Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Is there a difference between OPRP and CP in ISO 22000?

Share this

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

hygienic

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 457 posts
  • 22 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 May 2011 - 11:34 AM

Hello every one;

I did not post since long time , but unfortunatly no body here asked about me so I am sad for that , but what to do I ike this forum much .

Maybe I am asking about somthing it has been asked before but any way looking for sound answer .

Are we can consider the OPRP same with CP , I reveiwed our flow diagram or the process exactly , it has found that some steps which we considered a CP it could be as OPRP , for example Meat Thawing or defrosting it considered in our OPRP plan as OPRP1 , what I am asking is we can say that this step also CP ? I mean ,Is there a difference between the two steps, or currently in the Food safety management system (ISO 22000) I think nothing consider as CP , I mean it became old word , This is what I am thinking ,

Please clarify me in this point .

Warm Regards
Hygienic


Edited by hygienic, 07 May 2011 - 11:17 AM.


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 06 May 2011 - 04:44 PM

Dear hygienic,

It is always nice to hear from you. :smile:

There are many, many definitions of CP (except in ISO 22000) :smile: I womder which one you are referring ?

In general, I wud expect that a CP may, or may not be an OPRP depending on how you evaluate an OPRP.

But an OPRP will surely be a CP! :smile:

In the example you mention, how did you decide an OPRP exists ??

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Gourav

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 71 posts
  • 21 thanks
0
Neutral

  • India
    India
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Delhi

Posted 07 May 2011 - 05:03 AM

Hello every one;

I did not post since long time , but unfortunatly no body here asked about me so I am sad for that , but what to do I ike this forum much .

Maybe I am asking about somthing it has been asked before but any way looking for sound answer .

Are we can consider the OPRP same with CP , I reveiwed our flow diagram or the process exactly , it has found that some steps which we considered a CP it could be as OPRP , for example Meat Thawing or defrosting it considered in our OPRP plan as OPRP1 , what I am asking is we can say that this step also CP ? I mean ,Is there a difference between the two steps, or currently in the Food safety management system (ISO 22000) I think nothing consider as CP , I mean it became old world , This is what I am thinking ,

Please clarify me in this point .

Warm Regards
Hygienic


Hi Hygienic,
Every step inteh processing is CP. Every step you have to apply control. Depending upon the degree of control required some become OPRP and CCP.
Thanks


hygienic

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 457 posts
  • 22 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 May 2011 - 11:33 AM

Dear hygienic,

It is always nice to hear from you. :smile:

There are many, many definitions of CP (except in ISO 22000) :smile: I womder which one you are referring ?

In general, I wud expect that a CP may, or may not be an OPRP depending on how you evaluate an OPRP.

But an OPRP will surely be a CP! :smile:

In the example you mention, how did you decide an OPRP exists ??

Rgds / Charles.C



Dear Charles;

Thanks , and same to you. reffer to my example , actually Thawing step has been discussed with the Auditor as we are certified in ISO 22000 and he reveiwed our flaw diagram in the process was mentioned that this step is OPRP1 ,but in general this step could be cosidered as CP , but I do not know in ISO 2000 we can consider some steps as CP or now replaced in OPRP, again Pls clarify

Regards
Hygienic


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 07 May 2011 - 06:38 PM

Dear hygienic,

One initial point, You are referring to OPRP1. AFAIK, the “1” has no meaning within the context of the iso 22000 standard, ie, there is no “2”.

OPRP is a terminology introduced by the ISO 22000 standard. In principle, it’s meaning is particularly defined within the standard at 2 places, (a) as per the (relatively) general definition 3.9 and (b) as per the (operational) requirements of paragraph 7.4.4. Various interpretations of (a,b) can be found in the literature. A subsequent guidance document ISO 22004 contains further advice on the topic.

Accordingly, to answer yr query, it will be necessary for a given activity/associated control measure such as yr thawing example to be analysed (1) within the context of yr own interpretation of a “CP” and (2) in respect to the elements of the 22000/004 standard given in the previous paragraph (and associated paragraphs of the standard).

Some of the above points (particularly [a,b]) should hv already been adressed by yr colleagues and probably also by yr auditor ?? This was the reason for my request for your “details” in the previous post.

I hope this clarifies things a little.

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 54 thanks
15
Good

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 08 May 2011 - 06:55 AM

Hi Hygienic,
Every step in the processing is CP. Every step you have to apply control. Depending upon the degree of control required some become OPRP and CCP.
Thanks

Hi Gourav - You are right as per your comments. All processes need to be controlled and shall be determined by hazard identification then risk assessment and subsequently, risk categorization i.e. whether controlled under the OPRP plan (OPRP)or HACCP plan (CCP). I have been very impressed with the quality of contributions from India and since ISO22000 has been adopted by the Indiabn Government as their National Standard IS/ISO 22000 - they appear to have done very well in creating strong understanding of this standard and HACCP principles.

Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com

Thanked by 1 Member:

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 09 May 2011 - 06:24 AM

Dear Gourav,

Every step inteh processing is CP. Every step you have to apply control. Depending upon the degree of control required some become OPRP and CCP.


Sorry, I missed yr post first time around.

Your answer is certainly convenient but maybe over-simplistic in a safety-related context ? I'm not sure from your text but are you also suggesting that (the activity) of every processing step will be associated with either an OPRP or a CCP ?. This is surely not the case ?.

Regarding possible meaning(s) of "Control Point", some published interpretations are collected here (up to 2007) -

http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__15805

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


hygienic

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 457 posts
  • 22 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 May 2011 - 02:33 PM

Dear hygienic,

One initial point, You are referring to OPRP1. AFAIK, the “1” has no meaning within the context of the iso 22000 standard, ie, there is no “2”.

OPRP is a terminology introduced by the ISO 22000 standard. In principle, it’s meaning is particularly defined within the standard at 2 places, (a) as per the (relatively) general definition 3.9 and (b) as per the (operational) requirements of paragraph 7.4.4. Various interpretations of (a,b) can be found in the literature. A subsequent guidance document ISO 22004 contains further advice on the topic.

Accordingly, to answer yr query, it will be necessary for a given activity/associated control measure such as yr thawing example to be analysed (1) within the context of yr own interpretation of a “CP” and (2) in respect to the elements of the 22000/004 standard given in the previous paragraph (and associated paragraphs of the standard).

Some of the above points (particularly [a,b]) should hv already been adressed by yr colleagues and probably also by yr auditor ?? This was the reason for my request for your “details” in the previous post.

I hope this clarifies things a little.

Rgds / Charles.C



Dear Charles;

This was expected from you , thax for the clarifications it was more than adequate.

Regards
Hygienic


Gourav

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 71 posts
  • 21 thanks
0
Neutral

  • India
    India
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Delhi

Posted 14 May 2011 - 04:23 AM

Dear Gourav,



Sorry, I missed yr post first time around.

Your answer is certainly convenient but maybe over-simplistic in a safety-related context ? I'm not sure from your text but are you also suggesting that (the activity) of every processing step will be associated with either an OPRP or a CCP ?. This is surely not the case ?.

Regarding possible meaning(s) of "Control Point", some published interpretations are collected here (up to 2007) -

http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__15805

Rgds / Charles.C



Dear Charles,
Thanks for taking teh discussion further.
I did not mean that each step inthe processing would become either the CCP or OPRP. May be i should have elaborated more.
What I meant: -
Each step would require some dgree of control.
Some of them would remian control point, some become OPRP and some become CCP.
Thanks

Gourav


Gourav

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 71 posts
  • 21 thanks
0
Neutral

  • India
    India
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Delhi

Posted 14 May 2011 - 08:21 AM

Hi Gourav - You are right as per your comments. All processes need to be controlled and shall be determined by hazard identification then risk assessment and subsequently, risk categorization i.e. whether controlled under the OPRP plan (OPRP)or HACCP plan (CCP). I have been very impressed with the quality of contributions from India and since ISO22000 has been adopted by the Indiabn Government as their National Standard IS/ISO 22000 - they appear to have done very well in creating strong understanding of this standard and HACCP principles.



Hi Charles,
Thanks.
Yes in India there is ever increasing awareness about food safety and hygiene in India and more and more eateries & food processing organizations are adopting FSMSs. Today Indian Middle class going to any eatery would certainly like peep into the kitchen and ensure the place is clean and hygienic.
Another factor which is driving this is exports from India. The customers are getting more and more processors to comply to food safety requirements.
Government is also doing more and more on food safety. A new authority "Food Safety and Standards Authority of India" is in place. This wiil be unified agency for any food law in India. This authority has already put in place a number of scientific committies to review the food satandards already in place and to formulate new standards.
Ther are also doing a lot on capacity buiding. recently a project food safety surveillance has been started. Very soon a nation wide food safety surveillance mechanism would be in place. A kind of by Ministry of food processing is already in place. This will be more robust and inclusive.
Also accrediation to a number of labs are given to ensure the quality of food being imported in India. Recently after the unfortunate instance of quake in Japan the authoroty was very proactive in its approach and ensured only right quality food entered into teh country.
Hopefully we are in right direction.

Warm Regards

Gourav


APPAJI

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 32 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • India
    India
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Delhi

Posted 15 June 2011 - 08:26 AM

Dear Charles,
I am in agreement to what Gaurav has said about Indian activities on ISO22000.
I would like to understand first that is 7.4.4 asking us to differentiated between OPRP and CCP or is it asking us to catogorize the control measures such that to understand which will be controlled through either OPRP or through HACCP Plan.
If through HACCP Plan then the control measure is to be applied at a particular step and this step is now the CCP.
So through 7.4.4 we are to identify which steps are to be controlled through HACCP Plan and the control measures at the peration steps to be identified which will be now our CCP's.
Earlier Codex decision Tree used to give us which were CCP's directly.

If we read the standard 7.4.4 is asking us to do this what I stated above. I have read through all the earlier comments and I have still not got authenticated method for 7.4.4 as Codex Decision tree.

Please comment
Regards
Appaji



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 15 June 2011 - 02:47 PM

Dear Appaji,

I would like to understand first that is 7.4.4 asking us to differentiated between OPRP and CCP or is it asking us to catogorize the control measures such that to understand which will be controlled through either OPRP or through HACCP Plan.

I’m not sure I fully understand yr question but I think the answer is both.

Regarding yr comments relating to the Codex Decision Tree, (a) hv you seen the comments in a parallel thread to this? –

http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__44092

May answer some of yr queries although lacking a final solution, (b) hv you studied Fig3 in ISO 22004 which equally does not offer an explicit solution but is intended to spell out the chronological processes involved.
(Also note the location of (box [8.2]) in Fig3 as compared to Fig 2.)

If you mean “authenticated” by ISO, one hopes that the auditing profession represents a competent proxy. AFAIK, all the basic procedures presented in this forum have been accepted by some auditors although I recall one or two posters noting that their auditors were not satisfied with the “simpler” methods [inc. one from India I think but a few years back]).

The procedure > “Codex Tree” > CCPs + (all/some) defaults to OPRP is surely the quickest to perform and document (and remember that the control measure [CM] has already been validated [w/o Critical Limits?]). The (Q1-Q4) formula given for OPRP in above link is, I think, additionally in use in at least 1-2 commercial software packages, maybe more.

How much “typical” auditors do care is a topic of interest but requires input, eg from auditors/users of the standard. Perhaps it is like traditional HACCP, as long as the well-known CCPs are present (and some “logical approach” for OPRPs is given), everything is OK. The only certain thing IMO is that the ISO team who originated the OPRP concept hv certainly generated an amazing amount of (futile?) discussion which, with a few extra lines of clarification or an example, could IMO hv been totally avoided. :thumbdown:

Rgds / Charles.C

PS - At least the elevation of PAS 220 should hv removed some of the confusion regarding PRPs vs OPRPs.
I guess the CCP/OPRP confusion might be diminished if BRC included OPRP in their next revision.? :whistle:

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:


Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users