate with industry.

Internal audits are tools for industry to evaluate their performance at any given moment in time using performance criteria that are measurable and that can be measured in a consistent manner each time and by different people. An internal audit is not the same thing as monitoring procedures in the PCP for animal welfare, and it does not replace monitoring. It simply gives a snapshot of the slaughter process to gauge performance at that moment in time.

The objective of internal audits is to ensure the Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter are met for mammalian and avian food animal. Additional criteria may be audited or higher performance standards may be used, but performance standards must not be inferior to those indicated in Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter. The establishment may also perform internal audits of performance criteria associated with other steps of an activity (for example, pre-stun shocks in poultry) or with other activities done at the establishment (for example, ritual slaughter without pre-slaughter stunning or the assessment and monitoring of food animals before slaughter).

Internal audits should be conducted on all species being slaughtered, not just cattle, pigs, sheep, horses, chickens and turkeys. The criteria are adaptable to all species and all slaughter methods. The licence holder can adapt an audit for a minor species by using criteria for another similar species and a similar slaughter method as described in Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter. For example, use cattle criteria for bison stunned with firearms, or turkey criteria for geese or ducks stunned with an electrical water bath. Quail internal audits is similar to poultry internal audits and should use the same criteria as poultry. Rabbit internal audits should use the same criteria as poultry for electric stunning but in case of mechanical stunning (captive bolt), should use the same performance standard as for mammalian.

Internal audits can be performed by a trained employee or by an external third-party hired for that purpose. The auditor must not be the same person as the one doing the task that is being audited or the one responsible for taking corrective action (for example, re-stunning animals).

The person conducting an internal audit will not normally step in to initiate corrective action or draw attention to an ineffective stun or other deficiency while the audit is taking place, with the exception of an observed deliberate act of cruelty which always requires immediate intervention. The auditor's role is not that of the monitor or of the employee tasked with responding to any deviation. Instead, the auditor's role is to silently count the number of animals/events without drawing attention to deficiencies in order to avoid influencing the audit outcome.

Internal audit frequency and sample size

Internal audit frequency and sample size is determined by the licence holder and is specified in the PCP for animal welfare. Factors to consider when determining audit frequency and sample size are explained in Guidelines for animal welfare Preventive Control Plans and self-audits for the slaughter of food animals and accompanying footnotes. In very small plants, for example those slaughtering 5 animals per day, a running tally should be kept so that meaningful data can be extrapolated.

The recommended sample size of 100 cattle, pigs, sheep/goats, 500 chickens or 100 turkeys, as per Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter is not mandatory. The sample size must be discussed with the veterinarian with supervisory authority and should be appropriate to the slaughter volume. Sample size for internal audits does not have to be the same as for monitoring. During monitoring or random checks of slaughter effectiveness, smaller or larger sample sizes may be used depending on the situation or the issue and its extent, and only the particular area of concern needs to be evaluated.

Internal audit techniques

As a CFIA inspector, you do not need to know specific details about what is being evaluated other than the main objective criteria in Objective performance criteria for humane handling, stunning and slaughter. If you have concerns about what additional criteria are being audited , how/where they are evaluated , how individual criteria results are tabulated (pass/fail, or points), and how the overall pass/fail score is determined, consult the PCP for animal welfare to see if includes details that will clarify the concern, or discuss with the licence holder.

The audit procedure should be the same for all internal audits conducted at the establishment for a given species and slaughter method. However the audit procedure may be different in another establishment even if the same species is slaughtered using the same method and this may be because the licence holder wants to focus on particular criteria (for example, slips), or because different auditors perform the audit in the second establishment.

CFIA actions in response to internal audit failures

Do not be overly concerned with internal audit details. Your main concerns should be:

  • are animal welfare SFCR regulations for humane slaughter and humane handling (including receiving) complied with and if not, are immediate corrective actions taken by the licence holder
  • are regular internal audits being conducted by the licence holder
  • does the internal audit procedure itself and the frequency at which it is done appear reasonable
  • are the internal audit records representative of what is observed
  • are overall pass/fail ratings consistent with results for the objective criteria
  • are significant deficiencies evident upon performing record review
  • is the licence holder conducting a follow-up to determine the cause of a poor audit result

If you have any concerns with regulatory compliance, conduct the appropriate daily commodity task. For the other concerns listed above, conduct a portion or all of the animal welfare PCI of sub-element 1.1 (a) and/or 1.1 (b) (c) to see what the PCP for animal welfare says about internal audit procedures, documentation, rating and follow-up procedures, and discuss any concerns with the licence holder.

Some internal audit performance criteria are regulatory requirements while some are not. Regulatory requirements include effective stunning (SFCR 141), bleed rail insensibility (SFCR 142 and 143), access to water in holding pens (SFCR 71 and 136) and absence of deliberate acts of cruelty (SFCR 128 or 129 (1)). Performance criteria which are not regulatory requirements are slips/falls, vocalization and prod use, but they may be a regulatory requirement if slipping, falling and vocalization are the result of the facilities (floors-SFCR 57 (b) (iv) and 58 (3)), poor handling or equipment causing avoidable suffering or injury (SFCR 135), or if prod use is contrary to the requirements of SFCR 129 (2).

CFIA action during observed internal audits will not depend on the final result of an internal audit but will depend on the actions of establishment employees or of the licence holder when regulations are contravened (for example, when an animal fails to be rendered insensible or returns to sensibility on the bleed rail) with the exception of an observed deliberate act of cruelty which always requires immediate intervention such as compliance and/or enforcement actions.

Date modified: