8 replies to this topic

[bhelle]

We have been audited against HACCP system, and one of our findings is to conduct another risk assessment for raw and packaging materials, food ingredients and cleaning/sanitizing chemicals.

 

The risk assessment part (of our product), as reflected in our HACCP plan, already integrates Hazard Significance Assessment Matrix (5x5) and Decision TRee in determining CCPs. As i proceed with creating separate risk assessment for raw and packaging materials, i'm a bit confused if I could adopt the 5x5 matrix in determining the significance factor, which also serves as the basis for going through the 4Qs in the decision tree or i should have to adopt other assessment matrix only intended for raw materials.  if the latter is so, then, can i have a sample template, if you have any?

 

i just got a sample copy (which I recently downloaded) of the decision tree for raw materials. it's just a 2-question format that would lead one in determining whether a raw mat is CCP or not, in itself.

 

I need your help and suggestions on this.

 

Thanks. 

[Charles.C]

We have been audited against HACCP system, and one of our findings is to conduct another risk assessment for raw and packaging materials, food ingredients and cleaning/sanitizing chemicals.

 

The risk assessment part (of our product), as reflected in our HACCP plan, already integrates Hazard Significance Assessment Matrix (5x5) and Decision TRee in determining CCPs. As i proceed with creating separate risk assessment for raw and packaging materials, i'm a bit confused if I could adopt the 5x5 matrix in determining the significance factor, which also serves as the basis for going through the 4Qs in the decision tree or i should have to adopt other assessment matrix only intended for raw materials.  if the latter is so, then, can i have a sample template, if you have any?

 

i just got a sample copy (which I recently downloaded) of the decision tree for raw materials. it's just a 2-question format that would lead one in determining whether a raw mat is CCP or not, in itself.

 

I need your help and suggestions on this.

 

Thanks. 

Dear bhelle,

 

Relevant answers may depend on specifically why the auditor objected to yr present method.

 

It may also depend on the standard for audit ? (if any)

 

It may also depend on yr product / process?

 

IMEX the Codex Decision Tree which I guess you mean by 4Qs is only used for Process steps.

 

IMEX cleaning chemicals / packaging / ingredients frequently do not require a detailed haccp risk analysis. They do require validation as "Food Grade" quality or perhaps "compatibility"  for use within a food manufacturing facility. This typically involves "Approval of Suppliers".

 

Many people handle haccp control of the incoming raw materials via a Prerequisite program  rather than within the process hazard analysis. This avoids a CCP-type decision.

 

Nonetheless, hazard analysis of raw materials via dedicated risk matrix/trees is also possible. Some typical examples of trees are in this thread -

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts/#entry38441

 

Other methods combine the raw material/packaging/ingredient risk analysis within the same format as the process hazard analysis via an implicit risk matrix. For example this one (for iso 22000) -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...ge-4#entry46754

 

it really depends on what you (or yr auditor) require to implement. Most GFSI benchmarked standards other than perhaps FSSC22000 are happy with something "based" on Codex which means almost anything with a risk assessment.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

[bhelle]

Dear Mr. Charles,

 

Thank you so much for that very informative answer.

 

Best Regards,

 

Bhelle  

[bhelle]

Dear Charles,

 

I've gone through with the threads you specified above and so grateful for the sample excel format "CCP-OPRP appication" from an Indonesian consulting firm.  However, I've noticed that the HAZARD ASSESSMENT part (likelihood-severity) was based on the 3x3 matrix.

 

Would it be applicable if I'd make some modifications to it? say, e.g., replacing 3x3 with the 5x5 matrix and the 4-Q  5 x 5 MATRIX & 2-Q decision tree for raw materials.docx   272.84KB   336 downloadsdecision tree with the 2-question format for raw material?

 

Pls. see attached.

 

 

 

Thanks.

 

Bhelle

[Charles.C]

Dear Bhelle,

 

Attached ? maybe try again ?

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

PS - I'm sure you can amplify the matrix if desired but then the internal "decision" coding formula (eg OPRPs)  will probably fail unless you intend to cancel/adjust  all that part too. Do you want OPRPs as well ?

 

PPS - Ok, my error   , I missed the upload hidden in the text.

Yes, i've seen yr 5x5 matrix before but the severity criteria rather (safety) questionable IMO.

Nonetheless, the comment in my PS is i think unchanged but you have to remember the auditor may ask you to validate yr approach.

 

i suggest you try modifying  the excel sheet and repost the result. you will find that the calculation formula in excel sheet is at the moment a "little" complicated. I played with it a bit before and it soon starts crashing and you have to start again. You need to understand the AND and OR type commands in excel quite well.

 

3PS - there is also another excel interactive decision tree on the forum but i can't remember if in this thread. That one only in tree - type format but would be simpler to modify but not smoothly integratable with the rather neat layout of present case.

 

Another possibility if you are using PRPs is to look at the detailed layout i used in the yoghurt case study for fssc22000. This would maybe only need adjustment of some haccp risk columns and the decision tree question format already built into the right-hand side of excel sheet.

http://www.ifsqn.com...ge-7#entry50651

 

(I myself borrowed some of the traditional haccp layout from a sheet which Caz originated in same thread -

http://www.ifsqn.com...ge-8#entry52118

[bhelle]

Dear Charles,

 

Thanks for the very detailed HACCP study of the yoghurt.

 

Kindly take a look at the one I just finalized, which seems to be somehow a shortcut as compared to yours. We used them for process steps only and not for raw materials alone. 

 

Please do comment if it seems acceptable to auditors of HACCP system.

 

Thanks,

 

Bhelle

 

 

Attached Files

•  sample risk analysis.docx   185.1KB   331 downloads

[Charles.C]

Dear Charles,

 

Thanks for the very detailed HACCP study of the yoghurt.

 

Kindly take a look at the one I just finalized, which seems to be somehow a shortcut as compared to yours. We used them for process steps only and not for raw materials alone. 

 

Please do comment if it seems acceptable to auditors of HACCP system.

 

Thanks,

 

Bhelle

Dear Bhelle,

 

IMO your haccp system has got a little bit confused.

 

A purchased  ingredient such as metabisulfite  is IMO  either food grade or not. If not, it's unacceptable, by definition. Hence the use of  approved suppliers so that the likelihood of non-food-grade is negligible.

Therefore If it's not from an approved supplier, and one must assign a risk value, it is only logical to set the risk as maximum/maximum,  by definition. Presumably A1. With an approved supplier > E1.

 

This is why many people / standards / texts prefer to use prerequisites but, traditionally, one is not obliged to do so. The options may depend on yr standard which is unknown.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

PS - Non-food grade packaging would be similar to ingredients. Yr finished product / process is unclear (eg blanching designed to give elimination of Salmonella? so it's impossible to comment on the (ultimate) likelihood of occurrence of some of the other hazards. Sorry.

 

PPS - IMO Yr severity assessment of diesel as 4 is typically the reverse of usual opinion.

 

added - 3PS - Just as an afterthought - It is important to remember that for an input having a known potential BCP hazard, a "significant" risk as used in the hazard analysis typically relates to  the probability of the hazard being present at the final consumption step at an unacceptable safety level (this can involve some debate over "acceptable safety level", and additionally  where intermediate finished products are involved),

Edited by Charles.C, 07 April 2014 - 11:15 PM.
revised text

[bhelle]

Dear Charles,

 

Thanks a lot for explaining that part. Appreciate your inputs a lot.

 

 

Bhelle

[michaelgaspard]

Hi all,

does somebody have a good simple hazard risk analysis table and a 5 questions decision tree to send me please?

thanks beforehand, 

kind regards,

Michael G