Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
* * * * - 2 votes

Spray dry as CCP?


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

#26 walabies

walabies

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stuck at some Manufacturing factory...

Posted 14 April 2008 - 02:25 PM

Hay wallabies..

I am now working for coffee creamer manufacturer, and we already got ISO 22000 certificate..and we not put ccp on MIcorbiological Hazard.. the reasons Are :

1. the probability Salmonella in Coffee Creamer is Low.

You have to Hazard Analysis first.. Is the Salmonella significant Hazard for your Products .. How about the probability of occurrence in your product?

2. Microbiological hazard can control by GMP (personal Hygiene, Room Hygiene etc) .. that are part of PRP. So we just control the PRP (and OPRP)

3. Our process need higher temperature ( 180 – 220 oC) and temperature of product ± 93oC for 10 second stayed in Chamber. After that stay in Fludi Bad about 1 Menit at ± 65oC …according to our analysis in Product . we cannot Found Pathogenic Bacteria in the coffee Creamer..

That’s all my experiences .. I hope that can help you.



Thanks

AS NUR :thumbup:


Glad to hear someone from the same industry! :welcome:
I was anxious in putting Salmonella test in our routine but you told me that the risk is low in coffee creamer, may I know how do you prove that to auditors?

In the second statement if it's what you are saying, we got to setup the whole GMP system before I could remove the biological CCP?

And last but not least, I don't really understand the third statement is... :helpplease:
I understand that creamer stays in the chamber at 93 degree for more than 10 seconds, I assume but I have no ways to prove it stay for that time period. Lastly, what's a fludi bad?

I also can't find any pathogenic bacteria in our finish product. So that means our product is safe?
  • 0

#27 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 322 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 April 2008 - 04:32 PM

Walabies

Driers normally have a fluid bed at the end of the chamber. you may also have cyclones (no not rain!)

i'm going to attach the Tetra Manual's (which is the bible in the milk industry) chapter on drying for you to have a look at as it explains fluid beds etc.

unfortuantly it doesn't have a section on coffee creamers, but at least you'll get some understanding of drying principles.

i've also added the section on CIP

Attached Files


  • 0

#28 AS NUR

AS NUR

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 581 posts
  • 52 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Indonesia
    Indonesia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:east java, indonesia

Posted 15 April 2008 - 09:27 AM

Dear wallabies

To prove that salmonella is low in coffee creamer.. you have to :

GMP (PRP) is the basic requirement for ISO 22000.. if you didn’t Control GMP (PRP) so you can lose for all system of ISO 22000…

In Coffee creamer Plant.. the system is Closed Loop.. So source of Salmonella only from Human and Raw Material… you have to controlled the Source using GMP (personnal hygiene, room hygiene, Raw Material sampling process , etc)

… if you need GMP (PRP) standard you can use “basic hygiene” from CODEX..

And for verification you can use :

1. Microbiological analysis result for personnal hygiene using “Contact Plate Method”.

2. Microbiological result of room hygiene using “ Air sampler method”

3. Microbiological result of Raw material (pathogenic bacteria) from external lab regulary (every 6 month) and Microbiological result from Internal lab (coliform test)

4. Microbiological result of Finish Good (pathogenic bacteria) from external lab regulary (every 6 month) and Microbiological result from internal lab (coliform test)

For number 1 and 2 you can use ISO standar for Room hygiene ( class 10000 )


hope.. can help you :thumbup:

  • 0

#29 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,661 posts
  • 3327 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 16 April 2008 - 06:56 AM

Dear AS NUR,

Very helpful of you to add to this thread. :thumbup:

I would add one reservation regarding yr microbiological suggestions. Sampling / measurement limitations often severely restrict the interptetation of negative findings for low levels of pathogens. I totally agree with you regarding GMP however appropriate implementation of HACCP is usually considered the minimum recommended option in an operational and conceptual sense.

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#30 walabies

walabies

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stuck at some Manufacturing factory...

Posted 16 April 2008 - 04:45 PM

You guys are really helpful. :rolleyes:
I gotta download the files and have a read tomorrow.
Even if it's not related I feel that I could learn something from there. :thumbup:
Charles mentioned that:"I totally agree with you regarding GMP however appropriate implementation of HACCP is usually considered the minimum recommended option in an operational and conceptual sense." That means we can do what's minimally required by the standards and objectives? For instance the sampling plan can be ranging from 1 per batch or once per day per line, we could use the later one? (once per day?)


  • 0

#31 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,661 posts
  • 3327 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 16 April 2008 - 05:55 PM

Dear wallabies,

Sorry, it’s possible I misled you in my comment.

I was trying to say that since Salmonella will presumably be a zero tolerance parameter, enormous (negative result) sample sizes will be required to enable statements like – “there is a 95 pct confidence that the percentage Salmonella in a given lot is less than 1 %”. Accordingly, for this kind of situation, it is usually considered that one must initially rely on implementing a properly validated HACCP Plan as a primary objective. There is a very detailed thread on this subject in the forum (following the occurrence of a very severe UK Salmonella contamination problem) regarding which an investigating expert commented that “End-product testing is not a suitable instrument for guaranteeing the safety of the food and a robust HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point) needs to be in place”. The latter is the “minimum” I was refering to. (Of course, if you get a positive microbiological result, this will have some immediate meaning too, even if you cannot subsequently duplicate it!).

The thread referred above is here -

http://www.ifsqn.com...wtopic=4590&hl=

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#32 walabies

walabies

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stuck at some Manufacturing factory...

Posted 20 April 2008 - 02:21 PM

I guess I would be able to grasp a bit of what you mean after reading a few times.
Btw, if my sample size was reduced from 25g per test to 10g per test would it has any implications?


  • 0

#33 AS NUR

AS NUR

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 581 posts
  • 52 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Indonesia
    Indonesia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:east java, indonesia

Posted 21 April 2008 - 02:37 AM

I guess I would be able to grasp a bit of what you mean after reading a few times.
Btw, if my sample size was reduced from 25g per test to 10g per test would it has any implications?



Dear Wallabies..

According sampling technique.. if you reduced quantity of sample, that can be increased your error because of sampling process... so you have to calculate your sample need.. i think in CODEX or the other site, contain the rule of sampling.. sorry i forgot what the tittle of document are... :dunno:
  • 0

#34 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,423 posts
  • 1043 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 21 April 2008 - 07:09 AM

According sampling technique.. if you reduced quantity of sample, that can be increased your error because of sampling process... so you have to calculate your sample need.. i think in CODEX or the other site, contain the rule of sampling.. sorry i forgot what the tittle of document are... :dunno:

Is it this one?

CODEX SAMPLING PLANS FOR PREPACKAGED FOODS (AQL 6.5)
  • 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!


#35 walabies

walabies

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stuck at some Manufacturing factory...

Posted 21 April 2008 - 04:02 PM

Thats what I have been looking for... Another read through for me. Thanks for everyones help again. :lol:


  • 0

#36 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,661 posts
  • 3327 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 22 April 2008 - 05:21 AM

Dear walabies,

Although a beautiful publication, the Codex plans shown are not directly appropriate for items like Salmonella. The opening page states – “They are not intended however to cover factors which may represent a hazard to health” …….The reason is in the use of an AQL as a non-zero number (6.5) in this document. You need equivalent but zero tolerance plans such as in the specific presentations by ICMSF in my previously quoted thread or BAM (available on-line).

Regarding yr 25g / 10g query, I think this is primarily about arithmetic. If the average level of contamination is, say, 0.1 salmonella /gm then a sample size of 10 gm will contain on the average 1 salmonella bacteria in comparison to 2.5 for a sample of 25gm. So the latter case simply gives the detection procedure (assumed same in both cases) a better chance. This is the reason why standard texts like BAM often state increased sample weights (eg 50/100g) for low level pathogens. Unfortunately, if the contamination drops much lower, usual sampling/detection capabilities become inadequate and a negative result is obtained (unless you are very lucky :smile: or can perhaps afford taking many samples with pooling etc as described in BAM).

Rgds / Charles.C


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#37 walabies

walabies

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stuck at some Manufacturing factory...

Posted 24 April 2008 - 08:48 AM

Charles has a good point here.
The reason I am doing 10g per sample is because I am doing it for TPC and Y&M sample. So after the dilutions (Normally micro samples do) with the same ratio of diluent, the results would not be far from the 25g samples. 90ml diluent is much more easier to prepare compare to 225ml :).
So am I still valid?


  • 0

#38 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,661 posts
  • 3327 thanks
352
Excellent

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

Posted 24 April 2008 - 10:23 AM

Dear walabies,

So am I still valid?


It depends on yr procedure for Salmonella but the answer is probably not since the usual method requires taking the whole original sample and then enriches it to boost the detection chances. The arithmetic limitation will still apply, eg (1 x 100) does not equal (2.5 x 100) :smile:

(Yr method for TPC is also a questionable "shortcut" but I'm sure you know this already :biggrin: )

Rgds / Charles.C
  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#39 cazyncymru

cazyncymru

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 1,604 posts
  • 322 thanks
121
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 April 2008 - 06:14 PM

Walabies

if you look at the microcriteria legislation i sent you, you'll see salmonella needs to be absent in 25g

now i know this is british legislation, but i have a feeling that it is standard.

C x


  • 0

#40 walabies

walabies

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stuck at some Manufacturing factory...

Posted 27 April 2008 - 04:04 PM

I see.
What if I am doing 25g for Salmonella since it is a positive/negative data while for TPC, Y&M I do it for 10g only? :)


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users