24 replies to this topic

[zein1]

Dear colleagues,
I have good knowledge in establishing HACCP system documentation requirements. However, since the ISO22:000 std is something new for me.
I would like that somebody to kindly issue me pratical examples of the PRP and OPRPs so that I can notice the difference and on the other side acknowledge the way to set down those 2 issues.
Hoping to hear from soon.
Regards,
Zein

[Simon]

BUMP for Zein1.

[Simon]

Dear colleagues,
I have good knowledge in establishing HACCP system documentation requirements. However, since the ISO22:000 std is something new for me.
I would like that somebody to kindly issue me pratical examples of the PRP and OPRPs so that I can notice the difference and on the other side acknowledge the way to set down those 2 issues.
Hoping to hear from soon.
Regards,
Zein

Can somebody give one simple example of a PRP and one of and OPRP - please?

Thanks,
Simon

[Charles.C]

Dear Zein1 -

There are already several specific threads on this question which are well worth studying but I can happily add to these.

I am not a ISO i22k user so the following is a personally flavoured appraisal of my understanding of numerous comments generously donated to this forum. It will be clear that I don’t agree with all the posted opnions (naturally ). Anybody is only too welcome to express constructive alternatives or simply state believed corrections. Hv mostly avoided xrefs to standard / literature to try and condense the situation. No doubt there will be errors as compared to the standard’s own presentation format.

Be aware that there seem to be significant differences of opinion regarding the implementation of i22k (it is still very new after all), particularly regarding the control measures / HACCP interaction. I suspect that some of the earlier poster’s ideas may well hv changed over last 3 yrs (and probably the ISO body also!). IMO, professional advice as to implementation and yr current, local auditorial expectations is a worthwhile investment if possible.

Read the i22k, and partic.22004 (7.1) to appreciate the basic concept regarding the “reorganisation” of control measures. For sure you will hv to compare the two and re-read the i22k. Sadly, the standard is very badly lacking in illustrative examples considering this is a quite radical innovation. (Similar comments abounded at the introduction of ISO9000/2000, seems to be an ISO tradition).
Have avoided comments on monitoring, verification issues for simplicity.

You state that you are familiar with HACCP.
The majority (all?) of the pre-requisites that you hv already set-up for HACCP will probably be covered in the list of 7.2.3 of i22k. These are the basic PRPs. A specific example (as requested) is pest control. The activities are focused as per the PRP def 3.8. and are mainly “external” to the typical “process” as evaluated in traditional HACCP (“ process” is a very relative and expandable term). Note that possible expansion is evident from item k and preceding paragraphs.

The issue of selecting PRPs is fairly uncontentious I think, due it’s similarity to traditional HACCP.

The newly introduced OPRP category seems to hv created an unbelievable amount of confusion which (I think) is partly a reflection from the heated discussions which led to its eventual appearance in the standard. There are many detailed threads on this in the forum already which offer some help although they also demonstrate the range of interpretations existing. I guess this also occurs at the auditorial level. The result is maybe to elevate the OPRP category into one of much higher importance than originally intended ?

The operational selection of OPRP control measures appears to come from 3 directions – (a) from within existing PRPs as defined above where a specific oriented activity occurs which is “not considered typical” of the normal (general / routine) PRP function and has an appropriate risk assessment characteristic (how exactly assessed I’m not sure, as per trad. HACCP maybe, or as referred in (b), or .... anyone ??). (b) from an activity within the (main) process flow, eg a specific process step, (or again perhaps from an activity within that step), either of which are similarly categorisable as having appropriate risk characteristics to be signifiicant but not enough for a CCP. (suggest you search Modarres / Bennii’s ISO forum threads to appreciate the meaning of “appropriate”).© Beyond (a) and (b), will avoid this one. The meaning of (b) seems to be often interpreted as implying that conventional existing control points will often transform into OPRPs. I rather doubt this was the intention from the risk oriented evaluation procedure presented in the standard. It seems to me that there is a possibility of unfortunately resurrecting the situation as per early HACCP with all the plans having a multitude of CCPs only for the originators to then spend several years explaining why this was not necessary and indeed counterproductive. A poll of numbers of OPRPs / plan currently in use might be interesting ??


The result of above is that the choice of OPRP’s seems to hv the automatic possibility of considerable disagreement just like adding another layer to the risk assessment choices for the CCPs.

Any example should surely relate to yr own process but as examples from the literature to illustrate the range of quoted options (and perhaps disagreements) –

The receiving temperature of raw meat at a poultry further processing plant.
The slicing sequence of a cross-contamination hazard between cooked meat preparation and air-dried products.
GlobalGAP certification of suppliers for the fruit and vegetables.
Programs of breeding.
Time of passage of the products or ingredients in a chilling room to 5°C.

Hope this is of some interest and not too many direct errors. The fact is that the content of this standard is not that simple to us simple beings.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Simon]

Thanks Charles.

Has this helped you Zein1?

One thing I’m very surprised about is that not many people can offer a simple example of OPRP and PRP.

Is this evidence of the difficulty in understanding these concepts?

[Biss]

Hi,

practical examples of PRP & OPRP is attached for reference

Hope this will help ...

Biss Varghese

Attached Files

•  PRP_OPRP.doc   42KB   1125 downloads

[BVRC]

Hi, there

What a great document!
B

[Charles.C]

Dear All,

I agree it’s great to get any input. Many thks Biss.

I hv 2 queries –

(a) The long list of hygiene / conduct related requirements actually = two (safety) PRPs : Control of Personal Hygiene and Control of Process Environment. Agreed ??

(b) I interpreted the text as that the product is inspected visually for iron particles to determine any possible corrective action. If no further metal detector involved, the magnet step should be a CCP and not an OPRP. Agreed ?? (unless the results are always zero perhaps ??)

Rgds / Charles.C

[Biss]

hi,

I agree with the first point

but for the point 2 as per our control measure categorization technique this particular hazard is controlled by OPRP

thanks & regards

Biss

[Jessamine]

Hi Zein,

I think this example will be useful for you, it is a Hazard Analysis and related HACCP Plan & oPRPs.

PRPs are different thing, (PRPs = GMP).

Jessamine

Attached Files

•  Hazard_Analysis_Powder_1.doc   78.5KB   585 downloads
•  HACCP_Plan_Powder_1.doc   29.5KB   408 downloads
•  OPRPs_Powder_1.doc   25.5KB   518 downloads

[danielrocha]

Hi. Thanks for you post.

Can you post files in english please?

Thanks,

Daniel Rocha

[maurizio]

Dear colleagues,
I have good knowledge in establishing HACCP system documentation requirements. However, since the ISO22:000 std is something new for me.
I would like that somebody to kindly issue me pratical examples of the PRP and OPRPs so that I can notice the difference and on the other side acknowledge the way to set down those 2 issues.
Hoping to hear from soon.
Regards,
Zein

Hi Zein
1) first you must see what are the GMP of your production (you can see iìon www.codexalimentarius.org)
2) second: you make a list of all the hazard (may be from farm to fork)
3) third : you make hazard evaluation (severity x frequency (may be also detectable of hazard))
4) fourth: from this list you decide what control measure have the better caracteristic on 7.4.4 and you assign a "weight" to each characteristic:
for example 7.4.4 a) effect on hazard: 1 for reduce hazard 2 for eliminate hazard
7.4.4 b) easy monitoring: 1 slow to monitor (more than 15 minutes) 2 quick to monitor (less of 15 minutes) 3 continous monitoring
etc.
you make the sum of all characteristic
if they are less of a value that u choice, it will be a oPRP
if they are equal o more the value it is a CCP

regards
Maurizio

[Ramadan Elsayyad]

Hi Zein,

I think this example will be useful for you, it is a Hazard Analysis and related HACCP Plan & oPRPs.

PRPs are different thing, (PRPs = GMP).

Jessamine

thanks for your very good fully forms ,i am Ramadan from egypt working in the quality fields ,your way good,can be friends and alternate our informations,
contact me by email.

[a_andhika]

Dear Forum,

Still confused with the oPRPs... Because the determination of oPRP from you guys seems different from what I learnt here. Do you mind to help me, which one from this following statements is true:
1. oPRP is used to monitor and control the CP.
2. oPRP is determined from Decision Tree. If the step is CCP then we control it by CCP surveillance (or perhaps some of you said it as HACCP Plan). If the step is not CCP, then it will be considered as CP, and controlled by oPRP.
3. oPRP is determined from Hazard Analysis. If it was significant, then it will goes to Decision Tree, but if not significant, it considered as oPRPs.

How on earth we determine the oPRPs anyway? From the way I know, it must be significantly potential hazard, so the common PRP wont able to overcome it. Is it only particular for certain process, that might not be exist at other company? BTW, the personal hygiene, GMP, and SSOP is considered as PRP for me.

The sample of my oPRP are:
Monitor the Room Temperature and RH, it has critical limits, and monitored at certain periodic of time (routine, every day).


Regards,


Arya

[Simon]

Dear Forum,

Still confused with the oPRPs... Because the determination of oPRP from you guys seems different from what I learnt here. Do you mind to help me, which one from this following statements is true:
1. oPRP is used to monitor and control the CP.
2. oPRP is determined from Decision Tree. If the step is CCP then we control it by CCP surveillance (or perhaps some of you said it as HACCP Plan). If the step is not CCP, then it will be considered as CP, and controlled by oPRP.
3. oPRP is determined from Hazard Analysis. If it was significant, then it will goes to Decision Tree, but if not significant, it considered as oPRPs.

How on earth we determine the oPRPs anyway? From the way I know, it must be significantly potential hazard, so the common PRP wont able to overcome it. Is it only particular for certain process, that might not be exist at other company? BTW, the personal hygiene, GMP, and SSOP is considered as PRP for me.

The sample of my oPRP are:
Monitor the Room Temperature and RH, it has critical limits, and monitored at certain periodic of time (routine, every day).


Regards,


Arya

Can anybody help Arya with her query please?

[AS NUR]

Dear Forum,

Still confused with the oPRPs... Because the determination of oPRP from you guys seems different from what I learnt here. Do you mind to help me, which one from this following statements is true:
1. oPRP is used to monitor and control the CP.
2. oPRP is determined from Decision Tree. If the step is CCP then we control it by CCP surveillance (or perhaps some of you said it as HACCP Plan). If the step is not CCP, then it will be considered as CP, and controlled by oPRP.
3. oPRP is determined from Hazard Analysis. If it was significant, then it will goes to Decision Tree, but if not significant, it considered as oPRPs.

How on earth we determine the oPRPs anyway? From the way I know, it must be significantly potential hazard, so the common PRP wont able to overcome it. Is it only particular for certain process, that might not be exist at other company? BTW, the personal hygiene, GMP, and SSOP is considered as PRP for me.

The sample of my oPRP are:
Monitor the Room Temperature and RH, it has critical limits, and monitored at certain periodic of time (routine, every day).


Regards,


Arya

Dear Arya.. I think the right answer are no 1 and 2.. oPRP used for monitor CP and came from Decision tree if the HAzard is significant... and if the hazard not significant usually controled by PRP... And to determine ccp or OPRP you have to consider how frequent your hazard monitored and when the hazard is monitored (on line or off line)?.. The Hazard monitored by CCP in frequent monitor and activities for monitoring have to online with production...

[Charles.C]

Dear Arya,

Some more info. might help a little , eg –

Product ?
Process? Flow chart ?
Risk analysis ?

Did you see Bennii’s / Modarres ‘ threads which offer logical (and quantitative) methodologies closely aligned to ISO 22000’s format ?
I agree (and the existing forum threads illustrate) that the general topic is confusing although iso 22004 clarifies some of the issues a little bit. Remember that there is still debate over the appropriate selection of prps in traditional haccp!. ISO 22000 has added to this puzzle via oprps and its further focusing on control measures. However, the questions you pose still rely on yr risk assessment and proposed control / management (I think).

Rgds / Charles.C

[nef]

Dear Arya

The number three statement you wrote is not true. That will go for PRP

When you have a significant hazard you must analyse how you are to control it. Either by a CCP or by a OPRP (which can be considered as a CP). But be sure that you consider all the steps and all the control measures taken for that particular hazard. In this sense, a detailed flow chart for your product where every input and output, reprocesing and reusing, (as the standard ask) helps a lot.

Neyda

[a_andhika]

Dear Forum,

Yes, I've already seen the thread from other members. Modarres offers a great way to determine oPRP and CCP. But I am afraid my superiors wont agreed with me. We have a system, we have a consultant, I dont think I can convince my superiors easily to use a new system (what a pessimisitic person!). I've also seen the "Difference between PRP and oPRP in ISO 22000?" topic, and it gives me more clear distinction between PRP, oPRP, and CCP.

I am sorry, I cant give you more information right now (coz some technical and non-technical problems), but I'll seek for it in the future. This is our steps to determine the oPRP and CCP, free for any comments:
1. Describe the product (we are moving in seasoning / flavor bussiness with end product consists of 3 shape: powder, paste, and oil).
2. Develop and verify the flow process diagram.
3. Conduct a Hazard Analysis. This part is the most amusing part for me. On our system, we conduct a Hazard Analysis by using a table. Hazards from each step on flow process is identified. After that, we assess it by using the combination of likelihood and severity. If the Hazard is significant, it will goes to Decision Tree, but if it doesnt, it stays. The problem is, we include the Quality issue on the Hazard Analysis. Can a Quality matters determined as CP or CCP? Could anyone give me an example of Hazard Analysis please?
4. Determine the CCP and CP by using Decision Tree (Q1-Q4). If a step was determined as CCP, its controlled by a "CCP Monitor" or perhaps HACCP Plan in your term (beacuse in here, HACCP Plan is the whole package from product decription until CCP Monitor). If it was not a CCP, then it was a CP, and controlled by oPRP.
5. Conduct the CCP Monitor
6. Conduct the oPRP

Please feel free to give any comments or queries. Thank you very much.

Regards,


Arya

[Charles.C]

Dear Arya,

Thks yr very interesting list and comments. I'm sure a lot of people are appreciating yr post.
You omitted to mention whether your ISO 22000 system is already approved ?? If so, you (and especially yr consultant) will probably not agree with the following but never mind.

I am not a current user of ISO 22000 so cannot use any personal auditing experience here however I suspect that different interpretations of the ISO 22000 may be in use.?

A strict reading of ISO 22000 and 22004 seems (to me) to more closely agree with this comment made earlier by Modares (I will ignore aspects like verification / monitoring…)

I'm not agree with this method (Form 7: Hazard Analysis and CCP Determination Worksheet) , because you do:
1. Determination the step's hazards,
2. Assessment the hazards,
3. Based on Risk Assessment, the Process Step is a CCP or is controlled with a PRP/RAP or OPRP.
But in accordance with ISO 22K requirements in 7.4 you should:
1. Determination the step's hazards,
2. Assessment the hazards,
3. Based on the hazard assessment, an appropriate combination of control measures shall be selected,
4. The control measures selected shall be assessed and then categorized as to whether they need to be managed through OPRP or by the HACCP plan.
The difference is that in Codex Decision Tree or in this attached form, the result of hazard assessment determines CCP, but in 22K determines control measures that by a new form of Decision Tree , should be assessed, then the results of this control measures assessment determines CCP and how management of them.

( http://www.ifsqn.com...?showtopic=3183 )

But fig 2 in iso 22004 implies that hazard assessment is carried out as per Codex (box 7.4.3) which would presumably allow (but not mandate) use of the standard Decision Tree. (Note that this tree does not include oprp options at all so obviously some new change / expansion would be required if a selection for oprp is made within this chain)

Perhaps an article published (2006) by a member of the original drafting team clarifies the issue. This includes the statement –



The article link is –
 ISO_22k_22000_didier_blanc____some_concepts_and_terminology.pdf   381.73KB   388 downloads

Fig 1 in the article also indicates that some boxes in the iso 22004 / fig2 are “significantly altered and consolidated, compared to Codex Alimentarius” although not shown as such in the iso document. (but not 7.4.3)
I also note that in documents iso 22000 / 22004 there is no mention of the use of the traditional Codex decision (d) tree anywhere. In fact the only specific mention is (I think) to the severity / (likelihood of occurrence) functions (7.4.3/22000) which are implicit in the use of the standard codex Dtree but frequently not stated as such.

So I suggest that ISO does not intend the dtree to be used to finalise the choice of oprps / ccps. Nonetheless I can understand the temptation to follow this route since many people will already be using dtrees to finalise ccps in traditional haccp systems. My sympathies.

The obvious follow-up question is – How many people have approved ISO 22000 systems using a (direct) dtree approach to select oprps ? They are very welcome to post a rebuttal to the above.

Rgds / Charles.C

PS - regarding yr query as to inclusion of quality (=non-safety) issues, this simply seems not correct in the present context.

[a_andhika]

Dear Charles C,

Wooow... What a tremendous comments.. Just like Torres's (only) goal in finale... So refreshing... Are you sure you were not an ISO 22K user? Not even get involved in the smallest part? Coz it seems you know a lot better than me..

Well, Charles, to be honest, I would like to take another (simple) method to determine the CCP and CP. But I dont think my superiors (and probably my consultant), wont agreed with me. I dont think the Dtree is bad or a little bit old.. How so ever, it still managed to survived until now... But thats make me curious, from those who ever put your company's name on list of "ISO 22k certified" in this forum, do you use the Dtree? What kind of Hazard Analysis that you choose? (I am still highly intend to know it)

And about the inclusion of Quality (read:non food-safety) issue on my HACCP Plan... Yups... it decided to be treated separately, but not radically dragged the Quality issue out... We still counting them, but surely seprated from Fodd Safety issue... Finally... I can convince my superiors.. Huuuraaaay...:)

Regards,


Arya

[Charles.C]

Dear Arya,

Thks and I agree with you about Torres, he reminds me of the early Michael Owen. They probably should have an award for goal of Euro 200X but I guess they consider that these guys are rich enough already. It’s great that Wimbledon neatly adds on to the end of Eur08 (day-by-day, good quality video summary here in high-speed English - http://news.bbc.co.u...nis/7486926.stm ) (Sorry Admin, OT again ; but no tennis threads / pin-ups this year ).

Rgds / Charles.C

[Herman Storme]

Hi,

practical examples of PRP & OPRP is attached for reference

Hope this will help ...

Biss Varghese

Dear Biss,

Can you provide me the file "PRP_OPRP.doc" - when clicking the link I get an error message.

kind regards

Herman Storme

thank you very much

[Charles.C]

Dear Herman ,

Sorry for difficulty. Seems to be working ok for me.

Can you try again and revert if not successful. (Remember you must be logged in to enable dwl.)

Rgds / Charles.C

[rita]

Good examples and thanks