Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
- - - - -

SQF Certification for two companies operating under the same roof

SQF Certification

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 sozcan


    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 17 posts
  • 4 thanks

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female

Posted 17 April 2014 - 04:52 PM

Hello All,

We are in a very complex situation here (I feel like everything will explode in my hand).


Here is the situation.

We plan to get our SQF certification at the end of this year. Currently, we operate as two different companies under one roof. Owners and their managerial structure are different. The other company has its own Plant manager, purchasing, operation leads, employees, HACCP plans and equipment. They use our storage areas, and other common areas in the plant (warehouse, cold storage). They rely on our QA department for general controls. They also would like to get their own SQF certification as a separate company.

My questions:

1. How will SQF certification process work for us? Since SQF is site-specific, we will be responsible for their FSMS which we do not aware if it exists. Basically, they rely on ours. 


2. Per SQF Code, if one site gets one certificate, the other company will need to use our SQF certification when they deal with their customers.

How can I incorporate their paper work to our system since I am in charge of writing, implementing and maintaining our FSMS? Implementation part is the hardest since I do not have control over their system.


3.  The new code, 7.2, states the physical separation of operations which is impossible at the moment. We share the rooms and common areas.

Would using two different auditors at the same time work for two separate certification

How can it be handled?


4.Our company owner is the father of one of the owners of the other company.  So we have to work it out. 



We plan to contact an expert next week. But I would like learn your ideas and suggestions on this brainstorming issue. 

Thanks in advance. 




#2 SQFconsultant



  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,424 posts
  • 869 thanks

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:American Patriot
    Never give up, never give in

Posted 18 April 2014 - 01:57 AM

We just handled a situation like this last week. It was very interesting how it all worked out.  Some of your info is incorrect on interpretation. I would suggest you go with getting your SQF Registered Consultant that is certified in your FSC's on board quickly instead of getting into a sticky wicket here.

Kind regards,
Glenn Oster
GOC Group | +1.800.793.7042 | Serving the Food, Food Packaging & Food Storage Industries
SQF Development, Implementation, eContinuity & Certification Consultants 
In a nutshell we help small to large businesses to get their act together (as needed), help them to co-develop
entire SQF documentation systems, make recommendations as to installations and repairs in order
to get certified and continue with on-going support thru our popular eConsultant program and we do
all within 30 days so your staff can implement with our assistance to retain and get new business!
Serving the new Republic of the United States of America & Alliance Countries


#3 Philips


    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 45 posts
  • 11 thanks

  • Kenya
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nairobi
  • Interests:Reading, sharing with other professionals,driving and a humble drinker

Posted 23 April 2014 - 08:56 AM

I had a similar situation a couple of years ago and we did it perfectly well, what am not clear about is you operate under the same roof are the products the same or different, coz what you need to ensure for both is meeting the infrastructural requirements first then do separate documentation, if the facility requirements are met for both productions, I don't see much problem in documentation


The standard requirements must be met for both situations; whether the auditor start from whichever end

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users