Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Has anybody read the draft version of BRC V8?

Share this

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

Irishlass105

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 58 posts
  • 14 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 27 November 2017 - 04:40 PM

Hi all,

 

I had a lovely morning reading the draft version of BRC v8 - has anybody else had this pleasure?

 

What are your thoughts on the changes? I seen a few things which will be a pain in the neck for myself but hey just have to roll with the punches. 

 

Maybe it is just me but I think they have removed the use of suppliers who are approved through historical use as it only gives 2 options which are certificated sites or audited sites. Am I right to think this? In 2018 I will have 3 draft codes of practice for different bodies released and to implement. Its going to be a busy year ahead!!

 

IL



C-Wolf

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 27 November 2017 - 07:46 PM

Polishing up some wording and make it more FSMA compliant....cosmetic in my opinion...with exception to bringing Traded Goods and High Risk areas as separate (part of) sections of newly proposed Issue 8.....



ViandGroup

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 14 posts
  • 7 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 27 November 2017 - 08:38 PM

I received the draft but have not had time to read it thoroughly.  I will make sure to look at this and respond.

 



mgourley

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,403 posts
  • 997 thanks
274
Excellent

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

Posted 28 November 2017 - 12:30 AM

Polishing up some wording and make it more FSMA compliant....cosmetic in my opinion...with exception to bringing Traded Goods and High Risk areas as separate (part of) sections of newly proposed Issue 8.....

And of course these:

 1.1.2 The site’s senior management shall have a documented strategic plan for the development and continuing improvement of food safety culture. This shall include:

• defined activities involving all sections of the company

• an action plan indicating how the activities will be undertaken and intended timescales

• review of the effectiveness of completed activities

 

1.1.5 Employees shall be aware of the need to report any evidence of unsafe or out of specification product or raw materials, to a designated manager to enable the resolution of issues requiring immediate action.

 

1.1.6 The company shall have a system (eg a whistleblower system) that enables staff to confidentially report concerns relating to product safety, integrity, quality and legality to senior management.

The mechanism (eg the relevant telephone number) for reporting concerns must be clearly communicated to staff.

The company’s senior management shall have a process for assessing any concerns raised. Records of the assessment, and where appropriate actions taken, shall be documented.

 

Marshall



Irishlass105

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 58 posts
  • 14 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 28 November 2017 - 10:31 AM

With regards to the whistle blowing - as silly as it may seem I am glad that they are not asking to state numbers for certification bodies etc as I believe it gives staff who have the hump strong ability to report false claims and cause damage that way.I think every production site have at least one member of staff who just hate the job but refuse to move on to another and I wouldn't like to feel the consequences of giving them the power to make false claims that are damaging to any company or their reputation.

 

IL



GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,791 posts
  • 721 thanks
225
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 December 2017 - 08:46 AM

We have a whistleblowing line but no-one has ever used it (apart from me once who asked them to report a "test" which my old manager got really excited about till he realised it was me.)

 

I thought the "food safety culture" section was well meaning but very woolly.  What I am concerned by is how it can be measured.  Sure Campden and BRC have their own tools for this but they cost money and rely on questionnaires.  If you have ever read any research on nutrition you can be confident questionnaires do not accurately reflect reality.  What I've gone back with is how you can prove any measure of food safety culture is scientifically based?  Indirect measures (e.g. complaints) are at least independent.  It's not too difficult to imagine a site where the staff are told to say positive things on the questionnaire.  Also if a poor food safety culture is found, then whose "fault" is it?  Does the Technical Manager get blamed when they're fighting every day against competing priorities from the MD? 
 

The elephant in the room with food safety culture is that very few operations directors and MDs "get it" nor even care a stuff about it.  My MD never turns up to a BRC opening meeting.  Have we ever had a non conformance for that?  Have we hell.  I am still waiting for BRC to get some teeth.  Why not have a one to one conversation with the MD or most senior person on site on their own?  Talk to them about technical performance see if they even have a clue?!

 



Thanked by 1 Member:

QM-OS

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 103 posts
  • 40 thanks
15
Good

  • Sweden
    Sweden
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 07 December 2017 - 09:41 AM

We have a whistleblowing line but no-one has ever used it (apart from me once who asked them to report a "test" which my old manager got really excited about till he realised it was me.)

 

I thought the "food safety culture" section was well meaning but very woolly.  What I am concerned by is how it can be measured.  Sure Campden and BRC have their own tools for this but they cost money and rely on questionnaires.  If you have ever read any research on nutrition you can be confident questionnaires do not accurately reflect reality.  What I've gone back with is how you can prove any measure of food safety culture is scientifically based?  Indirect measures (e.g. complaints) are at least independent.  It's not too difficult to imagine a site where the staff are told to say positive things on the questionnaire.  Also if a poor food safety culture is found, then whose "fault" is it?  Does the Technical Manager get blamed when they're fighting every day against competing priorities from the MD? 
 

The elephant in the room with food safety culture is that very few operations directors and MDs "get it" nor even care a stuff about it.  My MD never turns up to a BRC opening meeting.  Have we ever had a non conformance for that?  Have we hell.  I am still waiting for BRC to get some teeth.  Why not have a one to one conversation with the MD or most senior person on site on their own?  Talk to them about technical performance see if they even have a clue?!

 

 

 

And of course these:

 1.1.2 The site’s senior management shall have a documented strategic plan for the development and continuing improvement of food safety culture. This shall include:

• defined activities involving all sections of the company

• an action plan indicating how the activities will be undertaken and intended timescales

• review of the effectiveness of completed activities

 

1.1.5 Employees shall be aware of the need to report any evidence of unsafe or out of specification product or raw materials, to a designated manager to enable the resolution of issues requiring immediate action.

 

1.1.6 The company shall have a system (eg a whistleblower system) that enables staff to confidentially report concerns relating to product safety, integrity, quality and legality to senior management.

The mechanism (eg the relevant telephone number) for reporting concerns must be clearly communicated to staff.

The company’s senior management shall have a process for assessing any concerns raised. Records of the assessment, and where appropriate actions taken, shall be documented.

 

Marshall

 

 

I say good luck to my senior management! They can start with implementing it on themselves.

However, I fear (and know) the responsibility will end up on my own desk to make sure the criterieas are met once it's time for audit  :thumbdown:

We do already have a Whistleblower system in place, thanks to a demand from a big customer of ours.

 

I like that "High care/high risk areas" etc. have been moved to it's own chapter 8. Chapter 4 was (and still will be) a heavy walk in the park and I'm also relieved we don't have any of these areas  ;)

 

IMO, the new version takes a, somewhat, strong stand against trading activities and companies. A whole new chapter just about the subject!

They have however started slowly by making it voluntarily to include in the certification.

 

IMO, a few of the other new requirements are just a way to lure more companies away from other certification schemes into BRC certification.



Thanked by 2 Members:

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,791 posts
  • 721 thanks
225
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 December 2017 - 11:40 AM

If the stories I've heard about Ranjit Boparan are to be believed then I think this will make no difference.  Within the Technical community long before the chicken expose, "2 sisters" was not seen as a place to go if you wanted to enhance your food safety reputation.  It cannot only be Technical people aware of these rumours.  Yet did the retailers vote with their feet?  No they voted with their wallets. 

 

The problem is, in general there is very little comeback in behaving in a way which is detrimental to technical standards.  For certain eventually people get found out but that can take decades.  In the short term, cash is king and those long term improvements or cost of throwing away stock which really should be thrown away?  There is still a "will we get caught" mentality in too many factories. 

 

I am trying to do my bit but I feel like a lone voice who is constantly undermined by my MD and Ops Director and I have felt like that wherever I've worked.  At least the ink being wet on the paperwork during audits is something I've convinced everyone is not acceptable but it has happened in other places and not small manufacturers either.  The fact is even an unannounced audit can be "stage managed", we all know that.  I don't have the answers but I don't think this latest version of BRC does either.  Just more tick boxes.



bacon

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 173 posts
  • 77 thanks
18
Good

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:NOAA HACCP & Better Process Control School Certified, GFSI Schemes (BRC/SQF) Certified, Woolworths Quality Assurance (WQA), USDC, FDA, U.S. Army and client audit preparation; Seafood Processing, Supplier Approval

Posted 15 December 2017 - 12:55 AM

Well, I did a quick boil-down... I may have missed some things but here is the suggested/proposed changes in the DRAFT version (without public comment input) to BRC Issue 8. 

Comment input deadline 31 December 2017: http://ow.ly/ekYY30gM7kB

 

1.1   SENIOR MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT AND CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT

"add site’s senior management requirement to provide a documented strategic plan for the development and continuing improvement of food safety culture with prescriptions to include:

• defined activities involving all sections of the company

• an action plan indicating how the activities will be undertaken and intended timescales

• review of the effectiveness of completed activities"

add required involvement of SM with MR process to understand the underlying reasons for the failure and setting future objectives to facilitate continual improvement.

add requirement for employee awareness/involvement to meeting programs.

add requirement for protected feedback for employees (eg a whistleblower system) to SM and a process to assess/document any concerns raised.

add required responsibility of the company to comply with the relevant sections of the Standard protocol.

add BRC Logo use prescriptions.

1.2     ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE, RESPONSIBILITIES AND MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

2    THE FOOD SAFETY PLAN – HACCP

2.1     THE HACCP FOOD SAFETY TEAM – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 1

remove Codex Alimentarius References

add requirement for "legal requirement for specific training"

2.2      PREREQUISITE PROGRAMMES

2.3      DESCRIBE THE PRODUCT – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 2

2.4      IDENTIFY INTENDED USE – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 3

2.5      CONSTRUCT A PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 4

2.6      VERIFY FLOW DIAGRAM – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 5

2.7     LIST ALL POTENTIAL HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH PROCESS STEP, CONDUCT A HAZARD ANALYSIS – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 6, PRINCIPLE 1

2.8     DETERMINE THE CRITICAL CONTROL POINTS (CCPs) – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 7, PRINCIPLE 2

2.9     ESTABLISH CRITICAL LIMITS FOR EACH CCP – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 8, PRINCIPLE 3

2.10     ESTABLISH A MONITORING SYSTEM FOR EACH CCP – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 9, PRINCIPLE 4

2.11    ESTABLISH A CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 10, PRINCIPLE 5

2.12     ESTABLISH VERIFICATION PROCEDURES – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS STEP 11, PRINCIPLE 6

2.13     HACCP DOCUMENTATION AND RECORD KEEPING – CODEXALIMENTARIUS STEP 12, PRINCIPLE 7

2.14     REVIEW THE HACCP PLAN

add HACCP review requirement to include "other relevant, published information (i.e. - a recall of a similar product)" to prompt review.

3    FOOD SAFETY AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

3.1       FOOD SAFETY AND QUALITY MANUAL

3.2      DOCUMENTATION CONTROL

include digital document system security.

3.3      RECORD COMPLETION AND MAINTENANCE

include digital document system security.

3.4      INTERNAL AUDITS (Change section title from "Internal Audits" TO "Food safety and quality management audits")

add minimum requirements for audit programme to include at least 4 different audit dates spread throughout the year with scopes defined with all sections covered in its entirety annually.

add requirement for Internal Audits to "include objective evidence of the findings."

3.5      SUPPLIER AND RAW MATERIAL APPROVAL AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING

3.5.1    MANAGEMENT OF SUPPLIERS OF RAW MATERIALS AND PACKAGING

add raw material review requirement for "variety or species cross-contamination" as part of RA.

add required drill down/focus for RA on prohibited substances with raw materials review.

add requirement to review raw material every 3 years with HACCP style review prompting.

"add GFSI Benchmark standards (not just BRC) for approval process.

Streamlining 2nd or 3rd party audits: add requirement for auditor credentials/competency, scope in product safety, traceability, HACCP review and GMPs, full report."

add requirement for Low Risk Suppliers on questionnaire:  prescriptive scope (product safety, traceability, HACCP review and GMPs) with evidence of review.

Supplier Approval Crunch: add requirement to have (and fully implemented) a documented Process for ongoing review and monitoring for suppliers based on risk and using defined performance criteria.

add required list of approved Suppliers readily available to relevant staff (eg at goods receipt)

add prescription to verify Supplier Traceability

3.5.2   RAW MATERIAL AND PACKAGING ACCEPTANCE AND MONITORING PROCEDURES

add "approved changes to raw materials" be communicated to goods receipt personnel.

add prescriptive live Animal Receipt inspection.

3.5.3   MANAGEMENT OF SUPPLIERS OF SERVICES

Expand "Services" definition to "off-site packing of products" & " food safety consultants"

"add prescriptive RA for additional Services of off-site packing of products & food safety consultants.

add Services RA prescriptions to be based on:

• risk to the safety and quality of products

• compliance with any specific legal requirements

• potential risks to the security of the product (ie risks identified in the vulnerability and food defense assessments)."

3.5.4    MANAGEMENT OF OUTSOURCED PROCESSING AND PACKING     (expand to Subcontractors)

add a requirement for GFSI benchmark standards in approval process for subcontractors or outsourcing.

add "frequency and methods of inspection or testing" from subcontractors or outsourcing be dependent on risk assessment .

3.6        SPECIFICATIONS

for "accurate, up-to-date finished product specifications", add aknolement of electronic systems management.

removed 3 year Spec review requirements, to "sufficiently frequent to ensure data is current".

3.7      CORRECTIVE AND PREVENTIVE ACTIONS

3.8     CONTROL OF NON-CONFORMING PRODUCT

add prescriptive "root cause analysis and implementing ongoing improvements, to avoid recurrence" to documented procedures.

3.9     TRACEABILITY

add Traceability procedure prescriptions: how the traceability system works & the labelling and records required.

add requirement for Trace document linkage explanation for withdrawal and recall procedure.

3.11    MANAGEMENT OF INCIDENTS, PRODUCT WITHDRAWAL AND PRODUCT RECALL

add Digital/Data security

add planning prescriptions for withdrawal and recall procedure

3.12   CUSTOMER FOCUS AND COMMUNICATION

added customer "communication" sub-section in Issue7, suggested removal for Issue 8

4    SITE STANDARDS

4.1     EXTERNAL STANDARDS

4.2    SECURITY (add "food defense")

add internal and external threats to Food Defense RA

add requirement for a Raw Material "Food Defense" RA

General "authorized personnel" area control assessment/measures to be changed to a required "Food Defense" RA to "defined, monitored and control" those risks & change visitor "reporting" to visitor "monitoring" system.

add requirement for "secured to prevent unauthorized access" to external storage tanks, silos and any intake pipes with an external opening" security.

4.3    LAYOUT, PRODUCT FLOW AND SEGREGATION

move Hight Risk/Care fabrication requirements to new section 8

4.4     BUILDING FABRIC, RAW MATERIAL HANDLING, PREPARATION, PROCESSING, PACKING AND STORAGE AREAS

add elevated walkway design prescriptions

add requirement for "internal and external" and "shall" to door maintenance.

4.5    UTILITIES – WATER, ICE, AIR AND OTHER GASES

4.6     EQUIPMENT

4.7     MAINTENANCE

add requirement authorized personnel confirmation for acceptance of Equipment and machinery back into operation to a documented hygiene clearance procedure.

add requirement of "appropriate grade or quality" to equipment materials and parts composition.

4.8     STAFF FACILITIES

add requirement for vending machines to "suitably controlled to prevent contamination of products"

4.9     CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PRODUCT CONTAMINATION CONTROL RAW MATERIAL HANDLING, PREPARATION, PROCESSING, PACKING AND STORAGE AREAS

4.9.1    CHEMICAL CONTROL

4.9.2    METAL CONTROL

4.9.3    GLASS, BRITTLE PLASTIC, CERAMICS AND SIMILAR MATERIALS

add requirement staff training & mechanisms for the safe disposal of contaminated product with glass/brittle items breakage procedures.

4.9.4    PRODUCTS PACKED INTO GLASS OR OTHER BRITTLE CONTAINERS

4.9.5    WOOD

"add new sub-section ""Other physical contaminants""

add requirement for documented procedures to be in place for the removal of packaging from raw materials (eg debagging or deboxing procedures) to prevent contamination of the raw material during these processes.

add requirements for pens used in open product areas being controlled to minimize risk of physical contamination."

4.10       FOREIGN-BODY DETECTION AND REMOVAL EQUIPMENT

4.10.1    FOREIGN-BODY DETECTION AND REMOVAL EQUIPMENT

4.10.2    FILTERS AND SIEVES

Remove requirement to "examined and recorded to identify contamination risks" of filter/sieve controls.

4.10.3     METAL DETECTORS AND X-RAY EQUIPMENT

add requirement FB testing of in-line metal detectors to be completed during line start up and at the end of the production period.

4.10.4    MAGNETS

4.10.5    OPTICAL SORTING EQUIPMENT

4.10.6    CONTAINER CLEANLINESS – GLASS JARS, CANS AND OTHER RIGID CONTAINERS

4.11     HOUSEKEEPING AND HYGIENE

add requirement for a defined  corrective action to be taken when monitored results are outside of cleaning performance acceptable limits.

4.11.7   CLEANING IN PLACE (CIP)

"remove more granular prescriptive CIP requirements and consolidate CIP section clauses.

add required CIP design and construction validation, schematic diagram, cross-contamination RA for recovered rinse solutions, authorized approval and record before changes are made, and revalidated at a frequency based on risk, and following any alteration or addition."

for CIP system critical limit & validation: add requirement for documented times, detergent concentrations, flow rate/pressure and temperatures parameters for target hazards removal. 

add required CIP equipment maintenance staff training

add requirement for CIP facilities to monitor at a defined and documented frequency based on risk.

add required procedures defining  action to be taken if monitoring indicates that processing is outside defined limits.

4.12      WASTE/WASTE DISPOSAL (add Environmental monitoring sub-section)

include "Internal"  external waste collection containers requirements.

"add requirement for a documented environmental monitoring programme based on prescriptive risk criteria:

• sampling protocol

• identification of sample locations

• frequency of tests

• target organism(s)

• test methods (eg settle plates, rapid testing, swabs)

• recording and evaluation of results"

add requirement for appropriate & defined control limits with document the corrective actions there is a failure to meet a control limit, or they indicate a trend of increasing positive environmental results.

add requirement for the company to review environmental monitoring programme at least annually and with prescriptive review requirements

4.13     MANAGEMENT OF SURPLUS FOOD AND PRODUCTS FOR ANIMAL FEED

4.14     PEST CONTROL

add requirement for pest control risk assessment to be reviewed whenever there are changes to the building or production processes.

remove required numbering for  pest control devices .

add requirement for adequate measures to prevent birds from entering buildings or roosting above loading or unloading areas.

4.15    STORAGE FACILITIES

4.16    DISPATCH AND TRANSPORT

5    PRODUCT CONTROL

5.1     PRODUCT DESIGN/DEVELOPMENT

add refined criteria for Shelf Life testing.

add requirement to ensure pet food is formulated/designed for the intended use

add requirement for pet food products for multiple, different animal species to have specific procedures for the management of any ingredient, raw material, product or rework that can be harmful to unintended recipients.

"add requirement for pet food that contain medicinal substances to include:

• identification of medication-containing materials handled on site.

• mechanisms to ensure correct concentrations of medicinal substances in finished products

• procedures to prevent cross-contamination with materials containing medicinal substances

• specific procedures to ensure the correct labelling of medicated pet food"

5.2     PRODUCT LABELLING

add requirement to provided fully validated cooking instructions.

5.3   MANAGEMENT OF ALLERGENS

add allergen risk-based assessment requirement to justify were allergen cannot be prevented and to include an allergen warning on the product label.

5.4   PRODUCT AUTHENTICITY, CLAIMS AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY

5.5   PRODUCT PACKAGING

"add required prescription to manage obsolete packaging (including labels):

• mechanisms to prevent accidental use of obsolete packaging

• timely disposal of obsolete packaging

• appropriate procedures for the disposal of obsolete printed materials"

5.6   PRODUCT INSPECTION AND LABORATORY TESTING

5.6.1   PRODUCT INSPECTION AND TESTING

add the requirement for ongoing validation of the product shelf-life

5.6.2    LABORATORY TESTING

add requirement for the significance of laboratory results be understood and acted upon accordingly & trended.

add requirement for legal limits to be understood/appropriate action implemented to address any exceedance of these limits.

5.7   PRODUCT RELEASE

6    PROCESS CONTROL

6.1  CONTROL OF OPERATIONS

6.2   LABELLING AND PACK CONTROL

add requirement for off-line coding or printing of packaging materials setting/amendments to the printer parameters be set only by an authorized person.

"add requirement for on-line verification equipment to have a documented procedures for the operation and testing of the equipment with prescriptive testing criteria:

• at the start of the packing run

• during the packing run

• when changing batches of packaging materials

• at the end of each production run. "

6.3   QUANTITY – WEIGHT, VOLUME AND NUMBER CONTROL

"add requirement for documented procedures for the operation and testing of online check weighers with prescriptive testing criteria:

• consideration of any legal requirements

• responsibilities for testing the equipment

• operating effectiveness and any variation to this for particular products

• the methods and frequency of testing the check weigher

• recording of the results of tests"

6.4   CALIBRATION AND CONTROL OF MEASURING AND MONITORING DEVICES

7    PERSONNEL

7.1 TRAINING: RAW MATERIAL HANDLING, PREPARATION, PROCESSING, PACKING AND STORAGE AREAS

add requirement for an additional training record requirement of the material, work instruction or procedure that is used in the training.

7.2  PERSONAL HYGIENE: RAW MATERIAL HANDLING, PREPARATION, PROCESSING, PACKING AND STORAGE AREAS

7.3  MEDICAL SCREENING

7.4  PROTECTIVE CLOTHING: EMPLOYEES OR VISITORS TO PRODUCTION AREAS

New section for consolidated High Risk, High Care and Ambient High Care Requirements

"8 High Risk, High Care and Ambient High Care Production Risk Zones

(New section for consolidated High Risk, High Care and Ambient High Care Requirements)"

8.1 Layout, Product Flow and Segregation in High Risk, High Care & Ambient High Care

8.1.1 (formerly 4.3.1)

8.1.2 (formerly 4.3.5)

8.1.3 (formerly 4.3.6)

8.1.4 (formerly 4.3.7)

8.2 Building Fabric in High Risk, High Care & Ambient High Care

8.2.1 (formerly 4.4.4)

8.2.2 (formerly 4.4.13)

8.3 Maintenance in High Risk, High Care & Ambient High Care

8.3.1 (formerly 4.7.5)

8.3.2 add maintenance requirement for when equipment is removed from the area, a documented procedure to ensure the cleanliness and removal of contamination hazards, before being accepted back into the area.

"8.3.3 add maintenance requirement for when portable equipment (eg handheld devices) is used in high risk or high care:

• items shall be visually distinctive and dedicated for use in that area

OR

• there shall be specific procedures (eg a full clean) to ensure this does not result in contamination."

8.4 Staff Facilities for High Rick, High Care & Ambient High Care

8.4.1 (formerly 4.8.4 and 4.8.5)

8.5 Housekeeping and hygiene in high risk, high care & ambient high care

8.5.1 (formerly 4.11.2)

8.5.2 (formerly 4.11.3)

8.5.3 (formerly 4.11.6)

8.5.4 add housekeeping requirement for CIP systems used for cleaning high risk or high care areas be dedicated for use in that area and separate from those used in low risk areas.

8.6 Waste/Waste Disposal in High Risk, High Care & Ambient High Care

8.6.1 add Waste Disposal requirement for waste disposal systems ensuring the risk of contamination to products is minimized through the control of potential cross-contamination & risk assessment be consider the movement and flow of waste and waste containers.

8.7 Protective Clothing in High Risk, High Care & Ambient High Care

8.7.1 (formerly 7.4.3)

8.7.2 (formerly 7.4.4)

8.7.3 (formerly 7.4.5)

"9 Requirements of the traded goods

Where a site purchases and sells food products, that are stored in the site’s facilities, that would normally fall within the scope of the Standard, but which are not manufactured, further processed or repacked at the site being audited, the site’s management of these products may be incorporated into the audit scope using the section 9 (Traded Goods).

Where the company applies for certification of the management of traded goods, all relevant requirements from the core Standard (sections 1 to 8) must also be fulfilled in addition to the requirements outlined in this section."

9.1 Approval and performance monitoring of manufacturers/packers of traded food products

9.1.1

9.1.2

9.1.3

9.1.4

9.2 Specifications

9.2.1

9.2.2

9.2.3

9.2.4

9.3 Product inspection and laboratory testing

9.3.1

9.3.2

9.3.3

9.3.4

9.3.5

9.4 Product legality

9.4.1

9.5 Traceability

9.5.1

9.5.2

9.5.3


____________________________________________________
><((((º> Salmon of Doubt & NOAA HACCP lover of Bacon

Thanked by 1 Member:

bacon

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 173 posts
  • 77 thanks
18
Good

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:NOAA HACCP & Better Process Control School Certified, GFSI Schemes (BRC/SQF) Certified, Woolworths Quality Assurance (WQA), USDC, FDA, U.S. Army and client audit preparation; Seafood Processing, Supplier Approval

Posted 15 December 2017 - 12:59 AM

Again: Comment input deadline 31 December 2017: http://ow.ly/ekYY30gM7kB


____________________________________________________
><((((º> Salmon of Doubt & NOAA HACCP lover of Bacon

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,791 posts
  • 721 thanks
225
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 16 January 2018 - 04:21 PM

Can anyone remember the implementation dates?  Helpfully they've removed the page on the website.  In my head I have July 18 for publication and Feb 19 for first audits.  Does anyone know if these are realistic or likely to change?  My audit windows are Dec - Feb which is going to make prep very, very challenging.



bacon

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 173 posts
  • 77 thanks
18
Good

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:NOAA HACCP & Better Process Control School Certified, GFSI Schemes (BRC/SQF) Certified, Woolworths Quality Assurance (WQA), USDC, FDA, U.S. Army and client audit preparation; Seafood Processing, Supplier Approval

Posted 17 January 2018 - 08:09 PM

rumor has it: http://www.ifsqn.com...or-food-safety/

 

Or and estimate form John Kukoly: http://www.ifsqn.com...d-release-date/

 

-B


____________________________________________________
><((((º> Salmon of Doubt & NOAA HACCP lover of Bacon

Irishlass105

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 58 posts
  • 14 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 16 April 2018 - 02:53 PM

I had an audit recently from BRC & the auditor said the training for V8 isnt being rolled out until Nov 18 which will have a knock on effect for the start of them auditing in Feb for the new version. 



J0hn

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 31 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 24 April 2018 - 09:24 AM

Hi

 

I had my BRC last week (AA+!!!!) and v8 is being issued in July 18 and audited against from Jan 2019 I was told. 

 

Does anyone have the final v8 version yet?

 

Best

 

J



cuong0000

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 31 posts
  • 23 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Vietnam
    Vietnam

Posted 14 May 2018 - 03:35 PM

Hi

 

I had my BRC last week (AA+!!!!) and v8 is being issued in July 18 and audited against from Jan 2019 I was told. 

 

Does anyone have the final v8 version yet?

 

Best

 

J

Amazing John

AA+ Show that your factory is definitely great.

Congratulation.



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 15 May 2018 - 03:54 AM

Another similar thread topic,less up-to-date but has a draft link (Post 7 Nov 17)  -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...d-release-date/

 

The definitive date for auditing appears to be here -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...ue/#entry125417

 

( Or do only BRC really know ??)


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C




Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users