Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

OPRP and HACCP


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

#1 Koko LMQ

Koko LMQ

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 98 posts
  • 18 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Thailand
    Thailand

Posted 09 February 2008 - 07:47 AM

Hi Friends,

Can anyone help me to interprete ISO 22K clause 7.4.4 using to categorize the OPRP and HACCP? I am not sure the methodology to category by application of cluase 7.4.4 a) - g). Is it needed to use them all or some of them.

Quoted from ISO 22K
The selecetion and categorization shall be carried out a logical approach that includes assessments with regard to the following:
a) its effect on identified food safety hazards relative to the strictness applied
b) its feasibility for monitoring (e.g. ability to be monitored in a timely manner to enable immediate corrections)
c) its place within the system relative toother control measures
d) the likelihood of failure in the funtioning of a control measure or significant processing variability
e) the severity of the consequence (s) in the case of failure in its functioning
f) whether the control measure is specifically estabished and applied to eliminate or significantly reduce the level of hazards(s)
g) synergistic effects (i.e. interaction that occurs between two or more measures resulting in their combined effect being higher than the sum of their individual effects)

NY


  • 0

#2 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,417 posts
  • 1039 thanks
227
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 10 February 2008 - 08:23 PM

BUMP for Monday.


  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#3 Modarres

Modarres

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 22 posts
  • 10 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Iran
    Iran
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tehran

Posted 11 February 2008 - 05:48 PM

Hi!

Dear alls!

I tested this assessment method, it was useful, Please use the table and feedback me.

Thanks:
Modarres - FSMS Consultant and Auditor :clap:

Attached Files


  • 0
Best Regards,
Modarres

Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,417 posts
  • 1039 thanks
227
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 13 February 2008 - 09:51 PM

Hi!

Dear alls!

I tested this assessment method, it was useful, Please use the table and feedback me.

Thanks:
Modarres - FSMS Consultant and Auditor :clap:

Thanks very much for sharing Modarres. :spoton:

Has anyone tried it or going to try it? NY is this assessment tool helpful?

Regards,
Simon
  • 0

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3315 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 14 February 2008 - 01:11 AM

Dear Modarres,

Very challenging, to me anyway! :thumbup:

Can see the table is a form of risk matrix but didn’t quite understand some of the details.

“a” = what?, … “g” = what? (added, sorry, as per 7.4.4 of course, was Monday am when I first saw it and the google bot blurred my vision :smile: ; very neat, maybe!?)
Seems to give equal weight to a >>g. Debatable ?? (d,e wud appear to be prime, f also?, is a "shortcut" from the old Dtree system I think?)

Divisions for HACCP/oprp at “18”. Why “18” ?? (the usual question of course)

Certainly full marks for brevity :thumbup:

Do you hv a table for differentiating prp / oprp also ? That wud be almost equally valuable perhaps??

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#6 Modarres

Modarres

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 22 posts
  • 10 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Iran
    Iran
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tehran

Posted 15 February 2008 - 04:46 PM

Hi!

Thanks for your attention, I hope the attatchment could help you.

Modarres :smarty:

Attached Files


  • 0
Best Regards,
Modarres

Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3315 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 16 February 2008 - 08:01 AM

Dear Modarres,

Thks for the addendum. Very thoughtful and ingenious, especially the So-Sos :smile: .

I agree with you that the “18” is inevitably arbitrary if one wishes to follow a (semi-) quantitative route (this is partly why many people don’t of course).

I personally would hv thought that a control measure which was not feasible to be monitored would simply fail the whole data set, eg score zero in the multiplicative style or a big minus in the additive method. After all, this is one of the axioms of the HACCP system, I think.??

I note that the last para. in 7.4.4 of ISO 22004 suggests that some simplification of ISO 22000 might be acceptable by prioritising certain sub-items from (a-g). I think that would be my preferred choice if I interpret the standard correctly (likelihood so-so :smile: ) but yr presentation is surely less argumentative to auditors, a critical practical factor.

I wonder what other people do ?.

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#8 nil

nil

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece

Posted 16 February 2008 - 01:54 PM

hi all

very useful the addendum but who is the writter of this?
is it accetable for a 22k study?


Edited by nil, 16 February 2008 - 02:00 PM.

  • 0

#9 arya

arya

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Indonesia
    Indonesia

Posted 03 May 2008 - 04:47 AM

Dear Modarres,

I'm new in these interesting forum. I work as auditor at CB a few year ago, now I joined in the Univ.
Well, good approach was obtained, anyhow what do you means by a,b,c,... in the first raw. Kindl explain me more details.

Regards
Arya

Hi!

Dear alls!

I tested this assessment method, it was useful, Please use the table and feedback me.

Thanks:
Modarres - FSMS Consultant and Auditor :clap:


  • 0

#10 Erasmo

Erasmo

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 135 posts
  • 14 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Mexico
    Mexico

Posted 13 May 2008 - 06:04 PM

hi all

very useful the addendum but who is the writter of this?
is it accetable for a 22k study?


No. ISO-22000 both CCP's and opPRP's requires VALIDATION, if its not feasible to validate a control measure (CCP's or opPRP's) it should be classified as PRP's. No matter what is the score in the addendum.
  • 0

#11 duente

duente

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 8 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:mountains, bicycles, capoeira, yoga and being positive!

Posted 20 May 2008 - 03:05 PM

Modarres I think it is a good work and for sure acceptable from auditors. !!!

Nil I think that a way to validate a ccp or oprp is through the bibliographies, scientific studies etc. which all of us use in order to set a measure. I do not think that we pick it up from our mind. So all we have to do is to write down the source! Correct me if iam wrong.


  • 0

#12 James Chen

James Chen

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 9 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • China
    China
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beijing

Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:41 AM

Firstly thanks for what all friends have posted here about the study of OPRP &HACCP.

This topic is very interesting and challenging.

Factors from a to g need to be considered when making the category of HACCP and OPRP , but the importance diffence exits in these factors, how to balance them?


  • 0
chen_zhigui@msn.com.

Glad to talk about food safety with you all friends here.

#13 firatozel

firatozel

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 7 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Turkey
    Turkey

Posted 18 July 2008 - 11:34 AM

thank you modarres


  • 0

#14 firatozel

firatozel

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 7 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Turkey
    Turkey

Posted 28 July 2008 - 10:16 AM

what is the source of 18 ???. can you explain please!


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users