21 replies to this topic

[ennyk]

Hi everyone;

 

Hi everyone;

 

I am attaching a copy of my draft for production zone, but I'm not sure if I'm on the right track or not, therefore would like to seek anyone's kind assistance if they could this draft and give comments. ....this my first time doing this, and i'm totally confused with the justification of the designated identified zones. Please note that I am using the guide for zoning in BRC std.

 

I would really appreciate any comments given.

 

Thank you in advance.

Attached Files

•  prodcution zoning areas.docx   18.25KB   726 downloads

[Charles.C]

Hi ennyk,

 

A little more info required just to confirm  -

 

Is the input raw whole fish ? (I expect yes)

 

is the finished product frozen, raw fish to be cooked by the consumer ? (I expect yes)

[Charles.C]

addendum - If the answers to previous post are both yes, i anticipate that there are no zones of high risk or high care.

[Sim Fallible]

ennyk,

 

Hello, I would agree with Charles that there is in fact no high risk areas as would be classified for BRC. I suspect looking at the process descriptions that this is a tuna process operation. From experience of these type of sites I can see the purpose of the segregations that you have in place and physical barriers, but as a process as a whole it is not a high risk/care operation.

If it is tuna, as I suspect, then obviously your biggest risk is temperature and time, for which you perhaps could classify specific areas as having specific temperature control requirements, and such be a high temp control area, but again these will be picked up and referenced in your HACCP plan.

 

You may look to classify areas as open product, closed product, non product as a means of reference which helps to identify various aspects from BRC in risk assessing things such as glass controls, GMP etc.

[Sim Fallible]

Just a quick further thought on this, and in reference to Charles, is the end product to be cooked, or is it consumed raw i.e. sushi? As that makes a difference.

[ennyk]

thank you gentleman for the input.

 

For more clarification, process is tuna processing, coming in whole round as raw material and end products could be loin, steak, saku, groundmeat etc (boneless, bloodline off, and skinless)  and declared ready to eat as it could be eaten as sashimi.

 

I understand why you said there would not be any high risk/care if it would be cooked by consumer, however, if it is ready to eat product i think there would be these high risk/care areas ... or what you think?

 

Pls note that all the cold holdings is our CCPs in our HACCP so controls for temperature monitoring is already in place. What my understanding is that zoning is based on the possibility of microbial growth to products, in which i think is all the cold holdings since the products could be put in there for long. I may be wrong in this...so if possible could clarify more, or refer me to other links that may be similar to this post.

 

What do we really look at when classifying zones? 

 

Really appreciate further discussion and clarification from experienced people like youse.

 

thank you and looking forward to hearing some more feedback.

[Appendix G]

Your product is not RTE.   It is a raw product.

 

In my process, product covered areas for storage, raw is all meat product areas (low risk).  Post cook- RTE = High risk.   

 

You could be using Tomkin report to support your room/processing area temperatures.  For me, I'd have only a single CCP backed up by Tompkins and appendix B.   Do you even need a CCP?

[Appendix G]

Sorry,  what zero tolerance req's for fish?  I am USDA FSIS trained.

[Charles.C]

Hi ennyk,

 

I deduce you are asking about something like sashimi.

 

The case of raw, RTE fish seems to be a tricky one for BRC due its  typical process being not fully matched to the BRC Zone Chart requirements as listed in the Standard.

 

The effective result is considered to be High Care via a rather zig-zag analysis.

 

See the attached file for an explanation –

 

 Raw,RTE Fish.pdf   144.16KB   422 downloads

[ennyk]

Hi gthornton;

 

The product is RTE as some customers may eat it raw, sashimi - especially sushi bars/shops etc, hence thinking it may be high risk. What do you mean by "zero tolerance"?

 

 

Charles;

 

I've read the attachment, and I think  get the picture now, it seems like I over zoning our processing areas!.. I will keep to the BRC definition for justifications of the zones. 

 

Cheers gentleman.

[Appendix G]

http://www.fsis.usda...PHIS_6420.2.pdf

 

Fecal, ingesta, and milk for slaughter.

[Sim Fallible]

Ennyk,

 

Some interesting reading there, and I hope it helps, just to add a couple of items that may be of interest, I have worked in the smoked salmon industry for a BRC approved site, that is cold smoke, where raw salmon is smoked, with temperatures reaching about 26 deg Celcius, so does not have a thermal kill stage, although it is salted, it is not a micro kill process. The product going into the kiln enters as a raw low risk product, from a low risk environment, but on exit from the kiln, ie. is then a ready to eat product, is processed in a high care area, until it is fully sealed where it exits back into a low risk area.

This classification of areas is the standard for the industry.

 

Regarding the tuna, and from memory of the sites I have seen there does tend to be a physical segregation between the stages with the "higher care" area generally being the final trimming (fat removal, cutting to size) and packing, as this is where there is the most exposed flesh.

 

I hope that helps somewhat.

[Madam A. D-tor]

See the attached file for an explanation –

 

Raw,RTE Fish.pdf

 

Dear Charles,

Thanks for sharing. Wonderful document. First me too, would have said that it should be High Risk, due to RTE intended use of the fish. Than I could not think how this would look like in practice. I would never come up with low risk, what is the actual  answer of the BRC.

 

 

http://www.fsis.usda...PHIS_6420.2.pdf

 

Fecal, ingesta, and milk for slaughter.

 

Dear gthornton,

Thanks for sharing. Nice document. However I miss the reference to the items discussed in this thread.

[ennyk]

Gudday everyone;

 

first thank you all for the valuable contributions you gave for this topic, cos after reading all your comments, it becomes more clearer with regards to zoning.  I've decided to go for low risk for processing plant and enclosed areas for packing and Cold store with a justification that we do not meet all the definition of high care/risk area.

 

thank you again.

[Charles.C]

Gudday everyone;

 

first thank you all for the valuable contributions you gave for this topic, cos after reading all your comments, it becomes more clearer with regards to zoning.  I've decided to go for low risk for processing plant and enclosed areas for packing and Cold store with a justification that we do not meet all the definition of high care/risk area.

 

thank you again.

 

I presume the above refers only to the non-sashimi product as far as actual, implemented, controls are involved..

[ennyk]

Yes Charles, it is sashimi products we produce, we label it low risk but we do have controls in our PRP and HACCP docs...

 

????

[Charles.C]

As I understand the file i posted, sashimi would be ultimately controlled as for High Care.

 

I guess this means you need to comply with paragraphs like 4.3.1, 4.3.6, 4.8.5 etc

 

(The real problem is that BRC probably omitted such products/processes in their original design and it's now not easy to rearrange their flowchat to include them. The consequence is the current fix-up .)

 

You may find this document introduced for BRC6 of some interest -

 

 brc6 F048 - Understanding High care and High risk 3 28 5 12 Final.pdf   589.79KB   395 downloads

 

 

 

 

[ahmedmourad]

Dear ennyk:

I think you need a map showing the site zoning areas as per clause 4.3.1

 

Best Wishes

Ahmed

[ennyk]

Charles and all;

 

Thanks again for your all your useful comments, we did have a map identifying different sections, and Charles, I have considered the final care zone, and decided as follows;

 

pre-process area - low risk

final-process area - high care  (considering sashimi)

final packing and cold store - enclosed product areas.

 

Really appreciate your help.

 

cheers.

[Tony-C]

As I understand the file i posted, sashimi would be ultimately controlled as for High Care.

 

I guess this means you need to comply with paragraphs like 4.3.1, 4.3.6, 4.8.5 etc

 

(The real problem is that BRC probably omitted such products/processes in their original design and it's now not easy to rearrange their flowchat to include them. The consequence is the current fix-up .)

 

You may find this document introduced for BRC6 of some interest -

 

brc6 F048 - Understanding High care and High risk 3 28 5 12 Final.pdf

 

I agree:

 

 BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 UK Production Zone Decision Tree 1.jpg   154.61KB   1 downloads

 

BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 Understanding High Risk, High Care, and Ambient High Care Unlocked PDF Version is available but for £45.00

 

Charles and all;

 

Thanks again for your all your useful comments, we did have a map identifying different sections, and Charles, I have considered the final care zone, and decided as follows;

 

pre-process area - low risk

final-process area - high care  (considering sashimi)

final packing and cold store - enclosed product areas.

 

Really appreciate your help.

 

cheers.

 

Sounds good, perhaps you can post your map for members to see.

 

Regards,

 

Tony

[ennyk]

Sorry people, just came back from our national independence holiday. After much discussions, our mgmnt decided we go for low risk all along and enclosed areas for our corrective actions and see what the auditors have to say! I have explained everything but they firmly stated that we see this first with the auditors!

 

I will post our map as soon as we get feedback from auditors.

 

Thank you everyone for all your contributions, and will get back here with everything after visitation from auditors.

[anna.k]

Hi

I'm currently working as well on production risk zones, however I done site map with highlighted in colour areas, instead of list. I think visually is better to explain whole areas.