Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Supplier Approval 3.5.1.3


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

#1 Whitney

Whitney

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 42 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 14 January 2016 - 07:19 PM

Hi

 

If we buy a range of ingredients from a supplier that they manufacture and 1 ingredient is bought in by that supplier, does that make them a supplier and a broker?

 

If so, if they have BRC for Food Safety rather than for BRC for Agents and Brokers, would that be sufficient?

 

The clause states that if you purchase ingredients from a agent or broker you must obtain information to approve the manufacturing site unless the agent/broker has BRC for agent/brokers. But what if they have BRC for food safety instead because they actually manufacture themselves as well as acting as a broker for certain products? Would they need both?

 

Thanks

 

Any help is much appreciated.

 

W


  • 0

#2 Anika

Anika

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 86 posts
  • 27 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 14 January 2016 - 09:10 PM

Hi,

 

I would say you need to approve the manufacturing site too through supplier approval and/or third party verification depending on your risk assessment unless they have BRC for agents and Brokers as well as BRC FS.

 

The goal would be to trace back ingredients to manufacturing site or farm(in case of fruits and vegetables)

 

Thanks


  • 0

#3 Whitney

Whitney

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 42 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 14 January 2016 - 09:32 PM

Thanks for your response, the product is food colour. We buy in 8 different ones from the same supplier, 5 they make and 3 they buy in.

 

I don't know the standard for agents and brokers but I was thinking that surely the same supplier approval should apply for agents and brokers as it does for food manufacturers? therefore would just having BRC FS not suffice?

 

thanks


  • 0

#4 BrummyJim

BrummyJim

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 299 posts
  • 101 thanks
22
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South West
  • Interests:Motorbike gone now. Only the dog to walk!

Posted 15 January 2016 - 10:20 AM

Hi Whitney,

 

We are both manufacturers (we repack and blend juices) and brokers (and agents as well, just for fun). We decided a while back that we needed to have both standards. It wasn't particularly difficult as the standards only diverge slightly.

 

You will need a separate HACCP/VACCP/TACCP though which we did find a little challenging. We ended up with a larger document than for manufacturing, with no CCPs. The auditor still found fault with it!


  • 0

#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 15 January 2016 - 01:28 PM

Hi Whitney,

 

Perhaps i have misunderstood the situation  but I'm confused. :smile:

 

If you are "A", your supplier is "B" (certified to BRC7) and "B"'s supplier is "C" then -

 

Surely the scope of B's certification to BRC7 must include any items having been bought in from C so that any such items must  already have been "covered" from BRC's POV ?

afaik, BRC traceability requirements only necessitate identification of the path 1 stage  both ways from the designated "auditee" ?


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#6 BrummyJim

BrummyJim

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 299 posts
  • 101 thanks
22
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South West
  • Interests:Motorbike gone now. Only the dog to walk!

Posted 15 January 2016 - 01:32 PM

Charles,

 

BRC7 would only cover the manufacturing side of the business, not the agent/broker/wholesaler side unless specifically included. The Agents & Brokers standard covers the latter.


  • 0

#7 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 15 January 2016 - 01:50 PM

Hi Jim,

 

Yes, i get yr point.

 

I'm simply challenging BRC's logic if you are correct..


Edited by Charles.C, 15 January 2016 - 02:29 PM.
edited

  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#8 Whitney

Whitney

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 42 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 15 January 2016 - 04:35 PM

Thanks for your comments

 

Yes Charles that is what I am thinking also. If supplier B is BRC FS accredited then would they need BRC for agents and brokers as well? Surely they would be covered with just BRC FS....


  • 0

#9 Whitney

Whitney

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 42 posts
  • 1 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 15 January 2016 - 04:41 PM

Hi Jim

 

what do you mean I will need a separate HACCP? I am confused. We are a manufacturer that buy in ingredients to produce our product. its the supplier of the food colours we buy that not only produce the colours, they buy some in and repack them. We take both kinds from them. The ones they manufacture and the ones they buy in.

 

The supplier themselves have BRC v7 FS, are you saying that they would also need BRC for agents and brokers?

 

thanks


  • 0

#10 BrummyJim

BrummyJim

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 299 posts
  • 101 thanks
22
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South West
  • Interests:Motorbike gone now. Only the dog to walk!

Posted 15 January 2016 - 04:48 PM

Sorry, my mistake. They need a HACCP for Agents & Brokers. You might find it interesting to read.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#11 Prairie West Ice Cream

Prairie West Ice Cream

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 19 January 2016 - 10:41 PM

I am in a similar situation, where we purchase ingredients from a supplier who acts as an agent/broker/distributor.  I can't imagine how my supplier could provide me with the information about the manufacturer of the ingredient.  It is very convoluted. 

 

I understand 3.5.1.3 to say that if my supplier is an agent/broker, that they must provide me with the details of the manufacturer of the ingredient, unless they have BRC for agents/brokers.  What a GREAT way for BRC to make more money by making it ridiculous for us to be able to truly approve every ingredient provided to us.

 

What about examples where I purchase an ingredient from company "A", who purchases it from company "B", who purchases it from company "C"???

 

My ingredient supplier questionnaire is 8 pages long.  How on earth is my supplier supposed to complete it based on the manufacturer of the actual product, when it goes through several brokers and distributors just to get there?  


  • 0

#12 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 20 January 2016 - 05:47 AM

Hi PWIC,

 

I guess the fundamental point  from BRC's POV is that a person/company selling such products  must be responsible for their food safety/Quality, (and must be able to document such acceptability). 

 

The classic case IMEX is where Production/ Purchasing simply go out and buy flavours / colours of Brand XYZ from a supermarket.

 

My ingredient supplier questionnaire is 8 pages long.  How on earth is my supplier supposed to complete it based on the manufacturer of the actual product, when it goes through several brokers and distributors just to get there?

 

Traceability zero ?  It might be argued that the biggest mistake lays with the Purchasing Section / Purchasing Policy ?

In current thread, I would have opined that "A's"  Purchasing section should have obtained appropriate documentation from "B" (the latter IMO should have already had it "on tap" as per their own Certification to BRC, eg within the Product specification)( I am assuming Food Grade ingredients are involved).


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#13 Koko LMQ

Koko LMQ

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 98 posts
  • 18 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Thailand
    Thailand

Posted 20 January 2016 - 08:55 AM

Hi,

 

I would suggest that supplier to certify BRC Food and AVM Traded Goods.

 

KoKo LMQ


  • 0

#14 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 20 January 2016 - 08:43 PM

Hi,

 

I would suggest that supplier to certify BRC Food and AVM Traded Goods.

 

KoKo LMQ

 

Hi Koko,

 

Sorry but i don't understand yr comment.

 

"that supplier" - which supplier ?

 AVM - what is AVM ?


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#15 Koko LMQ

Koko LMQ

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 98 posts
  • 18 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Thailand
    Thailand

Posted 21 January 2016 - 02:25 AM

BRC now allows the site to certify BRC Food and additional voluntary module (AVM). Your supplier is manufacturer and also the broker trading goods so this AVM Traded Goods is applicable.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#16 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 21 January 2016 - 08:48 AM

BRC now allows the site to certify BRC Food and additional voluntary module (AVM). Your supplier is manufacturer and also the broker trading goods so this AVM Traded Goods is applicable.

 

Hi Koko,

 

Thks for yr patience.

 

I deduce you are referring to this -

 

The voluntary modules published alongside the BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 have been designed to reduce multiple audits by covering additional specific geographical or customer requirements and auditing them at the same time as the BRC audit.

This module is applicable to food products that would normally fall within the scope of the BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 but which are not manufactured, further processed or repacked into primary packaging at the site being audited.

The scope of this module covers products that meet all of the following criteria:

• be purchased (take title to) and sold by the company
• be received into storage facilities at the site
• all the storage facilities used for the product shall be included within the scope of the Standard.

 

 

After reading the above module (8) it's convolution in the current context defeated my understanding.

 

As stated I find the above quoted terms "sold",  "food product", "(not??) further processed"  ambiguous.

 

Offhand i would consider any inputted raw materials/ingredients for manufacturer "A" as becoming  "further processed"  thereby possibly (see above ??) rendering module 8 irrelevant for present purposes. But frankly, i was unable to decide if relevant or irrelevant.

 

It seems to me the logical crux of the issue is as per post 12 but no problem to be refuted.

 

Either way, thanks for the input.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#17 Maltus

Maltus

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 46 posts
  • 13 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Spain
    Spain
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Navarra

Posted 08 February 2016 - 05:14 PM

Hi Jim

 

what do you mean I will need a separate HACCP? I am confused. We are a manufacturer that buy in ingredients to produce our product. its the supplier of the food colours we buy that not only produce the colours, they buy some in and repack them. We take both kinds from them. The ones they manufacture and the ones they buy in.

 

The supplier themselves have BRC v7 FS, are you saying that they would also need BRC for agents and brokers?

 

thanks

 

I think that your supplier only needs its BRC v7 FS certificate. BRC agents and broker Scope scope only includes:

 

Brokers – companies that purchase or ‘take title to’ products for resale to manufacturers, other brokers, retailers or food service companies but not directly to the consumer.
Agents or non-manufacturing service providers – companies that trade between a manufacturer orbroker and their customer but do not at any point own or take title to the goods. Such companies provide a range of services to facilitate the safe and legal trade of products.
 
Since the moment that your supplier, repacks the food color after buying it, they couldn't be included on the scope of BRC Agents and Brokers and that product would be included on the scope of BRC FS v 7.

  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#18 Anika

Anika

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 86 posts
  • 27 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 08 February 2016 - 06:45 PM

Hi Everyone.

 

So if you are A and your Supplier/Distributer is B with BRC FS Issue 7 and their Supplier/Product manufacturing plant is C, C would need to be GFSI or be approved through third party audits or questionnaires(depending on level of risk determined by company A), unless company B has BRC for agents and brokers, company A does not need to issue questionnaires or have GFSI or audits from company C.

 

this was my understanding. please correct me if I am wrong.

 

What we have been doing sometimes, lets say as company A is asking for the recall procedure or mock recall conducted by say company  B or C to test traceability of product. I have done mock recalls of several products from suppliers who only have questionnaires by selecting a random lot with the last 4 months but I'm sure the auditor will find faults with that too.


  • 0

#19 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 08 February 2016 - 06:58 PM

Hi Anika,

 

I'm not exactly sure what yr question was in respect to "A",  but i do believe that Traceability is only necessary for 1step up or down.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#20 Anika

Anika

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 86 posts
  • 27 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 08 February 2016 - 07:16 PM

Hi Charles,

 

I'm referring to section 3.5.1.3

"Where raw materials are purchased from agents or brokers, the site shall know the identity of the last manufacturer or packer, or for bulk commodity products the consolidation place of the raw material. Information to enable the approval of the manufacturer, packer or

consolidator, as in clause 3.5.1.2, shall be obtained from the agent/broker or directly from the supplier, unless the agent/broker is themselves certificated to the BRC Global Standard for Agents and Brokers"

 

 

By 'LAST MANUFACTURER' I don't know whether they mean the last one or the previous one though.

 

The comment section on the gap analysis of I6 vs I 7 states

"This new clause works on the principle that the same level of assurance should be applied irrespective of whether the raw material is supplied via an agent or broker or directly. It is expected that the information necessary will be provided by the agent or broker.

 

The intent is to ensure transparency"

 

 

Thank you

 

Anika

 

 

 

 

  •  


  • 0

#21 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 08 February 2016 - 07:59 PM

 

Hi Charles,

 

I'm referring to section 3.5.1.3

"Where raw materials are purchased from agents or brokers, the site shall know the identity of the last manufacturer or packer, or for bulk commodity products the consolidation place of the raw material. Information to enable the approval of the manufacturer, packer or

consolidator, as in clause 3.5.1.2, shall be obtained from the agent/broker or directly from the supplier, unless the agent/broker is themselves certificated to the BRC Global Standard for Agents and Brokers"

 

 

By 'LAST MANUFACTURER' I don't know whether they mean the last one or the previous one though.

 

The comment section on the gap analysis of I6 vs I 7 states

"This new clause works on the principle that the same level of assurance should be applied irrespective of whether the raw material is supplied via an agent or broker or directly. It is expected that the information necessary will be provided by the agent or broker.

 

The intent is to ensure transparency"

 

 

Thank you

 

Anika

 

Hi Anika,

 

i think this answers yr query -

 

Attached File  F081 - Phased introduction of Clause 3.5.1.3.pdf   91.66KB   79 downloads

 

The reluctances discussed are hardly surprising  IMO.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#22 Anika

Anika

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 86 posts
  • 27 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 08 February 2016 - 08:37 PM

Hi Charles,

 

Seems like BRC is giving us a little bit of a leeway atm. Good to know. :smile:


  • 0

#23 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,648 posts
  • 3322 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 10 February 2016 - 10:48 AM


Since the moment that your supplier, repacks the food color after buying it, they couldn't be included on the scope of BRC Agents and Brokers and that product would be included on the scope of BRC FS v 7.

 

Hi Maltus,

 

Yr comment seems a logical interpretation to me assuming  "repack" means any activity which alters the "presentation" of the received/stored/shipped material (Module 8 [see below] does reference Primary packaging [Hmmm]) .

 

@Whitney - As per yr  Post 9, and above quote, the supplier you mention is probably from your POV not a broker for the relevant  item "abc"  . So, assuming that "abc" was  included in the scope of B's BRC7 certificate, the latter would presumably suffice.

 

Note that, If B did no repacking, B presumably  would be regarded as a broker for "abc".  Four options would then seem (to me) to be available to B -

 

(i) B could choose to  include  "abc" within scope of B's BRC7 certificate via Module 8  (see posts 15-16)

(ii) B could decline option (i) which  would result in "abc" being specifically excluded from B's BRC7 scope (see text Pg2, module 8),

(iii) B could get further certification to Broker Standard for item "abc",

(iv) B could take no further action regarding "abc"

 

The crux of A's BRC7 certification and involvement with steps (i - iv) would then be as required to fulfill the details noted in this post -

http://www.ifsqn.com...indpost&p=95400

 

However, the "sensitivity" of some aspects of the above has resulted in  a (temporary?) deferral of the full requirements, see the attachment of post 21.

 

PS - Note that this thread partially overlaps this parallel thread -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts-or-brokers/


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users