Chevallier I1., Laguet A1 and Talon R2.1U.R. Typicité des Produits Alimentaires, ENITA, Site de Marmilhat, 63370 Lempdes, France

2Equipe Microbiologie, Station de Recherches sur la Viande, INRA Theix, 63122, Saint Genès Champanelle, France

Critical points in small-scale facilities producingtraditional fermented dry sausages

PerspectivesConclusionDespite the authority approved the plan, and the correct premises andequipments, hazards exist regarding :äthe hygiene practices of personnel, the respect of no cross linesäthe cleaning-disinfectant planäthe control of process temperature and RH but also the length of some steps(ex: desalting of casing)These points have to be improved in order to reduce cross-contaminations anddevelopment of alteration or pathogen flora.

Context* Small producers experience technical and financial difficulties in complyingwith official food safety regulations. For example, hygiene standards, generallydefined for large processing plants, are not always compatible with such smallproduction units.* Fermentation of traditional sausage is usually not controlled. It relies on naturalcontamination by environmental flora. Each small-scale facility has a specifichouse flora composed of useful microorganisms for the fermentation and flavor ofsausage But spoilage and pathogenic flora are also present.* Data available on the description of traditional dry-sausages manufacturingprocesses and of traditional workshops diversity in the European regions arelimited.

Microbial analysis50% of workshops have between 3 to 6 log CFU/100cm2 of Enterobacteriaceae. These contaminations were mainly localised in majority on cutting table, knives and stuffingmachine.In the hygienic evaluation of dry sausages, 10% of workshop presented a level of pathogens above to the limit (L.monocytogenes < 100 CFU/g or S.aureus < 1000CFU/g).

ObjectivesQuality instead of quantity is now a priority for Europe. In the White Paper onFood Safety (2000), a set of proposals that put the primary responsibility forfood safety with food business operators right through the food chain waspresented. This study is a part of the European project “TRADISAUSAGE”* Major objectives of this project are

À To evaluate and improve safety of traditional dry sausagesfrom the producers to the consumers while preserving theirtypical sensory quality.Á To identify the hazards associated with traditional sausagesand to evaluate information on process conditions leading tosafety risks in order to define the critical control points (CCPs) ina HACCP plan

Concerning the other European workshops, a statistical analysis of all the result isin progress in order to identify the safety hazards associated with traditionalsausages manufacturing. The data from this project will be useful to establishclear recommendations to traditional producers. They will strengthen the viabilityand competitiveness of the agricultural sector in UE and improve the livingconditions and economic opportunities in rural areas.

MethodsMethods

Results

F01 F02F03

F04

F05

F06F07F08

F09

F10

- raw material - product- processing equipments

10 workshops in Massif-Central were investigated

France

3 interviews3 inspections

3 samples analysis

�������������� ��� ��������������������������� ��� �������������������������������������� ���������� ����������������� ����������

part I, pre-requirements to an auto control system : based onHACCP system : Building and facilities, Sanitary facilities, Personnelhygiene, Hygiene surface, Cleaning- disinfectant method, Production andprocess controls.part II, critical points of the process and efficiency of the hygienicprogram implemented on their equipment.3 Measures of temperature, relative humidity3 analysis of spoilage and pathogen flora

Questionnaire :

Fifth European Community Framework Programme, Quality and Life Management of Living ResourcesN°QLK1 CT-2002-0224 - Start of the project : 01-02-2003

Coordinator : R. Talon (INRA, France)

According to criteria attributed to each item in the questionnaire, the maximum score thatcan be obtained is :Part I : 61 points. Workshop exhibiting score below 30 are classified as “insufficient”.Part II : 50 points. Workshop exhibiting score below 30 are classified as “insufficient”.The obtained results have been used to evaluate information on process condition leadingon safety risks in order to classify the workshops.

F01 F02 F03 F04 F05 F06 F07 F08 F09 F10PART I 32 35 24 40 30 38 42 29 49 48PART II 42 34 23 28 39 45 42 35 43 47Total 74 69 47 68 69 83 84 64 92 95

Part I : 80% of studied workshops had the adequate infrastructures for theimplementation of an auto control system.Part II : 80% had an efficient hygienic program on the equipment workshops.