Is cutting meat with a knife a CCP or not?

It would seem logical to me to use different knives as a generalised procedure or hv a cleaning/sanitising step when changing species., ie PRP. In general, need to consider things like -

Q1 - What is the Flow Path, ie which step are you discussing ? All raw products?

Q2- What is the hazard ? What is the acceptable level in the finished product / at the specific step ?

Q3 -How does the Control Measure Eliminate it / reduce to acceptable level ?

Cross-contamination is typically an environmental parameter. IMO, it is (by definition, eg 7.2.3g) typically controlled by a PRP but use of a knife could perhaps be OPRP/CCP under some specific (justifiable) circumstances, eg Q1 - Q3.

Rgds / Charles.C

dear,

IMO this is just a control point to prevent cross contamination and this can be achieved by sanitizing knives between uses as well, even if he doesnt use color coded which is the best hygiene practice.



riz

I disagree because of several reasons (you don't have to be a slave to a decision tree) but I think in this case it's actually misunderstanding how to use a decision tree because the step is not defined properly. However, even if you do define the step properly, you can still end up with a CCP (see below):

Ok, the step is "cutting meat with a knife". The hazard is "introduction of pathogenic bacteria, e.g. Salmonellae, E. Coli O157:H7 due to use of incorrect knives for cutting meat, poultry, fish and vegetables"

Q1: Do control measures exist? - Yes because you have colour coding

Q2: Is the process step specifically designed to control the hazard? - No, because the process step is cutting meat (fish or whatever), the process step is not the colour coding.

Q3: Could contamination occur or increase (yade ya you know the phrase)? - Yes

Q4: Will a subsequent step reduce or eliminate? - possibly, depends on whether all of the food will be cooked.

BUT - on my level 4 HACCP training, one question they threw in is that before going through the decision tree, they suggested that you should ask yourself the question "do adequate prerequisites exist to control this hazard?" If yes, then surely your PRP programme is enough! It is slavish use of the codex decision tree which led to many HACCP plans having 20+ CCPs in them in the 80's. Think about it, if you are being really pedantic any PRP could be defined as a CCP according to this! E.g. put "handwashing" through a decision tree and see what happens!

"do adequate prerequisites exist to control this hazard?"

Excuse me sir for my question because i still have no more experience in HACCP

are colored knifes will be an adequate prerequisites ?

or colored knifes is OPRP ?


==========================

and let us define this process as CCP
what is the critical limits ?

thanks

Dear Friends,

It is PRP not OPRP and CCP.
If your final products is heated food. It will not be certainly CCP.
If your final products is raw food. It will be seem CCP but it will CP controled in PRP.
Because of the impossible of hazard measurement, so the efficience of the control measure will not be measured. Consequently you don’t make hazard analysis or the assessment of the control measure. Therefore it is CP placed in PRP. Yes, It has critical limit which is subjective. It is “Change the colored knife or not”

Vecdi Karacaoğlu
www.nevgrup.com.tr

“Change the colored knife or not”

please sir what this mean ?

Dear Sir,
“Change the colored knife or not” is measurable limit for CP. This parameter is monitored for the CP is under control or not. Person who charged with monitoring of this CP will control “the knife color” being used if it is convenient for red meat or others. If its not. The CP is not under control and the products which prosesed at this CP will be called as unsafe. Person have to prepare “the nonconformity repord” and inform the responsible person to start corrective action.
Best Regards
Vecdi Karacaoğlu
www.nevgrup.com.tr

Dear All,

A few comments.

It seems to me the original poster has no direct interest in an ISO 22000-type evaluation, only traditional HACCP ? Probably discussing in the wrong forum.

Just to inject a little more confusion – Is this “cutting” done from the original raw whole animal, fish or what ? IMEX production-wise, it is a golden rule to never process fish in the same arena as chicken (guess why ? ) but I suppose restaurants do hv limited options.

As well-noted already, assuming the customer is not eating raw, appropriate cooking will “eliminate” the previously noted enteric pathogens plus a few other possibilities like marine vibrio, bird flu, trichinella spp (?), other viruses (??) although some spore forming entities may survive in some permutations, (admittedly, I rather doubt that the restaurant involved here is interested in such finer points)

If we are actually referring to traditional HACCP, in my own specialisation (fish) the possible (raw material) presence of pathogens such as above mentioned is conventionally (risk) downgraded to a non-significant hazard status after use of the “cooked before eating” principle for a raw finished product; or due to the actually utilised cooking step for a fully cooked finished product. (Some people still prefer to consider the raw material reception step as a potential (risk analysed) CCP although PRP is the auditor-friendly, modern automatic norm). For either presentation, IMEX, a cutting step from whole is never a CCP with respect to any of the above micro.possibilities. Possible cross-contamination either to other products or the environment or both is simply controlled by GMP (or should be). The use of coloured knives is then adequately classified within an SOP for hygienic control IMO. Some factories use a similar concept of differently coloured containers for initial product process stages as compared to later stages. Maybe the restaurant would be interested in such an additional refinement.
However, a later (knife) trimming stage often is a CCP due to the possible survival of (hazardous) bone .

I also noticed that generic haccp plans for production processes for meat hv regulatory CCPs in the initial cutting stages although not involving an appropriate selection of knives. The theoretical validity of these CCPs has been contested over many years. These might also be relevant to the restaurant ??

Out of curiosity with respect to ISO 22000, it is also interesting to note that the def of OPRP refers to a “PRP identified by the hazard analysis as essential in order to control the likelihood of introducing food safety hazards to and/or the contamination or proliferation of food safety hazards in the products(s) or in the environment.”

Does this not support the classification of a (specifically process introduced) programme for prevention of “mixing up cutting knives” as an OPRP ?

Rgds / Charles.C

Hi,

This is a prerequisite not a CCP - look at the new 5 stage CCP decision tree in CCFRA 2009 HACCP book.

Do you have a robust prerequisite programme covering all sections of your HACCP plan?

Regards

Simon

Dear mesophile,

It would be helpful if you could post a copy of the Decision tree you are referring (or an accessible link) so as to facilitate our understanding and perhaps allow further comments.

Rgds / Charles.C

Dear Friends,

Decision Tree handling is difficult part in HACCP especially whenever you are going to define CCP.
In this case cutting step is correlated with use of colored knifes, we have to see steps in Hazard Analysis rather than use of knifes.
This is handled through PRP, may be in personal training or knife code defining stage.

Faisal Rafique