Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

FAQ BRC issue 6 now available on BRC site

Share this

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

Madam A. D-tor

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 644 posts
  • 230 thanks
53
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 23 January 2012 - 02:26 PM

Dear all,

The BRC has published the FAQ for issue 6 on their website on 11 January 2012.

Please find enclosed.

Happy reading.
Attached File  F039 FAQs Issue 6 v2 11 1 12.pdf   1.25MB   369 downloads



Kind Regards,

Madam A. D-tor

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5665 thanks
1,545
Excellent

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

Posted 24 January 2012 - 01:24 AM

Dear all,

The BRC has published the FAQ for issue 6 on their website on 11 January 2012.

Please find enclosed.

Happy reading.
Attached File  F039 FAQs Issue 6 v2 11 1 12.pdf   1.25MB   369 downloads


Dear Madam A.D-tor,

Is this the same "Guidelines" document (previously un-free AFAIK) that you and Ken were discussing end of 2011 ?

It is obvious that BRC have now realised they can expect a stream of "exceptions" to their attempt to issue a Universal Zoning Tree. The mention of "time" based pseudo-physical barriers should be an interesting exercise for validation in forthcoming audits IMO. :smile:

I am also casually interested in where all the sous-vide / REPFEDS will fit in this grand scheme.

Their fixation with "Listeria" (= L.mono. presumably) 6D should be interesting in USA where they focus (for "fully" cooked foods) on Salmonella AFAIK. Or is this another interpretation of "equivalent" ?

I hope this document resolved your/Ken's criticisms though i rather doubt it. It did seem to me that some of Ken's customer's confusions might be related to mixing up the risk/care definitions as applied to areas /foods respectively. Not surprisingly either IMO !.

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

Madam A. D-tor

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 644 posts
  • 230 thanks
53
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 24 January 2012 - 10:35 AM

Is this the same "Guidelines" document (previously un-free AFAIK) that you and Ken were discussing end of 2011 ?


No, it is not.
This guideline still has to come.
This is 'just' a FAQ. I think that BRC uses the questions that come to their helpline to establish this document.

Kind Regards,

Madam A. D-tor

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5665 thanks
1,545
Excellent

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

Posted 24 January 2012 - 11:03 AM

Dear Madam A.D-tor,

No, it is not.


Yes, i thought it looked a bit too lightweight.

I think that BRC uses the questions that come to their helpline to establish this document.


Mostly from auditors i imagine ! :smile:

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,849 posts
  • 726 thanks
236
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 03 February 2012 - 05:02 AM

Dear Madam A.D-tor,

Is this the same "Guidelines" document (previously un-free AFAIK) that you and Ken were discussing end of 2011 ?

It is obvious that BRC have now realised they can expect a stream of "exceptions" to their attempt to issue a Universal Zoning Tree. The mention of "time" based pseudo-physical barriers should be an interesting exercise for validation in forthcoming audits IMO. :smile:

I am also casually interested in where all the sous-vide / REPFEDS will fit in this grand scheme.

Their fixation with "Listeria" (= L.mono. presumably) 6D should be interesting in USA where they focus (for "fully" cooked foods) on Salmonella AFAIK. Or is this another interpretation of "equivalent" ?

I hope this document resolved your/Ken's criticisms though i rather doubt it. It did seem to me that some of Ken's customer's confusions might be related to mixing up the risk/care definitions as applied to areas /foods respectively. Not surprisingly either IMO !.

Rgds / Charles.C


The fixation with L. mono. presumably arises from the CFA. Their reasoning for using L mono. as their target organism was that if it killed L mono., it would also kill other vegetative pathogens of interest; I think the same was not necessarily true of the critical limits for Salmonellae.


Thanked by 1 Member:


Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users