d… · web viewvinegar, spices, herbs, salt or flavourants fit for human consumption; food...

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED: DRAFT REGULATIONS – PROPOSED PUBLICATION OF REGULATION REGARDING

THE CLASSIFICATION, PACKING AND MARKING OF CERTAIN RAW PROCESSED MEAT PRODUCTS INTENDED FOR SALE IN THE RSA

[Request for comments: Government Notice No. 1138 of 26 October 2018]

REGULA-TION

STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS JUSTIFICATION DAFF COMMENTS

TitlePreamble

(a) determined that the said regulations shall come into operation 12 months after the date of publication thereof. Provided that products produced prior to the promulgation may be sold whilst stock last.

Allow products produced prior to implementation to be sold out to prevent unnecessary food wastage.

The 12 months will be retained, and companies requiring more time for their products that are non-compliant should rather apply for a dispensation to the Executive Officer. Each case will then be evaluated and handled on its own merit.

Regulation 1

Definitions Suggest to align the definition with the definition in R146.

Definition of address in R146:

“means a physical address in the Republic of South Africa and includes the street or road number or name and the name of the town, village or suburb and, in the case of a farm, the name or number of the farm and of the magisterial district in which it is situated;”

Definition of address proposed in draft Regulation:

"address" means a physical address and includes the street or road number or name and the name of the town, village or suburb and, in the case of a farm, the name or number of the farm and of

The definition in the proposed draft regulation will be retained since it is already aligned with the latest amendment to regulation R.146 dated 1 March 2010 of the Department of Health (please refer to regulation amendment No. R. 45 of 19 January 2012).

1

REGULA-TION


the magisterial district in which it is situated, or in the case of imported foodstuffs, if otherwise, the name and address as provided for in the Codex Alimentarius Commission's document entitled: General Standard for the Labelling of Pre-packaged Foods, CODEX STAN 1-1985;Suggest to align the definition with the definition provided for in R146 to avoid confusion as to which definition suppliers must follow.

ANIMAL SPECIES

There is no mention of game or venison in the Regulations. Suggest to include game and venison if no provision has been made.

The definition of animal species in the draft states:

"animal species" means animal species that are usually sold and fit for human consumption such as but not limited to bovine (excluding animals from the subfamily Bovinae, e.g. buffalo, kudus, etc.), ovine, porcine and caprine species;”

It is not clear whether or not the draft Regulation includes and covers meat such as wild boar and crocodile. If game and venison is included in the definitions a codex code of hygienic practice for meat will need to be provided.

Please clarify whether or not game and venison is included in the draft.

Noted. The expression animal species” will be amended to rather read as “domesticated animal species” to remove any uncertainty with regards to the animal species referred to in the definition. Furthermore, a definition for “wild game” has been added and raw processed products produced from wild game will then also be covered in the draft regulation.

Batch

2

REGULA-TION


Means a definite quantity of a raw processed meat product that is produced essentially under the same conditions under the same production batch number and over a period not exceeding 24 hours; or a definite quantity of a raw processed meat product that is produced essentially under the same conditions and over a production cycle under the same production batch code

The batch could be longer than 24 hours for frozen products.

Noted. However, the definition in the proposed draft regulation will be retained as is since it is already aligned with regulation R.146 dated 1 March 2010 of the Department of Health.

CONTAINER

Suggest to align the definition with that of R146. Definition of container in R146:

“means any packaging of foodstuffs for sale at retail level or for catering purposes for delivery as a single item or for free sample handout purposes, whether by completely or partially enclosing the foodstuff and includes wrappers for individual and multiple-unit-packs;”

Definition of container in draft:

"means the immediate container manufactured from any suitable material into which the raw processed meat products packed for final sale, and includes wrappers when such is offered to the consumer;

Suggest to align the definition with that of R146 to avoid confusion.

Noted. The proposal to align the definition for “container” with that of regulation R.146 dated 1 March 2010 of the Department of Health is not adopted due to the fact that the definition in regulation R.146 covers all foodstuffs, whereas the definition in the proposed draft regulation is specific to certain raw processed meat products only.

EDIBLE OFFAL

Seek clarification on whether or not “edible offal” includes venison. If it does not include venison suggest to amend the definition.

It is not clear whether or not venison is included in the definition.

Edible offal originating from venison/wild game meats is included in the definition as long as the offal is fit for human

3

REGULA-TION


Please confirm whether or not venison falls under the definition of “edible offal” as it is not clear where products such as venison boerewors, venison sausages, venison patties etc. would fall?

For example: does the definition of “edible offal” cover ostrich patties?

consumption.Meat from venison/ wild game is considered as meat, and not edible offal. Please refer to the definition for “meat” and “edible offal”.

FAT

Align the definition with SANS 885 to include:

“means edible lipids obtained from animal or plant origin, or combinations thereof”

Definition of “fat” in SANS 885:

“edible lipids from animal or plant origin, or combinations thereof”

Definition of “fat” proposed in draft:“means edible lipids obtained from animal or plant origin;”

Suggest to align the definition with SAN 885 as it can be a combination of lipids from animal and plant origin.

In agreement. A definition for “fat” will be included.

"geographical indication" (GI) means an indication (name) protected in terms of an international agreement and which is used on agricultural products intended for sale in the Republic of South Africa;

The use of South African names, such as Grabouw boerewors, Drakensberg boerewors and Drakensberg burger seem excluded and exempt.

This requirement is not applicable to these products, and only applies to those products that are listed in Annexure A titled: LIST OF PROTECTED GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (GIS) FOR RAW PROCESSED MEAT PRODUCTS in the proposed draft regulation.Products such as e.g. Grabouw boerewors, Drankensberg boerewors and Drankensberg burger are not listed in the list of protected GIs and may thus

4

REGULA-TION


continue to be named as such.Definitions re"inedible offal" means in the case of animal other than poultry: with the exception of bone, it includes all parts of the animal not covered…”

A word appears to have been omitted, possibly “includes”.

Noted. The definition will be amended by including the missing word “includes”.

Lean meat equivalent: include as per the definitions in SANS 885

Include the definition to cater for the request of the revised compositional requirements for bangers and braaiwors (see comments on 5 (8) and 5 (9)).

In agreement with the proposal to include the definition for lean meat equivalent (LME) to be only applicable to specific products such as braaiwors, econo-burger, value-burger and bangers that allow inclusion of MDM and meat extenders (soya proteins etc.) as an ingredient.

MDM BASED SAUSAGES/ UNSPECIFIEDRAW PROCESSED MEAT PRODUCTS

Suggest to include a definition for mechanically deboned meat/mechanically recovered meat or unspecified raw processed meat products

For products that are not mixed species or mixed species minced meat but an MDM based product, there is currently no definition.

In order to call a product a sausage, the product must fall under the definition of “sausage”. However, products that are sausages that are MDM based are not covered by the Regulations.

For example, products such as a “fry”, which is an MDM based sausage, does not fall under the Regulation.

Sausages that contain mixed species of beef or pork from mechanically

Noted. However, there is a definition for mechanically recovered meat (MRM) in the proposed draft regulation. (MDM is just a synonym for MRM.)

Noted. However provision for products that are MDM based are provided for in the proposed draft regulation - please refer to regulations 6 (9) and (10). Products such as “fry” will fall within the scope of raw bangers/raw grillers or raw braaiwors depending on their composition.

For raw species-sausage and mixed-species sausage MDM is not

5

REGULA-TION


deboned meat is not covered in the Regulations. Would the species need to be indicated in the name as well? It is not clear from the draft Regulation.

A definition for MDM based products must be provided.

permissible. However, in the case of other raw processed sausage where MDM is permissible, the species name will need to be indicated in the ingredient list as prescribed in regulation R146 of the Department of Health.

Please refer to the above responses with regards to the provision for MDM based products.

OFFAL

Clarification on whether or not the definition of “offal” includes venison

The definition of offal does not refer to game or venison but “any part of any animal or bird that is not included in the definition of meat or mechanically recovered meat…”

For products such as venison boerewors (for e.g.) it is not clear whether or not such a product falls within the definition of “offal”

Request clarification on whether or not the definition includes venison.

The definition for ‘edible offal’ now also includes offal originating form venison/ wild game species which are fit for human consumption. However, it should be noted that the definition for offal has been removed in the second proposed draft regulation since the terms ‘edible offal’ and ‘inedible offal’ is rather used in the rest of the document to ensure clarity.

OUTER CONTAINER

Definition differs to the definition provided in SANS 885. Suggest to align the definitions.

Definition of “outer container” in SANS 885:“outer containerbox, carton or case into which packages of meat products (with or without wrappers) are packed for storage or distribution”

Definition of “outer container” in draft:

“means a container which contains

Noted. The definition for “outer container” has, however, been amended to include hamper packs and gift packs.

6

REGULA-TION


"outer container" means a container which contains more than one container of a raw processed meat product, but excluded re-usable transport or distribution lugs, gift packs or hamper packs or braai packs;

more than one container of a raw processed meat product, but excluded gift packs or hamper packs or braai packs;”

With the proposed definition it is not clear what classifies as a gift pack, hamper pack or braai pack.

For distribution purposes, Woolworths products are transported in plastic trays, referred to as a lug. This should not be included in secondary product packaging.

Woolworths customer products are transported in plastic trays with the customer products are clearly visible. It is an unnecessary burden to require labelling of each carrier container, when the customer product is clearly visible.

And the use of composite lugs for transport efficiency will be a problem since they may contain different classes of processed meat products.

Only Woolworths frozen products are transported in outer box which is labelled.

Noted. However, a provision for re-usable transport or distribution lugs has been provided for in the definition for outer container.

“raw minced meat”

Recommended to add provision for “ground meat”, as underlined:“raw ground meat” or “raw minced meat” means any meat type product sold under a name(s) in which the

Addition of “ground meat” for alignment with definition and classification of “raw flavoured ground meat / minced meat”

Ground meat refers to minced meat with meat extenders (i.e. textural vegetable protein, water, preservatives) – this does not meet

7

REGULA-TION


words “minced” or “minced meat” or “ground” or “ground meat” appears either by itself or in combination with any other word or expression, and which complies with the compositional standards as set out in regulation 5(1).

or comply with the compositional requirements of the raw minced meat. The words “minced” and “ground” mean the same in a dictionary but the application of these words in the raw processed meat industry mean two different things.Ground meat – means extended minced meat containing meat extenders with or without flavourings.Minced meat – means minced or ground meat without any added ingredients.

Definition:“raw minced meat”Recommended to add provision for “ground meat”, as underlined:“raw ground meat” or “raw minced meat” means any meat type product sold under a name(s) in which the words “minced” or “minced meat” or “ground” or “ground meat” appears either by itself or in combination with any other word or expression, and which complies with the compositional standards as set out in regulation 5(1).

Addition of “ground meat” for alignment with definition and classification of “raw flavoured ground meat / minced meat”

Please refer to our above response/ explanation. Therefore, the proposed change is not adopted.

“raw mixed-species sausage” and “raw species sausage”

Recommended to include that scope of definition, class and compositional standard specifically excludes prepared products where “sausage” is part of the customary description, for example “sausage roll”.For example the addition of the following:…Does not include products where the term “sausage” is part of the customary name or description of a combined/prepared meal item, for

The sausage-type component of these type of products, of which the customary name/description includes “sausage”, resembles characteristics of “raw species sausage” or “raw mixed-species sausage”. However, as a component of these combined/prepared items, the component cannot comply with the

Noted. In agreement with the proposal and regulation 3(3) will be amended to also exempt other foodstuffs using certain customary names or descriptions from the restrictions.

8

REGULA-TION


example “sausage roll” compositional standards of sausages, for example to be contained in a casing, minimum meat content requirement and permitted other ingredients.

Definitions:“raw mixed-species sausage” and “raw species sausage”Recommended to include that scope of definition, class and compositional standard specifically excludes prepared products where “sausage” is part of the customary description, for example “sausage roll”.For example, the addition of the following:…Does not include products where the term “sausage” is part of the customary name or description of a combined/prepared meal item, for example “sausage roll”

The sausage-type component of these type of products, of which the customary name/description includes “sausage”, resembles characteristics of “raw species sausage” or “raw mixed-species sausage”. However, as a component of these combined/prepared items, the component cannot comply with the compositional standards of sausages, for example to be contained in a casing, minimum meat content requirement and permitted other ingredients.

Please refer to the above response.

Total meat equivalent: include as per the definitions in SANS 885

Include the definition to cater for the request of the revised compositional requirements for bangers and braaiwors (see comments on 5 (8) and 5 (9)).

In agreement with the proposed change to include the definition for Total meat equivalent (TME) to be only applicable to the economic products such as braaiwors, econo-burger, value-burger, bangers etc.

Total meat content” means fat-free meat together with the fat, expressed as a percentage of the product mass as offered for sale.

Query – What is defined as fat-free meat? What about meatthat is e.g. 70% Lean & 30% Fat, or 90% Lean & 10% Fat?

Fat-free meat mean meat without fat or the fat tissues has been trimmed out from meat.These types of cuts/trimmings (70/30 or 90/10 lean meat) are included in the definition for “total meat content”.

9

REGULA-TION


Include definition of water: Water complies with specification No SANS 241 – 1984 with regards to water for domestic use.

Ensures suitable water used and tested according SANS 241 specifications

Proposed change not adopted to include a definition for water. Water/ water quality falls the scope of the Agricultural Product Standards Act, 1990 (No.119 of 1990).

Need clarity on whether regulations cover Venison and wild game or not?

If yes, need a definition for “Wild Game/Venison”

Including (e.g.)“Wild Game” or “Venison” includes African Buffalo (Syncerus caffer) and Common Eland (Taurotragus oryx) and Greater Kudu (Tragelaphus stepsiceros) of the Subfamily Bovinae as well as other species classified as “wild game” under Schedule 1 of the Meat Safety Act No. 40 of 2000, which are also commonly referred to as “venison”.

Unclear whether draft ‘s scope covers Wild game meat (venison) or does not, as under definitions it states:"animal species" means animal species that are usually sold and fit for human consumption such as but not limited to bovine (excluding animals from the subfamily Bovinae, e.g. buffalo, kudus, etc.), ovine, porcine and caprine species;Subfamily Bovinae includes Domestic Cattle (Bos taurus) therefore the above definition id confusing.And Subfamily Bovinae includes three species defined as “wild game” by the Meat Safety Act 40/2000, namely:1. African Buffalo (Syncerus caffer)2. Common Eland (Taurotragus oryx)3. Greater Kudu (Tragelaphus stepsiceros)

Therefore, without a definition of “venison” or a mention of “venison” under the “2. Scope of the regulations”, as per the definition of “animal species”, several species of venison are excluded from the scope

Noted. The proposed draft regulation covers meat from wild game species used in the manufacturing of raw processed meat products. The definition for “animal species” has also been amended to read “domesticated animal species” to ensure clarity about which species are included.

A definition for “wild game species” has been added in the proposed draft regulations to further provided clarity for stakeholders. Provision has also been made for wild game meat to be used in the manufacturing of certain raw processed meat products.

10

REGULA-TION


of this regulation,

but under 8 (2) “Venison” are referred to:8 (2) “In the case of mixed-species minced meat and mixed-species sausage referred to in regulations 5 (2) and 5 (6), the name of the different species in a descending order of mass, followed by the word “minced meat” and “sausage” shall appear on the main panel: Provided that the word “Game” or “Venison”, as the case may be, may be used as part of the name only if such name is further qualified by an indication, in descending order of mass, of the species of game or venison or other species of animal or bird present. “

Regulation 2

Suggest to remove the following underlined portion of Regulation 2:

“Scope of regulations

These regulations shall apply only to the classes of raw processed meat products set out in regulation 4 and intended for sale in the Republic of South Africa to which and under circumstances in which a prohibition in terms of section 3 of the Act regarding the sale of raw processed meat products apply.”

Include an additional point:(2) These regulations shall not apply to the following foodstuffs: as inDraft 2: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Processed Meat

The manner in which the Regulation is written may cause confusion. The Regulation applies to local and imported products and, accordingly, as Section 3 of the Act already provides a prohibition suggest to remove the underlined portion for Regulation 2 to avoid further confusion.

Therefore defining scope of the different products covered Proposed

Noted. However, the proposal to remove the underline part is not supported. The way in which the underlined part is phrased is standard practice in all regulations published under the Agricultural Product Standards Act, No. 119 of 1990 (Act 119 of 1990) – APS Act.Cross-referencing the specific section in the APS Act also assists in providing clarity about where the prohibition stems from.

In agreement. The scope of the draft regulation will be amended to

11

REGULA-TION


Products

2 different legislations published for comment within 1 week in October:

Draft 1: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Certain Raw Processed Meat Products andDraft 2: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Processed Meat Products

Regulations as 2 sets of regulations were published in a space of 1 week i.e.Draft 1: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Certain Raw Processed Meat Products andDraft 2: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Processed Meat Products.

Clearly define the Scope of each Draft as to prevent confusion as Draft 2 could be seen as a replacement of Draft 1 and the 2 documents talk to different categories and classes of processed meat products.

ensure that it is clear with regards to the products that are covered and not covered in the draft regulation.

Noted. Please refer to our above responses with regards to the scope of the regulation.

Regulation 3

Restrictions on the sale of raw processed meat productsComment: “The Executive Officer may grant written exemption, entirely or partially, to any person on such conditions as he or she deems necessary, from the provisions of sub-regulation (1)”

Query - On what grounds would this exemption be granted? If products do not fall into a specified Category/Designation, would that qualify to apply for an exemption?

Inspectors will only inspect the classes of products covered by the proposed draft regulation. A concession will therefore apply to these products only.The Executive Officer considers each application received on its own merit.

Regulation 4

Classes of raw processed meat products Allow another alternative class name In agreement with proposed

12

REGULA-TION


4. (1) Raw processed meat products shall be classified as follows:(a) Raw minced meat.

(b) Raw mixed-species minced meat.(c) Raw flavoured ground meat or Raw flavoured minced meat.(d) Raw boerewors.

(e) Raw species sausage or wors.

(f) Raw mixed-species sausage or wors.

(g) Raw burger, Raw patty and Raw hamburger patty.

(h) Raw banger.

(i) Raw braaiwors.

(j) Geographical Indication (GI) Raw processed meat products.

namely ‘wors’ for this category between boerewors and braaiwors.

“Sausage” may seem like and be perceived by customers to be a translation rather than another product category.

changes as highlighted.

Delete the words "or Raw flavoured minced meat" from both headings.

The expression "flavoured minced meat" is too close to "minced meat" and is misleading to consumers. Its use will also encourage deceptive practices, especially in view of the very different compositions of the two products. It is especially important that the term "flavoured minced meat" is not misused in conflict with the requirements of 8(1) and 8(2).

In agreement with the proposed change – the designation “flavoured minced meat” will be replaced with the words “flavoured minced mix” and “flavoured meat mix”, since this is the current practise.

Reg 4 & 5 4 AND 5CLASSES AND SPECIFIC COMPOSITIONAL STANDARDS

Suggest to add another class and category for MDM Products such as raw bangers, raw Noted. However, there is a

13

REGULA-TION


based products/unspecified raw processed meat products, such as and for example braai wors and variations of braai wors that contain MDM. These products currently do not fall under the Regulations and, accordingly, cannot be classified.

Suggest to include a category for unspecified raw processed meat products which contain less than 40% meat (as the main ingredient is MDM) as these products do not contain 75% meat (as is required in the draft Reg).

grillers etc. do not contain 75% meat which one of the compositional standards provided in the draft.

A category is required for products that, for example, do not have any species in it and therefore do not fall under any category and therefore cannot be classified!

A further problem that may arise is with products that contain ingredients, such as Dhania sausages. Due to the limitation provided in the compositional standards, whereby the only products that can be added are cereal products, vinegar, spices etc. and food additives, it is not possible to classify sausages that contain ingredients.

Accordingly, it is suggested that a further compositional requirement for unspecified raw processed meat be provided i.e. which permits the addition of an ingredient in a sausage.

provision for the use of MDM in various products such as braaiwors, econo-burger and bangers. The proposed total meat content in the draft regulation will be reviewed as well as the total meat equivalent will be included as a requirement to ensure that products that are MDM based are also covered.

Noted. However, provision is made for the use of flavouring – please refer to regulation 9 in the draft regulation

Noted. However, a provision will be made for certain raw processed meat products, except for Raw Boerewors, Raw species sausages and mixed species sausages, to permit the use of any ingredients that is fit for human consumption and is permitted in terms of the regulations published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972). Therefore it is not necessary to have a class called unspecified raw processed meat products.

14

REGULA-TION


Regulation 5

(5) (1) (b); and(5) (2) (b); and(5) (7) (b) (Table: Category 2: Fat content %)Recommendation to change percentage fat contentconditions to:Fat content claim Fat content (%)Extra lean, Extra trim, or any similar wording

≤ 5%

Lean, Trim or Trimmed of fat, or any similar wording

> 5 to ≤ 10%

Regular, or any similar wording > 10 to ≤ 30%

Recommended to exclude 5% and 10% fat content to be interpreted as dual fat content claims allowed (Extra Lean/Trim or Lean/Trim and Lean/Trim or Regular respectively), as well as alignment with R.146 conditions for fat content claims for minced meat and processed meat products [R.146 (52)(14)].

In agreement with the proposed change.

5(1) Regarding Raw minced meat

In the table change the Fat content (%) of “Regular, or any similar wording” to be changed from : “≥10 to ≤30; and”

to instead read “≥10 to ≤40; and”

The Food Drugs and Disinfectants Act No.13 of 1929 Regulation 2(a) permitted minced meat to contain "not less than 60% lean meat", indicating by subtraction that the mince could contain 40% fat, 5 (1) (b) stipulates that mince of the lowest grade, labelled as "Regular Mince", must have a fat content between 10% fat and maximum 30% fat.In industry “regular mince” is widely being sold with a higher fat content than 30%.Decreasing the fat content of “regular mince” may increase the cost of mince in the retail sector.

Noted. The range for the fat content (%) claim for “regular or any similar wording” will be increased since it is a long standing practise in the industry. However, this increase will only be implemented for the classes minced meat, mixed-species minced meat, ground meat and mixed-species ground meat.It should be further noted that regulation 14(2)(a) of the Food Drugs and Disinfectants Act, 1929 (Act No. 13 of 1924) has been repeal by No.656 of 10 May 2019 published under the Foodstuff, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972).

Edit to read:(b) shall consist of a mixture of finely chopped or

comminuted musculature meat from two or more animal or bird species; and fat from one or more animal species; and

Cognizance should be taken of the ratio of bird fat present as this has an impact on overall fat integrity, VIZ accelerated rancidity.

Noted. However proposed change is not supported due to the fact that the proposed definition for “meat” is clearly defined. Including words such as ‘musculature’ and ‘fat’ will

15

REGULA-TION


and addition of additional criteria:(d) unless poultry is the predominate species named in the minced meat name, the product shall contain less than 5% added fat and skins from a bird species.

thus be a repetition.

The proposed percentage for fat claims shall apply also to minced meat products produced from poultry meat as prescribed in the draft regulation.

5(2) Regarding Raw mixed-species minced meat

In the table change the Fat content (%) of “Regular, or any similar wording” to be changed from : “≥10 to ≤30; and”

to instead read “≥10 to ≤40; and”

The Food Drugs and Disinfectants Act No.13 of 1929 Regulation 2(a) permitted minced meat to contain "not less than 60% lean meat", indicating by subtraction that the mince could contain 40% fat, 5 (1) (b) stipulates that mince of the lowest grade, labelled as "Regular Mince", must have a fat content between 10% fat and maximum 30% fat.In industry “regular mince” is widely being sold with a higher fat content than 30%.Decreasing the fat content of “regular mince” may increase the cost of mince in the retail sector.

Please refer to the response provided under the regulation 5(1) above in relation to the proposed fat content for regular raw minced meat.

5(3)Insert a new item between (a) and (b) stating:"shall have a total meat content of at least 75%"

Insert a new item after the existing (e) stating:"shall contain no more than 10% water"

This classification makes no mention of any minimum meat content, which in theory could be as low as 1%. To be consistent with the requirements for raw sausage meat, the minimum meat content should be 75%

Raw ground meat is very like raw minced meat in appearance. It is usually displayed for sale right next to raw minced meat, and often marked as a special offer at a slightly lower price than raw minced meat. The water content of this product can be as high as 25% or more. SANCU

In agreement with the propose change. A minimum total meat content of 75% for Raw flavoured ground meat will be included.

Noted. However, we request clarity from other stakeholders with regard to the inclusion of minimum/ maximum requirements for water, especially for the econo products such as flavoured ground meat, econo/ value burger, braaiwors and banger. Unlike processed product

16

REGULA-TION


Delete the words "or Raw flavoured minced meat" from both headings.

1. Define other foodstuffs2. Provide the minimum meat content

considers this practice to be deceptive; the unwary or illiterate consumer frequently ends up paying more per kg of meat than the price of the raw minced meat displayed alongside. A real example is minced meat priced at R69,99 and ground beef (containing 25% water) priced at 59,99. The consumer is in effect paying R79,99 per kg for the latter meat. The addition of excessive amounts of water is very similar to the past excessive brining of frozen chicken portions, and should likewise be limited. The excess water adds nothing to the nutritional value of the product, and dissipates during cooking.

The expression "flavoured minced meat" is too close to "minced meat" and is misleading to consumers. Its use will also encourage deceptive practices, especially in view of the very different compositions of the two products. It is especially important that the term "flavoured minced meat" is not misused in conflict with the requirements of 8(1) and 8(2).

1. Indicate what is permissible in terms of other foodstuffs. As the category of raw processed meat refers to flavours, is the other foodstuffs that can be added permissible only for flavouring

the excess moisture may be lost through drying or during the cooking process whereas in the raw processed products the water is retained in the product.

The USDA standard for raw sausages recommends that no more than 3% water can be used in sausages. The function of added water is to facilitate the mixing of dry ingredient(s) with meat.What is the function of water in the econo products? Is it to facilitate the mixing process or is there a specific purpose? Meat naturally contains approximately 75% water. It will thus be appreciated if stakeholders could provide this office with the necessary guidance.

In agreement with the proposed change – the “flavoured minced meat” will be replace with the words such as “flavoured minced mix” or “flavoured meat mix” as this is the current practise.

Foodstuff is defined in the propose regulation under definitions in regulation 1. If the foodstuffs meet the definition of foodstuff as defined in the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972) – FCD Act, this foodstuff

17

REGULA-TION


Raw flavoured ground meat or raw flavoured minced meat

Add – ‘ground beef’ in description of Regulation 5(3) or create an ‘econo meat mix or econo ground beef or econo ground meat’.Add - May contain vegetable protein.Add – May contain food colourant to the extent permitted for in the regulations published under the FCD Act, 1972.Would meatballs and frikkadel mixes fall into this category?

purposes, or other ingredients like starch can be used as well.

We have meat mixes that are extended by using vegetable protein. More affordable for the end consumer.

will be permitted to be used in certain raw processed meat products as prescribed in the draft regulation.In agreement with the proposal to allow the use of colourant and vegetable protein.

Extended meatball and frikkadel will fall within the scope of raw burgers, patty and hamburgers under sub-regulation 5 (8).

Re. Raw flavoured ground meat or Raw flavoured minced meat -

(b) shall have a fat content of no more than 30 percent;

change tob) shall have a fat content of no more than 40 percent;

The Food Drugs and Disinfectants Act No.13 of 1929 Regulation 2(a) permitted minced meat to contain "not less than 60% lean meat", indicating by subtraction that the mince could contain 40% fat, the draft DAFF regulations stipulates that mince of the lowest grade, labelled as "Regular Mince", must have a fat content between 10% fat and maximum 30% fat.In industry regular mince is being sold with a higher fat content than 30%.

Please refer to the response provided under the regulation 5(1) on page 14 above in relation to the proposed fat content for raw minced meat.

Under 5.3 Raw flavoured ground meat or Raw flavoured minced meat” Can“(c ) Shall contain no offal”be changed to

In industry, bovine, porcine, ostrich and poultry hearts are being added as show pieces to economy ground meat and savoury mince seasonally

Noted. However, it is crucial that the quality of the class “Raw flavoured ground meat” be maintained. The definition for “meat” in the draft

18

REGULA-TION


“(c ) may contain hearts, of animal or bird species, as only edible offal permitted.”

(when hearts are available at an economical cost) to provide an attractive meaty red coloured mince to the low LSM market.

regulation does not include edible offal.

Need an additional category named“Raw flavoured ground mixed-species meat or Raw flavoured minced mixed-species meat”And under this category the same criteria as 5 (3) except change‘ (a ) shall consist of a mixture of finely chopped or comminuted meat from two or more animal or bird species”Plus add additional criteria:d) shall have a fat content of no more than 40 percent; and unless poultry is the predominate species named in the flavoured ground mince’s name, the sausage shall contain less than 5% added fat and skins from a bird species.

In industry, seasoned savoury mince and economy ground meat are being manufactured mixing two species and labelling the species e.g.) beef and ostrich.


In agreement with the proposed change. The class “raw flavoured ground mixed-species meat” or “Raw flavoured minced mixed-species meat” will be included.

Noted. However, The proposed percentage for fat claims shall apply also to raw flavoured ground meat produced from poultry. Stakeholders need to ensure that all products falling within this class complies with the prescribed compositional requirements in the draft regulation.

Amend to "water, not more than 10%; and"

3) Raw flavoured ground meat or Raw flavoured minced meat --(a) shall consist of finely chopped or comminuted meat from a single animal or bird species;

There is a tendency in the industry to add unnecessarily large quantities of water (up to 25%) to products such as these in order to mislead the consumer in much the same way as the past excessive brining of frozen chicken portions. The excess water adds nothing to the nutritional value of the product, and leaks out during cooking.

Why is flavoured mince limited to single species? Can a multi-specie minced meat not be flavoured?

Please refer to the response provided under the regulation 5(3) on page 16 above in relation to the proposal to prescribe a minimum/ maximum water content for raw mixed species minced meat.

Please refer to the response provided above in relation to the inclusion of a class namely “mixed species flavoured ground meat product”.

19

REGULA-TION


(b) shall have a fat content of no more than 30 percent;(c) shall contain no offal;(d) may contain other foodstuffs; and(e) may contain food additives to the extent permitted for in the regulations published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972).

5(4)(4) Raw boerewors --h) may contain a maximum of 0.02 grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass

If the product does not contain Mechanically Recovered Meat, what is the reason for Calcium testing?

Need to analyse products to establish normal, acceptable range of calcium content.

The reason for this requirement was to ensure that the product does not have a high calcium content or bone. However, the prescribed limit for calcium content will be removed for all raw processed meat products. The limit set for calcium content in MRM will remain as to ensure that the quality of MRM is maintained.

5(5) (5) Raw species sausage or wors --

(5) Raw species sausage or wors --(a) shall be manufactured totally or

predominantly from the meat of a specific animal or bird species;

(b) shall be contained in an edible casing;

(c) shall have a total meat content of at least 75 percent: Provided that in the case of raw species sausage manufactured predominantly from the

Allow another alternative class name namely ‘wors’ for this category between boerewors and braaiwors.“Sausage” may seem like and be perceived by customers as a translation rather than another product category.

Provision must be made product innovation.

Make provision for Sausage or wors that may include other ingredients e.g. spinach and feta chicken sausage, Rosemary lamb, Sosatie lamb sausage, etc.

In agreement with the proposed change.

Regulation 9 (2) makes provision for the addition of other foodstuffs if they are used to render a distinctive taste to the product, provided that these ingredients are QUID as specified in the regulations (R.146 of 01 March 2010) published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfects Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972). The can also form part of the

20

REGULA-TION


meat of a specific animal or bird species -

(i) a minimum of 75 percent thereof shall consist of the meat of the predominant species, which shall be mentioned in the product designation referred to in regulation 7(1)(a); and

(ii) a maximum of 25 percent thereof may consist of the meat of any one or more animal or bird species other than the predominant species referred to in subparagraph (i);

(d) shall have a fat content of no more than 30 percent;

(e) shall contain no offal, except where such offal is to be used solely as the casing of the raw species sausage;

(f) shall contain no mechanically recovered meat;

(g) shall contain no added ingredients other than –(i) cereal products or starch;(ii) vinegar, spices, herbs, salt or

flavourants fit for human consumption;

(iii) food additives to the extent permitted for in the regulations published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972); and

(iv) water; and

product name or product description.

21

REGULA-TION


(h) may contain other food ingredients for flavour such as cheese, spinach, etc.

(i) may contain a maximum of 0.02 grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass.

(5) Raw species sausage or wors --(h) may contain a maximum of 0.02 grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass

Where sausages contain other ingredients, the other ingredients may contribute calcium.


Noted. The calcium content will be removed.

5(6)Under “Raw mixed-species sausage -”, Edit to read: ‘ (a ) shall be manufactured from any mixture of the meat or fat of two or more animal or bird species;”

Edible fat is often added separately from the meat and the product labelled with two species names (e.g.) a sausage with lean beef and pork fat, for improved mouth feel on upper palate instead of the cooked beef fat that sticks to the palate.

Noted. However, the proposed change is not supported due to the fact that the definition for “meat” in the proposed draft includes fat as part of meat, therefore it will be a repetition if included.

Under “Raw mixed-species sausage -”, Edit to read:

(d) shall have a fat content of no more than 30 percent; and unless poultry is the predominate species named in the sausage name, the sausage shall contain less than 5% added fat and skins from a bird species.


Noted. However, the proposed change is not supported due to fact that this phenomenon (rancidity) may also occur in beef and pork sausage if a high amount of fat is used in these sausages. There are other factors that also play a role in acceleration of rancidity such as storage temperature and storage time/period. Even if products are frozen over a certain period of time the fat may become rancid. Therefore, manufacturers of these products will need to be aware of the amount of fat used and how

22

REGULA-TION


these products are stored as well as the storage time.

(6) Raw mixed-species sausage or wors --(a) shall be manufactured from any mixture of the

meat of two or more animal or bird species;(b) shall be contained in an edible casing;(c) shall have a total meat content of at least 75

percent;(d) shall have a fat content of no more than 30

percent;(e) shall contain no offal, except where such offal

is to be used solely as the casing of the raw mixed-species sausage;

(f) shall contain no mechanically recovered meat;(g) shall contain no added ingredients other than

–(i) cereal products or starch;(ii) vinegar, spices, herbs, salt or

flavourants fit for human consumption;(iii) food additives to the extent permitted

for in the regulations published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972); and

(iv) water; and(h) may contain other food ingredients for flavour

such as cheese, spinach, etc.may contain a maximum of 0.02 grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass.


Provision must be made product innovation.

Provision must be made for mixed-species sausage or wors that may include other ingredients

Where sausages contain other ingredients, the other ingredients may contribute calcium.


There is a tendency in the industry to add unnecessarily large quantities of water (up to 25%) to products such

Please see the above response to regulation 5 (5) on page 19 regarding the inclusion other foodstuff as ingredient in the raw species sausage or wors.

Noted. However, the calcium content requirement will be removed.

Please see the above response to regulation 5 (3) on page 16 with regards to water content in raw

23

REGULA-TION


as these in order to mislead the consumer in much the same way as the past excessive brining of frozen chicken portions. The excess water adds nothing to the nutritional value of the product, and leaks out during cooking.

ground meat products.

5(7)Recommendation to add statement similar to underlined proposal:Raw burger, raw patty and raw hamburger patty -Shall be manufactured from finely chopped or comminuted meat of an animal of the bovine, ovine, porcine, caprine or bird species, or from a mixture of two or more thereof, and permissible ingredients per category as per below table, and formed into a round, square or any other shaped patty;

Recommended for clarification and to eliminate contradiction with compositional specifications as per table.

Noted. However, the proposed change is not supported due to the fact that it will be a repetition of the statement.

GROUND BURGER OR GROUND PATTY

No salt or pepper?Add ‘ to be flavoured by basting with sauce/marinade or topped with foodstuffs in end application’

Add end consumer application. There is a provision for the manufacturers of ground burger or ground patty to include the consumer application on the label of a product. Please refer to regulation 9 (3).

Recommendation to change heading to:Fat content (%) or Fat content (%) (as analysed)

(7) Raw burger, raw patty and raw hamburger

The phrase (of fat as analysed) relevant to Fat content (%) is confusing in terms of the definition of Fat content being the mass of the fat as a percentage of the total product mass.Elsewhere in the draft regulation [(5)(1)(b) and (5)(2)(b)] this is only stated as Fat content (%)

Does this category include frikkadel,

Noted. In agreement with the proposal to include the wording “(as analysed)” to remove any uncertainty with regards to the fat content that it will be analysed for.

Yes, Frikkadel and meatball

24

REGULA-TION


patty --(a) shall be manufactured from finely chopped or comminuted meat of an animal of the bovine, ovine, porcine, caprine or bird species, or from a mixture of two or more thereof, and formed into a round, square or any other shaped patty; and

Recommendation to change percentage fat contentconditions to:Fat content claim Fat content (%)Extra lean, Extra trim, or any similar wording

≤ 5%

Lean, Trim or Trimmed of fat, or any similar wording

> 5 to ≤ 10%

Regular, or any similar wording > 10 to ≤ 30%

Change:(a) (iii) water; to (a) (iv) water;

Recommendation to update statement to clarify otherfoodstuffs which may be present, or to include a definitionfor the term Ingredients to clarify the intended differencebetween permissible foodstuffs and ingredients:

Permissible ingredients: (c ) May contain –(i) other foodstuffs;

meat ball, beef olives, Christmas stuffing, etc.?

Recommended to align fat content requirements to those of minced meat [(5)(1)(b) and (5)(2)(b)], due to the compositional standard that the category Ground Burger/Patty should be manufactured from ground meat only.

Recommended change for numbering sequence.

Section may be interpreted as contradictory to Section (a) in terms of ingredients permitted. Recommended to be described to clarify other foodstuffs included in this permission.

A definition for foodstuff as defined in the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 is included in this Draft. If the intended difference between foodstuffs and ingredients is aligned with the definition of ingredient in R.146 under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and

products will fall under the Raw burger, raw patty and raw hamburger category.

In agreement with the proposed change. Will align accordingly.

Noted with thanks. Will align the numbering sequence.

Noted. The definition for “ingredient” will be included in the draft regulation to remove any uncertainty.

25

REGULA-TION


Recommendation to change designation of Category 3, and create a 4th category for Economy Burger or Econo Burger; Economy Patty or Econo Patty; Budget Burger; Econo Hamburger patty; Budget Hamburger patty, or similar wording, with the following recommended fat and meat content specifications:Fat content (%) Total meat content (%)≤ 15% ≥ 20%

Category/Designation – There appears to be a Category missing for Burgers containing less than 55% Total meat.

Disinfectants Act, it is recommended to also include this as a definition in this regulation. As defined in R.146 of“ingredient” means any substance, including any food additive and any constituent of a compound ingredient, which is used in the manufacture or preparation of a foodstuff and which is present in or on a final product, although possibly in a modified formA minimum meat content of 55%, as per the Category 3 compositional specification in this draft regulation, is considered a higher quality product than the designation Economy or Budget burger/patty. It is recommended that provision is made for an additional category with a lower total meat content. This proposed category is representative of a wide variety of current product offerings in the retail environment (further information can be submitted on request) as a lower cost, non-vegetarian offering to a specific South African target market.

This category of product (i.e. less than 55% total meat) services a vast category of consumers at an affordable price and we propose that we include such a category in order to provide such an offering to those consumers.

The Size of Frozen Beef burgers in Top end Retail (PNP, Shoprite

Noted. However, the category econo-burger; econo-patty ; Econo- Hamburger will be amended as follows:

(a) total meat content – ≥35%;(b) total meat equivalent – ≥

55%; and(c) fat content - ≤ 30%.

A new category namely Value Burgers, Value Patty and Value Hamburger will be included in the proposed draft with the following minimum compositional specification for (a) total meat content ≥55%; (b) total meat equivalent ≥60%; and (c) fat content ≤30%.

26

REGULA-TION


Query - There are 3 categories/designations for this Class. Propose a 4th Category

Query – What criteria was used to set the compositional standards in this table for Category/Designation, Permissible ingredients, Fat content claim, Fat content %, Total Meat content?

Group, Spar and Makro) is 2950 tons per annum. 2800 tons of this volume relates to products that contain less than 55% meat. (94% of the market). Whilst the size of the Frozen Beef burger market in the informal market is unknown, it is almost certainly dominated by products containing less than 55% meat.

Query – Can we rename the Economy/Econo Category to “Value” Burger and then create a 4th category with the name Economy/Econo Burger/Patty with a Fat content of ≤ 30%and a meat content of ≥35%

Please clarify

In agreement. Please see our response above relating to Value burger and Econo burger

The following criteria were used to determine the compositional specification for the type of burgers:

o The compositional standards for sausage (single and mixed species) as stipulated in regulation R.2718 of 23 November 1990 of the Department of Health (DoH) were used for single specie burger and mixed-species burger. A desktop study looking at the recommended meat-block/ recipe by the ingredients suppliers of the raw processed meat products industry was also conducted.

o Ground burger or ground patty – Adopted from

27

REGULA-TION


Burger or Patty or Hamburger PattyQuery – If the Burger falls into the fat range of ≥ 10 to ≤ 30% Fat content %, do you need to state the word “Regular” or can that be omitted? E.g., do you have to state “Regular Beef Burger” or can you state “Beef Burger”?

Query – Statement (c) in all categories “May contain a maximum of 0.02 grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass”. Why is this statement included and where would the calcium be sourced from? Why is the limit of 0.02 grams proposed?

Please clarify

Please clarify

Canada’s Food Inspection Services Agency’s document titled “labelling beef burger/patty”.

o Econony Burger - Adopted from the Scottish Statutory Instruments, 2014 No. 289, Food – The Product Containing Meat, etc. (Scotland) Regulation 2014, which recommends a total meat content of at least 55% for economic burgers.

It is not necessary to include the word “regular” as part of the product name/descriptor. Please refer to regulation 9(3) that provides more clarity with regards to indication of the fat content claims.

Noted. The main reason for this proposed regulation is to ensure that these products do not contain any traceable bone. The proposed limit of 0.02 gram is the currently prescribed limit in regulation R.2718 of 23 November 1990 relating to boerewors, species sausage and mixed species sausages of the Department of Health (DoH).This maximum limit will be removed since various foodstuffs and ingredients used in the manufacturing of raw processed product may contribute to the calcium content.

28

REGULA-TION


(2) Burger or Patty or Hamburger Pattymay contain a maximum of 0.02 grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass

2 Burger or Patty or Hamburger Patty

Where burger patties contain other ingredients, e.g. cheese, the other ingredients may contribute calcium.


Due to the natural fat content, a speciality Wagu beef burger will be classed as Econo burger.

As this is not correct, provision needs to be made for a new speciality category which allows for a higher fat content.

Noted – please refer to our above responses.

Noted. However, it will be appreciated if stakeholders could first confirm whether Wagyu is the only breed that will naturally have a

29

REGULA-TION


ECONO BURGER OR ECONO PATTY OR ECONO HAMBURGERAdd – May contain food colourant to the extent permitted for in the regulations published under the FCD Act, 1972.

Economy Burger or Econo Burger etcQuery – What rationale was used to use Mechanically recovered meat in this category? Could there not be a “lower level” category where Mechanically recovered meat can be used?

It should not be required to include these categories in the product naming.

Allow optional use of the class name, if the product complies with the requirements, e.g. Lean Beef Burger is a positive claim that may be used on the product label

Customers do not purchase the end products if the colour is not appealing, with a fat content of max. 30% and 25% fat free meat – the colour is too light.

Please clarify

fat content exceeding 30% due to the high degree of marbling.

Should this be the case, stakeholders should then please (a) indicate whether provision should be made as per the highlighted proposal, and (b) provide this office with suggestions on the fat content claim that will be most suitable in this instance.

It is this office’s opinion that the use of the proposed claim “speciality” will create a misleading impression about the quality of the product.

In agreement. Will amend accordingly to allow the use of food colourant.

The rational used to include MDM in this category of burger as an ingredient that may be used was based on the composition of MDM as one of the cheapest sources of protein when compared to chicken, Beef or pork meat. This category (i.e. Econo-burger) covers burgers manufactured from only MDM, hence the requirement for the total meat equivalent will be stipulated to ensure that the consumer at least get adequate protein from consuming this category of burgers.

30

Extra Lean, Extra trimmed of fat or any similar wording

≤5

Lean, Trimmed of fat or any similar wording

≥5 to ≤10

Regular ≥10 to ≤30

Speciality ≥30 to ≤50

REGULA-TION


Category/Designation : Category 2 – Burger or Patty or Hamburger Patty

Fat content claims are not in line with R429. “Regular burger” requires 10 - 30 % fat. This class is not in R429. Under regulation 7 (b) on page 8 for Ground burger an extra lean burger is less 10% fat and lean burger is less than 17% fat and medium regular burger is 23 - 30% fat.

Will Mechanically Recovered Meat form part of the Total Meat Content % referred to in Category 3 – Economy Burger or Econo Burger?

Under “3. Economy burger or Econo Burger;…” edit from:“(b) Shall contain no offal”To read as either:“(b) May contain edible offal”Or changed to“(b) may contain hearts (of animal or bird species), clean, stripped poultry gizzards, spleens, tongue roots, momentum, lungs, diaphragm and pluck, as the only edible offal permitted.”

Query – Is HVP or TVP permitted in this category under (a) (i) Cereal products or starch? Or can it be included under (c) “May contain (i) other foodstuffs?”

Standardise or include class in R429 for Regular Burger Fat Content.

Please clarify

In industry, bovine, porcine, ostrich and poultry hearts are widely being added as show pieces to economy burgers seasonally (when hearts are available at an economical cost) to provide an attractive meaty red colour burger with improved firmness/binding on cooking to the low LSM market.Also so the butchers can utilize edible offal on hand from carcasses processed.Clean, stripped poultry gizzards, spleens, tongue roots and omentum appear to also be widely added.Lungs, diaphragm and pluck are added less widely.

HVP or TVP is not permitted in Category 2 – burger or patty or hamburger. Also, HVP or TVP is an ingredient and not a foodstuff.

In agreement. The fat claims will be amended accordingly.

The MDM will contribute to the total meat content, except where it is excluded in the draft regulation. Please refer to the definition for “total meat content” in the draft regulation.

In agreement. Provision will be made for edible offal to be included in this category of burgers.

31

REGULA-TION


Under “3. Economy burger or Econo Burger;…” can“(iii) a maximum of ??? grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass”

Note:??? to be determined from meat industry, based on calcium content of current Economy Burgers containing MRM being sold.

Re. “3. Economy burger or Econo Burger;…”Increase the permitted “Fat content (%) (of fat as analysed )” from≤30%, to be to 35% (or 40%).

Re. “3. Economy burger or Econo Burger;…”Decrease the permitted “Total meat content (%)” from ≥55%to be 35% (or 30%)

Or edit row 3 to include

A calcium content of only 0.02 g/100 g is valid for >70% meat burgers with no added MRM.For a category product which, as per 5 (7) (b) table row 3 (c ) (i) “may contain mechanical recovered meat” (MRM), the maximum permitted calcium needs to be revised and increased based on the species MRM, supplier origin and quality of the MRM, in view of bone calcium present in MRM (e.g.) the calcium value can be based on a chicken bone calcium level of 120-300 mg/100 g or as high as 485 mg calcium/100 g in Beef MRM.

In industry, economy burgers are being manufactured with a higher fat content than 30%, using the fattier cuts of meat to provide an affordable protein and fat source to the low LSM market.

Noted. However, the calcium content will be removed.

Noted. However, the fat content will be kept as it is for all categories of burger, patty and hamburger patty. Furthermore, the proposed draft does not make any provision for fat claims for the burger, patty category namely “economy burger” or “econo burger”, it should be noted that the fat as an ingredient in this product is not the only ingredient that can assist manufactures to achieve a more cheap econ burger, the draft makes provision for other ingredients that may assist manufactures of econo burger to make a cheap products that will

32

REGULA-TION


( d ) shall have a total meat equivalent (TME) content of at least 55 percent, In industry, economy burgers are

being manufactured with a lower meat content than 55% using MRM and fat to provide an affordable protein and fat source to the low LSM market.

Otherwise a reference must be made to a minimum TME permitted for an economy burger.

provide affordable protein and fat source to the low LSM.

In agreement. Please see our above response with regards to the revised total meat content for economy burger on page 25.

5(8) Change the compositional requirements for bangers to a) include total meat equivalent of 60 % and b) total meat content to 40 % in line with the provision of previous versions of SANS 885.

Bangers were originally included in SANS 885 and in previous versions of this standard, the total meat content was 40% for bangers and the total meat equivalent was 60%.• Therefore, there were two compositional requirements based on meat for this product.• As these compositional requirements were adopted by industry there are currently many banger products in the market that adhere to these compositional requirements.

o This means though that these products will not comply with the requirements of total meat content of 55 % as stipulated in the draft.o A change of the total meat content of 55 % for bangers will make bangers unaffordable to the lower LSM consumers.

In the South African food industry sausages with a meat content of less

In agreement with the proposal. The total meat and total meat equivalent will be set as proposed.

In agreement to include the alternative name.

33

REGULA-TION


Under “Raw banger;…”

Add “alternatively referred to as “Grillers”.”

than 75% are widely referred to as “Grillers”, including fresh cheese grillers preserved with sulphur dioxide which contain 68% meat and fat and 7% added cheese, resulting in the total meat content being less than 75% (as required for a species sausage). Adding 75% meat & fat and 7% cheese would be economically more expensive for the public to purchase.Can this alternative name be added to the “Raw banger” category?


A calcium content of only 0.02 g/100 g is valid for >75% meat species sausages with no added MRM.For a category product which, as per 5 (8) (g) “may contain mechanically recovered meat”, the maximum permitted calcium needs to be revised and increased based on the species MRM, supplier origin and quality of the MRM, in view of bone calcium present in MRM (e.g.) the calcium value can be based on a chicken bone calcium level of 120-

Noted. Please refer to above response with regards to the use of water in flavoured ground meat on page 16.

Noted. However, the calcium content requirement will be removed due to the fact that many ingredients may contribute to the calcium content in raw processed meat.

34

REGULA-TION



Under “Raw banger;…” edit to read:

“(i) may contain a maximum of ??? grams of calcium per 100 grams

300 mg/100 g or as high as 485 mg calcium/100 g in Beef MRM.

35

REGULA-TION


of the product mass.”

Note:

??? to be determined from meat industry, based on calcium content of current Bangers, containing MRM, being sold.

5(9)Under “Raw braaiwors;” edit to read:

(c) shall have a total meat content of at least 35%

Or edit to read

(c) shall have a total meat equivalent (TME) content of at least 55 percent,

In meat industry supplying the low LSM market, economy braaiwors is being manufactured with a lower meat content than 55%.Most braaiwors for the low LSM market are made with MRM, fat, hearts, gizzards, lungs and TVP. Providing an affordable protein and fat source to the main market within LSM 1-3. Most manufacturers will be affected if minimum 55% total meat is legislated.

Otherwise Braaiwors classification

Noted. The proposed total meat content will be reviewed and the minimum total meat equivalent will be included in the draft as ≥60%.

36

REGULA-TION


should only have a minimum permitted TME classification, not a total meat & fat content.

This edit to total meat content or TME would also make the “banger” (and “grillers”) category a far superior quality classification to “braaiwors” (and “sizzlers”).

5(9)Same comments as for bangers to be applied to braaiwors. Total meat equivalent should also be included as a compositional measure together with total meat content as per previous version of SANS 885.


Same justification as for bangers.


In agreement. Will include Total meat equivalent since this product may contain MDM. See response to the comment under 5(8) above – Will implement as stipulated.

Noted. Please refer to our above response with regards to the use of water in flavoured ground meat on page 16.

Amend to “water, not more than 10%; and” There is a tendency in the industry to add unnecessarily large quantities of water (up to 25%) to products such as these in order to mislead the consumer in much the same way as the past excessive brining of frozen chicken portions. The excess water adds nothing to the nutritional value

Noted. Please refer to above response with regards to the use of water in flavoured ground meat on page 16.

Under “Raw braaiwors;…” In the South African food industry In agreement with the proposal and

37

REGULA-TION


Add “alternatively referred to as “Sizzlers”.”sausages with a meat content of less than 75% often containing edible offal are widely referred to as “Sizzlers”.

If the name had to change in future from“ABCD Chilli Dhanya Sizzlers” to“ABCD Chilli Dhanya Sizzlers Braaiwors”this would become too long a name on the printed label and might also confuse customers.

Can the alternative name be added to the “Raw braaiwors” category?

provision for an alternative name will be made.

Under “Raw braaiwors;…” edit to read:

“(k) may contain a maximum of ??? grams of calcium per 100 grams of the product mass.”

Note:??? to be determined from meat industry, based on calcium content of current Braaiwors, containing MRM, being sold.

A calcium content of only 0.02 g/100 g is valid for >75% meat species sausages with no added MRM.

For a category product which, as per 5 (9) (g) “may contain mechanically recovered meat”, the maximum permitted calcium needs to be revised and increased based on the species MRM, supplier origin and quality of the MRM, in view of bone calcium present in MRM (e.g.) the calcium value can be based on a chicken bone calcium level of 120-300 mg/100 g or as high as 485 mg calcium/100 g in Beef MRM.

Noted. However, the calcium content requirement will be removed.

RAW BRAAIWORSAdd ‘or raw griller or raw braai or raw sizzler or

Current varying names for braaiwors type products.

In agreement with the proposal the provision for the alternative names

38

REGULA-TION


similar wording’ will be made.

Regulation 6

No outer container shall contain more than one class of raw processed meat products, unless the outer container containing more than one class of raw processed meat adequately indicates the information of each product as per these regulations if it is not transparent or if the outer container is transparent, the individual products are wrapped and labelled in accordance with these regulations.

Stated currently: “No outer container shall contain more than one class of raw processed meat products, irrespective whether those classes of raw processed meat products are packed therein in separate containers”

Hampers and value packs have different classes of products and have been sold as such for many years.

There should be no prohibition on the sale of such combined products as long as each product is individually wrapped and contains the relevant information as per these regulations. If the individual packs are not visible from the outer packaging, the outer packaging must include all relevant information of the individual packs.

Query – In the case of a “Snackpack” or a “Party pack” type of product, e.g. Burgers and Bangers in a single pack. Can we not have such a product packed in this way according to this Regulation?

Regulation 6(3) has been removed in the draft regulation since it was established that is standard practice to pack different classes of raw processed meat products in the same outer container. The revised definition for “outer container” now also include gift packs and hamper packs which usually contain a variety of raw processed meat products.

Please refer to the above response

Regulation 7

Please align to R146 for letter heights Packaging changes for letter heights only are impractical and costly. If aligned to R146 of 2010, these do not need to be changed as they would already be compliant on current packaging.

Noted. Stakeholders should take note that product specific regulations published under the APS Act take precedence over the general labelling and advertising of foodstuffs regulations (R.146) of the

39

REGULA-TION


Reg 7(a) The applicable product designation; andReg 7(b) The additions to the product designations:

Suggest to align Reg 7(a) and 7 (b) with R146.

Stated currently:

Where the letter size of at least 1 mm is mentioned in the Regulation, can this be amended to at least 1.2 mm

In terms of the draft, the letter size of the product description must be at least 3 mm in height.

In terms of Reg 8 of 146 the product description must “not be less than one third of the letter size of the biggest letter of the name…”

The requirements for the product designation and additions to the product designations contradicts to R146. Accordingly, it is suggested that Reg 7(a) and 7(b) be aligned with R146.

Query – If for example our product name is “Econo Beef Patties” and the addition to this product designation states:“Econo Beef Patties with Cheese”. Must the difference between “Econo Beef Patties” and “with Cheese” not exceed 2 mm?

Amend to at least 1.2 mm in height as indicated in the proposed R429 Labelling regulations

Department of Health.The minimum letter sizes prescribed in the proposed draft regulation will thus be retained as is.

Yes, the wording “with cheese” is an addition to the product description, and the difference or variation between the letter size of the lower case vowels will need to be taken into consideration which mean the word “cheese” may not be bigger than the product name i.e. econo beef patties in this instance.

Noted. However, product specific regulations published under the APS Act get preference over the general labelling and advertising of foodstuffs regulations (R.146 and the proposed R429) of the Department of Health and the letter size prescribed in the draft regulation will apply.

Reg 7(f) Best before date and the batch code or Certain raw processed meat In agreement. The wording will be

40

REGULA-TION


batch number:

Suggest to amend the Regulation to require a “Use by” date.

(f) The "best before" date and/or the batch code or batch number in the manner prescribed in the regulations published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No. 54 of 1972).

The best before dateWhy use the best before date?

products are frozen and it is respectfully submitted that a “Use by” date should be indicated on such products.

Date marking can be the batch number

We recommend the use of “date marking” to give option to manufactures. Align with R146 which says a date marking, as with other regulations.

aligned with regulation R.146 dated 1 March 2010 of the Department of Health. A definition for “use by”, “best before”, and “sell by” will also be included in the draft regulation to provide further clarity.

Noted. However, the date marking and batch identification in the proposed draft regulation is for traceability purposes since some manufactures of raw processed meat products use the date mark as a batch code and are able to trace the products in that manner.

Please refer to our above response regarding date marking.

Reg 7(2) relating to outer containers:

Suggest to amend Reg 7(2) to include additional minimum requirements that must be present on the outer container such as:

IngredientsAllergen declarationStorage instructions

Suggest to amend the draft to require information such as the ingredients, allergen declarations, storage instructions etc so as to ensure the container contains at least the minimum information as required in R146.

These proposed requirements deal with the food safety of the product and fall within the mandate of the Department of Health. The mentioned aspects are already addressed in the regulations published under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act and will thus not be included.

Reg (7)(3)(c): “The country of origin in case of imported raw processed meat products only in a letter size of at least 1 mm in height.”

Suggest to include “… in the case of local and/or

Reg 7(3)(c) is limited to imported products, suggest to include local products labelled with a scale label.

Country of origin requirements are

In agreement. The country of origin will need to be indicated for all products labelled with a scale label only. The proposed regulation 7 (3)(c) will thus be removed.

41

REGULA-TION


imported raw processed… ” not aligned with R146. Suggest to align the requirements

Regulation 8

8. (1) The product designation shall at least consist of the applicable designation: Provided that in the case of raw minced meat, raw species sausage, raw species burger or patty, and raw species banger, the name of the species referred to in regulations 5(1)(a), 5(5)(c)(i), 5(7)(c)(i) and 5(8)(d)(i) followed must be indicated in addition to by the word “minced meat”, “sausage”, “wors”, “burger” or “patty” and “banger” shall appear on the main panel of the label.

Whilst specie must be indicated for customer choice, provision must be made to allow it to be indicated in another way, ie. not required as part of the product name

Noted. However, regulation 8 will be completely amended to remove any uncertainty with regards to the indication of the appropriate product name.

Change to read as:”(2) In the case of mixed-species minced meat and flavoured ground mixed-species meat or flavoured minced mixed-species meat and mixed-species sausage referred to in regulations 5 (2), 5 (3) and 5 (6), the name of the different species in a

Changes required due to changes requested under 5 (3) to allow a mixed species of meats in flavoured ground meat or mince.

Please refer to the above response.

42

REGULA-TION


descending order of mass, followed or preceded by the words “minced meat” or “flavoured ground meat” or “flavoured minced meat” or “sausage” shall appear on the main panel: Provided that the word “Game” or “Venison”, as the case may be, may be used as part of the name only if such name is further qualified by an indication, in descending order of mass, of the species of game or venison or other species of animal or bird present.”

(2) In the case of mixed-species minced meat and mixed-species sausage referred to in regulations 5 (2) and 5 (6), the name of the different species in a descending order of mass, followed by the word “minced meat” and “sausage” shall appear on the main panel: Provided that the word “Game” or “Venison”, as the case may be, may be used as part of the name only if such name is further qualified by an indication, in descending order of mass, of the species of game or venison or other species of animal or bird present.

Whilst specie must be indicated for customer choice, provision must be made to allow it to be indicated in another way, e.g. can be provided in the ingredient statement

Noted. Please refer to our above response with regards to the indication of the appropriate product name.

8(3)Relax this requirement as long as it does not interfere with the product designation.

Sometimes words like ‘no pork’ are used and can be larger it not the same size as the product designation. It does not compete with product designation and should therefore be permitted.

Regulation 8(3) will be amended to be less restrictive to allow for the use of certain words to be larger.

Regulation 9Additions to the product designation9. (1) If a flavouring has been added to a raw processed meat product in order to render a distinctive flavour thereto, the applicable product designation shall either be preceded by the expression “X Flavoured” or followed by the expression “with X Flavour” or “with X Flavouring”,

If flavourings are used to not provide a distinct flavour, should they still be called out?

No. it will not be necessary to use the expression “X flavoured” if flavourant concerned has been added with the intention to enhance the flavour of a specific meat ingredient or other added foodstuff concerned.

43

REGULA-TION


where “X” indicates the name(s) of the flavouring(s) used, unless the flavourant concerned has been added with the intention to enhance the flavour of a specific meat ingredient or other added foodstuff concerned.

Regulation 10Batch identification10. Each container containing a raw processed meat product shall be clearly marked with the "best before" date and/or the batch code or batch number in such a way that the specific batch is easily identifiable and traceable.

Date marking can be the batch number

Yes, If it can be used as a batch number if it assists with the traceability and batch identification of the raw processed meat product concerned.

Regulation 11

Regulation 12

Regulation 13

Regulation 14The Regulations relating to microbiological standards have not been mentioned in the draft Regulations with respect to obtaining a sample. Suggest to reference the Regulations relating to microbial standards if the products are to be tested for microbial standards.

Where applicable, the procedure for sampling could be aligned to established sampling procedures like the procedure for sampling of the US Food and Drug Administrations (FDA) procedure.

Please confirm whether or not the products will be tested in terms of the Regulation relating microbial standards? Contamination of raw processed meat by an inspector must be prevented when the inspector is obtaining a sample.

The following link provides further information:https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScienceResearch/LaboratoryMethods/ucm063335.htm

The regulations relating to microbiological standards (i.e. food safety) do not fall within the scope of the Agricultural Product Standards Act, 1990 (Act 119 of 1990). Sampled products will be handled in an appropriate manner.

Noted. This regulation only provides guidance on how sampling must be done. Stakeholders are encouraged to discuss and come to an agreement with the assignee on the sampling and sampling frequency that should apply. The link will be shared with the Assignee to assist them when developing a sampling

44

https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScienceResearch/LaboratoryMethods/ucm063335.htm



REGULA-TION


plan for the raw processed meat products.

Include scenarios and reasons as to when additional samples are required for analysis.

The scenarios or reasons for when number of samples are increased must be made clear as it cannot be based on the inspector’s discretion.

Stakeholders are encouraged to approach the DAFF assignee’s inspectors (i.e. Agency for Food Safety) to discuss or incorporate scenario’s into their SOP with regard to sampling.

Change the combined total mass of 2 kg to 1 kg. This will align with the new draft Regulations regarding the classification , packing and marking of meat products intended for sale in the Republic of South Africa; regulation 15 (1) (a) (ii)

In agreement with the proposal. It will be aligned accordingly.

Regulation 15(ii) the minimum number of containers that will result in a combined total mass of at least 2kg; or

Standardise to read as in Draft 2: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Processed Meat Products –The minimum number of containers that will result in a combined total mass of at least 1kg; or

In agreement with the proposal.

Please explain the ‘type’ (last column) in TABLE 2 for better understanding of the method of analysis.

Please include the AOAC method for calcium content.

The type is allocated by the Codex Alimentarius Committee for a specific testing method.Noted. AOAC 983.19 method will be included and it will only be applicable for determination of calcium in Mechanically Recovered Meat.

Regulation 16

45

REGULA-TION


ANNEXURE A

Current Regs relating to raw boerewors and species etc.

Indicate in the draft that the current Regulations governing the composition and labelling of raw boerewors, raw species sausage and raw mixed-species sausages is to be repealed.

Please note that it has not been indicated in the draft that the Regulations regarding the classification, packing and marking of certain raw processed meat products intended for sale in the Republic of South Africa is going to replace the current Regulations governing the composition and labelling of raw boerewors, raw species sausage and raw mixed-species sausage.

Noted. However, stakeholders need to be aware of the fact that once the proposed draft regulation has been promulgated, R.2718 of 23 November 1990 of the Department of Health will be repealed.

Include restrictions for non-use of classifications. This is to prevent circumventing of the use of classifications by using another name e.g. sizzler instead of banger.

If a product has a different name that is not aligned to the classifications in these regulations, would these products fall under these regulations? For example, instead of calling a banger, it is termed sizzler, how would these products be regulated?

It is suggested that they fall under unspecified class (or similar) and require approval by the Executive Officer before use.

Noted. However, Sizzler is an alternative class name for braaiwors, whereas an alternative name for raw banger is raw griller.

The proposed draft regulation is for certain raw processed meat products only. If a product under a different name would composition wise fall within any of the classes listed in regulation 4, it has to be designated accordingly and all the other minimum marking requirements will then also have to be met.

Allow for alternate class names In the interest of innovation, alternate names should be permitted for products that fall into a defined class of raw processed meat.

Application could be made to the Executive Officer for the alternate

In agreement with this proposal. Alternate class names will be allowed: Provided that they do not mislead the consumer with regards to the composition of the raw processed meat product concerned.

46

REGULA-TION


name with an indication of which class it belongs to.

Request for clarification • The regulations governing the composition and labelling of raw boerewors, raw species sausage and raw mixed species sausage under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 also regulates sausages and boerewors.

• Will there alignment between the two Departments who administer Act 54 of 1972 and Act 119 of 1990 for the DoH regulation to be repealed/amended so as to not duplicate enforcement?

Noted. However, stakeholders need to be aware of the fact that once the proposed draft regulation has been promulgated, R.2718 of 23 November 1990 of the Department of Health will be repealed.

2 different legislations published for comment within 1 week in October:Draft 1: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Certain Raw Processed Meat Products andDraft 2: Regulations regarding the Classification, Packing and Marking of Processed Meat Products

Clearly define the Scope of each Draft as to prevent confusion as Draft 2 could be seen as a replacement of Draft 1 and the 2 documents talk to different categories and classes of processed meat products.

We take note that this may have caused some confusion. Regulation 2 in both draft regulations clearly defines the scope of each proposed regulation.

R146 Labelling requirements requires that the Meat and water percentage is indicated on the main panel of the package in bold and at least 3 mm height

Query – Will this Regulation still apply or fall away

Since the declaration is QUID related it will remain a requirement specified under regulation R.146 of 01 March 2010 of the Department of Health.

Comment – If there no other categories/designations included, this will prevent manufacturers from innovating new products.

Propose to include other categories/designations, provided that the information that is conveyed

The proposed draft regulation is for certain raw processed meat products and if there are new

47

REGULA-TION


to the consumer, is truthful and not misleading.

innovative product that falls within the scope of the draft regulation for certain raw processed meat products, they will need to comply with the prescribed minimum marking and compositional requirements.

R214 Salt Regulations, Amendment R1071 dated 6 October 2017 states that for Raw processed meats the following Sodium levels apply.

Include the reference to R214 Salt Regulations and the relevant Amendments in order to ensure compliance to this Regulation

The Sodium regulation deals with health issues and this falls within the mandate of the Department of Health, while the proposed draft regulations deal with the quality/ compositional aspects of certain raw processed meat products. It is therefore not necessary to again reference the sodium regulations in the draft regulation for certain raw processed meat products.

Affordibility of Econo Category Burgers If current burgers with meat content less than 55% are increased to meet the requirements of the Econo/Economy Category, there could potentially be a price increase to the consumer of 20 – 30%.

Please refer to our above response for regulation 5 (7) on page 25 with regards to the inclusion of a category for economy burgers.

Query – Who will be the Competent authority mandating and monitoring the enforcement of this Regulation. Will levies be applied? If so, what will the fee structure be?Will the products be inspected at the processing facilities and sent for analysis?

Please clarify The proposed regulation will be enforced by the designated Assignee (i.e. the Agency For Food Safety) and the industry is encouraged to engage with the Assignee with regards to where/how inspection will be performed, inspection fees and inspection frequencies etc. In this way costs for enforcement of the proposed

48

REGULA-TION


regulation could be reduced to the minimum.

We would like to propose that a Working Group is formed with relevant stakeholders/industry to work together and consult with DAFF on the Regulations.

Please clarify DAFF is available to address any matter raised by stakeholders relating to the proposed draft regulation.

Will the proposed regulation have an impact on the naming of plant-based sausages?

Meat analogues are not covered in this draft regulation, therefore the use of words such as ‘sausage’ or ‘burger’ will not be restricted on these kinds of products.

Use of ‘Raw’ and ‘Processed’Can the word ‘Raw’ be omitted on the product designation?

It is optional e.g ‘Processed’ is not required to say Processed.

Can the category name be used instead of the class designation name and omit the word ‘Raw’?

Noted. Provision will be made for the indication of the word ‘Raw’ to be optional. This means e.g. Raw boerewors may be sold as “boerewors” only.

This proposed regulation for certain raw processed meat products and the draft regulation for processed meat products make the ‘processed meat’ regulatory landscape very complex and complicated. For starters, the titles of the individual regulations do not make it clear which products are in scope of which regulation.

Noted. Regulation 2 in draft regulation clearly defines the scope of certain raw processed meat product covered in the proposed regulation as well as regulation 4 in the proposed draft regulation provides the list of products covered in the draft regulation.

49

REGULA-TION


It is recognized that the intention of the proposed regulation is to replace the current boerewors and sausage regulation currently published under the FCD act.

Yes, that is the intention of the proposed draft.

However, the proposed regulation is also introducing new and additional requirements, which is potentially problematic.

Stakeholders will need to provide clarity with regards to the problems which they foresee with the proposed draft.

In order to simply the potential complexity, we would like to propose that the existing boerewors and sausage regulation is republished under the aps act firstly.

This will result in unnecessary and additional costs for DAFF if the regulations are published in the proposed manner.

We request a socio-economic assessment report before finalization of the regulations.

SEIAS is currently implemented for development of a new Act or the amendment to an existing Act. As far as the development of a new regulation or amendment of an existing regulation is concerned, there is currently neither the capacity nor the necessary funds available to implement SEIAS.

OrganicFree range

Should provision be made for organic and free range claims?

Both organic and free range is management control systems which will be regulated separately once the APS Amendment Bill has been approved.The existing classification and marking of meat regulations (No.R.55 of 30 January 2015) do provide for the use of ‘quality indications’ (e.g. free range, grass fed, etc.), provided that a protocol has been submitted to DAFF and it

50

REGULA-TION


is audited on a regular basis.If the necessary traceability is in place to ensure that the meat used in the manufacture of a particular raw processed meat product originates from a farm that is audited for the ‘quality indication’/ claim concerned, such claim (e.g. free range) may be used on the packaging.In the case of ‘organic’, the inspector must for the time being rely on the organic certificate issued by a recognised accredited certification body.

What is the impact on the sodium regulation. How will we reference to categories applicable for sodium compliance?

Please Clarify The sodium regulation clearly stipulated the requirements for all raw processed meat sausages (all types) and similar products. All categories of raw processed meat products will need to comply with the set sodium levels in regulation R.214 dated 20 March 2013 (as amended) of the Department of Health.

51

d… · web viewvinegar, spices, herbs, salt or flavourants fit for human consumption; food...

Documents