Decision on full GFSI recognition of FSSC 22000

Just in from FSSC

Due to the severe weather conditions in Washington DC, the GFSI Board of Directors meeting which was due to take place on Friday 5th February 2010 was unfortunately cancelled. All discussion points will be postponed until the next meeting, which will be scheduled in the coming weeks. This included the review and pending decision on the full recognition of FSSC 22000. We regret this delay, but await the final decision from the GFSI Board of Directors, at their earliest convenience.

Regards,

Tony

It's pretty much a formality I guess.

It's pretty much a formality I guess.

I guess it is:

FSSC_22000_Successfully_Benchmarked.pdf   64.92KB   82 downloads

We recently completed the documentation for several organizations seeking ISO22000 accredited certification and have included the statement confirming that PRPs were established after taking into consideration the elements of PAS220 and ISO22002-1-2009 i.e. since their additional existence given the current PRP guidelines under FAO/WHO which have been around for donkey years. The documentations were in fact established based on our own assessments w/o even looking at PAS220 and or ISO22002.

IMO, we should be guided by our own evaluations rather than a PRP checklist(s) which is pretty much what private standards or (GFSI) stand up for. I am not against this approach because I understand the concerns and onus of due diligence requirements on retailers. PAS220 and or ISO22002 should be used as a reference if needed but should not be used as a tool to differentiate between ISO22000 and FSSC22000.

I have encouraged my clients that if they so wish to go for dual Certifications, they could do so with the fullest confidence but thought it would be silly bugger to do so.

Rgds
Charles Chew

IMO, we should be guided by our own evaluations rather than a PRP checklist(s) which is pretty much what private standards or (GFSI) stand up for. I am not against this approach because I understand the concerns and onus of due diligence requirements on retailers. PAS220 and or ISO22002 should be used as a reference if needed but should not be used as a tool to differentiate between ISO22000 and FSSC22000.

Rgds
Charles Chew

Maybe some people don't have the experience and knowledge and these are useful in defining standards. I personally wouldn't go for both ISO and FSSC certification. ISO 22000 does refer to some prerequisite standards but does not necessarily prescribe them allowing you to select your own evaluation:

ISO 22000 7.2.3 When selecting and/or establishing PRP(s), the organization shall consider and utilize appropriate information including Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) principles and codes of practices.

Regards,

Tony

IMO, we should be guided by our own evaluations rather than a PRP checklist(s) which is pretty much what private standards or (GFSI) stand up for.

Dear Charles Chew,

I´m not sure I´m understanding your point. PAS 220 says you can skip any requisite, but it should be justified by a hazard assesment.

"Food manufacturing operations are diverse in nature and not all of the requirements specified in this PAS apply to an individual establishment or process.

NOTE Where exclusions are made or alternative measures implemented, these need to be justified by a hazard assessment. Any exclusions or alternative measures adopted should not affect the ability of the organization to comply with these requirements. Examples of such exclusions include the additional aspects relevant to manufacturing operations listed under i), ii), iii), iv) and v) below."

Regards,

FSSM

PAS 220 says you can skip any requisite, but it should be justified by a hazard assessment.

"Food manufacturing operations are diverse in nature and not all of the requirements specified in this PAS apply to an individual establishment or process.

Dear FSSM,
Sorry for the late response. My participation in this forum is severely hampered by the lack of available time.

I agree and it is only logical to opine that suggested specifications under PAS220 or ISO22002 cannot be fully applied as it depends on the nature of the processes / characteristics of the product including other process & product parameters as these are applied to an individual establishment.

As we perform hazard analysis base on data obtained from our preliminary studies (layout design, process flow, PD, etc...), the suitability and relevancy of PRPs were/are duly considered. In this instance, we would take into account the specifications outlined under PAS220 or ISO22002 but as always purely as a point of reference.

To satisfy food auditors that specifications listed under ISO22002 had been considered since the release on 15th Dec. 2009, we have been conducting PRP Review-Audits for our clients base on such considerations as listed in the ISO/TS to determine relevancy/currency of existing PRPs and attach with justifications for any "exclusions", if any. This was done on a matrix format.

In summary, we are on the same page.

Regards
Charles Chew

Dear Charles Chew,

Thanks for your feedback!

Saludos,

FSSM

To satisfy food auditors that specifications listed under ISO22002 had been considered since the release on 15th Dec. 2009, we have been conducting PRP Review-Audits for our clients base on such considerations as listed in the ISO/TS to determine relevancy/currency of existing PRPs and attach with justifications for any "exclusions", if any. This was done on a matrix format.

Regards
Charles Chew

This seems like a logical approach.

As ISO 22002 contains fundamental prerequisite programmes I would be interested to see some of your examples of exclusions (If you are able to share them). I can see that allergen management and rework could be irrelevant in some cases.

Regards,

Tony