Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Micro. Guidelines for Food Contact Surfaces


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

#26 stef lam

stef lam

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia

Posted 21 June 2016 - 04:22 AM

Well done! I got alot of information through here! Thanks guys!


  • 0

#27 GCH

GCH

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 15 July 2016 - 08:44 AM

Thank you for referring me to this thread. Got loads of information regarding my inquiries. 


  • 0

#28 nurulnazirah

nurulnazirah

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia

Posted 21 August 2016 - 07:31 AM

Thanks a lot for the worksheet. Really helpfull.....


  • 0

#29 jorch

jorch

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ecuador
    Ecuador

Posted 02 September 2016 - 03:14 PM

Muy buen aporte

 

Good apport .... thanks


  • 0

#30 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,586 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

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

Posted 02 September 2016 - 04:59 PM

Hi jorch.

 

You're welcome.

 

And Welcome to the Forum !  :welcome:


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#31 sbarzee

sbarzee

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 14 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 23 November 2016 - 03:17 AM

So extremely helpful! Thank you so much.


  • 0

#32 sheshe

sheshe

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 7 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 23 November 2016 - 03:36 AM

Thank so much, Charles for sharing this compilation with us. This really help me a lot. 


  • 0

#33 Ryan M.

Ryan M.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 395 posts
  • 163 thanks
28
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, California
  • Interests:Reading, crosswords, passionate discussions, laughing at US politics.

Posted 24 November 2016 - 03:18 PM

Nice work Charles.  It says in some of those "environmental swabs", but just to be clear the assumption is all Zone 1 surfaces and perhaps Zone 2?


  • 0

#34 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,586 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

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

Posted 25 November 2016 - 04:01 AM

Nice work Charles.  It says in some of those "environmental swabs", but just to be clear the assumption is all Zone 1 surfaces and perhaps Zone 2?


Hi Ryan,

Can you identify the location of yr quote.? I am lazy to search through excel.
  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#35 Ryan M.

Ryan M.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 395 posts
  • 163 thanks
28
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, California
  • Interests:Reading, crosswords, passionate discussions, laughing at US politics.

Posted 25 November 2016 - 04:34 PM

I can't recall the specific sheet in the excel workbook, but there were a number of references to "environmental swabs" and then descriptions around some areas.  I'm thinking this all relates to product contact surfaces, or possible product contact surfaces, with those ranges/limits.

 

 

Hi Ryan,

Can you identify the location of yr quote.? I am lazy to search through excel.


  • 0

#36 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,586 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

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

Posted 25 November 2016 - 11:18 PM

I can't recall the specific sheet in the excel workbook, but there were a number of references to "environmental swabs" and then descriptions around some areas.  I'm thinking this all relates to product contact surfaces, or possible product contact surfaces, with those ranges/limits.

 

hi Ryan,

 

TBH, offhand, I don't think any of the data shown came from articles which specifically addressed "zoning". So the conclusions/suggested limits are sort of generic as far as specific location is concerned.

 

The usual starting point for a (micro.) hygiene study demands the establishment of a baseline, ie what level of cleanliness is a realistic target for the specific process. This may not coincide with the theoretical target. My previous compilation (see link in post 1) contains a table of various published micro.targets plus related quotes/comments. The diversity of expectations/ observations is prodigious. One obvious factor is the diversity of food processes., eg is it reasonable to expect the quantitative cleanliness of process tables in a slaughterhouse to equal those used for preparing RTE sandwiches ?.

 

An anecdotal rule-of-thumb is that a just "cleaned" surface should have an APC not > 10% of the "typical"  micro. working condition (presumably area based). But then again, the longer you rub, the lower the APC. It's a very subjective topic. :smile:


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#37 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,586 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

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

Posted 26 November 2016 - 07:41 PM

addendum

 

Hi Ryan,

 

As a follow-up to post 33 –

 

It says in some of those "environmental swabs", but just to be clear the assumption is all Zone 1 surfaces and perhaps Zone 2?

 

This is a deceptively simple Sampling query. :smile::thumbup:

 

Note that environmental monitoring (and zoning) may focus on either/both of (a) Hygiene and (b) Pathogen detection.

The surface micro.data/limits in the excel compilation for, APC, Coliform, E.coli (et al)  may be considered to measure the effectiveness of a facility's Cleaning Procedures to achieve a satisfactory level of  Hygiene (Sanitation). (ATP-based criteria are an alternative technique).

 

Depending on the reference, Sampling schemes may involve permutations of any/all of the 3-4 Zones typically presented. The choice regarding location/frequency is typically based on a mixture of Risk Assessment/prioritization combined with process factors /food types/expert opinions. Suggested Zoning/Sampling procedures for a/b, may/may not be identical. The result is that Sampling for a/b may involve the entire Zonal range or (varying) portions of it (see refs below).

 

I have enclosed 5 examples to illustrate some of the published Zoning/Testing approaches, there are many others –

 

 Attached File  Hygiene Monitoring Strategies (2013).pdf   114.2KB   75 downloads

(discusses use of Zoning as particularly related to Hygiene sampling program)

Attached File  Environmental Monitoring Program (EMP),AIB,2013.pdf   412.49KB   59 downloads

(integrated Salmonella/Listeria/Hygiene sampling/testing program based on Zones)

Attached File  GMA Industry Handbook.pdf   1.52MB   53 downloads

(see Pg 65/sec.3.6.4 et seq)(RTE, Salmonella [Zoning], Hygiene[non-Zoning]).

Attached File  Environmental-Monitoring, Pathogen-Hygiene,Cornell Uni..pdf   2.9MB   53 downloads

(RTE, Integrated Zoning, illustrates divergence of opinions/potential zoning complexity)

Attached File  Zoning classification in the Food processing area,,2015.pdf   254.11KB   64 downloads

(discusses iso22002/BRC7 zoning concepts, hygiene/pathogen individual-combined zoning aspects, wet-dry cleaning procedures, etc)


  • 1

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 3 Members:

#38 Ryan M.

Ryan M.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 395 posts
  • 163 thanks
28
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, California
  • Interests:Reading, crosswords, passionate discussions, laughing at US politics.

Posted 28 November 2016 - 02:40 PM

Yes, thanks for the added clarification and resources Charles.


  • 0

#39 Joseah njuguna

Joseah njuguna

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Kenya
    Kenya

Posted 08 February 2017 - 01:34 PM

Hi jtang,

 

Thanks for the comment.  Food QA via chemistry - it pays the rent. :smile:

Great information there aside from paying rent I can read passion.


  • 0

#40 anavet

anavet

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Portugal
    Portugal

Posted 11 February 2017 - 10:30 AM

Thank you for the information! It is very useful. I have an operator that have the limits of surfaces based on technical study of John T. Patterson & David B. Stweart. But I can´t find this! This exist? Thanks 


  • 0

#41 Rener De Jesus

Rener De Jesus

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 15 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Saudi Arabia
    Saudi Arabia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 February 2017 - 10:08 AM

Guys, is it okay to test those zone 1 surfaces/areas for TPC, Enterobacteriaceae, Coliforms, and E.coli? Or only one of those indicators are enough?


  • 0

#42 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,586 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

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

Posted 17 February 2017 - 01:03 PM

Guys, is it okay to test those zone 1 surfaces/areas for TPC, Enterobacteriaceae, Coliforms, and E.coli? Or only one of those indicators are enough?

Hi Rener de Jesus,

 

It likely depends on the nature of your Operation. And the specific objective of yr sampling/analysis, eg Regulatory Compliance..

 

I suggest you initially read the first file in Post 37 which discusses (some) options. Possibly followed by the additional files if relevant.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#43 Ryan M.

Ryan M.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 395 posts
  • 163 thanks
28
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, California
  • Interests:Reading, crosswords, passionate discussions, laughing at US politics.

Posted 17 February 2017 - 03:14 PM

Guys, is it okay to test those zone 1 surfaces/areas for TPC, Enterobacteriaceae, Coliforms, and E.coli? Or only one of those indicators are enough?

 

If it were me I would do TPC and Enterobacter. or Coliforms.  I wouldn't do E.coli because some outside bodies who may view the results consider them to be a contaminant and will then ask, "Did you do a cleaning/sanitation after swabbing before starting production?"

 

The Enterobacter. captures coliforms and E.coli so that should be sufficient.


  • 0

#44 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,586 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

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

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:24 PM

If it were me I would do TPC and Enterobacter. or Coliforms.  I wouldn't do E.coli because some outside bodies who may view the results consider them to be a contaminant and will then ask, "Did you do a cleaning/sanitation after swabbing before starting production?"

 

The Enterobacter. captures coliforms and E.coli so that should be sufficient.

 

Hi Ryan,

 

It may get more interesting if it's RTE.

 

So many (frequently debated/subjective) factors are involved from any predictive POV. Possibly including geographical.

 

For example Enterobacteriaceae ("Enterobacter" is a genus) is sometimes (albeit afaik unproven) regarded as a safety indicator since, inter alia, it includes Salmonella/Shigella.

 

JFI and not claimed to be definitive -

 

http://mb-labs.com/r...microorganisms/


  • 1

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#45 Rener De Jesus

Rener De Jesus

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 15 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Saudi Arabia
    Saudi Arabia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 February 2017 - 06:00 PM

Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Those help us a lot.


  • 0

#46 mile

mile

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 35 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Egypt
    Egypt

Posted 23 March 2017 - 11:00 AM

Dear All,

I previously posted a table of various micro. guidelines for food contact surfaces which were mostly issued pre-2000 at this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__22352

To update the earlier info., the attached excel file presents guideline data I have accumulated for 12 countries issued in the period 2000 – 2012. The compilation demonstrates that for a range of food-related scenarios, some “average” opinions for various (just) cleaned surfaces are –

(a) For Aerobic Plate Count (APC) - the majority of data suggests that, for routine cleaning/sanitising, surfaces typically have maximum APC counts in the range 10-100cfu/cm2 .
(b) For factors like Coliform, (generic) E.coli, Enterobacteriaceae, S.aureus, the expected maxima are, predictably, low, eg 1-10 cfu/cm2, or undetected. The latter requirement also invariably applies for “zero-tolerance” pathogenic microbial species.

Hopefully of some interest. Further input / comments welcome as usual.

attachicon.gifCompilation of International Micro. Guidelines for food contact surfaces, 2000 onwards.xls

Rgds / Charles.C

Dear Charles,

 

Thank you so much for the effort to compile useful information in the excel sheet.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Ahmed


  • 0

#47 AHDL

AHDL

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 3 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 21 June 2017 - 06:51 AM

thank you :sleazy:


  • 0

#48 yogirl

yogirl

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 11 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 13 September 2017 - 07:20 PM

Thank you Charles! That is very helpful to many of us


  • 0

#49 TESUKA KUNIMITSU

TESUKA KUNIMITSU

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Peru
    Peru

Posted 29 October 2017 - 04:05 PM

Dear All, muchas gracias, lo estaba buscando. saludos. 

I previously posted a table of various micro. guidelines for food contact surfaces which were mostly issued pre-2000 at this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__22352

To update the earlier info., the attached excel file presents guideline data I have accumulated for 12 countries issued in the period 2000 – 2012. The compilation demonstrates that for a range of food-related scenarios, some “average” opinions for various (just) cleaned surfaces are –

(a) For Aerobic Plate Count (APC) - the majority of data suggests that, for routine cleaning/sanitising, surfaces typically have maximum APC counts in the range 10-100cfu/cm2 .
(b) For factors like Coliform, (generic) E.coli, Enterobacteriaceae, S.aureus, the expected maxima are, predictably, low, eg 1-10 cfu/cm2, or undetected. The latter requirement also invariably applies for “zero-tolerance” pathogenic microbial species.

Hopefully of some interest. Further input / comments welcome as usual.

attachicon.gifCompilation of International Micro. Guidelines for food contact surfaces, 2000 onwards.xls

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

#50 TESUKA KUNIMITSU

TESUKA KUNIMITSU

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Peru
    Peru

Posted 29 October 2017 - 04:07 PM

MUCHAS GRACIAS CHARLES POR EL APORTE SOY ESTUDIANTE. 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users