This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Food safety inspections for the years 2014, 2015, 2016'.

Version 11 November 2014
Business Profile 
Resources
Surveillance Activity
Complaints
Enforcement Activity
Business Inspection Outcome
Scores on Doors
Number of temporary 
Premises
Number of primary inspections
Revisits
Number of fixed premises
and mobile premises
Number of complaints investigated in relation to: 
Number 
Number 
Number 
Number 
penalty 
penalty 
Number 
premises with  Number 
High & 
Number High 
Number fixed 
Alleged 
notices 
notices 
premises with  multiple 
premises 
Medium risk 
Number 
& Medium risk 
Number fixed  premises 
single-
Number 
issued to 
issued to 
Number 
Number 
no/small 
issues & no  with critical 
Number 5  
Number 4  
Number 3  
Number 'no  premises 
Number 
FTE 
fixed 
Temporar
premises 
requiring 
Food 
incident 
Number 
improvemen High risk 
Medium risk  seizure 
prohibition 
number 
enforcement  failures at 
Participating  star SoD 
star SoD 
star SoD 
star' SoD 
with no 
High (H) 
Medium 
Temporary  Mobile 
authorised  authorised  premises 
Fxed 

Mobile 
requiring re- additional re-
Hygiene &  Foreign 
quality/ 
Labelling &  foodborne 
warnings 
t notices 
fixed 
fixed 
notices 
orders 
issues at 
at primary 
primary 
in Scores on  ratings 
ratings 
ratings 
ratings 
score yet 
Council name
risk
(M) risk
Low risk
premises
premises
officers
officers
inspected
premises  premises
premises
inspection
inspection/s
handling
matter
deterioration advertising illness
Other
issued
issued
premises
premises
issued
served
primary inspn inspection
inspection
Doors (SoD) determined determined determined determined determined
Wollongong City Council
953
49
51
7
4
1002
1811
54
248
40
18
11
27
4
9
13
348
13
9
0
0

ID
Council name
120
Berrigan Shire Council
121
Dubbo City Council
123
Ku-ring-gai Council
125
Cootamundra Shire Council
127
Jerilderie Shire Council
128
Coonamble Shire Council
129
Wentworth Shire Council
132
Guyra Shire Council
134
Wakool Council
138
Bogan Shire Council
140
Armidale Dumaresq Council
141
Carrathool Shire Council
142
Uralla Council
143
Lockhart Shire Council
144
Leeton Shire Council
145
Deniliquin Council

146
Gwydir Shire Council
147
Warrumbungle Shire Council
150
Clarence Valley Council
154
Junee Shire Council
155
Broken Hil  City Council
156
Junee Shire Council
157
Blayney Shire Council
158
Murray Shire Council
159
The Hil s Shire Council
162
North Sydney Council
163
Glen Innes Severn Council
165
Greater Hume Shire Council
166
Hurstvil e City Council
168
Manly Council
169
Parramatta City Council
171
Bourke Shire Council
173
Lithgow City Council
174
Wagga Wagga City Council

176
Albury City Council
177
Shel harbour City Council
180
Camden Council
181
Tumbarumba Shire Council
182
Coolamon Shire Council
183
Ashfield Council
186
Wellington Council
187
Boorowa Council
189
Blacktown City Council
190
Wil oughby City Council
194
Lake Macquarie City Council

195
Queanbeyaan City Council
199
Greater Taree City Council
200
Wollondil y Shire Council
201
Leichhardt Council
202
Narromine Shire Council
203
Hornsby Shire Council
204
Wyong Shire Council
207
Bellingen Shire Council
213
Tweed Shire Council
214
Dungog Shire Council
216
Harden Shire Council
225
Nambucca Shire Council
226
Gosford City Council

229
Auburn Council
230
Griffith City Council
231
Lane Cove Council
232
Goulburn Mulwaree Council
233
Burwood Council
235
Pittwater Council
236
Blue Mountains City Council
238
Parkes Shire Council
240
Kiama Municipal Council
241
Wool ahra Municipal Council
242
Brewarrina Shire Council

246
Warren Shire Council
248
Randwick City Council
249
Kogarah Council
252
City of Canada Bay Council
256
Moree Plains Shire Council
257
Cobar Shire Council
258
Cooma-Monaro Shire Council
259
Oberon Council
260
Bathurst Regional Council
261
Kempsey Shire Council
263
Botany Bay City Council
265
Central Darling Shire Council
267
Canterbury Council
268
Muswellbrook Council
269
Ballina Shire Council
273
Bankstown City Council
276
Cowra Shire Council
278
Singleton Council
281
Port Stephens Council
282
Mid Western Regional Council

284
Snowy River Shire Council
285
Department of Premier & Cabinet (Kosciuszko National Park)
286
Bega Valley Shire Council
287
Waverley Council
288
Cessnock City Council
289
Cabonne City Council
290
Marrickvil e Council
291
Balranald Shire Council
295
Weddin Shire Council
296
Wollongong City Council

297
Lachlan Shire Council
298
Narrandera Shire Council
301
Mosman Municipal Council
303
Tenterfield Shire Council
305
Newcastle City Council
308
Eurobodalla Shire Council
310
City of Sydney Council
311
Great Lakes Council
312
Holroyd City Council
313
Hay Shire Council
314
Maitland City Council

315
Ryde City Council
321
Coffs Harbour City Council
323
Liverpool City Council
324
Narrabri Shire Council
325
Fairfield City Council
332
Gloucester Shire Council
333
Campbelltown City Council
334
Palerang Council

335
Penrith City Council
336
Inverell Shire Council
337
Orange City Council
339
Young Shire Council
340
Bland Shire Council
342
Yass Valley Council
343
Tamworth Regional Council
345
Gunnedah Shire Council
346
Gilgandra Shire Council

347
Liverpool Plains Shire Council
350
Richmond Valley Council
351
Fairfield City Council
352
Kiama Municipal Council
353
Shoalhaven City Council
355
Hunter Hill Council
356
Temora Shire Council
357
Holroyd City Council
358
Conargo Shire Council
360
Walcha Council
361
Lismore Council
364
Warringah Council
365
Hawkesbury City Council
366
Wingecarribee Shire Council
367
Upper Lachlan Shire Council
370
Rockdale City Council
371
Byron Shire Council
372
Walgett Shire Council
373
Sutherland Shire Council
374
Kyogle Council
375
Bombala local government area / NSW Food Authority
376
Unincorporated Area / NSW Food Authority
377
Murrumbidgee Shire Council
378
Port Macquarie-Hastings Council

379
Upper Hunter Shire Council
380
Forbes Shire Council
381
Strathfield Municipal Council
383
Corowa Shire Council
384
Lord Howe Island Board
393
Tumut Shire Council

Comments
No comments
Questions 32 to 34. Dubbo City Council was not given any prior advice of the data required for these questions 
and therefore we are unable to provide any data. The number of staff used throughout the inspection period of 
2013-2014 has made it difficult to determine estimations for those questions. The computer system (Authority) 
that Council uses does not have the capability to capture the data requested in Question 32 to 34. The Food 
Authority need to provide at least 12 months warning of the data they need Councils to capture, this wil  permit 
Councils to adjust their systems to capture accurate information/data.
Dubbo City Council is using the standard FPAR form however we are not calculating scores, as we were under 
the understanding that this was a voluntary system.
Question 19 Other complaints. This number has risen from 9 (2012-13) to 45 (2013-14) the rise has occurred 
due to the increased number of enquiries for home based food businesses in the Local Government Area
In relation to Question 3 Council does not keep a record of number and type of premises as defined. These 
were previously defined as P4 incident only premises not requiring inspection.
In relation to Questions 4,5,6,9,10 Council does not keep a record of number or inspections in relation to 
temporary/mobile food premises. 
In relation to Question 20 Council has only provided information in relation to the number of formal warning 
letters issued as the number of warnings written on food inspection reports was not recorded. Note: The figure 
of 56 as provided is likely to be an under representation of the total number of warnings given.
In relation to Questions 32,33 and 34 Council does not currently keep an electronic record of scoring results for 
each premises.   
Please note: The NSW Food Authority did not inform Council of the need to record the above information for 
the purpose of this reporting period.  
Council did collect information in relation to fast choices and childcare centres as it was understood that this 
information was required by the Authoirty for this reporting period. This information is available if needed.
No issues this year. Council employed a contractor to do initial round of inspections. Scores on doors seems to 
pJerilderie Shire Council contracted the food inspection during the reporting period to Griffith City Council.
No Comments
It would benefit LG if an automated notification were sent to Council for any changes (new premises Temporary 
0
none
Warning letters issued are mainly for minor issues (19). Any questions regarding this submission please 
contact myself on 68359000 or xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx.xxx.xx
Data for Q32 was not recorded for the 2013-2014 financial year
Nil
The Powers of Authorised Officers needs to extend to landlords / Owners of food shop premisies.  Many 
business are being held to accountability of failing infrasturcture because the landlords / owners are not fixing 
issues with there premises that must comply to Australian Standards 3.2.2 or 3.2.3.  
The risk catagories of the High, Medium and Low need to be clearer in definition.  The Uralla Shire believe that 
we have close to al  high risk business in the colder months of the year with food warmers and microwave 
ovens being used to reheat or keep foods at temp.  The majority of Food Businesses here in the Uralla Shire 
are small cafe's and fish and chip shops.  These types of buisiness should not be cassified as High risk 
Inspections were sub-contracted out to Building & Environmental Services Today (BEST), and conducted by 
- Two premises inspected during first round in November 2013 have since been closed prior to 2nd round in 
June 2014 - Question 4 unanswered due to insufficent information. COuncil currently is unaware of the number 
Note Q32 - Q34 does not include temporary food stalls.  Of these 7 had minor administartive matters and 3 had 
multiple issues but no enforcement action required.
With our proximity to Victoria and the nature of our large events such as the Deni Ute Muster and Deni Blues 
& Roots Festival we have traders coming from interstate that do not have a NSW Food Safety Supervisor.  
They generally are able to show they have the qualifications outlined and / or are registered with the Victorian 
"Street Trader" system.  These people are return traders for these events and we are working with organisers 
and the traders to get all traders with a NSW Food Safety Supervisor Certificate.  
I have raised this matter at the Regional Food Group meeting and it is a matter other Council Officers have also 
raised.  The general consensus at the Regional Food Group (meeting at Culcairn attended by Ben Lees) was 

We have completed al  of our annual food premises inspections and are going to
4 critical food safety failures are stil  being followed up. Possible improvement notice or other enforcement 
action wil  depend on proprietors actions & premise condition upon reinspection.
Each year it becomes more and more difficult to extract the answers required for this report - the report has 
expanded from 1 page to 8 this year! I think it is unfair to ask more and more questions each year as we are 
struggling to extract the basic data from our systems in a timely manner. The guideline for the reporting 
questions should be released and stay current for a number of years to ensure that we can set up our corporate 
Thank you
I commenced with the Broken Hil  City Council NSW, from interstate, in October 2013.  I am stil  sorting out the 
High risk from Medium Risk premises in town, and which businesses have changed activities and/or closed. I 
wil  also need to fine tune the data collection throughout the year to make the reporting process easier.
Why does the GM need to approve submission of report when delegations in place?
Several food businesses that have had warning notices issued require follow-up inspections to assess 
compliance. 
The Council presently has not been registering food businesses as required under S100 of the Food Act, a 
Nil
Please advise Councils of the intended reporting criteria at least 12 months prior to the end of the reporting 
period to allow the required changes to data collections.
 - In addition to the 749 primary inspections of all of our high and medium risk food shops, I have included in the 
total number of primary inspections conducted the figures for pre opening inspections and some complaint 
investigations.
 - We don't keep the stats at this time to enable us to answer questions 32 to 34.
- Question 13 - 374 premises required reinspection. We have the stats on the total number of additional 
reinspections but to break them down per premises would be too time consuming at this late stage. Also it 
should be noted that additional reinspections are not necessarily for the same item/s that were original y 
identified the first time round.
Question 4 - 93 temporary food stalls were inspected This does not necessarily equate to the total number of 
temporary food stalls that operated in our Council area. We aim to get to all markets once per year but the 
number of stalls at the markets can change on a month to month basis. 93 were inspected but the total number 
Food premises across the LGA continue to show a steady improvement in food Handling Controls, Health 
& Hygeine and Premises maintenance. Greater evidence of pest activity (rodents) was found, with many 
operators reporting issues with rodents this year. Likely due to greater numbers moving in due to the long and 
warm autumn. A greater number of Improvement Notices were issued this year compared to Warning Letters. 
This is reflecting our escalating level of enforcement, whereby premises receiving a Warning Letter last year, 
automatically received an Improvement Notice this year if issues of any risk level were found, not just critical 
risk failures. In the coming year, premises with ongoing issues may receive higher level enforcement, such as 
Penalty Notices, if efforts to improve are not demonstrated. On the whole, a majority of premises were either 
Q4 includes most food premises at Henty Machinery Field Days (agriculture expo of approx. 60,000 visitors).
Endeavours wil  be made throughout this years inspections to more accurately reflect the new questions data 
required for the 2014-2015 report (assuming the questions are the same or similar).
Question 32-34
Hurstvil e City Council commenced using FPAR in May 2014.  Prior to May 2014, an in-house inspection report 
was used.  The in-house inspection report provided a "pass" or "fail" reporting system as appose to scores 
provided in FPAR.  
As it is not compulsory or legislative rquirment that Council uses FPAR scoring system, no data has been 
collected to provide answers to question 32-34. 
Other high risk problems we encountered in two food premises related to pets in kitchens. Both owners made 
assurances of initiating immediate interim controls to prevent pets accessing the kitchen. We also verbally 
instructed and reached agreement with both owners to install self-closing doors as a permanent engineered 
control and verbally gave them 4 weeks’ notice to comply. We wil  be making reinspections next month to 
No further comment
Generally most food shops complied, had one meat seizure at a local supermarket
3 warning letters issued, 3 complaints investigated including one foreign matter.
For activity submission P2 is classified as medium risk however Wagga Wagga City Council all P2 ratings are 
also considered high risk and require at least one programmed inspection per year. Questions 32 and 33 are 
approximate figures, more accurate data wil  be collated in the next financial year. This submission has 

Council’s Team Leader Compliance, Mr John Mulvey contacted Sandy Goh from the NSW Food Authority to 
advise that AlburyCity’s recording and reporting systems for its food inspection program have been designed to 
accommodate the previous reporting structure of the NSW Food Authority and the relevant legislation.
The new reporting documentation appears to reflect the “Scores on Doors” system which is considered a 
strong movement away from the previous reporting requirements. Despite the officers not  being aware of the 
new reporting format and in an attempt to respond to the new questions and reporting statistics required by the 
Food Authority for the 2013/14 annual report, additional time and resources were required to manual y review 
Every effort was made to inspect a number of food premises that only open seasonally or sporadically, however 
due to unavai
I refer to rec libi
en l
t iity
nf , ac
orm ces
ati s
on or
 th  ins
at  pec
Cam tion c
de
oul
n Co d not be 
uncil recei c
v oor
ed di
 fr nated.
om the State Liaison Group Meeting regarding the 
additional questions within the draft Food Activity Report for 2013/2014. 
Council is not aware that these inclusions were discussed with councils prior to the last State Liaison Group 
meeting and it appears that the changes have simply been made by the Authority and included in the current 
Activity Report.
Questions answered in this 2013 /2014 Activity Report have been answered based upon the agreed defifinitions 
of "Risk" as given in previous reporting.
You are advised that to date Camden Council has not agreed to participate in the "Scores on Doors" Scheme 
as there are no legislative provisions that protect Council applying the Scheme. Accordingly, as at present 
Scores on Doors is not mandatory it should not be included in the reporting regime. It is the opinion of Council 
that the inclusion of the "Scores on Doors" reporting may be detrimental to those councils who are not 
participating in the scheme.  
Question 32 to 34 within the Food Activity Report requires Council to categorize the number of premises with 
no, or minor, non-conformances to critical issues at primary inspection. These questions are not part of the 
reporting protocol and therefore have not been answered in in Council's 2013/2014 data collection 
program.You are advised that these have been included in the report by the Authority without reasonable prior 
notice to Council or consultation and no such data has been collected or collated for the reporting period.
Please ensure that any proposed changes to the 2014/2015 Food Activity Report are provided to Council no 
later than 31 July 2014 to enable new data collection  and reporting tools required to address the proposed 
changes are established at the outset of the reporting period not at the end.
Further, in addition to the above, you are advised that there have been other recent changes or advice 
introduced (without consultation) by the Authority that appear to contravene provisions of the Food Act 2003, 
Food Standards Code and the Food Authority’s Guidelines. These changes affect Council’s enforcement roles 
to effectively and consistently apply legislative standards. Recent examples of changes made or advice issued 
by the Food Authority include:
• Self-service of certain food items in Coles Supermarket, 
The remaining 6 businesses have been identified and inspections wil  be carried out prior to the end of August 
Nil
Q4 We have 4 food events three of which are more show cases for our fixed businesses.  So no extra 
inspections are undertaken for this event.  The Carnival of Coulture is an event but no official inspections are 
N/A
No comments, thank you
high, medium and low risk rating is based on the ANZFA classification ratings of p1, p2, p3 and p4
Advice regarding Questions due to data not captured during reporting period: Q1&2 - Answers provided under 
ANZFA classification 'P' as per Food Regulation Partnership - Pathway to Partnership Q3 - Answer provided 
under ANZFA classification 'P4' as per Food Regulation Partnership - Pathway to Partnership. P4 premises are 
incident only.These types of premises are not included in Council's inspection programe. Q9 - Council did not 
capture data during reporting period. Q22 & Q23 - Data compiled from this report's classification High/medium 
Q32- Q34.  We received no communication from the NSW Food Authority that these particular fields wil  be 
required and as such our Council for the 2013/14 Financial year is unable to provide this data.

Additional inspections not included in annual activity submission include pre-purchase and (DA) pre-opening 
inspections. Council works with proprietors by providing info and advice on shop design, construction, and fit-
out. Council has a bi-annual newsletter. Council engages the services of translators (where necessary) when 
engaging with proprietors of non-English speaking background. 2x PINs from the 13/14 financial year have 
Participated in the soft serve sampling pilot.
Risk categories based on P ratings 
Guestimation for q 32 -33
We do not have a register for temporary food premises therefore the number operating in the LGA is unknown.
Q20: LMC do not issue warning letters however business owners are advised of any non-compliances through 
electronic inspection reports and they are followed up accordingly. Q32-34: LMC are unable to extract this data 
due to; 1) Advised at the end of the reporting period to provide this data 2) Did not record this data during the 
reporting period 3) Licensing module and inspection report had not been set up to record this information 4) Not 
One food premises was unable to be inspected as it was never open when Council tried to inspect, including 
after hours. Council also wrote to the business requested an inspection be conducted and never received a 
response. Council also tried ringing the business however every time the phone just rang out, no answer 
machine or message bank was available for Council to leave a message. The business is thought to have 
In addition to three primary inspections conducted for mobile premises, Council received three inspection 
reports from Blacktown Council for three mobile food vans operating in Hornsby Shire. (Q9)
In addition to 452 warnings issued, Council issued 28 follow up improvement notice letters. (Q20)
Any changes to the information or statistics that are required to be supplied by Council in the annual activity 
submission should be advised to Council with sufficient time to al ow for these alterations/changes to be made 
to the Council's data recording systems. It is suggested that at least 15 months notification is required to enable 
changes to be made to the data recording systems. This amount of time wil  allow for a full 12 months to be 
N.B 1 - Temporary / Mobile Vendors: The figure quoted for Qu.4 & Qu.5 are estimates only. The Event 
Coordinators of the various markets operating in the Bellingen LGA were contacted & provided an 
estimate of the number of local food vendors that had stalls operating at their markets. The Event Coordinators 
indicated that these vendors have their relevant licenses & approvals. Belligen Council does not presently 
have a Register of Temporary & Mobile Food Vendors operating in the LGA area, however is looking at 
assembling one as a matter of priority in the 2014/15 financial year. N.B 2. - 16 "Fixed" Food premises did not 
have a staff member with a NSW Food Authority formal 'Food Safety Supervisor (FSS)' Certificate. Information 
Q4: Tweed does not currently collect this data. This wil  be reviewed for next annual report. Q13: Tweed's 
current data base does not collect this information. Review required for next annual report. Q32,33,34: Tweed 
does not currently use the FPAR and the Tweed's current data base does not currently collect this information. 
Review required for next annual report. Please note where a review is required, Tweed wil  endeavour to 
No further comments
Al  inspection undertaken annually, no breaches found at any premises
Council achieved almost a 100% inspection rate this year, albeit the balance required is currently being 
completed in July 2014, and wil  appear in next year's annual return.
Where field is blank information was not captured due to Councils current recording proceedure or was unable 
to be retrieved. Shannon McKiernan, the supervisor responsible for previous reports and information correlation 
has resigned making information retrevial difficult. Infringement notices are down on previous years as Gosford 
council over the past 12 reporting months has placed an emphasis on education rather than enforcement. 
Council has run a number of food safety seminas both of a general type and for specific industries for example 
school canteen operators. Council has also run a food waste minimisation programme targeted within a specific 
area where food waste storage and generation is a problem. As previously stated food surveil ance officers 
have taken additional time during the inspection process to bring a value added component to various 

Question 3: The number provided represents those currently on councils Database that were inspected. This 
does not include al  low risk premises such as news agents, video stores etc that sell packaged food only.
Question 4: Number provided includes all outlets that operated and were inspected within the LGA during the 
reporting period. This number includes temporary outlets that operated at repeat / multiple events as additonal 
outlets. 
Question 5 : This number reflects the number of mobile operataors that are either registered with Council or are 
known to be operating within the LGA from Private property. Council generally does not provide approval udner 
section 68 of the local government Act for mobile vendors operating from a public place (other then during 
temporary events)
Question 9: 0 Inspections recorded as mobile vendors that were inspected have been captured as temporary 
utlets at events or inspected by neighbouring Councils under the home base jurisdiction.
Question 20: Number provided has been based on number of primary inspection provided with an inspection 
report (not including those that recieved a notice) plus formal warning letter.
Question 32 -35: This information was not previoulsy required by the Authroity. As council was not aware that 
this information was required the data was not capture in councils reporting/records system. Council in not in a 
postion to provide this information at this time. Councils data base and electroinc inspection system wil  be 
amended to capture this data (where possible) to enable this data to be provided in next years report.
Following on from question 13:
 - 15 food businesses required "additional re-inspections".  42 additional re-inspections were carried out.
- Temporary Events: 37 additional re-inspections were carried out.
Lane Cove Council is unable to provide answers to the non compulsory questions 32-34 due to the lack of prior 
warning that this information would be required as Council has been unable to capture this data. 
Lane Cove Council experienced a change in its Environmental Health staff towards the end of this reporting 
period and also left council without a EHO for a period of 8 weeks. This resulted in a significant number of its 
food shops having thier primary inspections in the last few weeks of the reporting period. Although al  primary 
inspections were completed many of the required follow up inspections required as a result of these inspections  
Easy to use
Burwood Council does not use the Food Authority FPAR. However, Council is introducing the scores on doors 
program in the Burwood LGA and wil  commece using the FPAR that wil  assit in annual reporting. Some 
difficulty has been experienced during this reporting period due to competing priorities in the work place and 
Please give 12 months notice to changes in matters that wil  require reporting in the annual activity submission.
1) Q 32- Q34, relate to the scoring system for "Scores on Doors". Blue Mountains City Council did not 
participate in the trials / programs for the "Scores on Doors". Therefore our reporting system was not able to 
capture and provide the data for these questions.
2) In relation to Q11, please be advised that the reporting indicates that we have only completed  94.74% of our 
program. This is a result of a number of premises that had a "final approval inspection" from Councils 
Environmental Health Officer, but not a "primary inspection", it also includes some premises that closed prior to 
the primary inspection being completed. 
3) Q20, please be advised because BMCC did not participate in the scores on doors the number of warnings 
issued is based on "Warning PINS" issued, and not warnings indicated in food assessment reports.
4) Please be advised the contents of this report has been submitted by an officer of Council who has been 
Data not collected for Q4 & Q5. Unable to provide accurate answer.
Q 9 & Q 10 is one and the same. Distinction between mobile vehicles and temporary food stall not collected. 
On a quarterly basis Council sends all registered premises a Food news letter.
FPAR are not used. Wool ahra Council's long standing Food Premises Inspection Report form is used.
Generally, most of the food premises within the vil ages are poorly designed to meet with current standards, 
however, are reasonably clean in appearance and at this stage no complaints have been fort-coming 

Although Council always aims to conduct two routine inspections (excluding re-inspections) per premises a 
year due to staff numbers being down during the later part of 2013
Warren Shire Council could only conduct the minimum 1 round of routine inspections for the 2013-2014 period
Council has already put framework in place to ensure next reporting period it can carry out its preferred two 
*Free Food Handling training
*Food premises checklist - Produced by Randwick City Council with the assistance of Special Projects Grant 
funding from the NSW Food Authority
Q4 - Is a guesstimate as there is no means of recording these details.
Q8 - Please note there has been 58 Food Businesses which were inspected and are no longer trading,  
.
Q2. Comparing data from 2013/14 financial year there is a variance in regards to the number of medium risk 
premises within the LGA. It appears temporary food vendors may have been included in this figure in previous 
financial years.
Q20. Council's electronic reports enable attachment of photos and inclusion of detailed information. For this 
reason inspection reports have taken the place of warning letters, hence the high number of warnings issued.
Q32 & Q33. Council is not able to extract data required to answer these questions however wil  amend current 
This finanical year has been a very busy year for myself and our contractor. I approached Moree TAFE to 
encourage them to run a FSS course in March which was well received and we have received good feed back 
Please contact Council's Manager of Planning & Environmental Services, Stephen Poulter for clarification of the 
No comments at this time
Oberon Council has had recent and ongoing staffing issues and difficulties with work loads associated to 
completing inspections of food premises. Oberon Council continues to implement strategies to ensure food 
inspections are completed, reinspections are carried out and that support is provided to both the community 
Q4 Same stall could have been present at different venues on different dates - not able to provided separate 
data figures.
Q8 Figures include al  risk premises and regardless of result of inspection (ie satisfactory or unsatisfactory). 
Exclude low risk = 307.
Q27 Figure is based on number individual premises NOT number of certificates issued.
The Activity Report appears to change from one year to the next; this makes it difficult to alter and add fields to 
issues with staffing usual 2nd round inspections not completed, didnt use fpar wil  do for inspections in current 
finacial year.Computer system set up to rationise P1,P2,P3, AND P4 wil  need to have premises reclassified 
In relation to Scores on Doors, Three Star Certificates have not been issued and 'no star' ratings have not been 
measured. Al  high and medium risk food premises have been risk assessed.
Re inspection of one business satisfactory
nil
.Mobile and temporary premises ratio estimate only
FSS promotion with food workshop conducted by TAFE, Food safety education kit with Food safety calendar 
distributed.Basic food safety monitoring calendar available on web with posters. Ecoli swab random test carried 
Q4 and Q12. Temporary Food Premises. We have 161 operating, but only 84 are subject to inspection (med 
and high risk). Out of the 84, 37 were inspected. Its a hit and miss as they may not always be present when the 
insepctins are carried out.
Q19 Other complaints: undisclosed seafood al ergy at restaurant; toilet requiring maintenance, bin odour, dog 
Q 32 to 34 have not been completed due to Council not partcipating in the scores on Doors at the moment. 
Council was not notified that we were required to keep stats on these questions, however for the next financial 
Cowra Shire Council provided food safety education to operators of medium and high risk food businesses. 
This was done through a variety of educations methods including providing the 2014 food safety calenders and 
a number of food authority factsheets, along with written and verbal advice regarding non-compliance issues. 
Q33 Because the business inspection outcome definitions changed at the end of the reporting period, some 
warning letters were issued to premises under the multiple definition once the outcome had been reclassified. 
Previously all unsatisfactory premises were issued a warning letter. This wil  be rectified for the following 
Unable to provide robust data for questions Q32, Q33 and Q34 as the data is not recorded
Mid-Western Regional Council do not inspect markets (temporary food business) held outside work hours due 
to resources. 

The premises types classifications breakdown recorded in this submission are as per the systems used by 
SRSC (we have followed the system as outlined within the partnership documentation and set out in Food 
Standards Australian New Zealand have published a Priority Classification 
Guide to assist in determining the risk category of a food business. 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/ANZFA_1578_Info_Paper__final.pdf)  
If the examples and classifications laid out in this report document were used instead of the above system then 
the answers for questions would be changed as follows.
Question one would be 96 premises, 
Question two would be 22 premises, 
Question three would be 0 premises. 
Question twenty two would be 5 and 
Question twenty three would be 0
It is noted that when this issue was raised with NSWFA at time of circulation of the draft report format in June 
2014 [very poor timing] that the reply from NSWFA did flag that: "This year we wil  prioritise consolidating and 
updating guidance on risk rating, and wil  roll this out in consultation with councils. It is recognised that this 
issue wil  also need to be directly addressed in the examples for the 2014/15 activity report." 
SRSC hopes that this consultation is conducted early in the year and that it also addresses the potential for 
variability and interpretation within the report so that one of the outcomes of the report is the collection of 
meaningful data which minimises potential variability due to interpretation.
   
It is also noted that as a Council that does not use "Scores on Doors" and had not for the full extent of the 2014 
reporting year used a numbered FPAR then attempting to break down the questions on Business Inspection 
Outcomes as set out in question 33 is particularly difficult. Is a reinspection of a premises classified as 
"enforcement action"? Is enforcement action including both formal and informal?
Within the report there is no capacity for explanation is allowed: e.g.: in SRSC situation a number of premises 
This online submission is very difficult to fil  out accurately because it appears to be based on FPAR template - 
which is not mandatory in NSW.
Q1 - Definition of 'High Risk Food Premise' requires reworking. We included Childcare Facilities in our total.  
Many premises undertaking High Risk activities are excluded from this definition.  For example businesses 
pasteurising their own eggs & then using it in raw egg aioli.
Annual activity submission subject to an upcoming Council report to Council ors and General manager
Full details wil  be provided for the 2015-2016 period
.
nil
The Business Inspection Outcome questions (Q32, 33 and 34) were non-mandatory for the 2013/2014 
reproting year. Marrickvil e Council collected data for the reporting based on guidance last released by the 
NSWFA. These questions were not included in the guidance and thus Marrickvil e Council has opted not to 
nil
Nil
Accurate data not available in relation to unanswered questions  and Fpar not being used

We had two service stations selling hot dogs, with one of them even selling microwaved chicken wings and 
potato scallops which involved handling in their preparation. Neither of these premises had kitchen facilities, 
including hand wash basins for hand washing and double bowl sinks to adequately wash utensils, and in one of 
them, no adequate preparation bench space. The hot dog warming facilities for both premises looked high risk 
with inadequate monitoring procedures for stock rotation. We negotiated with both owners to discontinue selling 
the products until adequate facilities have been installed. Both premises complied with the request initially, but 
we have since had reports that one of them is back to business. We wil  be making reinspections of the 
premises next week in view of issuing fines and confiscating the offending stock and equipment after seeking 
direction and advice from the food authority as we consider the proprietors actions as being high risk to public 
health.
Other high risk problems we encountered in two food premises related to pets in kitchens. Both owners made 
assurances of initiating immediate interim controls to prevent pets accessing the kitchen. We also verbally 
instructed and reached agreement with both owners to install self-closing doors as a permanent engineered 
control and verbally gave them 4 weeks’ notice to comply. We wil  be making reinspections next month to 
ensure that both owners have kept their word, and if not, wil  issue infringement notices and continue to elevate 
our response if required.
Two other food businesses operating with high risk activities were businesses that were undertaking staged 
refurbishments whilst continuing to sell food. In both instances verbal agreements were made on implementing 
temporary controls to mitigate potential risks, and for one food business, agreement was reached on when the 
refurbishments wil  be completed. We wil  be reinspecting both food businesses next month and wil  be 
elevating our actions by issuing infringement notices and ongoing reinspections if compliance is not reached for 
one business, and for the other, we wil  be negotiating written assurances for practical completion of works and 
we wil  continue monitoring compliance.
The answers for question 27-30 are only from one round of inspections. The FPAR was not used to asses 
business for the first round of high risk inspections for this reporting period. The business results for the first 
round were based on a rating system developed by Griffith Council. 18 A-Rated Businesses, 6 B-Rated 
Nothing further to add.
High and Medium Risk categorisation fields appear to have changed since the last reporting period due to more 
descriptive examples within the 2013-14 Activity Report.
Council note that it would be beneficial to have the questions (or a full draft report) available at the beginning of 
the reporting periods, as opposed to only at the end, to allow Council's to capture relevant data throughout the 
Please note that unable to differentiate between mobile and temporary at events. Q1-3 - We classify high risk 
premises as P1 & 2, medium as P3, low as P4. Q4 - We have reported on number inspected not number that 
operated. Q5 - We have reported on number approved and inspected in 2013-14. Q20 - Warnings are not 
Form goes from Q25 to Q32.
We do not use the SOD FPAR, and thus we do not score as for Q32-34. We do yes an electronic data base but 
unless we have advance notice of theses question, it would be a laborious task to sort through manual y to 
extract that information. 
Therefore I would suggest that a NSWFA database be created to gather the information on a weekly basis. 
This would also al ow each council to have better access to end of year data.
No additional comments to make.
Q20 - this question is not practical to report on. Warning letters only included in nominated number.
Risk categories reported are based on P ratings.
Data not recorded for business inspection outcomes section.
Nil
Nil
The data for questions 32,33 and 34 was not collected so cannot be included I the report.  We are currently in 
the process of determining if this information can be recorded for the 14/15 reporting year. At a minimum 3 
months notice before the start of the financial year is required to allow changes to be made to our data base.

1) There has been a reduction in the number of inspections conducted in the 2012-2013 financial year to those 
conducted in the 2013-2014 finacial year and a reduction in FTE due to leave of absence of one Environmental 
Health Officer with primary food inspection responsibilities for 9 months of the financial year.
2) There is a discrepancy between the total number of premises inspected and the total number of fixed 
premises.  This discrepancy is due to a number of factors including:
(a)  A number of food business  (approximately 70-80 premises) closed down during the financial year, or 
closed for a significant period of time for renovations.
(b) However, a number of new food businesses have opened, which may have received a fitout inspection but 
not been open long enough prior to the end of the financial year to have received a primary inspection
(c) Low risk premises are inspected on a complaint basis, or where there has been a change in risk 
classification of the business.
3) Council is unable to provide data for questions 30 and 31 as Council’s database system in the financial year 
did not record this data.  Furthermore, Council was only made aware of the need for this data to be kept at the 
Council is currently trial ing the FPAR inspection template in an electronic version with the intention of utilising 
the rating/scoring system to enable identification of those premises requiring further monitoring.
Questions 12, 32, 33, & 34 we cannot provide information on
Narrabri Shire inspections now carried out by staff member employed September 2013, not previous contract 
arrangement. Premises not yet inspected mainly due to "irregular" trading hours or inability to organise access 
Results were extracted to the best of Council's ability as Council does not use the FPAR system and current 
database does not automatically produce such detailed reports.
Several bussinesses ceased operation during the 2013-2014 year which screw the numbers slightly.
Uable to obtain required data for questions 32 - 34. Council's Licensing System is unable to capture this 
information. Manager of Compliance, Paul Curley, has approved this submission.
Temporary Premises numbers are only an estimate for this financial year as resourcing issues have prevented 
inspection of these types of premises.  We are hoping to get some inspections of temporary premises 

Q1 and Q2. The number provided is the number of businesses registered with Council. Whilst officers make 
every effort to ensure all food premises are registered with council, there may be food businesses operating 
without council’s knowledge or consent.
Q3. Council does not have the resources to routinely check Food Notify for low risk premises or conduct audits 
to identify these premises. Council currently has 3 low risk premises on its food premises register.
Q4. The figure provided is the number of temporary food stalls that sought approval from council to operate. 
There may have been temporary food stalls operating without council’s knowledge or approval.
Q5. The figure provided is the number of mobile food premises that sought approval from council to operate. 
There may have been mobile food premises operating without council’s knowledge or approval. Please note 
that council considers a mobile food premises that trades in a stationary position at an event to be a temporary 
food stall.
Q9. 3 mobile food premises that were given approval to operate were inspected by their home council under 
the NSW Food Authority’s home jurisdiction rule.
Q10. When comparing this response with the response to Q4 it is important to note that council receives 
applications for many one off food stalls like fundraising BBQs and current resourcing does not al ow all 
temporary food stalls to be inspected. Council inspects at major events when resourcing permits.
Q11. The difference between the combined response of Q1 and Q2 and the response to this question is 41. 
This is made up of:
- 32 sporting canteens operating on weekends which council is not currently resourced to inspect. Council has 
carried out construction and maintenance inspections of these facilities so that upgrades to older facilities can 
be prioritised and programmed;
-  5 new food businesses which commenced operating in May or June and wil  be inspected in the 2014-15 
financial year; 
- 2 premises where we were unable to gain access before 30 June 2014; 
- 2 premises which were overlooked and wil  be inspected as a priority in 2014-15
Q13. This question has changed since the last activities report. Councils were only advised on 1 July 2014 that 
this change would occur. Changes were made in May 2014 to electronic reports to enable us to report on the 
previous question. Further changes are now required in order for Council to report on this item which wil  
require additional time and resourcing. Council is not in a position to report on this item.
Q20. This question has changed since the last activities report. Councils were only advised on 1 July 2014 that 
this change would occur. Council’s response to this question only includes warning letters. Warnings on 
Senior Officer with Delegated Authority has approved this submission.
Q4 - number of temporary food business premises that operated in the council area?
Council's figure for this question includes markets and festivals, but does not include local show/fairs/fetes
Due to staffing issues, the majority of scheduled inspections were undertaken in April & June - Q13 (additional 
reinspections) were not in the reporting period. 
In regards to Mobile Vans and Temporary events - Council currently only undertakes inspections at the Annual 
Show (held on a weekday). No inspections were carried out at temporary events on weekends in 2013-2014. 
Q5 - Council is only aware of 4 mobile food premises operating in the Shire. 
No comments necessary.
First round of inspections completed, though only 18 primary inspections and 3 follow -up inspections were 
carried out in the second round of inspection. This was due to a 50% staff shortage during the time of the 
Question 3 - do not record low risk premises (complaint response only) Question 4 - have not recorded 
temporary premises to date - if need to record particular data, please advise at the start of the finacial year, not 
at the end of the reporting year. Question 10. As above, no data recorded in record keeping system. 
Inspections where completed for Country Music Festival event, but were not entered into our Property and 
Rating COM- food identifiy record system. We wil  record this for future reference. Business outcomes- we 
record mobile food business in another record system, as registration based not property based, therefore 
business outcome = 212+66+45+17(mobile) = 340 premises. 5 of our mobile businesses are charity based and 
Question 2 - Premises are categorised as high or low risk. Premises wil  be review in 2014-2015 financial year 
to ensure categories accurately reflect risk assessment. Al  high risk premises are inspected annually.  
Question 9 - mobile operator not in operation at time.  Wil  check to ensure inspection conducted before re-
commencement of mobile operator. 
Question 10 - Have a high number of temporary premises due to AGQUIP (agriculture field day) event which 
0

Question 2- Premises are classified as either high or low risk. Any high risk premises is inspected annually. 
Premises classification is assessed annually to ensure risk category accurately reflects risks. 
Question 4 - Temporary premises have been inspected (for example the food outlets at the annual show) but 
data was not collated.  Temporary premises (for example at markets) is not data that is currently captured.
mobile food premises classed as serving over80% of food from mobile facility
Results were extracted to the best of Council's ability as Council does not use the FPAR system and current 
database does not automatically produce such detailed reports.
On a quarterly basis Council sends all registered premises a Food Newsletter.  In addition to this questions 32 
to 34 are not recorded throughout the year on our database as these are new questions that the Food Authority 
Non-mandatory Questions 4,5,9,10,32,33 and 34 have not been completed due to Council's present data-base 
not being set up (or able) to answer these 7 questions in an accurate and meaningful way. Note, Council does 
inspect Temporary Food Premises and Mobile Food Vehicles within the Shoalhaven on a regular basis, 
however the specific (total) number is unknown. The total number would therefore be a crude estimate only and 
as stated above would be inaccurate and not meaningful for the purposes of this report. It is intended to 
-
Nil comments
Council undertook 12 food hygiene seminars including 1 provided in Tamil. 4 newsletters were sent to 
businesses. Council promotes through its website the EHA - 'I'm Alert'. Each food business received a copy of 
the Holroyd City Council 'FoodWise' Food Safety Manual, fridge magnets for handwashing/temperature control, 
protien swabs, dishwasher temperature labels and sanitiser measuring cups. Copies of all food safety 
Most common issues with food premises in the shire are structural due to the age of the buildings and the 
sporadic trade they cater for.   Enforcement concentrates on cleanliness of premises, temperature control and 
We have not answered questions 32 to 34 as our Council has not previously used the FPAR scores on doors 
calculations during inspections.  Whilst we do not intend on taking up scores on doors for businesses, we wil  in 
There were no other issues, appart from the short notice in the change in format an information required for 
Note 1 - Questions 1 & 2 & 11 - Unable to provide this information as re-profiling of risk categories occured 
during the year:  Whilst Council undertook a re-profiling of the High and Medium categories throughout the year 
it must be noted that al  High and moderate risk inspections were completed prior i.e.; there were 481 High and 
moderate risk premises in the 2013-2014 financial year and al  were inspected.  The answer to question 11 is 
481
Note 2 - Q22 & 23: It is noted that the level of PINs issued to moderate risk and high risk are as a proportion 
Some medium and high risk premises received a score rating, however mid way through the 2013 - 2014 
period Council (due to lack of interest from business owners) did not continue with program and later on 
throughout the year made a submission to the Food Authority to opt out of the program. Some high and 
medium risk businesses were not inspected throughout the period due to businesses changing ownership, 
Q10. - Temporary premises are inspected only in response to food safety complaints. Q4.& Q5. - Reported 
numbers are based on active NFSIS notifications from temporary and mobile food business respectively.
Nil
Council intends to hold food safety seminars for food handlers in near future.
- Council's priority ratings for a food business is based on business type (P1-P4) and not risk (H, M, L) - 
Council's systems are not set up to easily retrieve the information required by the FA. - Some multiple entries in 
Additionally after speaking with Josie Q32 to Q34 are not be fil ed in, as Council has not implement the point 
system and Q20 ‘number of warnings issued’ include  identified issues for improvement listed under additional 
notes on (FPAR) Note:   Council has not issued any warning notices via letter.
The one outstanding inspection is in a remote vil age with limited population and the premises are only open 
Answers to questions 32, 33 & 34 not based on point scoring but on the severity of the inspection result 
notation (ie: One or more of: "pass", "minor issues" or "Letter to Comply", "Fail reinspection" and "Fail Order", 
"Fail Improvement Notice"). Some food businesses may have inspection results in more than category. Number 
don't include Low risk (P4) inspections which we ispect as well. These questions may need to be a little more 
specific. Electronic point scoring as per the FA checklist has already been developed and introduced onto our 
Unfortunately due to staff shortages, Council has not been able to achieve its target of 95% of inspections.
Al  businesses inspected on an annual basis.
Businesses inspected on an annual basis.
Nil
Most premises inspected meet a very high food safety standard compared to how they were six years ago. The 
Port Macquarie Hastings Council inspection program is geared towards rewarding compliant businesses with 
fewer food premises food safety inspections. Such an inspection regime works weel  so far for this particular 
Council. This financial year we are in, (2014- 2014) like the (2012-2013) financial year should see all our 

Note that current risk ratings are based on the P ratings.
The number of temporary food premises businesses is an estimate only, Council does not currently record this 
Nil
Council used 2 contractors throughout 2014 for food inspections
Contractor engaged to manage food safety program. FPAR used for inspection program and al  education 
programs carried out by NSWFA implemented for Shire.
1  x High Risk premises is a licenced premises under the Food Act and onnly requires auditing every 2 years. 
Due 2015.
Food inspections activity in largely carried out by a contractor, and a little in house work is undertaken as