08 Specific Requirements for Food Production

All Oiva evaluation guidelines for approved food establishments.

8.1 Processing of TSE Risk Material

Guide/version: 2146/04.02.00.01/2021/4, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to all establishments where TSE risk material of bovine, ovine or caprine animals is processed, also when no specific approval is required for the processing of TSE risk material.
  • Technical matters related to TSE approval, such as application for required approvals, approval documents, own-check activities (up-to-date status and consistency with approval decision) and the facilities related to the approval are evaluated in point 1.3.
  • BSE/TSE sampling is evaluated in point 17.1.
  • The separation of material of animal origin from wastewater in facilities where TSE risk material is being separated is evaluated in point 1.1 in connection with approval of the facilities, structures and equipment of the establishment.
  • The handling and storage of by-products other than TSE risk material are evaluated in point 5.7 insofar as the operations fall under the Food Act, and in point 5.8 insofar as the operations fall under legislation on by-products. The results of the evaluations based on Guideline 5.8 are not presented in the Oiva report, but only in the inspection report.
  • The dispatching of and commercial documents related to by-products are evaluated in point 15.5 insofar as the operations fall under the Food Act, and in point 5.8 insofar as the operations fall under legislation on by-products.

Matters to be controlled:

  • Compliance of TSE operations and processing of TSE risk material with requirements, and prevention of cross-contamination of foodstuffs.
  • Where a specific approval is required for TSE operations, compliance of TSE operations with the TSE approval decision and any specific conditions laid down in the approval decision.
  • Correct determination of TSE risk material and verification by the operator of compliance with the age limits laid down in TSE provisions.
  • Placing of the carcass, other parts of the slaughtered animal, and by-products in quarantine, keeping in quarantine and releasing from quarantine.
  • Marking and separation of TSE risk material.
  • Processing, dispatching, reception, and commercial documents of the carcasses or other parts of the slaughtered animal containing TSE risk material.
  • Cutting of meat from the head of bovine animals aged over 12 months.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check activities as concerns the processing of TSE risk material, and the own-check plan, if appropriate, are controlled applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

Operations comply with requirements as regards the matters that are controlled. For example:

  • TSE operations are carried out in compliance with the TSE approval decision and any specific conditions laid down in the approval decision. Processing of TSE risk material complies with requirements.
  • TSE risk material is marked and kept separate from foodstuffs in a manner that prevents cross-contamination. All parts of animal that legislation defines as TSE risk material are treated as such. The carcass, other parts of the slaughtered animal, and by-products are kept in quarantine until the TSE examination result is confirmed.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

For example:

  • There are some minor shortcomings in the records related to TSE operations at the establishment as concerns deviations and corrective action taken, but corrective actions have been appropriate and adequate.
  • There are some minor shortcomings in the marking of containers used for the collection and storage of TSE risk material, or in the staining of TSE risk material, but there is no risk of confusion with foodstuffs.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

For example:

  • TSE operations are not carried out in compliance with the TSE approval decision or with any specific conditions laid down in the approval decision, and food safety is impaired.
  • There are repeatedly shortcomings in the TSE marking of carcasses or in the sealing of the foramen magnum and the plugging of the bolt hole.
  • Shortcomings occur on a regular basis or continue for a prolonged period of time.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

For example:

  • TSE operations are not carried out in compliance with the TSE approval decision or with any specific conditions laid down in the approval decision, and food safety is jeopardised.
  • TSE risk material is not removed.
  • There are shortcomings in the marking of containers used for the collection and storage of TSE risk material, or in the staining of TSE risk material, which cause a risk of confusion between TSE risk material and foodstuffs.
  • The result of the TSE examination is not waited for before continuing the processing of carcasses, other parts of the slaughtered animal, and by-products.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 999/2001, rules regarding TSEs
  • Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 on by-products
  • Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs
  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on hygiene rules for food of animal origin
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on zoonoses 316/2021, Chapter 7
  • Finnish Food Authority's Guide “TSE actions at establishments”
  • Finnish Food Authority 's Guide “Handling and control of by-products of animal origin at food establishments”.


Updates in version 4:

  • Guideline no. 2146/04.02.00.01/2021 replaces guideline no. 10290
  • List of legislation has been updated
  • Example in grade To be corrected regarding TSE marking of carcasses has been modified.

8.2 Sensory Monitoring of Cleanliness of Carcasses and Organs

Guide/version: 2147/04.02.00.01/2021/3, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to slaughterhouses and low-capacity slaughterhouses that slaughter ungulates, as well as to reindeer slaughterhouses and game handling establishments for the evaluation of the sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses and organs.
  • This Guideline is also applied to slaughterhouses and low-capacity slaughterhouses that slaughter poultry for the evaluation of the sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses.
  • The adequacy and effectiveness of monitoring and corrective actions can be evaluated on the basis of observations made in the acceptance inspection at the cutting plant.
  • Microbiological sampling from the surface of carcasses, carried out to monitor process hygiene, is evaluated in point 17.1 "Sampling and Own-check Tests".
  • Management of lactic acid decontamination of bovine carcasses is evaluated in point 8.3.

Matters to be controlled:

  • Cleanliness of carcasses and organs
  • Organisation of sensory monitoring of cleanliness of carcasses and organs
    • implementation of own-check activities
    • records of implementation
    • records of deviations
    • corrective actions carried out due to deviations
    • HACCP system, if appropriate
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check activities and, where appropriate, the plan are controlled by applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

Operations comply with requirements as regards the matters that are controlled. For example:

  • Carcasses in chilling room are clean according to sensory assessment and there is no visible faecal or other contamination on them.
  • Sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses and organs comprises adequate own-check, implementation, records, corrective actions, and a HACCP system, if appropriate.
  • Own-check activities are adequate and suitable in relation to the nature and scope of operations at the establishment.
  • Corrective actions have been adequate.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

For example:

  • Carcasses in chilling room are clean according to sensory assessment and there is no visible faecal or other contamination on them.
  • There are some minor shortcomings in the sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses and organs, or in own-check or the HACCP system, but they do not impair food safety, however. 

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

For example:

  • According to sensory assessment, there is some faecal or other contamination on carcasses in chilling room, which impairs food safety.
  • There are shortcomings that impair food safety in the sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses and organs, or in own-check or the HACCP system.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

For example:

  • According to sensory assessment, there is faecal or other contamination on carcasses in chilling room to the extent that food safety is jeopardised.
  • There are shortcomings that jeopardise food safety in the sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses and organs, or in own-check or the HACCP system.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs
  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on hygiene rules for food of animal origin
  • Commission Implementing regulation (EU) 2019/627
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on food hygiene 318/2021.


Updates in version 3:

  • Guideline no. 2147/04.02.00.01/2021/3 replaces guideline no. 10291
  • List of legislation references updated.

8.3 Management of Lactic Acid Decontamination of Bovine Carcasses

Guide/version: 2148/04.02.00.01/2021/3, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to slaughterhouses and low-capacity slaughterhouses that slaughter domestic bovine animals (incl. Bubalus and Bison species) and to reindeer slaughterhouses.
  • The purpose of this point is to evaluate the reduction of the surface contamination of bovine carcasses using lactic acid, and the monitoring of the reduction of surface contamination.
  • As the use of lactic acid may not affect the obligation of the food business operator to comply with good hygienic slaughter practices and operational procedures, it is recommended that the sensory monitoring of the cleanliness of carcasses and organs (point 8.2) is evaluated at the same time as this point. 

Matters to be controlled:

  • Compliance of lactic acid solution with requirements.
  • Realisation of pre-conditions for lactic acid treatment, and its compliance with requirements.
  • HACCP system, incl. sampling before lactic acid treatment as required by the Regulation on microbiological criteria of foodstuffs, lactic acid concentration during treatment, lactic acid temperature during treatment.
  • Documentation of lactic acid treatment.
  • Notifying operators receiving the carcasses about the lactic acid treatment.
  • Documentation of notified information.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check activities and, where appropriate, the plan, are controlled by applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities”.

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

Operations comply with requirements as regards the matters that are controlled. For example:

  • Operations meet the specified requirements and the operator has unexpected and occasional shortcomings under control through own-check activities. Implementation of HACCP system complies with requirements.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

For example:

  • Minor shortcomings in compliance with requirements; for example, occasional deficiencies in records.
  • However, corrective actions have been adequate and appropriate.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

For example:

  • Shortcomings requiring corrective actions in the compliance of the process with requirements, or in records.
  • The nature of shortcomings and the standard of corrective actions cause food safety to be impaired.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

For example:

  • Serious shortcomings requiring immediate corrective actions in the compliance of the process with requirements.
  • Lactic acid treatment is carried out on carcasses on which visible faecal contamination is observed.
  • The nature of shortcomings and the standard of corrective actions cause food safety to be jeopardised.

 Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs
  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on hygiene rules for food of animal origin
  • Commission Regulation (EU) No 101/2013 concerning the use of lactic acid to reduce microbiological surface contamination on bovine carcasses
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on food hygiene 318/2021.


Updates in version 3:

  • Guideline no. 2148/04.02.00.01/2021/3 replaces guideline no. 10292
  • List of legislation references updated.

8.4 Management of Trichinella Risk

Guide/version: 2150/04.02.00.01/2021/4, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to slaughterhouses, low-capacity slaughterhouses and game processing establishments that slaughter species susceptible to Trichinella infection.
  • Pigs housed under controlled housing conditions are exempt from Trichinella examination.
  • The competence of the laboratory used to analyse the samples is evaluated in point 1.6.

Matters to be controlled:

  • Sampling for Trichinella examination in compliance with regulatory requirements and the regulations of the Finnish Food Authority.
  • Samples and carcasses are linkable and traceable
  • Health marking of carcasses before results of Trichinella examination are received
  • Cutting of pig carcasses before results of Trichinella examination are received
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check activities and, where appropriate, the plan are controlled by applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

Trichinella sampling is carried out in compliance with regulatory requirements. Samples can be traced to carcasses or groups of carcasses.

Carcasses with a health marking are not removed from the slaughterhouse facilities or processed until the Trichinella examination has been completed. Any deviating arrangements applied to pig carcasses have been approved by the controlling inspector of the establishment, and the arrangements meet other regulatory requirements specified for them.

Performance of Trichinella sampling is verified through own-check in compliance with regulatory requirements. The actions to be taken at the establishment in case Trichinella infection is detected are also included in the own-check. Any deficiencies in operations are detected through own-check and corrective actions are carried out appropriately.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

There are some minor shortcomings in own-check at the establishment. For example:

  • Trichinella sampling is carried out on all the animals for which sampling is required by legislation, but samples cannot always be traced to a specific group of animals in a case where all the samples have tested negative.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations that are not in compliance with legislation or impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set time of period.

For example:

  • Carcasses with a health marking have been removed from the slaughterhouse facilities without the approval of the controlling inspector prior to the completion of the Trichinella examination, but the carcasses have not been processed otherwise, however.
  • The management of Trichinella risk is deficient at the establishment, corrective actions have not been carried out or they have been inadequate.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

For example:

  • Trichinella sampling is not carried out in compliance with regulatory requirements (for example, no samples are taken, samples are taken from a wrong point, or samples are too small).
  • Carcasses that are to be sampled are not identifiable (for example, pigs from ordinary conditions and from controlled housing conditions).
  • The results of the Trichinella examination are not waited for before starting the processing of carcasses, or the conditions laid down for any deviating arrangements applied to pig carcasses are not complied with.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Commission Regulation (EC) No 2015/1375
  • Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2019/627
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on food hygiene 318/2021
  • Regulation of the Finnish Food Safety Authority exempting pigs born and reared under recognized controlled housing conditions from Trichinella examination, 1/2015
  • Finnish Food Authority's Guide ”Sianruhojen terveysmerkintä, paloittelu ja leikkaaminen ennen kuin trikiinitutkimuksen tulos on valmis” (in Finnish).


Updates in version 4:

  • Low-capacity slaughterhouses added to “To be taken into consideration”
  • Guideline no. 2150/04.02.00.01/2021 replaces guideline no. 10293
  • List of legislation and guidelines has been updated.

8.5 Production of Minced Meat and Meat Preparations

Guide/version: 2151/04.02.00.01/2021/2, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This point is applied to establishments approved for the production of minced meat or meat preparations
  • The temperature requirements specified for the production of minced meat and meat preparations are evaluated in point 6.5 "Temperature Management in Food Production Processes"
  • Matters related to the connective tissue protein of minced meat are evaluated in Guideline 13.4
  • The use of additives in meat preparations is evaluated in point 11.1 "Additives, Flavourings and Enzymes".

Matters to be controlled:

  • Muscles or offals permitted by legislation are used as raw material for minced meat.
  • Age of the raw material used for minced meat.
  • Muscles or offals permitted by legislation are used as raw material for meat preparations.
  • Microbiological requirements for mechanically separated meat used for the production of meat preparations intended to be heated.
  • Minced meat and meat preparations may not be re-frozen after thawing.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check and, where appropriate, the plan are controlled applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

  • The raw material used for the production of minced meat and / or meat preparations meets regulatory requirements.
  • The age of the raw material used for the production of minced meat and / or meat preparations meets regulatory requirements.
  • Mechanically separated meat used for the production of meat preparations intended to be heated meets the microbiological requirements laid down for minced meat.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

The grade can be Good e.g. in cases where:

  • The raw material used for the production of minced meat and / or meat preparations meets regulatory requirements.
  • There are some minor shortcomings in the monitoring of the age of the raw material used for the production of meat and / or meat preparations, but they do not impair food safety.
  • The have been some minor shortcomings in the microbiological quality of the mechanically separated meat used for the production of meat preparations intended to be heated.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

The grade can be To be corrected e.g. in cases where:

  • There are shortcomings in the monitoring of the age of the raw material used for the production of meat and / or meat preparations, or the meat used as raw material is too old, and its use impairs food safety.
  • Mechanically separated meat used for the production of meat preparations intended to be heated does not meet the microbiological requirements laid down for minced meat.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

The grade can be Poor e.g. in cases where:

  • Scrap cuttings and trimmings (other than whole muscle cuttings), mechanically separated meat, meat containing skin, or meat of the head with the exception of the masseters, the non-muscular part of the linea alba, the region of the carpus and the tarsus, or bone scrapings, or the muscles of the diaphragm with the serosa unremoved are used as raw material for minced meat.
  • The age of the raw material used for the production of minced meat and / or meat preparations is not known, or it is too old, and its use jeopardises food safety.
  • Mechanically separated meat has been used in meat preparations intended to be heated, although the microbiological tests of mechanically separated meat have not been carried out or included in the sampling plan.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the Hygiene of Foodstuffs
  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on Hygiene Rules for Food of Animal Origin, Annex III, Section V
  • Regulation /EC) No 2073/2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021.


Updates in version 2:

  • Guideline 10294 is replaced by guideline 2151/04.02.00.01/2021.
  • The number of the Food Act has been updated.
  • Reference to the Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on Food Hygiene at Establishments 795/2014 has been deleted.

8.6 Production of Mechanically Separated Meat

Guide/version: 2152/04.02.00.01/2021/1, valid from 1.5.2015

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to establishments that produce mechanically separated meat.
  • The temperature requirements specified for the production of mechanically separated meat are evaluated in point 6.5 "Temperature Management in Food Production Processes"
  • The time and temperature limits applied to the quick-freezing of mechanically separated meat and to the storage of frozen mechanically separated meat are evaluated in Guideline 6.6 "Temperature Management of Quick-frozen and Frozen Foodstuffs, and Ice Cream"
  • The labelling of the prepacked food products containing mechanically separated meat is evaluated in point 13.1 "General Labelling".

Matters to be controlled:

  • The raw material for mechanically separated meat is derived from animal parts permitted by legislation.
  • The age of the raw material used for mechanically separated meat
  • The period of use of meat separated mechanically using high pressure (excluding quick-freezing)
  • Mechanically separated meat produced using high pressure or low pressure is marked during production as "mechanically separated meat" instead of as "meat", for example.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check activities, and where appropriate, the plan are controlled by applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

The raw material used for the production of mechanically separated meat and its age meet regulatory requirements.

Meat separated mechanically using high pressure is quick-frozen, if it is not used within one hour after production.

Mechanically separated meat produced using high pressure or low pressure is marked during production as mechanically separated meat; mechanically separated meat produced using low pressure, for example, is not marked as meat.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

The grade can be Good e.g. in cases where:

  • The raw material used for the production of mechanically separated meat meets regulatory requirements.
  • The raw material used for the production of mechanically separated meat is slightly too old on occasion, but this does not impair food safety.
  • There have been deviations regarding the period of use of meat separated mechanically using high pressure, but the deviations have not impaired food safety.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

The grade can be To be corrected e.g. in cases where:

  • There are shortcomings in the monitoring of the age of the raw material used for the production of mechanically separated meat, or the meat used as raw material is too old, and its use impairs food safety.
  • There have been deviations regarding the period of use of meat separated mechanically using high pressure to the extent that they have impaired food safety.
  • Mechanically separated meat produced using high pressure or low pressure is marked incorrectly during production; mechanically separated meat produced using low pressure, for example, has been marked as meat.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

The grade can be Poor e.g. in cases where:

  • Poultry feet, neck skin, or heads, or bones of the head, feet, tails, femur, tibia, fibula, humerus, radius and ulna of other animals are used for the production of mechanically separated meat.
  • The age of the raw material used for the production of mechanically separated meat is not known, or it is too old, and its use jeopardises food safety.

 Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs
  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on hygiene rules for food of animal origin, Annex III, Section V
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021.


Updates in version 1:

  • Guideline no. 2152/04.02.00.01/2021/1 replaces guideline no. 10295
  • List of legislation has been updated.

8.7 Production of Dried Reindeer Meat

Guide/version: 2153/04.02.00.01/2021/3, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to the production of dried reindeer meat based on the traditional outdoor air-drying method in a meat product establishment located in the Finnish reindeer husbandry area.
  • Compliance with the requirements specified for approval for production of dried reindeer meat is evaluated in point 1.2.
  • Production of dried reindeer meat using some other method than the traditional outdoor air-drying method, or in a meat product establishment located outside the reindeer husbandry area, is evaluated in point 5.1 "General Hygiene in Food Production".
  • This Guideline is not applied to the production of dried reindeer meat in the place of primary production in the reindeer husbandry area.

Matters to be controlled:

  • The requirements of the Decree on food hygiene at establishments are complied with in the production of dried reindeer meat, taking the limitation of the scope of the Decree as defined in Section 2 into account.
  • Inspection of the hygiene of the handling of reindeer meat as it is prepared for the drying process in the indoor facilities of the meat product establishment.
  • Inspection of the handling of reindeer meat before and after drying as the meat is hung in the drying rack and removed from the rack.
  • Inspection of the hygiene of the handling of dried reindeer meat after the drying process in the indoor facilities of the meat product establishment.
  • Inspection to verify that vermin and birds cannot contaminate reindeer meat during the drying process.
  • Inspection to verify the free circulation of air round the reindeer meat during the drying process.
  • Inspection to verify that the drying of reindeer meat is carried out in a suitable period of the year and at a suitable outdoor temperature.
  • Only inspected reindeer meat is dried in the drying rack.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check and, where appropriate, the plan are controlled applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-Check Activities". 

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

  • Reindeer meat is handled in a hygienic manner as it is prepared for drying, hung in the drying rack and removed from the rack, and handled after the drying process.
  • Reindeer meat intended to be dried is prepared for drying in appropriate indoor facilities at the meat product establishment.
  • Reindeer meat is after drying handled in appropriate indoor facilities at the meat product establishment.
  • Vermin and birds cannot contaminate reindeer meat during the drying process.
  • Reindeer meat is dried in a suitable period of the year.
  • Reindeer meat is hung for drying in a manner that verifies free circulation of air.
  • Only inspected reindeer meat is dried in the drying rack.
  • Own-check is adequate and suitable as regards the controlled matters.
  • The operator has sudden and random shortcomings under control through own-check.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

For example:

  • Reindeer meat is dried under highly varying conditions, but the drying process is still adequately under control to ensure that the meat is not spoiled.
  • There are some minor shortcomings in own-check as regards the controlled matter.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

For example:

  • Reindeer meat is dried under conditions that are sometimes unsuitable resulting in delayed drying of the meat; for example, unsuitable period of the year or outdoor temperature. The safety of the meat is impaired.
  • Air circulation round the drying meat is not effective; for example, the pieces of meat are hung too close to each other. The drying of meat is delayed and the safety of meat is impaired.
  • Also other meat and products than inspected reindeer meat are dried in the drying rack.
  • There are shortcomings in own-check as regards the controlled matter which impair food safety.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

For example:
- Reindeer meat is not handled in a hygienic manner as it is prepared for drying, hung in the drying rack and removed from the rack, and handled after the drying process.
- Vermin or birds can contaminate the meat during the drying process.
- Meat is dried under unfavourable climate conditions or air circulation round the drying meat is not adequate, resulting in inadequately controlled drying of the meat and jeopardised safety of the meat.
- There are shortcomings in own-check as regards the controlled matter which jeopardise food safety.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the Hygiene of Foodstuffs
  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on Hygiene Rules for Food of Animal Origin
  • Implementing Regulation (EC) No 2074/2005
  • Commission delegated regulation (EU) 2019/624
  • Finnish Food Act 297/2021
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on Food Hygiene 318/2021
  • Evira's Guide 16033: Approval of an Establishment (only in Finnish and Swedish).


Updates in version 3:

  • Guideline 10296 is replaced by guideline 2153/04.02.00.01/2021.
  • The number of the Food Act has been updated.
  • Reference to the Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on Food Hygiene 318/2021 and the Commission delegated regulation (EU) 2019/624 have been added.
  • Reference to the Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on Food Hygiene at Establishments 795/2014 and the Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 on Official Controls on Products of Animal Origin have been deleted.

8.8 Parasite Checks and Freezing Treatment of Fishery Products

Guide/version: 2154/04.02.00.01/2021/3, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This point is evaluated at establishments where:
    • Fish is gutted (parasite checks)
    • Ready-to- eat fishery products are produced, and the treatment of the fish is not adequate to kill the viable parasites, with the exception of fish species exempt from the freezing treatment.

Matters to be controlled:

  • Parasite checks of fresh fish.
  • Freezing treatment required due to parasite risk.
  • Indication made in the commercial document about the freezing treatment of the product.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check, and the plan, are controlled applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

  • The controlled matters comply with requirements.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

For example:

  • As a rule, parasite checks are carried out in compliance with requirements, but some individual lots have not been checked.
  • As a rule, the freezing treatment is carried out in compliance with requirements, but some individual lots have not undergone the treatment.
  • As a rule, an indication is made in the commercial document about the freezing treatment, but in some individual cases the indication has not been made.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

For example:

  • Parasite checks are only carried out on a random basis.
  • All products or product groups that require the freezing treatment due to a parasite risk do not undergo the treatment.
  • No indication is made in the commercial document about the freezing treatment.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

For example:

  • The freezing treatment is not carried out on any of the product groups that require the treatment due to a parasite risk.
  • Parasite checks are not carried out.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Commission Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, Annex III, Section VIII, Part D
  • Commission Regulation (EC) No 2074/2005, Annex II, Chapter II
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on food hygiene 318/2021
  • Evira's Guide 16023: Control of fishery products.


Updates in version 3:

  • Guide no. 2154/04.02.00.01/2021 replaces guideline no. 10297
  • List of legislation and guidelines has been updated.

8.9 Quality Control for Raw Material of Egg Products

Guide/version: 2156/04.02.00.01/2021/3, valid from 1.7.2021

To be taken into consideration:

  • This Guideline is applied to all establishments that produce egg products.
  • For the purposes of this Guideline, raw material refers to the eggs used at egg product establishments for the production of egg products and are procured to the establishment from egg-packing centres and producers.
  • The shells of eggs used in the manufacture of egg products must be fully developed and contain no breaks.
  • However, cracked eggs may be used for the manufacture of egg products if the establishment of production or a packing centre delivers them directly to the processing establishment, where they must be broken as soon as possible.
  • Eggs must not be broken unless they are clean and dry. An egg is considered to be dirty, if the amount of dirt or dirt spots on the surface of the shell exceeds 1/16 of the area of the egg, or if there are lumps of dirt or blood on the shell.
  • Dirty eggs can be washed with a detergent suitable for this purpose.
  • Only water tested for at least Escherichia coli and intestinal enterococci and subjected to an assessment of colour and smell may be used to clean eggs. The egg producer can do an organoleptic examination of the water at the primary production site.

Matters to be controlled:

  • How is quality control for eggs used for the production of egg products implemented at the egg product establishment.
  • The adequacy and suitability of own-check activities and, were appropriate, the plan are controlled by applying the Annex to Guideline 1.6: "Adequacy and Suitability of Own-check Activities".

Excellent: Operations are in line with the requirements.Operations comply with requirements.

  • The own-check provides a description of how the egg product establishment verifies the quality of the raw material used for egg products.
  • The egg product establishment controls the quality of the raw material and removes any eggs that do not meet the criteria laid down for production.

Good: There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.There are small issues with the operations which do not impair food safety or mislead consumers.

The grade can be Good e.g. in cases where:

  • There are some minor shortcomings in the description provided in the own-check how the egg product establishment verifies the quality of the raw material used for egg products.
  • The egg product establishment controls the quality of the raw material and removes any eggs that do not meet the criteria laid down for production.

To be corrected: There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.There are issues with the operations which impair food safety or mislead consumers. These issues must be rectified within a set period of time.

The grade can be To be corrected e.g. in cases where:

  • There are clear shortcomings in the description provided in the own-check how the egg product establishment verifies the quality of the raw material used for egg products.
  • The egg product establishment controls the quality of the raw material, but eggs that do not meet the criteria laid down for production have gone undetected into the production of egg products resulting in impaired food safety.

Poor: There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.There are issues with the operations which jeopardise food safety or considerably mislead consumers, or the operator has failed to comply with orders that have been issued. These issues must be rectified with immediate effect.

The grade can be Poor e.g. in cases where:

  • The own-check does not provide a description of how the egg product establishment verifies the quality of the raw material used for egg products.
  • Eggs that do not meet the criteria laid down for production have been used in the production of egg products resulting in food safety being jeopardised.

Legislation and guidelines (with any amendments) pertaining to the subject:

  • Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 on hygiene rules for food of animal origin; Section X, Chapter II, points II and III
  • Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on food hygiene 318/2021
  • Evira's Guide 16006 Quality of raw material for liquid egg.


Updates in version 3:

  • Guideline 2156/04.02.00.01/2021 is replaced by guideline 10298
  • Reference to Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on primary production 1368/2011 has been deleted
  • Reference to Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on food hygiene 318/2021 has been added
  • To Be taken into the consideration has been added that egg producer can do an organoleptic examination of the water at the primary production site.