Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Raw material risk assessment BRC issue 6 Clause 3.5.1.1


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

#1 Jinan

Jinan

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 25 March 2012 - 04:43 PM

Hi Everyone,

I have hit a blank, and my creative flare has come to a halt. - Doe anyone have any forms or insipartions to help me combat this clause?

BRC issue 6 3.5.1.1
The Company Shall undertake a documented risk assesment of each raw material to identify potential risks ....

Account for
Allergen Contamination
Foreign Body Risk
Micro Contamination
Chemical Contamination


  • 0

#2 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,241 posts
  • 487 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 25 March 2012 - 04:50 PM

We already had a list of every raw material with supplier information in a table with overall 'score' and complaints info too. All I did was put in 6 extra columns for the following:

Chemical risk
Microbiological risk
Physical risk
Allergen risk
Impact on quality of the product
Total risk (which was a combination of the above 5)

I graded all of this high, medium or low.

Basically I only thought about contamination risks from my knowledge of the ingredient and supplier and previous experience wrt my product and process. I then used this assessment to work out the audit frequency.

Sorry I don't like to attach the actual documents because they belong to our company and my approach might not be sensible for you. I mean, this document was only 3 pages long because we don't buy that many ingredients but for, say, a ready meal manufacturer which might have thousands it would make more sense to group things together, e.g. spices, dairy, raw meat, cooked meat etc.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Harminnie

Harminnie

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 26 posts
  • 18 thanks
3
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 25 March 2012 - 05:22 PM

We're starting to work on the same assessment. I've included a sample of the direction we're going with it, although it is not complete. We're opting for the "group of raw materials", and I can see already that we need to separate them a bit more. Hope this gives you food for thought.


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 Harminnie

Harminnie

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 26 posts
  • 18 thanks
3
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 25 March 2012 - 05:24 PM

We're starting to work on the same assessment. I've included a sample of the direction we're going with it, although it is not complete. We're opting for the "group of raw materials", and I can see already that we need to separate them a bit more. Hope this gives you food for thought.



Hope it came through this time.

Attached Files


  • 0

Thanked by 6 Members:

#5 mgourley

mgourley

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 808 posts
  • 656 thanks
81
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plant City, FL
  • Interests:Cooking, golf, firearms, food safety and sanitation.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 12:18 AM

I would think this should already be a part of your HACCP Plan. Just reference to that.
It would be the same format as any of your other Hazard Analysis for your Process Flow Charts.
You should be able to get most of the information required from the Product Specification sheets from the ingredient manufacturer.

Here is an example:


Marshall

Attached Files


  • 0

Thanked by 2 Members:

#6 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,655 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:28 AM

Dear Jinan,

The standard does mention safety, legality and quality. "Quality" is (BRC) undefined of course. "Contamination" is defined in the glossary.

This is BRC covering (due diligencing) the (final) receiver's backs as far as possible.

Basically this paragraph is asking you to (risk) validate yr specifications for input materials (eg how did you decide on what to check ?, how to check it?,).

As illustrated in previous posts, the safety-related part (and maybe some overlapping legality) should have been done for yr hazard analysis. Presumably "quality" is the non-safety "contamination" part here (and maybe overlapping legality again).

Or perhaps some people ignore the non-safety bit ?

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,241 posts
  • 487 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:49 AM

Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.

Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)

This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.

As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...

Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.

I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.

Attached File  RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls   37.5KB   2916 downloads


  • 0

#8 DP2006

DP2006

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 64 posts
  • 21 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 March 2012 - 08:11 AM

Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.

Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)

This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.

As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...

Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.

I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.

Attached File  RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls   37.5KB   2916 downloads


GMO, couldn't agree more with your comment that:-

we're not great at recording in HACCP where things [i]aren't[/i] an issue.

At the risk of making for extensive documentation which I have seen with some clients,if you've assessed a hazard / risk combination and reached the conclusion ( in your opinion ) that the overall risk rating (severity of effect / likelihood of occurrence) is "Low" get the thought process and conclusion down on paper.

At least this demonstrates that you have considered all potential risks / hazards and the logic behind your decision that the overall risk rating is "Low".

Get it down on paper!
  • 1

#9 Jinan

Jinan

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 26 March 2012 - 08:16 AM

This is an excellent example! - Thank you very much, I like the way it is layed out, and hits several 'clauses with 1 stone '


  • 0

#10 Cranberry

Cranberry

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 38 posts
  • 13 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Triathlon, Marathon. Generally causing myself pain.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 09:54 AM

I have run a system similar to GMO's. I grouped the the raw materials in terms of supplier and then combined the risk assessment with the supplier and raw material approval process. It takes a bit of work to set up and maintain but the system flew through BRC6 and was useful in terms of the allergen section of the standard as well.


  • 0

#11 Miroslav Suska

Miroslav Suska

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 13 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Czech Republic
    Czech Republic
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 April 2012 - 09:54 AM

RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls is quide good example how to solve BRC 6 requirement. In my opinion, there is further consequence which is the smapling plan. Based on the assessment results, it is often possible to optimize the sampling (reduced for lower risk raw materials and consistently well performing suppliers and extended for higher risk raw materials and suppliers). This is on going work as the suppliers are changing and new issues are comming but it allows to focus on problematic areas. That means also that for the same raw materials, sampling or controls may differ for different suppliers.


  • 0

#12 Jo Soap

Jo Soap

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Afghanistan
    Afghanistan

Posted 18 July 2012 - 01:24 PM

This has been a great help to me. I love the simplicity of your excel sheet.
Many thanks







Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.

Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)

This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.

As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...

Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.

I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.

Attached File  RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls   37.5KB   2916 downloads






  • 0

Thanked by 2 Members:

#13 Geetika

Geetika

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 2 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Las Vegas
  • Interests:Food Safety

Posted 05 May 2015 - 09:57 PM

Here you go:) Hope this will give you an idea

Attached Files


  • 0

Thanked by 3 Members:

#14 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,655 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 06 May 2015 - 09:45 AM

Here you go:) Hope this will give you an idea

 

Hi Geetika,

 

Thanks for the attachment and welcome to the Forum !

 

I deduce the Program included was not specifically addressed to BRC but interesting nonetheless. Thks.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#15 techgirl

techgirl

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 12 January 2016 - 04:54 PM

Hi I have been working most of the day on updating my supplier approval risk assessment and still struggling to find a scoring system for it.  I then found this article and it throws a different light on approval of suppliers.  Does anyone have a recent template to use?  We are a fresh fruit salad supplier with long standing supplier relationships and rarely change suppliers. 

Thanks in advance for your help :helpplease:

http://www.techni-k....val#comment-818


  • 0

#16 m.erzetti

m.erzetti

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 23 posts
  • 4 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Italy
    Italy
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Perugia
  • Interests:Consultant for ISO 9001; ISO 17025; ISO 22000; BRC & IFS. I worked at the University of Perugia in the CERB (Italian Brewing Research Centre) as Quality Manager (ISO 9001 - ISO 17025)

Posted 09 June 2017 - 03:25 PM

Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.

Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)

This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.

As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...

Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.

I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.

attachicon.gifRM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls

Thank you. I have one similar but the BRC auditor sign this NC "3.5.1.1 Different raw materials and packaging are not evaluated within specific hazard analysis to evaluate the risk"

I was not present during the audit but the Client said to me the the procedure was not correct. Hmmmmmm


  • 0

#17 PTGC

PTGC

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 33 posts
  • 5 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 11 June 2017 - 04:46 PM

Thanks all for sharing the excel & sheet. Helped us a lot


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users