7 replies to this topic

[khall_12_34]

My farm's potato packaging plant is working toward PrimusGFS certification. One of the items (1.03.04) asks for a daily incident report or NUOCA log. We're going to have a NUOCA log, but I we're likely to have only a handful of NUOCAs in a week, if even. Does this item really have to be "daily" or will a NUOCA log be sufficient? 

[Charles.C]

My farm's potato packaging plant is working toward PrimusGFS certification. One of the items (1.03.04) asks for a daily incident report or NUOCA log. We're going to have a NUOCA log, but I we're likely to have only a handful of NUOCAs in a week, if even. Does this item really have to be "daily" or will a NUOCA log be sufficient? 

 

Dear khall,

 

I'm not a user of Primus but from the attachments below, it looks like a NUOCA log will suffice -

 

 PrimusGFS_Checklist_Module_1_FSMS_v2.1_March14.pdf   16.16KB   59 downloads

 PrimusGFSv2.1FSMSModule1 rev1.1.pdf   182.87KB   42 downloads

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

PS - this seems to be an expanded version of 1st attachment above -

 

 Primus_Packinghouse.pdf   243.96KB   44 downloads

[SoCalLiving]

You don't need to use it daily.

the NUOCA should only be used if there is an unusual occurance.

 

Your other primus logs like Daily Pre Op, Receiving etc all have a section for corrective actions within the logs. So if for example you have an issue with your daily pre-op lets say a trash can had a missing liner... you would then document on that log your CA and a PM would be retraining of the sanitary team. Find the root cause as to why the liner was missing... did re run out, are they not double checking etc.

 

If an employee was sick all of the sudden and threw up at the production area then you would fill out an NOUCA, where you would have to make sure you document the incident, document that you are throwing it away. There really is no preventative action because it was an unsual occurance, the employee became suddenly ill.

 

I hope that makes sense.

[Charles.C]

You don't need to use it daily.

the NUOCA should only be used if there is an unusual occurance.

 

Your other primus logs like Daily Pre Op, Receiving etc all have a section for corrective actions within the logs. So if for example you have an issue with your daily pre-op lets say a trash can had a missing liner... you would then document on that log your CA and a PM would be retraining of the sanitary team. Find the root cause as to why the liner was missing... did re run out, are they not double checking etc.

 

If an employee was sick all of the sudden and threw up at the production area then you would fill out an NUOCA, where you would have to make sure you document the incident, document that you are throwing it away. There really is no preventative action because it was an unsual occurance, the employee became suddenly ill.

 

I hope that makes sense.

 

Hi SoCallLiving,

 

I'm not familiar with the details of  the relevant Primus Standard but IMO the relationship between "corrective action" and issuing a "NUOCA" depends on the context and definition of the terms  involved.

 

If both relate to a HACCP plan implementation i suggest  the correlation is 1:1.   IMEX NUOCA / corrective action as appearing in FS documents are  reserved   for  significant deviations in HACCP system control data  but perhaps it varies with  the type of business, geographical location etc.

 

If "corrective action" is simply a semantic convenience, i guess any linkage to NUOCA is simply arbitrary  unless specified otherwise.  And similarly for NUOCA also.

[SoCalLiving]

Hi Charles,

 

The Notice of Unusual Occurrence Corrective Action Log is for unusual occurrences within the food safety plan. The point of it is to document an occurrence that is not likely to happen. For example foreign material control can be visually inspected with the Primus GFS scheme if you meet certain requirements like you aren't cutting product or using a saw/blade. If an instance occured where a foreign object came abouts let's say raw material about to get sorted you would than have to log it under NOUCA and perform a corrective action and if possible a preventative action.  PrimusGFS does not have a business continuaty plan as a part of its scheme requirement, so another example would be if an earthquakes occurred or even a loss of power, this would be documented under the NOUCA log.

It is not intended to be used everyday.

The daily logs like the pre-operational has a corrective actions section for daily occurrences (if any).

 

Thanks for questioning me further, I've done a lot of PrimusGFS audits. I would have to say that almost all the audits I have been involved with have not reported anything on NOUCA logs.

 

[Charles.C]

Hi SoCallLiving,

 

Thanks for the details.

 

I had a quick look at a few Primus "manuals".

 

Seems that a variety of documentation terminologies are in use, eg NUOCA (NOUCA), Daily Incident Report, Corrective Action Record (elsewhere known as CARs maybe). Different author preferences perhaps. Scoring systems are quite thoughtful IMO.

 

Personally I use (individual) NUOCA forms for documenting both (individual) GMP and HACCP-related,  “significant”, deviations.

 

Horses for Courses.

 

Thanks for questioning me further, I've done a lot of PrimusGFS audits. I would have to say that almost all the audits I have been involved with have not reported anything on NOUCA logs.

 

TBH, that would make me slightly nervous. Whiter than white.

 

PS - i noticed this in the Certified HACCP Auditor Handbook -

 

 NUOCA.png   96.25KB   3 downloads

 

 

[bbekbekk]

So my understanding is basically as you said Charles C - for the Primus requirements, the NOUCA form basically Primus' version of the standard deviation form, but broader to include any other unusual occurrence instead of just deviation from a critical limit? They both seem to have the same requirements and sections for detailed corrective actions.

[Charles.C]

So my understanding is basically as you said Charles C - for the Primus requirements, the NOUCA form basically Primus' version of the standard deviation form, but broader to include any other unusual occurrence instead of just deviation from a critical limit? They both seem to have the same requirements and sections for detailed corrective actions.

 

Hi bbk,

 

TBH, this thread is the first time i have seen any reference to a, so-called, NOUCA form. Then again, What's in a Name ? 

 

I guess that the associated scope is up to the user as long as an explanation is attached.