Commission Regulation (EC) No 1249/2008 (repealed)Show full title

ANNEX II U.K. AUTHORISATION OF AUTOMATED GRADING TECHNIQUES AS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 9(1)

PART A U.K. Conditions and minimum requirements for authorisation

1. The Member State concerned shall organise a certification test for a jury composed of at least five licensed experts in classification of carcases of adult bovine animals. Two members of the jury will come from the Member State performing the test. The other members of the jury will each come from another Member State. The jury shall comprise an uneven number of experts. The Commission services and other Member States' experts may attend the certification test as observers. U.K.

The members of the jury will work in an independent and anonymous way.

The Member State concerned will nominate a coordinator of the certification test who shall:

• not be part of the jury,

• have satisfactory technical knowledge and be fully independent,

• monitor the independent and anonymous functioning of the members of the jury,

• collect the classification results of the members of the jury and those obtained by using the automated grading techniques,

• ensure that, during the entire duration of the certification test, the classification results obtained by using the automated grading techniques shall not be available to any of the members of the jury and vice versa nor to any other interested party,

• validate the classifications for each carcase and may decide, for objective reasons to be specified, to reject carcases from the sample to be used for the analysis.

2. For the certification test: U.K.

• each of the classes of conformation and of fat cover shall be subdivided into three subclasses,

• a sample of at minimum 600 validated carcases shall be required,

• the percentage of failures shall be no more than 5 % of the carcases that are fit for classification by using automated grading techniques.

3. For each validated carcase, the median of the results of the members of the jury shall be considered as the correct grade of that carcase. U.K.

To estimate the performance of the automated grading techniques, the results of the automated classification machine shall, for each validated carcase, be compared to the median of the results of the jury. The resulting accuracy of the grading by automated grading techniques is established by using a system of points that are attributed as follows:

	Conformation	Fat cover
No error	10	10
Error of 1 unit (i.e. one subclass up or down)	6	9
Error of 2 units (i.e. two subclasses up or down)	-9	0
Error of 3 units (i.e. three subclasses up or down)	-27	-13
Error of more than 3 units (i.e. more than three subclasses up or down)	-48	-30

With a view to authorisation, the automated grading techniques should achieve at least 60 % of the maximum number of points for both conformation and fat cover.

In addition, the classification by using the automated grading techniques must be within the following limits:

	Conformation	Fat cover
Bias	± 0,30	± 0,60
Slope of the regression line	1 ± 0,15	1 ± 0,30

PART B U.K. Information to be provided by Member States as regards the organisation of a certification test

• The dates on which the certification test shall take place,

• a detailed description of the carcases of adult bovine animals classified in the Member State concerned or a part thereof,

• the statistical methods used for selecting the sample of carcases that shall be representative, in terms of category, classes of conformation and of fat cover, of the adult bovine animals slaughtered in the Member State concerned or a part thereof,

• the name and address of the slaughterhouse(s) where the certification test shall take place, an explanation of the organisation and performance of the processing line(s), including the speed per hour,

• the carcase presentation(s) that shall be used during the certification test,

• a description of the automated grading machine and its technical functions, in particular the security concept of the machine against any type of manipulation,

• the licensed experts nominated by the Member State concerned to take part in the certification test as members of the jury,

• the coordinator of the certification test, proving his satisfactory technical knowledge and full independence,

• the name and address of the independent body designated by the Member State concerned that shall analyse the results of the certification test.

PART C U.K. Information to be provided by Member States as regards the results of a certification test

• A copy of the classification sheets completed and signed by the members of the jury and by the coordinator during the certification test,

• a copy of the classification results obtained by using automated grading techniques signed by the coordinator during the certification test,

• a report of the coordinator on the organisation of the certification test in view of the conditions and minimum requirements set out in part B of this Annex,

• a quantitative analysis, according to a methodology to be agreed upon by the Commission, of the results of the certification test indicating the classification results of each expert classifier and those obtained by using the automated grading techniques. The data used for the analysis must be provided in an electronic format to be agreed upon by the Commission,

• the accuracy of the automated grading techniques established in accordance with the provisions in part A, point (3) of this Annex.