Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

BRC/IOP Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials: Issue 4


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

#1 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,422 posts
  • 1042 thanks
227
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 23 February 2011 - 01:41 PM

Publishes 25 Feb 2011

Buy it here

Discuss the changes on this thread.

The new, updated 'Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials: Issue 4' has been revised to provide greater focus on quality and functional aspects of packaging, which compliment the established requirements of factory hygiene.

Maintaining its versatility in food and non-food packaging, the publication will ensure the scheme continues to be a leading global standard adopted by major retailers and packaging businesses around the world. Certification to the Standard verifies technical and functional performance, aids manufacturers' fulfilment of legal obligations and helps provide protection to the consumer.

All of the changes within the revised edition have been based on wide and extensive consultation with International Stakeholders. Changes to the revised Standard include:

•Preparation and planning section, providing guidance and support for sites new to the certification process

•New requirements for managing print control

•Additional safeguards to reduce the risk of chemical migration from packaging into food products

•Greater emphasis on managing the functional quality of packaging materials to meet customers' specifications

•Introduction of 'Fundamental' clauses, relating to systems that are crucial to the establishment and operation of an effective packaging manufacturing operation

•Introduction of a grading scheme based on number and severity of non-conformities

•Audit frequencies and processes for corrective action review based on performance

•Reduction to two product categories based on the hygiene risk associated with the final use of the packaging materials.

To allow time for retailers, producers and certification bodies to become fully familiar with the new requirements and for the BRC to develop their support and infrastructure, the BRC will not recognise audits against Issue 4 until six months after it is formally published.

It is a requirement that all suppliers undergoing a BRC/IOP Packaging and Packaging Materials audit have an official, authorised copy of this Standard.


  • 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!


Thanked by 1 Member:

#2 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,010 posts
  • 808 thanks
170
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 25 February 2011 - 11:18 PM

This is the e-mail I received from BRC:

From August 2011 it is a requirement that all suppliers undergoing an audit have an official, authorised copy of the new BRC/IOP Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials – Issue 4.
The Standard has been updated following extensive consultation with international stakeholders. It provides greater focus on quality and functional aspects of packaging, which complement the established requirements of factory hygiene.
Certification to the Standard aids manufacturers' fulfilment of legal obligations.
To ensure you are compliant, order your copy of the new Standard today!


For the benefit of our members here is a translation:

Show me the money!


  • 0

#3 saguym

saguym

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Israel
    Israel
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fountain Pens, Music, Traveling

Posted 14 March 2011 - 08:33 AM

This is the e-mail I received from BRC:



For the benefit of our members here is a translation:



Quite strange that no remarks,from any member, associate, guest, etc. as to implementation, gap analysis, or any other issue to the new published Issue 4 of BRC/IOP, since the day it was officialy issued almost three weeks ago ...

Awaiting your comments.

saguym
  • 0

#4 Foodworker

Foodworker

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 239 posts
  • 171 thanks
7
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 14 March 2011 - 09:20 AM

There has been a little discussion, but it is still very new and there has not been much opportunity to digest the new content.

Although it was published a couple of weeks ago, I am still waiting for my copy.

There will be a ~6 month transition period to allow suppliers and certification bodies to understand the requirements and organise training. The CB that I work for is still putting its auditor training programme together.

Comments will start to trickle in soon I am sure.


  • 0

#5 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,422 posts
  • 1042 thanks
227
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 20 March 2011 - 08:41 PM

As Foodworker says it won't be too long before BRC packaging users come looking for answers on the latest revision.

One of the main changes are the new requirements for preventing ink migration / transfer to the food contact side of printed packaging. This addition to the standard backs up Regulation 2023/2006, GMP for materials and articles intended to come into contact with food.

A couple of question sto fall out of this:

How do you control ink off set to the food contact side of the material?
How do you check this as a buyer of printed packaging materials?


  • 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!


#6 Benko

Benko

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 9 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 21 March 2011 - 12:51 PM

Happy Monday to all....if its possible.


Well I got my Version 4 Friday and have already found one clause that is beyond my grasp...

5.2.6 When composite print is used (a mixture of different designs are printed together), a process shall be in place to ensure effective segregation of differing print variants.

Any one have any ideas what they are looking for here? My best guess is something to do with the trapping of the differnet colors or possible something to do with process jobs. Not at all sure though.

Also have not come across anything about preventing ink migration at all. Which clause is this or was it something left on the editing floor from the rough draft?


  • 0

#7 kaz

kaz

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 34 posts
  • 13 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Co Durham

Posted 21 March 2011 - 02:12 PM

issue 3 index versus issue 4. A good stating point i thinkAttached File  Issue 3 versus issue 4 indexes live.xls   28KB   197 downloads


  • 0

#8 saguym

saguym

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Israel
    Israel
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fountain Pens, Music, Traveling

Posted 22 March 2011 - 04:13 AM

Happy Monday to all....if its possible.


Well I got my Version 4 Friday and have already found one clause that is beyond my grasp...

5.2.6 When composite print is used (a mixture of different designs are printed together), a process shall be in place to ensure effective segregation of differing print variants.

Any one have any ideas what they are looking for here? My best guess is something to do with the trapping of the differnet colors or possible something to do with process jobs. Not at all sure though.

Also have not come across anything about preventing ink migration at all. Which clause is this or was it something left on the editing floor from the rough draft?


My understanding is that the request is to avoid, in case of composite printing, any possible mixing among the different product labels (printed on the same run) supplied to the buyer. No more.

On ink transfer and migration, I am still waiting my official copy.

saguym
  • 0

#9 Foodworker

Foodworker

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 239 posts
  • 171 thanks
7
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 22 March 2011 - 05:16 PM

I am still waiting for my copy too.

This clause is clearly designed to prevent mixing of printed items, labels and cartons probably having the greatest potential to be mixed.

These are often printed 2,3,4+ up on a sheet or roll to use materials efficiently and prevent waste. However this inevitably increases the liklihood of mixing (I can almost hear printers shouting "no way - it can't happen"!)

Some retailers will not allow composite printing.

Mixing designs is pretty much the only way printers can kill consumers so it is right that the BRC have highlighted it as a requirement.

Preventing it is difficult as the collation of the different designs is often a manual task and the way to do it can only be determined in your own set up as layouts vary, but it will almost always involve some form of line clearance protocol.

Ink transfer is also difficult to control in reality. You can analyse samples chemically, but to do this on every print run as a positive release would be prohibitvely expensive.

Typical process controls to include are drying/curing conditions temperature, air flow for example, or UV emission intensity/lamp life if a UV system is used. Anti set off powder application efficiency is another.

Routine test methods are a bit limited - rub tests, Robinson tests and scotch tests seem to be the most common, but I would appreciate it if any members had alternatives.


  • 0

#10 SpiceGenius

SpiceGenius

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 17 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 23 March 2011 - 01:40 PM

Man,....I thought I had enough as it is with cardboards and plastic, ...now ink....@$%&($@(@*&#$, maybe I should rethink my career......Sorry. I don't mean to be so pessimist.

SpiceGenius.


Happy Monday to all....if its possible.


Well I got my Version 4 Friday and have already found one clause that is beyond my grasp...

5.2.6 When composite print is used (a mixture of different designs are printed together), a process shall be in place to ensure effective segregation of differing print variants.

Any one have any ideas what they are looking for here? My best guess is something to do with the trapping of the differnet colors or possible something to do with process jobs. Not at all sure though.

Also have not come across anything about preventing ink migration at all. Which clause is this or was it something left on the editing floor from the rough draft?


  • 0

#11 denist

denist

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 13 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 08 April 2011 - 07:55 AM

Hello everybody.

I'm on internship for 6 month in a packaging society and the objective is to prepare the company to be certificate BRC/IOP 1st categorie .
We have the 3rd issue of the norm for the moment and we wont have the 4th issue before 1 month i think (haven't been ordered yet).

How many times did it took for you do get the the new version (pdf version)?

Can anobody tell me what chapters haven't change much so i'll concentrate on them?

thanks by advance
Denis


  • 0

#12 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,422 posts
  • 1042 thanks
227
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 13 May 2011 - 07:12 PM

Hello everybody.

I'm on internship for 6 month in a packaging society and the objective is to prepare the company to be certificate BRC/IOP 1st categorie .
We have the 3rd issue of the norm for the moment and we wont have the 4th issue before 1 month i think (haven't been ordered yet).

How many times did it took for you do get the the new version (pdf version)?

Can anobody tell me what chapters haven't change much so i'll concentrate on them?

thanks by advance
Denis

Copied below is a briefing issued by the BRC.

BRC Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials Issue 4 - An overview of the key changes to the BRC / IOP Standard between Issue 3 and 4

Introduction
It is now three years since the Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials Issue 3 was published and Issue 4 provides the opportunity to look again at the relevance of the Standard to emerging issues.

Whilst the principles of the Standard and broad expectations remain unchanged, Issue 4 has been substantially rewritten and the operation of the scheme updated to reflect the implementation of the other schemes. We believe Issue 4 adds value to Retailers and Manufacturers alike in reflecting commitment to the scheme.

This also means, however, that it is not possible in a document such as this to provide a comprehensive list of every change. In order to prepare for an audit, or understand the changes, it will be necessary to purchase a copy of the Standard. This document is designed to give an overview of the most significant changes and improvements to the Standard

Scope of the Standard
The scope of the Standard remains the same, encompassing Packaging and Packaging Materials. However, Issue 4 has been rewritten to provide greater focus on quality control and functional properties of packaging which compliment the established requirements of factory hygiene.

General layout of the Standard
In order to maintain the clarity of the Standard the layout lists the requirements for the categories separately.

The number of categories has been reduced to two, based on the hygiene risk associated with the application of the Packaging or Packaging Material. The categories are entitled “High Hygiene Risk Category” and “Low Hygiene Risk Category,” and can be broadly defined as food or non-food packaging. Generally the statements of intent for the Low Hygiene Risk Category are based on expected outputs from the requirements.

The grading system from the Food Safety and Consumer Products Standard has been incorporated into Issue 4, so the number and severity of non-conformities is reflected in the certification status and grade applied. Audit frequency and corrective action review will also relate to grade and performance.

“Fundamental” Clauses have been introduced, relating to systems that are crucial to the establishment and operation of an effective packaging manufacturing operation.
A Preparation and Planning section provides guidance and support for sites new to the scheme’s audit and certification process.

The site now maintains responsibility for continued certification, requiring that recertification audits occur on or before the audit due date. Should this not occur then a major non-conformity will be raised. If a site does not continue certification then a period of six months must elapse before a new initial audit may take place.

Standard Requirements

1. Senior Management Commitment and Continual Improvement

This section incorporates the existing requirement of Senior Management Commitment by defining the component parts e.g. organisational structure, resource management and management (systems) review together with new clauses demonstrating senior management involvement and commitment to the Standard, including setting and reviewing objectives for improvement. This section is identical in both categories. The quality policy has been moved into Section 1 to emphasise the importance of this within the context of senior management commitment.

2. Hazard and Risk Management System

Slight changes have been made to this section to reiterate the importance of the use of a multi-disciplinary team to manage and review the implementation of the Standard, and to clarify the role of exemptions to the Standard found through the implementation of the pre-requisite programme.

3. Product Safety and Quality Management System

The content of the clauses remain largely unchanged, but have been extensively reviewed and enhanced to ensure the clauses are clear and add value to the pre-requisite programme. Notable inclusions are around establishing customer requirements as a function of customer focus; the requirement for a declaration of compliance as a greater emphasis on the functional and physical properties of packaging materials; and focus on the processes surrounding incidents, product withdrawals and recalls.

4. Site Standards

Generally, requirements covering the grounds, building fabrication, layout for staff facilities have been only slightly reworded. Site security measures have been extended to reflect the increased concerns in some regions of the threat of malicious contamination.

5. Product and Process Control

The greatest changes in this section are the new clause requirements for managing packaging print control. The aim with this section is to ensure that essential criteria such as allergen information is fully legible and correctly printed. This section also makes requirements over adequate segregation of printed packaging to prevent mixture of packaging types, particularly where composite or ‘gang’ printing is use. This formalises the general good practice followed by many packaging printers and reassures retailers and packaging end-users of the integrity of the information presented on the packaging.

6. Personnel

Requirements have been slightly reworded. For the Low Hygiene Risk Category the requirements surrounding medical screening have been removed.

Audit Protocol
The general elements of the audit protocol remain the same, the process and audit duration remain as Issue 3 with some new elements introduced. Those familiar with the Food Safety and Consumer Product schemes will recognise the principles of grading and subsequent audit frequency based on grading. The grading thresholds in Packaging are the same as in the other Standards, with an A or B grade remaining on a 12 month audit frequency, and a C grade incurring a 6 month audit frequency. D graded sites will not be certificated.

Consequences for major non-conformities against the Statement of Intent of a Fundamental clause are also now in line with that of the Food Safety and Consumer Products Standards. Where such a non-conformity has been identified the site shall not be certificated.

Operation and Governance of the scheme
Detail has been added to the Standard to incorporate information on the operation and governance of the scheme. This is to inform users of the Standard how the schemes are operated.

The aim of this document is only to summarise the major changes. A copy of Issue 4 can be ordered from www.brcbookshop.com. An interpretation guideline for Issue 4 of the Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials will also be available in summer 2011.
  • 1

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!


Thanked by 1 Member:

#13 denist

denist

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 13 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 16 May 2011 - 09:46 AM

Thank you very much! Very helpfull.
We've got the new version the day you posted.
Still comparing the issues but your comment is really helpful.


  • 0

#14 saguym

saguym

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Israel
    Israel
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fountain Pens, Music, Traveling

Posted 18 May 2011 - 07:34 AM

Publishes 25 Feb 2011

Buy it here

Discuss the changes on this thread.



1) What happend to organisations that has to pass their BRC/IOP audit in August but before the 25th ? IMO still ver 3. Is it so ?

2) Packaging Suppliers to Coca Cola in our country were asked by the local licenced Coke filler to be certified to BRC ver 5 (food) and they will not accept anymore the BRC/IOP valid certification the packaging suppliers have. It seem to my completely a misunderstanding of a request which came from Atlanta U.S. and also something which complitely contradicts the BRC rules.
Has anyone else encountered such a request ?

saguym
  • 0

#15 denist

denist

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 13 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 18 May 2011 - 03:24 PM

Copied below is a briefing issued by the BRC.

BRC Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials Issue 4 - An overview of the key changes to the BRC / IOP Standard between Issue 3 and 4
[...]
The aim of this document is only to summarise the major changes. A copy of Issue 4 can be ordered from www.brcbookshop.com. An interpretation guideline for Issue 4 of the Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials will also be available in summer 2011.


I've compared the issues and associate points of the new version to the old one with a really few comments.
= for absolutly no difference in the text
+ for a little more requirements / information in the 4th issue
- for a little less

Hope it can help
(The aim of this document is only to summarise the changes. A copy of Issue 4 can be ordered from www.brcbookshop.com)
Attached File  issue3 vs 4.xls   44KB   141 downloads
  • 0

#16 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,010 posts
  • 808 thanks
170
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 18 May 2011 - 05:13 PM

I've compared the issues and associate points of the new version to the old one with a really few comments.
= for absolutly no difference in the text
+ for a little more requirements / information in the 4th issue
- for a little less

Hope it can help
(The aim of this document is only to summarise the changes. A copy of Issue 4 can be ordered from www.brcbookshop.com)
Attached File  issue3 vs 4.xls   44KB   141 downloads


Nice document but I think the changes are more significant than you've highlighted and you haven't realigned the sections

Regards

Tony
  • 0

#17 denist

denist

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 13 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 19 May 2011 - 06:59 AM

Nice document but I think the changes are more significant than you've highlighted and you haven't realigned the sections

Regards

Tony


Thanks for the advice Tony.

I precise that there is no thinking made to clarify the meanings of the differences found.
I did this to facilitate the self assessment during the change of versions (since the company I work in has started the process a few month ago we still have to implement many things).
All the interpretation and global vision come after (and before with the post of Simon quoting the briefing of the BRC)

ps: It may not be easy to undertand me. Do not hesitate to ask for some explanations
  • 0

#18 Gita

Gita

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 10 posts
  • 5 thanks
0
Neutral

  • South Africa
    South Africa
  • Gender:Female

Posted 20 July 2011 - 10:28 AM

you 100% percent spot on. we usually call it gang printing, and that's what needs to be eliminated. However, its extremely difficult when companies are striving for higher throughput and efficiencies.

whereas, inks are concerned, job appropriate inks should be used. there are an array of low odor, vegetable based ,and direct food grade inks from all major ink suppliers around the world.


  • 0

#19 saguym

saguym

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Israel
    Israel
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fountain Pens, Music, Traveling

Posted 25 July 2011 - 03:06 PM

you 100% percent spot on. we usually call it gang printing, and that's what needs to be eliminated. However, its extremely difficult when companies are striving for higher throughput and efficiencies.

whereas, inks are concerned, job appropriate inks should be used. there are an array of low odor, vegetable based ,and direct food grade inks from all major ink suppliers around the world.


Unfortunately, I am not aware of any major ink supplier having the full range of "printable food grade inks". There are inks that can be used externally for printing packagings for food products, but IMO there are no full ranges of inks for direct contact with food products.

Can anyone coment ?

saguym
  • 0

#20 liamm

liamm

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Belarus
    Belarus

Posted 21 March 2012 - 01:23 PM

Hello!

not possible to get the file (download link)


  • 0

#21 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,658 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 22 March 2012 - 05:23 AM

Hello!

not possible to get the file (download link)


Dear liamm,

Which link, or file, or post No. (#1, #2 etc) are you referring ??

Rgds / Charles.C
  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#22 daniel73

daniel73

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Sweden
    Sweden

Posted 20 March 2015 - 09:19 AM

The BRC Packaging and Packaging Materials Standard is a leading global brand and the first Standard in the world to be recognised by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GSFI) benchmarking committee. It’s why over 2,000 suppliers in over 70 countries worldwide have chosen to be certificated by BRC Standards.
 
1.Customer confidence
2.Achievable and cost effective
3.Highly trained auditors worldwide
4.Support when you need it 

  • 0

#23 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,422 posts
  • 1042 thanks
227
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 20 March 2015 - 09:42 AM

Welcome to the forums Daniel.

 

Do you have a question about the standard...can we help you?


  • 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!





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users