Audit finds improved import controls in Norway

An audit in Norway has revealed progress in the system for import checks of products of animal origin but some areas still need further attention.

Norway is part of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). The EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) monitors how the country implements European Economic Area (EEA) rules on food and feed safety, animal health and welfare.

The ESA found Norway had improved controls for food of animal origin entering the EEA, but three recommendations were made.

The objective of the audit in November 2024 was to verify compliance with legislation on official controls for imports of products of animal origin, composite products, which are of mixed animal and plant origin such as ready-to-eat meals or pastries with cream, and live animals from other countries.

It revealed improvements in Norway’s import control system since the last audit in 2017. However, not all corrective actions had been fully implemented. The ESA sent a letter of formal notice to Norway in September 2021 for failing to address two recommendations from the 2017 audit. The case was closed in October 2023, after it was concluded that Norway had taken steps to tackle the issues raised.

Low sampling
A new Norwegian Food Safety Authority (Mattilsynet) structure is planned to be in place beginning in May. Among other things, the border control posts will no longer be a part of regional offices but will come under a centralized department.

The audit team noted, based on data provided, that sampling and laboratory tests were not always done in accordance with the monitoring plan for 2023. The 23 samples taken were significantly below the planned amount of 82, however there were no non-compliances. Auditors also found operators were not always told of their rights for a second expert opinion.

The monitoring plan for 2023 aimed to sample 1 percent of consignments, which was achieved. However, the number of samples taken of food of animal origin for human consumption was lower than planned and two out of four categories were not sampled. The ESA said this reduces effectiveness of the plan and increases the possibility that non-compliant consignments enter the EEA market.

Two inspection centers were not able to simultaneously store goods at the required temperatures, pending results of lab analysis or the outcome of controls. The ESA said this can result in spoilage of temperature sensitive goods and increased risk of cross contamination between consignments.

However, Mattilsynet said both facilities were able to store items at the required temperatures pending results of lab testing or official controls and there was no risk of spoilage of goods, or of cross contamination between different consignments.

Notification issues
The audit team observed that for one BCP, 5 percent of prior notifications in 2024 were not reported within required time limits. In 2023, this figure was 10 percent. One importer was responsible for 40 percent of the late notifications at that BCP in 2024.

When an operator does not pre-notify a consignment within the time limits, Mattilsynet writes to the company and reminds them of the requirement. As an informal deterrent, the BCP would place the non-notified consignment at the end of the list to be controlled. However, BCP staff said measures were not effective in forcing compliance with the legislation and that no other actions were available to address repeated non compliances concerning pre-notifications.

“This increases the risk that consignments arrive at the BCP without the BCP staff having the opportunity of securing the necessary personnel and equipment to be able to carry out official controls in a timely and effective manner,” said auditors.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)