27 replies to this topic

[tech]

Thanks guys, your input has been invaluable to the topic and i can now confidently address the non- conformances that were raised in our last HACCP audit. . I really enjoy the discussions in this forum,they are very informative/educative, keep the views rolling!!!!!

Regards

Tech

I would like to be the Number 100 person to click "Thanks" Button to you, GMO You always the light on this forum .

About the review process to HACCP system, I agree with you so much. In China, when teammember want to review the HACCP Plan, they will conduct a meeting called HACCP team member activity meeting and finally make a record for all disscussions and conclusion of such meeting. According to conclusion, they will decided whether to adapt the HACCP Plan or not.

Best regards,

Jason

[Charles.C]

Dear tech,

You asked about validating as PRP. My experience includes processing raw clam/mussel meat which typically arrived at the factory mixed with large amounts of shell, bits of rope, the occasional stone etc, etc. Sorting was totally by hand.

For a traditional haccp analysis, my original plan included the sorting step as a CCP based on the existence of ideas such as the already mentioned US regulatory comments. This generated considerable humour when audited and a comment something like "no other processors of this product ever include this as a CCP, for us it is always a PRP, please change it" (the basic principle of minimising total number of CCPs). So my CCPs decreased by 1.
(eventually, if the percent by count of shell exceeded a certain level, we simply charged the supplier for the excess labour, more effective than rejection ).

You might summarise the above as reverse of metal detectors. The latter is a typical pragmatic CCP for audit purposes, sorting IMEX simply the direct opposite.

If you are interested in validation, I'm sure it can easily be found as a non-significant hazard for various products if you do a little searching. (as example seafood, the US publishes an official list of typical generic CCPs, no mention of such a sorting procedure). Nonetheless, yr specific risk situation may be different, ultimately,it's yr HACCP system.

Regarding size limits, I hv seen use in specifications of max. 2mm in Europe / Australia for hard shell and recently 0.8 mm in another document (sorry, didn't note the link).

If out customer had required a nil contamination, the business would never hv started. If you want spec.validation, it is surely available on the IT.

Rgds / Charles.C

[croissant]

Our plant has recently encountered some complaints about stones (<10mm in size) being found in our crackers, so this thread has been really helpful.

 

The odd thing is, these complaints seem to only affect one variety of our cracker of a particular lot, which led me to believe that the stones most likely came from the dried fruits used in this variety as all other ingredients (flour, sugar, seeds, milk powder etc.) are common to other varieties (~15 ingredients go into this variety). We had 2 stone complaints for the same variety early last year but they were different lots. I have relayed this concern to all the suppliers of these ingredients, and as expected they said they did not receive stone complaints from their other customers. Our current material prep process does not include screening/sorting of dried fruits and seeds (bakers just scoop, weigh and dump these ingredients into mixing bin); only sifting of some powdered ingredients. Stones are hardly detectable by the packers as they look like part of the crackers, we only have a metal detector in place.

 

I'm currently pushing to get a screening machine that can work in our setting and not drastically drop the efficiency (we don't have silos, bakers need to cut ingredient containers and scoop out ingredients, making more than 40 batches a day), any recommendations? Other than this, is there any way we can prevent stones from entering our products?