[Tony-C]

GMO, on 24 June 2011 - 12:03 PM, said:

I'm not familiar with SQF

True you are not familiar with the SQF code and whilst I understand your comments - the examples given were from SQF Implementation Guidance

[GMO]

Tony-C, on 25 June 2011 - 03:55 AM, said:

True you are not familiar with the SQF code and whilst I understand your comments - the examples given were from SQF Implementation Guidance

Fair enough! They just have a very funny interpretation of validation then!

[Tony-C]

GMO, on 25 June 2011 - 05:32 AM, said:

Fair enough! They just have a very funny interpretation of validation then!

Yep a different tack on verification and validation but I don't mind that as they do a good job of explaining what they are looking for. And a big plus - the SQF 2000 Code is free.

This post has been edited by Tony-C: 26 June 2011 - 09:13 AM

[chipollinij]

Thank you everyone for your responses. The certification body auditing my plants interprets validation in a unique way. Regulatory requirements are not enough and I must establish criteria (critical limits0 for each prerequisite program. We use a checklist that covers all elements and subelements of the sqf system including section 6 prerequisite programs, however the CB does not feel this is complete. Verification of statements of your GMP's in the plant is not consider validation. Any comments??
Thanks again

[Sean Archer]

CB auditors are completely right.
You can use checklists for verifying your PRP but not for validation. Validation is related to "Why" whereas verification is concerned in "How". Therefore, validation records shall include methods of validation, acceptance criteria and revalidation period. As an example, cleaning validation can be practiced since there is some information in the internet to begin with.

Normally, a PRP includes "What/Where", "Who", "When", "How" and "reference SOP" coloumns. So you have to validate all the coloumns under a bullet of your PRP.

[esquef]

Sean Archer, on 03 February 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

CB auditors are completely right.
You can use checklists for verifying your PRP but not for validation. Validation is related to "Why" whereas verification is concerned in "How". Therefore, validation records shall include methods of validation, acceptance criteria and revalidation period. As an example, cleaning validation can be practiced since there is some information in the internet to begin with.

Normally, a PRP includes "What/Where", "Who", "When", "How" and "reference SOP" coloumns. So you have to validate all the coloumns under a bullet of your PRP.

Quoting from the SQF 2000 Guidance document (4.5 Verification):

Verification is the proving that you are doing what you say you are doing.
Validation is the proving that what you are doing is working and effective.

Sounds easy but it's tricky (and potentially expensive) when you're trying to validate and verify a pre-requisite program like Allergen Control.

[mgourley]

It seems that SQF has not done any favors by basically mashing together verification and validation.
GMO is absolutely correct from a Codex perspective re validation and verification.

[esquef]

mgourley, on 03 February 2012 - 09:24 PM, said:

It seems that SQF has not done any favors by basically mashing together verification and validation.
GMO is absolutely correct from a Codex perspective re validation and verification.

That's absolutely true!!!!