Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Non-veggie sandwiches in high risk area?


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

#1 phbmeats

phbmeats

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 13 March 2017 - 05:18 PM

We are a meat processing plant that cooks our own meat. We are small, we have a high risk area for post-lethality packing and a low risk area for raw processing. Our owner was approached by someone that wants to take meat and assemble in a sandwich, meat, bread and cheese, no veggies. Normally, BRC lists sandwiches under high-care in the standard. We don't have anywhere to add on a high care area, so it'd have to be done in the high risk area if we were to do it. For something to be high risk there are several requirements:

 

Finished products require chilling or freezing (yes, it won't survive under ambient)

All components have a full cook process to 158°F before entry to the area (bread yes (in my research, usually finished bread is around 190°F,) meat yes, cheese ??)

Finished products are vulnerable to the growth of pathogens or the survival of pathogens (yes)

The finished products are ready to eat or ready to heat.

 

So my question seems to revolve around the cheese. If the cheese is considered fully cooked, we should be able to do it under high risk? I know that it is cooked in the process of making it, but don't know if that counts. I've also seen references in the BRC Issue 7 that hard cheeses are stored cold for quality rather than due to pathogen growth, which puts it in a low risk area on pages 105-106, and so if we get something from the manufacturer that either it is fully cooked or has a low water activity (<.85) and can't support pathogen growth we might be able to do it there, but I don't have a concrete footing on that idea. Any thoughts for or against this would be appreciated.


  • 0

#2 FurFarmandFork

FurFarmandFork

    QA Manager/FS Blogger

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 333 posts
  • 180 thanks
27
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 March 2017 - 05:41 PM

An argument for the cheese being a post-legality ingredient would be centered around pasteurization of the milk that was used. Reference the requirements of the PMO to ID the log reduction that was used. Aw could also be a good justification, provided that you have some data on the actual cheese you're using to confirm it.

 

The problem with this is given some recent recalls and enforcement actions, I would say that Listeria is a concern with incoming cheese. You definitely don't want to inadvertantly bring a listeria positive ingredient into your post-lethality environment. This doesn't put it into the category of a raw product, just a higher-risk post-lethality product. No different than your cold cuts I suppose.

 

Definitely have listeria testing as a condition for raw material release on the cheese though. At this point I wouldn't bring anything into the area you described unless it's been cooked to death or L. mono negative.


  • 1

For discussions related to food safety, production, and agriculture. Check out Fur Farm & Fork


Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 442 posts
  • 105 thanks
20
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 13 March 2017 - 06:17 PM

Listeria is going to be your largest concern.......you would have to hold and test or insist that your supplier is performing hold and test prior to selling their product.  Are you preparing luncheon style meat, or fully cooked whole muscle meats without preparation? Are you certain that USDA/FDA will allow both of these to coexist in one facility unless areas are physically separate?


  • 0

#4 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,219 posts
  • 3158 thanks
338
Excellent

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

Posted 13 March 2017 - 07:32 PM

We are a meat processing plant that cooks our own meat. We are small, we have a high risk area for post-lethality packing and a low risk area for raw processing. Our owner was approached by someone that wants to take meat and assemble in a sandwich, meat, bread and cheese, no veggies. Normally, BRC lists sandwiches under high-care in the standard. We don't have anywhere to add on a high care area, so it'd have to be done in the high risk area if we were to do it. For something to be high risk there are several requirements:

 

Finished products require chilling or freezing (yes, it won't survive under ambient)

All components have a full cook process to 158°F before entry to the area (bread yes (in my research, usually finished bread is around 190°F,) meat yes, cheese ??)

Finished products are vulnerable to the growth of pathogens or the survival of pathogens (yes)

The finished products are ready to eat or ready to heat.

 

So my question seems to revolve around the cheese. If the cheese is considered fully cooked, we should be able to do it under high risk? I know that it is cooked in the process of making it, but don't know if that counts. I've also seen references in the BRC Issue 7 that hard cheeses are stored cold for quality rather than due to pathogen growth, which puts it in a low risk area on pages 105-106, and so if we get something from the manufacturer that either it is fully cooked or has a low water activity (<.85) and can't support pathogen growth we might be able to do it there, but I don't have a concrete footing on that idea. Any thoughts for or against this would be appreciated.

 

Hi phbmeats,

 

Seemingly regardless of logic arguments, the BRC6 document F048 apparently has "Sandwiches"  unilaterally classified as associated with a high care environment. (sort of similar to text in zone diagram)

 

Nonetheless, a  production zone which (design-wise) already "qualifies" for use as high risk should anyway surely be acceptable for high care ?

 

An interesting (logic) case as compared to the vegetable-included sandwich. I daresay the differentiation has come up before for sure.


  • 1

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#5 phbmeats

phbmeats

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 14 March 2017 - 03:34 PM

Listeria is going to be your largest concern.......you would have to hold and test or insist that your supplier is performing hold and test prior to selling their product.  Are you preparing luncheon style meat, or fully cooked whole muscle meats without preparation? Are you certain that USDA/FDA will allow both of these to coexist in one facility unless areas are physically separate?

We do whole meats, and/or shred and/or sauce them. I'm not sure if we will be slicing them for this or not, that is another concern, but not one I have gotten to yet.

 

Hi phbmeats,

 

Seemingly regardless of logic arguments, the BRC6 document F048 apparently has "Sandwiches"  unilaterally classified as associated with a high care environment. (sort of similar to text in zone diagram)

 

Nonetheless, a  production zone which (design-wise) already "qualifies" for use as high risk should anyway surely be acceptable for high care ?

 

An interesting (logic) case as compared to the vegetable-included sandwich. I daresay the differentiation has come up before for sure.

 

What I've found is that the cheese doesn't meet the cooked requirement of high-risk, it seems like the cheese (or the milk-rennet mixture that becomes cheese) only gets to ~100°F, and the high-risk area requires all components to be cooked (158° for 2 mins or equivalent.)

 

There might be ways around that requirement, using Aw and such, as FurFarmandFolk referenced, but I think that the major concern at that point will be bringing in a Listeria carrier. I think prudence is going to be my approach to this.


  • 0

#6 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,219 posts
  • 3158 thanks
338
Excellent

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

Posted 14 March 2017 - 03:49 PM

Hi pbh,

 

If i understand yr post(s) correctly, it seems to me that yr control problem is unrelated to BRC.

 

Does the production come under USDA's RTE regulatory jurisdiction and therefore the maze of L.monocytogenes monitoring rules ? (ie as mentioned in Post 3). If so, their requirements will supercede BRC unless the unlikely event of being less demanding..


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#7 phbmeats

phbmeats

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 16 March 2017 - 04:11 PM

Hi pbh,

 

If i understand yr post(s) correctly, it seems to me that yr control problem is unrelated to BRC.

 

Does the production come under USDA's RTE regulatory jurisdiction and therefore the maze of L.monocytogenes monitoring rules ? (ie as mentioned in Post 3). If so, their requirements will supercede BRC unless the unlikely event of being less demanding..

No, I was worried foremost about only having a high risk room, and the high-risk requirements say that all components have to be cooked to 158°F for 2 mins (or equivalent) before entering the room. Cheese does not meet that requirement as it is only cooked to ~100°F with no time required, so that's the roadblock as far as I can see now. Furthermore, FurFarmandFork convinced me that incoming cheese can cause a bacterial hazard due to not being fully cooked.


  • 0

#8 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 442 posts
  • 105 thanks
20
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 16 March 2017 - 04:48 PM

Oh no, the bacteria hazard ISN"T that it is not fully cooked........it is that some PROCESSING types in ALL RTE carry hazards you wouldn't have to deal with in your particular scenario........I agree with Charles, you may be going about this all wrong.........it doesn't matter what BRC states if the USDA and/or FDA aren't happy with your set up........I would assume that up until you introduced a sandwich, you have been solely governed by USDA, add a finished RTE that doesn't require the customer to even reheat and I think you will need to follow the FDA legislation

 

Here is a primer on Listeria..........http://www.birkocorp...l/listeria-101/

 

I think you really are looking at this backwards.....BRC is the least of your concerns


  • 0

#9 phbmeats

phbmeats

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 17 March 2017 - 07:30 PM

Oh no, the bacteria hazard ISN"T that it is not fully cooked........it is that some PROCESSING types in ALL RTE carry hazards you wouldn't have to deal with in your particular scenario........I agree with Charles, you may be going about this all wrong.........it doesn't matter what BRC states if the USDA and/or FDA aren't happy with your set up........I would assume that up until you introduced a sandwich, you have been solely governed by USDA, add a finished RTE that doesn't require the customer to even reheat and I think you will need to follow the FDA legislation

 

Here is a primer on Listeria..........http://www.birkocorp...l/listeria-101/

 

I think you really are looking at this backwards.....BRC is the least of your concerns

I apologize, but I don't understand what you are getting at.

 

I already have dual FDA and USDA inspection, and already have RTE that doesn't need to be cooked, so am already well versed in Listeria.

 

If it helps on background, we test for Listeria species and Lm monthly, and I'm familiar with most RTE provisions, having produced RTE product for 20 years.

 

Personally I've been to both HACCP and advanced HACCP certifications, HARCP Preventative Controls, and have been BRC certified since Issue 6 (2014?).

 

I have a high risk room (which is where our cooked and smoked meats go into for processing into retail or foodservice packs, all in this room are RTE with or without heating) and a low risk room (where our raw meats are prepped for the oven.)

 

We also have a few cooked FDA products that go through the same process (prepped on raw, cooked, finished in RTE room, some are heated by consumer, some are not.)

 

I know closed sandwiches are non amenable, whereas open faced are, I have not had the parameters defined on what we are doing, I'm assuming closed face.

 

Since I can do either USDA or FDA products, (and do already) I see my roadblock to do RTE sandwiches in my RTE high-risk room as the requirement by BRC that all components entering a high-risk room need to be fully cooked to 158°F for 2 mins or equivalent, and cheese isn't.

 

The cheese coming into the RTE high-risk room, even though cheese is typically consumed without cooking, is going to cause a problem in regards to both BRC standards as well as my concern for the rest of my RTE products. Do you see another?


Edited by Charles.C, 18 March 2017 - 07:42 AM.
re-formatted

  • 0

#10 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 442 posts
  • 105 thanks
20
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 17 March 2017 - 07:40 PM

Sorry phbmeats, all of that in the beginning would have avoided this cycling back and forth.....

 

I would think that you've answered your own question......... BRC that all components entering a high-risk room need to be fully cooked to 158°F for 2 mins or equivalent. I would assume that the pasturization step at the dairy would suffice?

 

Dairy processing plants use three methods to pasteurize milk:


1. High Temperature Short Time (HTST) Method

  • milk is pumped rapidly through a series of steel plates
  • milk is heated to 72°C and held no less than 16 seconds
  • then it is rapidly cooled to 4°C
  • a continuous-flow pasteurizer is used to achieve this precise temperature control

2. Batch-Holding Method

  • uses a paddle or coil in a large vat to agitate the entire batch of milk as it heats to62°C
  • the milk is held at this temperature for 30 minutes before being cooled to 4°C

3. Ultra High Temperature (UHT)

  • whole or partly skimmed milk is heated to 138°C - 158°C for one or two seconds
  • milk is quickly cooled and placed, under sterile conditions, into pre-sterilized containers
  • an unopened package of UHT milk will keep for three months with very little change in flavour and quality
  • once opened, milk should be refrigerated and used within one week

  • 0

#11 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,219 posts
  • 3158 thanks
338
Excellent

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

Posted 18 March 2017 - 12:50 PM

Hi phb,

 

Cheese not my area but i noticed this -
 

Sec. 133.169 Pasteurized process cheese

21CFR133.169

During its preparation, pasteurized process cheese is heated for not less than 30 seconds at a temperature of not less than 150 deg. F

(no idea what the XYZ target micro.species is for above, Salmonella maybe, but I speculate that the process is designed for ca. 6D-cheese reduction of XYZ))

 

2 speculations -

 

(1) the BRC 70degC/2min requirement is based on 6D/L.mono. I daresay the CFR's Regulatory status(?) in USA may therefore supercede the UK setting, ie be regarded as "equivalent". I'm not in USA but if true this distinction  should be a general food feature which you must hv encountered for other meat products already ??

 

(2) Regardless of (1) above, and taking an extreme case, I wonder if a bread sandwich containing solely cooked meat (or shrimp or ...)(ie no mayonnaise...) will still be (BRC) associated with high care production zone ? I sort of get the impression that "sandwiches" have been generically categorized/locked as  associated with "high care" zone by BRC.

 

PS - I did a google sandwich survey and was unable to find a single mention of a (BRC) "high risk" sandwich but a look in the CFA's best practice guidelines for chilled foods might be more definitive.

 

It's an interesting thread despite its cyclic nature. :smile:

 

PPS - the L.monocytogenes aspect is of course a specifically US kettle of sandwich.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#12 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,197 posts
  • 462 thanks
53
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:28 PM

I raised this at the BRC briefing session for version 7 that the requirement for 70degC / 2 mins meant any plant using cheese can no longer be high risk.  David Brackston looked at me like I was a lunatic!  I still think it was a valid point and confusing for people.
 

In any case, your classification for BRC purposes would become high care because of the cheese and bread (not because of the cooking process for bread which you're right is very hot but because of transfer, I will explain in a bit).  Does that mean you change anything on how you process your other processes?  Nope.  It makes barely a jot of difference.

 

I will answer a few other questions in this thread.  Firstly is cheese a Listeria risk?  Yes but if it's pasteurised, cheesemakers would be horrified to think a pasteurisation process, typically 72 degC / 15-25 secs is not effective against Listeria.  I can tell you it definitely is.  What is the issue is post process contamination but this is the same for cooked meats; in fact many outbreaks have been associated with cooked meats and far, far fewer with hard cheeses.  Why is that the case?  Well hard cheeses like cheddar (particularly well aged) have defences against Listeria growth; there is a decent amount of salt, pH isn't that favourable, Aw while not low isn't that great but most of all it has competing microflora in the guise of the starter cultures.  Listeria can be present in hard cheeses but it's rare and often dies off even if it is there. 

 

Now it's a different state of affairs for blue and soft cheeses (including bries) where the pH is far closer to neutral and Aw can be higher.  Then, I'd be more cautious.  Recalls tend to be associated with these kinds of cheese for Listeria, especially if they're made with unpasteurised milk.

 

Another thing you will need to think of though is how you get your ingredients into your high care area and that I would say is your major issue.  Cheeses are easy, unless you're picking an artisan cheese (see my comments on blues and soft cheeses here) all cheese is wrapped in plastic, send it through a sanitiser tunnel.  Your problem is the bread.  You can't give loaves of bread a good soaking with sanitiser and that is an issue.  All sandwich factories I've been to have a less stringent barrier for bringing in bread.  They often do so by transferring in a separate room with specified staff.  The idea is to limit the risk from this transfer process.  Because that barrier isn't quite as good as you'd want it to be, though, they don't process raw meat in any of their low risk areas so the risk of transferring something they shouldn't reduce.  So no UK sandwich maker I've ever been to cooks their own bacon or chicken for example.

 

If you have a set up where your intake of ingredients is completely separate (separate changing, staff etc.) to your raw meat area then it might be doable but it's the bread not the cheese which would make me wonder if this is a safe thing to do.

 


  • 0

#13 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,197 posts
  • 462 thanks
53
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:29 PM

 

(2) Regardless of (1) above, and taking an extreme case, I wonder if a bread sandwich containing solely cooked meat (or shrimp or ...)(ie no mayonnaise...) will still be (BRC) associated with high care production zone ? I sort of get the impression that "sandwiches" have been generically categorized/locked as  associated with "high care" zone by BRC.

 

PS - I did a google sandwich survey and was unable to find a single mention of a (BRC) "high risk" sandwich but a look in the CFA's best practice guidelines for chilled foods might be more definitive.

 

Sorry I should have said, I think the reason for the BRC rating of sandwiches as high care as a result is to do with transferring bread.


  • 0

#14 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,219 posts
  • 3158 thanks
338
Excellent

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

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:36 PM

Hi GMO,

 

I'm not quite clear what the "this" in yr opening paragraph referred to ?

The frequent problem IMO with the BRC zoning plan is that it probably attemps to (a) over-generalise and (b) over-analyse. The result is that many exceptions are likely to occur.

The transfer aspect as you say is a detail typically overlooked in the production flow. Because it can be tricky/debatable.

I notice that Tesco have their own risk interpretation/approach for high care/risk areas. Unilateral physical separation.

I don't quite get why bread would be a critical factor with respect to the zone designation, it has surely received (somewhere) a lethality equal or exceeding that for 70degC/2min ?

 

There is another point.

Afaik, USDA/FSIS do not quantitatively agree with the typical UK's choice of L.monocytogenes prioritization for pasteurization. Whether their logic/interpretation extends to Cheese i do not know (the CFR quotation possibly suggests that it may but the z-value is obviously also involved)(I am also assuming meat sandwiches are within the jurisdiction of USDA?).

Hence my previous Post. Particularly the Global interpretation of "Equivalent".

So what do BRC America do regarding the Zoning diagram ?

 

@phb - as per my post 11, I note from Post 9 that facility is already certified to BRC for other meat RTE processes, how did  that go with respect to US lethality criteria (Salmonella-based?)  as compared to the UK's L.mono based 70degC/2min figures)


Edited by Charles.C, 21 March 2017 - 05:18 AM.
expanded

  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#15 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,197 posts
  • 462 thanks
53
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 20 March 2017 - 01:11 PM

I think a lot of the BRC's thought process was around how foodstuffs enter the area though which was why David Brackston was confused by my question I think.  His view was "as the cheese blocks were washed in, there was no issue as the washing in process is assumed to be effective" forgetting the milk used to make cheese before it goes into those plastic wrapped block hasn't undergone a 70degC 2min treatment.  I also sense the hands of a few lobbyists on those BRC flow diagrams on what should and shouldn't be high care / high risk.  There are some processes which should definitely be high care at least IMO which the BRC have been a bit slow to adopt.

As for FDA's views on the subject, I'm less experienced on that sadly and will have to bow to your superior knowledge.


  • 0

#16 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,219 posts
  • 3158 thanks
338
Excellent

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

Posted 21 March 2017 - 06:39 AM

I think a lot of the BRC's thought process was around how foodstuffs enter the area though which was why David Brackston was confused by my question I think.  His view was "as the cheese blocks were washed in, there was no issue as the washing in process is assumed to be effective" forgetting the milk used to make cheese before it goes into those plastic wrapped block hasn't undergone a 70degC 2min treatment.  I also sense the hands of a few lobbyists on those BRC flow diagrams on what should and shouldn't be high care / high risk.  There are some processes which should definitely be high care at least IMO which the BRC have been a bit slow to adopt.

As for FDA's views on the subject, I'm less experienced on that sadly and will have to bow to your superior knowledge.

 

Hi GMO,

 

Yes, i agree with a lot of yr comments. I guess it's 5 years since the original zone diagram surfaced. Surely long enough for a BRC review ?.

 

IMO BRC could usefully issue a compilation of cases/"solutions" which have been demonstrated to be specific exceptions (or "subtleties") to their zoning chart(s). Sort of extension to the aging, but still readable, F048.

 

Regarding USA, I am for sure no expert either. Hence my numerous "??"s in previous post. :smile:

 

Afaik, the quotations below illustrate the nature of the UK/US divergences but the underpinning micro.details/opinions get, rapidly, very intricate. The overall issue seems to have been progressively (UK) catalysed  due commercial interest in so-called "rare" burgers, eg see the 2015 FSA file attached below which contains some quite carefully couched FS (risk) opinions.

 

31. The  USDA  FSIS  publishes  consumer  advice  regarding  the  minimum temperature requirements for cooking a variety of raw products (Anon 2006a).

It  recommends  that  all  burgers  (comminuted,  reformed  beef  patties)  are cooked  to  achieve  a  inimum  temperature  of  160°F  (71.1°C)  and,  whilst  this same  temperature  is  also  advocated  for  pork  and  egg  dishes,  higher temperatures  are  recommended  for  chicken  breasts  and  whole  chicken (165°F/75.3.°C). In addition, advice to consumers is to use a thermometer to check the temperature rather than rely on visual appearance due to concerns over  the  potential  for  the  burger  to  appear  cooked  even  though  lethal temperatures may not have been reached.

 

32. Meat  and  poultry  products  cooked  in  official  establishments  in  the USA  are  subject  to  specified  legislative  requirements.  Fully  cooked  beef patties  (burgers)  must  meet  the  following  emperature/time  requirements;

66.1°C (151°F) for 41 seconds, 66.7°C (152°F) for 32 seconds, 67.2°C (153°F) for 26 seconds,  67.8°C  (154°F)  for  20  seconds,  68.3°C  (155°F)  for  16  seconds,  68.9°C (156°F) for 13 seconds and 69.4°C (157°F) for 10 seconds (Anon 2006b). In contrast no temperature/time requirements are specified for cooked beef, roast beef and  cooked  corned  beef  products,  where  the  requirements  specify  that  a process must be applied to ensure that a 6.5-log 10 reduction of Salmonella is achieved (or a process that achieves an equivalent probability that no viable Salmonella organisms remain in the finished product) (Anon 2006c). Similar requirements exist for fully cooked poultry products except that they must achieve a 7-log reduction in Salmonella spp. (Anon 2006d). Risk assessments were  conducted  when  establishing  these  minimum  process  requirements which  took  into  account  an  estimate  of  the  “worst  case”  raw  product,  i.e. highest levels of Salmonella contamination and the probability distribution of survival in the finished product given different lethal processes (Anon 1998).

(FSA, 2007) (2017 figures not checked for any changes)

The scientific support for RTE products should be sufficiently related to the process, product, and hazard identified in the hazard analysis.   For thermal lethality treatments (i.e., cooking), establishments can use scientific support that demonstrates reduction in one pathogen to support that another pathogen would also be reduced.

 

For example, although establishments may identify several biological hazards (i.e., Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes (Lm), and E. coli O157:H7) that are addressed by a lethality treatment, Salmonella is generally considered the reference organism for lethality for most RTE meat and poultry products because: (1) It is prevalent in raw poultry, beef, and pork; (2) it causes a high incidence of foodborne illness; and (3) foodborne illness associated with Salmonella is severe (66 FR 12593).  In addition, FSIS recommends that establishments use Salmonella as an indicator of lethality because it tends to be more heat resistant than other pathogens.  Therefore, if an establishment’s scientific support demonstrates that its lethality treatment achieves sufficient reduction in Salmonella, it does not need to provide additional support that adequate reduction in other pathogens such as Lm or E. coli O157:H7 is achieved.

(FSIS,2015)

 

Attached File  FSA risky foods,2015.pdf   340.24KB   5 downloads


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#17 phbmeats

phbmeats

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 21 March 2017 - 06:59 PM

...I would think that you've answered your own question......... BRC that all components entering a high-risk room need to be fully cooked to 158°F for 2 mins or equivalent. I would assume that the pasturization step at the dairy would suffice?...

 

I would think in regards to cheese, which is milk + other things (rennet, etc.) would mean the cheese would have to be cooked, or all individual things added to the cheese? That's why I never considered the pasteurization of milk making cheese "fully cooked."

 

...I wonder if a bread sandwich containing solely cooked meat (or shrimp or ...)(ie no mayonnaise...) will still be (BRC) associated with high care production zone ? I sort of get the impression that "sandwiches" have been generically categorized/locked as  associated with "high care" zone by BRC...

 

That's what I was getting before I asked the question. High care because of things that can't be cooked (due to high-risk needing all components to be cooked), such as lettuce, tomato, etc. that might be put on a sandwich, but in this case if we avoided that and did components that are cooked can a sandwich be done in high-risk?

 

...In any case, your classification for BRC purposes would become high care because of the cheese and bread (not because of the cooking process for bread which you're right is very hot but because of transfer, I will explain in a bit).  Does that mean you change anything on how you process your other processes?  Nope.  It makes barely a jot of difference...

 

Except I don't have a high-care room, and don't have a place to add one on. I was trying to find anything that allows a room to change between high-care and high-risk, but I don't that is prudent.

 

...(I am also assuming meat sandwiches are within the jurisdiction of USDA?)...

 

...@phb - as per my post 11, I note from Post 9 that facility is already certified to BRC for other meat RTE processes, how did  that go with respect to US lethality criteria (Salmonella-based?)  as compared to the UK's L.mono based 70degC/2min figures)...

Sandwiches are only USDA if they're open faced, closed are FDA. (Don't ask me why that is, it just is.)

 

I'm not sure what you're asking with the question, however we are cooking meat to pulling temperature, around 190° to 200°F, so it's really covers them both. In general, USDA for meat likes to see 145-158°F with dwell times, and 158°F and above is instantaneous. Chicken is 163°F and above instantaneous. Our BRC auditors haven't had a problem with our temperatures.


  • 0

#18 phbmeats

phbmeats

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 21 March 2017 - 07:09 PM

Oh, as an add-on, I have went to my boss with the advice that we can't do it without major changes. The bread and cheese, as noted above, increases the risk to our other products. Without construction, I only have a high-risk and low-risk room, so I'd have to shoehorn sandwiches into a high-risk room, which doesn't seem to have a precedent.

 

It's an interesting thought process to go through it, but no one has to solve this problem for the time being.


  • 0

#19 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,219 posts
  • 3158 thanks
338
Excellent

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

Posted 21 March 2017 - 07:47 PM


Sandwiches are only USDA if they're open faced, closed are FDA. (Don't ask me why that is, it just is.)

 

I'm not sure what you're asking with the question, however we are cooking meat to pulling temperature, around 190° to 200°F, so it's really covers them both. In general, USDA for meat likes to see 145-158°F with dwell times, and 158°F and above is instantaneous. Chicken is 163°F and above instantaneous. Our BRC auditors haven't had a problem with our temperatures.

 

Hi phb,

 

I assume this link is the reason yr temperatures are >> 158degF

http://www.bbq-breth...ad.php?t=106999

 

Do note that the red data above would presumably be unacceptable to BRC/UK. (Just compare the numbers). This was the point of my previous post.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#20 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,197 posts
  • 462 thanks
53
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 22 March 2017 - 11:12 AM

 

Except I don't have a high-care room, and don't have a place to add one on. I was trying to find anything that allows a room to change between high-care and high-risk, but I don't that is prudent.

 

 

 

No, I don't think it is but I also don't think even if you did it would control the risks from low risk.  I believe it's the presence of raw meat in your low risk area which is more the issue.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users