Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

BRC Version 6 - discussion on the changes


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 6 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:43 PM

So- Has anyone heard anything about v6? I understand some initial training will be taking place at the end of 2010? :helpplease:


  • 0

#2 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,390 posts
  • 1018 thanks
222
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 03 March 2010 - 09:59 AM

So- Has anyone heard anything about v6? I understand some initial training will be taking place at the end of 2010? :helpplease:

Probably be about £90 give or take a few quid. It is a huge money making exercise. Of course it’s important to review and revise standards as part of continual improvement taking into account changes in laws, operating environment, emerging food safety threats and best practice etc. How often should this be done? When was the last update?

Importantly will this be a minor tweak or a major overhaul, I would wager a minor upgrade that maybe could include more on food defence and security. Maybe there are some gaps there. The thing is it is mandatory to have a copy of the latest version of the standard as part of certification.

What do other members think of this and what do you expect to see changed?

Regards,
Simon
  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#3 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 320 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:29 PM

Probably be about £90 give or take a few quid. It is a huge money making exercise. Of course it’s important to review and revise standards as part of continual improvement taking into account changes in laws, operating environment, emerging food safety threats and best practice etc. How often should this be done? When was the last update?

Importantly will this be a minor tweak or a major overhaul, I would wager a minor upgrade that maybe could include more on food defence and security. Maybe there are some gaps there. The thing is it is mandatory to have a copy of the latest version of the standard as part of certification.

What do other members think of this and what do you expect to see changed?

Regards,
Simon



I wouldn't mind betting that they make unannounced audits mandatory...then see us all defect to ISO 22K!

I think that they ought to bring the BRC/IOP into line with the BRC, especially for those producing packaging for food manufacturing so that we are at least singing from the same hymn book

Caz x
  • 0

#4 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,390 posts
  • 1018 thanks
222
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:37 PM

I wouldn't mind betting that they make unannounced audits mandatory...then see us all defect to ISO 22K!

I think that they ought to bring the BRC/IOP into line with the BRC, especially for those producing packaging for food manufacturing so that we are at least singing from the same hymn book

Caz x

Oh yes mandatory uannnounced audits that would be a big one. Mind you it's the way the retailers are going and essentially it's their standard.

Not sure what you mean re bringing the BRC Packaging in line?

Regards,
Simon
  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#5 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 320 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 March 2010 - 04:00 PM

Oh yes mandatory uannnounced audits that would be a big one. Mind you it's the way the retailers are going and essentially it's their standard.

Not sure what you mean re bringing the BRC Packaging in line?

Regards,
Simon



Well lets take laundry as an example, seeing it is topical at the moment.


BRC V5
7.5.4 Laundering of protective clothing shall take place in-house using defined and verified criteria to validate the effectiveness of the laundering process, or by an approved contracted and audited laundry. The effectiveness of cleaning shall be monitored. Washing of workwear by the employee is exceptional but shall be deemed acceptable where, based on a detailed risk assessment, it can be confirmed that there is no risk to product safety. Detailed procedures shall be in place to ensure the effectiveness of the laundering process.

BRC/IOP
6.5.7 Protective clothing shall be kept clean and laundered. Laundering shall be carried out by one of the following methods: professionally laundery service, in-house controlled laundering facility or self care.
6.5.8 Self care shall be permitted provided adequate controls and appropriate guidelines are in place. there shall be a defined process for monitoring the effectiveness of the system

Why should they be so different? Do those who self launder stipulate is their procedures what detergents can be used? temperatures for washing? ensuring that work clothing aren't mixed with domestic laundry? How would you validate? do they expect staff to log each wash? how would you measure the effectiveness of that cleaning for self care?

I'm sure that i'm not alone in being nervous about self care, and i would expect that there very few from food manufacturing would allow self care (except in dispatch and stores). Primary packaging that is used for food manufacture should be treated the same as if it were a raw ingredient as contaminatiion can (and sometimes does) originate from packaging.

I just this it needs parity

Caz x
  • 0

#6 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,390 posts
  • 1018 thanks
222
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 03 March 2010 - 04:56 PM

Well lets take laundry as an example, seeing it is topical at the moment.


BRC V5
7.5.4 Laundering of protective clothing shall take place in-house using defined and verified criteria to validate the effectiveness of the laundering process, or by an approved contracted and audited laundry. The effectiveness of cleaning shall be monitored. Washing of workwear by the employee is exceptional but shall be deemed acceptable where, based on a detailed risk assessment, it can be confirmed that there is no risk to product safety. Detailed procedures shall be in place to ensure the effectiveness of the laundering process.

BRC/IOP
6.5.7 Protective clothing shall be kept clean and laundered. Laundering shall be carried out by one of the following methods: professionally laundery service, in-house controlled laundering facility or self care.
6.5.8 Self care shall be permitted provided adequate controls and appropriate guidelines are in place. there shall be a defined process for monitoring the effectiveness of the system

Why should they be so different? Do those who self launder stipulate is their procedures what detergents can be used? temperatures for washing? ensuring that work clothing aren't mixed with domestic laundry? How would you validate? do they expect staff to log each wash? how would you measure the effectiveness of that cleaning for self care?

I'm sure that i'm not alone in being nervous about self care, and i would expect that there very few from food manufacturing would allow self care (except in dispatch and stores). Primary packaging that is used for food manufacture should be treated the same as if it were a raw ingredient as contaminatiion can (and sometimes does) originate from packaging.

I just this it needs parity

Caz x

I think I agree with you Caz...wait...yes I do. :smile: That said the results of some most industrial laundries leave a lot to be desired.

Regards,
Simon
  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#7 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 320 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 March 2010 - 06:43 PM

I think I agree with you Caz...wait...yes I do. :smile: That said the results of some most industrial laundries leave a lot to be desired.

Regards,
Simon



LOL that's why it stipulates that you audit!!!
  • 0

#8 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,390 posts
  • 1018 thanks
222
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 04 March 2010 - 08:22 AM

LOL that's why it stipulates that you audit!!!

You crease me up. The first thing I'd check for is a fully functioning iron and someone who can use and is motivated to use it. :smile:

Anyway back to the discussion.

What other changes do you expect to see in Version 6 of the BRC Food Standard?


Regards,
Simon
  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#9 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 320 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 March 2010 - 09:54 AM

I think I agree with you Caz...wait...yes I do. :smile: That said the results of some most industrial laundries leave a lot to be desired.

Regards,
Simon



Mind you, i've worked with some very fit engineers in the past, and i wouldn't mind auditing their laundry!!!! :biggrin:
  • 0

#10 bibi

bibi

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 119 posts
  • 4 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 04 March 2010 - 11:36 AM

Ooooooh lovely :whistle:

we will be gratefull if you can share your template
many thanks
bibi


  • 0

#11 rosie

rosie

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 118 posts
  • 12 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:N Ireland

Posted 05 March 2010 - 12:34 PM

Not very good at adding previous quotes to my replies.

I agree with you Caz on self care - it really is difficult to justify and BRC should address this - however pressure from customers produces results every time.

Rosie


  • 0

#12 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,448 posts
  • 3244 thanks
346
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 05 March 2010 - 01:42 PM

Dear All,

I predict 7.5.4 will include the words "risk based" in the last sentence.


Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#13 bibi

bibi

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 119 posts
  • 4 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 06 March 2010 - 07:23 AM

fine
the approved laundry is under contract and be audited.
we are based in london and we use jonhsons for more than 3 years now, we do twice random swabs (low & high care coats) TVC<10 always, so

my question is how often shall we audit our contractor?
thank you
bibi


  • 0

#14 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,216 posts
  • 468 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 March 2010 - 08:02 PM

Thanks guys, I'd not heard verson 6 was in the offing.

Is it me or does version 5 doesn't seem that a long ago???

I reckon it will bring some of the Tesco Manufacturing standard in.


  • 0

#15 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 320 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 March 2010 - 11:24 AM

fine
the approved laundry is under contract and be audited.
we are based in london and we use jonhsons for more than 3 years now, we do twice random swabs (low & high care coats) TVC<10 always, so

my question is how often shall we audit our contractor?
thank you
bibi



You risk assess it!!

if you've had no issues it would be fair to risk assess and say audit every 3 years.

But if you have had issues, then an annual audit.

The big thing is RISK ASSESS everything!
  • 0

#16 bennii

bennii

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 34 posts
  • 23 thanks
2
Neutral

  • South Africa
    South Africa
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:South Africa

Posted 09 March 2010 - 08:57 PM

Version 6? Really?

You must be kidding me...


  • 0
Circle 7 Consulting
www.circle-seven.co.za
Systems for the Wine Industry

"Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention,
sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the
wise choice of many alternatives"

#17 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,448 posts
  • 3244 thanks
346
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 10 March 2010 - 02:31 AM

Dear Bibi,


The question of frequency resurfaces for every audit posted thread and, not surprisingly, particularly for external services.

Obviously if the results are poor, a repeat will be rapidly necessary. But if the reverse ?? Theoretically it is related to sampling theory, eg how statistically accurate do you want the assessment to be ??
(eg http://www.jstor.org/pss/2631408 )

Practically, as far as I can see, it’s usually decided by rule-of –thumb. Auditors have their own rules probably prioritised on profit. IMEX, they are instructed to challenge any data with a renewal frequency over 1 yr regardless of it’s risk status or perfect compliance. This of course is conveniently aligned to their typical own (maximum) visit schedule. :smile:

Assuming no regulatory aspects involved, the usual route is simply to seek validation of yr preferred frequency from a sufficiently official looking published document, especially if the parameter looks important and the target is more than 1 year. People who enjoy challenging auditors may not agree of course.

A few thoughts (but no solution) just to illustrate the arbitrariness –

Attached File  auditFrequency_Dec_03.pdf   184.13KB   159 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#18 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,958 posts
  • 790 thanks
167
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 10 March 2010 - 03:25 AM

Version 6? Really?

You must be kidding me...


It's a great way for BRC to make some money - everyone that wants certification and is BRC certified will have to buy a copy of the standard - Section 1.10 The company shall have the current edition of the standard available. :thumbdown:

8,000 customers @ at least £90 must make over £0.5m.

Regards,

Tony
  • 0

#19 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 320 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 March 2010 - 11:32 AM

Probably be about £90 give or take a few quid. It is a huge money making exercise. Of course it’s important to review and revise standards as part of continual improvement taking into account changes in laws, operating environment, emerging food safety threats and best practice etc. How often should this be done? When was the last update?

Importantly will this be a minor tweak or a major overhaul, I would wager a minor upgrade that maybe could include more on food defence and security. Maybe there are some gaps there. The thing is it is mandatory to have a copy of the latest version of the standard as part of certification.

What do other members think of this and what do you expect to see changed?

Regards,
Simon



I think that Food Security and Sustainability may become biggies next time around!
  • 0

#20 Allsafe

Allsafe

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 13 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 10 March 2010 - 11:35 AM

Yes, I have heard that version 6 is due to be published around Jan 2011 and will come take effect July 2011.
GOOD LUCK Everyone!!!


  • 0

#21 Madam A. D-tor

Madam A. D-tor

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 563 posts
  • 174 thanks
20
Excellent

  • Netherlands
    Netherlands
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:meat, meat products, ready to eat, food safety, QMS, audits, hazard analyses, IFS, BRC, SQF, HACCP, ISO 9001, ISO 22000

Posted 10 March 2010 - 10:02 PM

I think BRC version 6 will include more continue improvement things.
E.g. records of failures (equipment) to improve preventive maintenance plan (IFS 4.13.4), more trend analyses and actions based on trend analyses.

Also I think they will add ethical aspects and sustainability.
More focus on customer requirements and specifications.
more focus on specific training records, although I do not know on which aspects. If you compare version 4 to version 5, you see that there is more training records required (due dilligence?). I think this will be followed in version 6.
Maybe requiring BRC IOP for all suppliers of packaging materials?
And how about requiring shoe brushes at all entrances.

I also believe that they might change something in the certification rules to prevent that companies handling whole fresh fruits and vegetable can be certified for BRC Food.
Maybe something like IFS Broker.

Statistical data included: e.g. number of complaints per million consumer units (or KG) and other quality parameters. If the number is higher in the next audit you get a non-conformity for not implementing continue improvement.

Don't be scared. These are just some suggestions from a silly auditor. ;)


Edited by Madam A. D-tor, 10 March 2010 - 10:04 PM.

  • 0
Kind Regards,

Madam A. D-tor

#22 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,448 posts
  • 3244 thanks
346
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 11 March 2010 - 01:22 AM

Dear Madam A.D-tor,

Don't be scared. These are just some suggestions from a silly auditor.


On the contrary, not silly at all. It is much appreciated to hear from people on the frontline (I almost said from the dark[er] side :smile: ) :thumbup:

Rgds / Charles.C
  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#23 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,390 posts
  • 1018 thanks
222
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 11 March 2010 - 11:39 AM

Dear Madam A.D-tor,



On the contrary, not silly at all. It is much appreciated to hear from people on the frontline (I almost said from the dark[er] side :smile: ) :thumbup:

Rgds / Charles.C

I agree. Keep up the good work Madam A.D-tor, all of your inputs are valid and very much appreciated. :smile:

Regards,
Simon
  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#24 rosie

rosie

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 118 posts
  • 12 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:N Ireland

Posted 15 March 2010 - 01:50 PM

Changes in V6.

I'm hoping that they insist that all packaging suppliers hold cert for BRC/IOP which means we don't have to fill out any more supplier questionnaires.

Rosie


  • 0

#25 Madam A. D-tor

Madam A. D-tor

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 563 posts
  • 174 thanks
20
Excellent

  • Netherlands
    Netherlands
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:meat, meat products, ready to eat, food safety, QMS, audits, hazard analyses, IFS, BRC, SQF, HACCP, ISO 9001, ISO 22000

Posted 15 March 2010 - 02:37 PM

Hi Rosie,

I have to disappoint you.
I do not think that supplier questionnaires will disappaer if BRC-foodies are required to use BRC/IOP certified packaging materials suppliers.

BRC food version 5 includes a requirement to use BRC S&D certified transport organisations. However they are still sending questionnaires and even statements/quality contracts to these certified organisation.

Questions to start with are always: do you have a system? is it certified? can you send us the certificate? But also questions as: who is is the 24 hr contact person? who is responsible for quality? etc are included. These questions will still remain.
For packaging material suppliers it still will be needed to send in specifications and conformity statements (1935/2004, FDA).

So I do not think that you will ever get rid of those terrible paper filling questionnaires.


  • 0
Kind Regards,

Madam A. D-tor




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users