What's New Unreplied Topics Membership About Us Contact Us Privacy Policy
[Ad]

PAS 223: 9 - Is a Certificate of Analysis enough in this situation?

Started by , Mar 03 2015 06:44 AM
4 Replies

I just recently conducted a Food Safety Audit of a FSSC 22000 certified Bottling Plant.

I noticed that only a written Certificate of Analysis (CoA)is given by their customer.

 

The CoA states that Syrup A and B are safe to use per their company product specifications.

 

I believe that the Bottling Plant is non-compliant per PAS 223: 9 Purchased materials and services.

 

Per PAS 223: 9 Purchased materials and services

Raw materials shall be inspected, tested or covered by CoA/CoC to verify conformance to specified requirements prior to acceptance or use. The method of verification shall be documented.

 

There is no way for them to verify that the ingredients/chemicals used in Syrup A and Syrup B is within product specifications.

 

Your comments are highly appreciated.

Share this Topic
Topics you might be interested in
Can Data Cutoff Dates Differ for Audits vs. Internal Analysis? Expired Inventory - setting a new assessment on positive microbial analysis and organoleptic inspection results Unexpected Nutritional Label Variances from Water Addition: Root Cause Analysis SQF 2.4.3.7 - Hazard Analysis CCP and Preventive Control in the same Hazard Analysis
[Ad]

Hi,

Are there any microbial specs stated? If yes, and they complies, then it is OK

Thanks for the comment.

 

Just to clarify, the customer of the contract bottling toller never mention any micro, chemical or ingredients specs in their CoA.

 

Only a general statement " the their raw materials is to safe to use per their specifications"

Thanks for the comment.

 

Just to clarify, the customer of the contract bottling toller never mention any micro, chemical or ingredients specs in their CoA.

 

Only a general statement " the their raw materials is to safe to use per their specifications"

 

I presume "customer" = supplier.

 

The intention of a CoA is to show that the delivered product complies with (appropriate) specifications.

 

This requires (a) analytical lot data and (b) evidence of compliance, ie a specification with limits for the relevant parameters.

 

It is possible that you are studying a CoC which can be a less definitive document than a CoA. Sometimes, arguably,  too much less. :smile:

 

Whatever, there should be a mutually agreed / signed product specification. It's supplier 101.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

You're right when you presume the customer = "supplier"

 

 

Thanks Charles for the input.


Similar Discussion Topics
Can Data Cutoff Dates Differ for Audits vs. Internal Analysis? Expired Inventory - setting a new assessment on positive microbial analysis and organoleptic inspection results Unexpected Nutritional Label Variances from Water Addition: Root Cause Analysis SQF 2.4.3.7 - Hazard Analysis CCP and Preventive Control in the same Hazard Analysis How to Score Severity and Likelihood for Raw Materials in Hazard Analysis Is a PCQI certificate required for all my suppliers? How to Score Metal Detection CCP in Hazard Analysis: High or Low Risk? Hazard Analysis Template & Preventative Controls ISO 9001 Certificate -- fake or real?