26 replies to this topic

[noahchris97]

Morning,

    Just want to double check myself on this topic because its been awhile. I know I was taught to number each hazard analysis processing step that coincides with the  steps ( process ) in the flow chart. Is this the standard way of doing it? or is this just an extra add in or someone's preference ?

 

Thanks,

JJ   

[Charles.C]

Dear noahchris,

 

afaik, it's primarily a convenience. A convenience which IMEX is less hassle in Excel.

 

But I have never done it for Word flowcharts with < 20 steps if labelling the boxes is unambiguous.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

[Tony-C]

Hi JJ,

 

That's what I normally do and I like to number the steps as it helps clearly identify the order of the steps in the process. Also you may have the same process twice in the process flow for example a product being pasteurized twice.

 

Regards,

 

Tony

[Mr. Incognito]

Morning,

    Just want to double check myself on this topic because its been awhile. I know I was taught to number each hazard analysis processing step that coincides with the  steps ( process ) in the flow chart. Is this the standard way of doing it? or is this just an extra add in or someone's preference ?

 

Thanks,

JJ   

 

I've never seen that done before.  We don't have everything numbered the hazard analysis just all goes, basically, in line with the flow chart in ours.  Of course there may be something that gets sent back like in-line rework that flows back automatically then they can just flip back to that point.

[Snookie]

I haven't seen a lot of numbers in the HACCP plans I have worked with in the past.  Think it can helpful if it is a complicated process, but not necessary. 

[trubertq]

Helpful for auditors if you have a complex process ( which I had) makes it easier to tie the hazard analysis to the flow diagram , but it's a pain in the butt when you have to change something, as invariably the numbers will go skew-wiff and it'll need  3 or 4 proof readings to fix.....

[Snookie]

skew-wiff, not heard that one before.....I like it. 

[RG3]

Morning,

    Just want to double check myself on this topic because its been awhile. I know I was taught to number each hazard analysis processing step that coincides with the  steps ( process ) in the flow chart. Is this the standard way of doing it? or is this just an extra add in or someone's preference ?

 

Thanks,

JJ   

Definitely a preference...don't even get me started...you can even number your CCP's.

 

It's just a reference point for the auditor to use for "easy readability".

 

I got a non-conformance for not putting my critical limits ON THE FLOW CHART!!! (I'm sorry for all you regulars but I'm not never going to let that one go).

[Snookie]

I got a non-conformance for not putting my critical limits ON THE FLOW CHART!!! (I'm sorry for all you regulars but I'm not never going to let that one go).

 

   ahhh revenge is a dish best served cold, I feel so sorry for that auditor....

[cazyncymru]

I don't have critical limits on my flow chart...... Or numbers!

 

And if they can't follow a flow diagram ( mine starts the same for all products, branches off for each product then comes back to end the same for all products) then they ought not to be auditing!

 

Was given a non con once for having no numbers on flow chart (or numbered process step if your posh), but argued where did it say in codex that I had to have numbers on my flow chart! Standard says to follow codex. Suffice to say, non con was removed!!

 

Cazx

[Snookie]

HACCP....many are certified, few understand. 

[RG3]

HACCP....many are certified, few understand. 

PREACH!!!

[fgjuadi]

I number them.  I do that because there are a lot of hazards that are present at several steps.  So instead of listing a hazard several times or listing the name of each process, I refer to it as that number. 

 

I thought it was standard (see example forms 5, 6, and 7)?  http://www.inspectio...18?chap=2#s10c2

 

Am I totally misunderstanding the question?  It seems like it's intuitive to do it that way.  How else would you number them?

[Charles.C]

 How else would you number them?

 

In French ?

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

PS - Based on replies so far, you are part of a tiny Pro-vote majority, namely 55% who do.

 

PPS - Maybe also compare this thread -

http://www.ifsqn.com...cps/#entry84164

[Tony-C]

HACCP....many are certified, few understand. 

 

Ouch. Really?

 

So perhaps you can educate us or substantiate your post by telling us which organization is awarding HACCP certification to people who don't understand the HACCP principles? and where (in the world) your comment is based on?

 

Please 

 

Tony

[fgjuadi]

Ouch. Really?

 

So perhaps you can educate us or substantiate your post by telling us which organization is awarding HACCP certification to people who don't understand the HACCP principles? and where (in the world) your comment is based on?

 

Please 

 

Tony

I'm a total moron and I have HACCP certification. I even left the class half way through to go chat with the FDA.  There are a lot of online tests you can take that are pretty easy but don't prove knowledge.  They only prove you can have someone else log in for you, be able to open two windows, or use the back button on your browser

 

 

 

I wouldn't wanna be part of any club that would have me - Groucho

Edited by magenta_majors, 18 February 2015 - 09:42 PM.

[cazyncymru]

I suppose Tony that having level 4 HACCP would be the same as certification ??

[Snookie]

PREACH!!!

 

 

Ouch. Really?

 

So perhaps you can educate us or substantiate your post by telling us which organization is awarding HACCP certification to people who don't understand the HACCP principles? and where (in the world) your comment is based on?

 

Please 

 

Tony

 

As you can by RG3 reaction I am not alone in this thought and perhaps in your part of the world, everyone who gets a HACCP certification is knowledgeable and capable.  That has not been my experience.

 

I'm a total moron and I have HACCP certification. I even left the class half way through to go chat with the FDA.  There are a lot of online tests you can take that are pretty easy but don't prove knowledge.  They only prove you can have someone else log in for you, be able to open two windows, or use the back button on your browser

 

 

Magenta they could remove 99.9% of your brain and still you would not qualify as a moron.   In fact how you present many concepts is not only genius, its hysterical.  

[ChocoTiger]

Our auditor required the steps in the HACCP Flow Chart be numbered, and a description of each step be provided.  The "Process Step Description" page appears right behind the Flow Chart.

[Tony-C]

I'm a total moron and I have HACCP certification.

 

 

I don't think so ........ being a moron I mean!

[Mr. Incognito]

I think that part of the problem is that a lot of the hazard analysis can be pretty subjective to how you perceive the threat versus what someone else, like an auditor, may perceive it.

 

Then you have different ways to organize the HA and flow charts.

 

Unless you put something crazy like the broken glass machine, that you have installed over your packing line, which breaks glass (because you know... why not) and then rate the risk of broken glass getting into your bag of food low (because duh things don't fall down) auditors are mostly just looking for evidence that you applied the HACCP principals when looking at the risks.

 

Numbers in flowcharts/HA are one way to do it another way is to lay everything out in a logical pattern for flow that the auditor can just read through.  We use the latter, some use the former, and some others may use both.  

 

 

Disclaimer: This post is not to suggest it's ok to install a broken glass machine above your packing line or to rate glass as a hazard of low or zero.   (I can here it now "Mr. Incognito said we could to it  )

Edited by Mr. Incognito, 19 February 2015 - 12:50 PM.

[trubertq]

I have HACCP certification...I thought it was a good thing  .

I number steps because the very first BRC audit I was involved in started with the complete HACCP system being ripped to shreds by the auditor who then didn't raise a non-conformance against it. One of his issues was not having numbers so I decided to choose my battles and let that one go... numbers are a pain in the ass as I have said before but you know what, if it means I get a smoother start to an audit I'm willing to do it.

I don't imply that everyone should do it , it's up to you, as Caz says it doesn't say to number in Codex. 

 

On  the subject of critical limits on Flow diagrams.... I won't start as I'll say something rude, but why would you put proprietary information on a document you send to customers and from there who knows where it goes????

 

[Mr. Incognito]

Some places have two versions of their flow diagrams.  One for customers and one for the HACCP plan.  So they may use the non-haccp plan one to send out.

[swanswal]

HACCP....many are certified, few understand. 

This is soooo true. 

[trubertq]

:off_topic:OMG...... the Seagulls have infiltrated the forum.... now they will know the methods we use against them.......