29 replies to this topic

[Charles Chew]

Hi All,

Personally I think it risk assessment plays a key role here.

If you can risk assess you packaging - including supplier, number of supplier non-conformances, packaging storage location, risk rating of food produced etc... then this should be able to determine whether your should micro test your packaging, and the frequency to which it should be done.

I have seen packaging stored out in the rain before as the supplier can only sends full container loads and the storage area wasn't large enough to house them all. I know, not ideal however this is something that should be considered.

We used to micro test packaging when producing RTE chilled dips and sandwich fillings on a monthly basis. Never had any problems however when a certain 5 letter retailer asked they were very impressed that we took this in to consideration. For the amount it cost us (10 x packs per month for TVC & Ents = £15/month) it was worth it.

Regards

Simon

I fully support your view and believe potential microbiological contamination concerns WILL ALWAYS BE LIKELY TO OCCUR as a result of post-production residual risk (which requires risk assessment). I also believe it is more important to know WHEN to test a packaging material rather than WHAT to test. IMO, heavy metal and migration concerns are more relevant than microbial. This is a good thread.

[Charles.C]

I fully support your view and believe potential microbiological contamination concerns WILL ALWAYS BE LIKELY TO OCCUR as a result of post-production residual risk (which requires risk assessment). I also believe it is more important to know WHEN to test a packaging material rather than WHAT to test. IMO, heavy metal and migration concerns are more relevant than microbial. This is a good thread.

Dear Charles Chew,

Receiver's viewpoint. (No labels in direct food contact. Frozen raw / cooked foods.)

IMHO, the aspect under discussion is totally a supplier's responsibility.

Food Grade = Food Grade.

My only (safety) risk assessment is a (mainly) GMP audit + typical supplier documentation (eg BCPA product specifications, raw material / converter documentation, etc).

Plus "appearance" control at reception.

Never had a (safety) problem. Too trusting ?

Rgds / Charles.C

[Simon]

IMO, heavy metal and migration concerns are more relevant than microbial.

If the packaging supplier has good GMP and Hygiene controls I agree with the above statement. That said microbial monitoring/results is great evidence to have in place to give customers confidence. Customers can relate to it as they have to do it themselves and for the relative low cost of maintaining such a programme IMO it's well worth the investment. Sometimes (just sometimes) our FSMS can be shaped by feeling and not only data.

Cheers,
Simon

[flyingdutchman]

How much initial testing should you do and what should you test in order to give you a good indication on frequency of testing needed?

[Charles.C]

How much initial testing should you do and what should you test in order to give you a good indication on frequency of testing needed?

Type of packaging / process ??

 

Rgds / Charles.C