15 replies to this topic

[ahmedmourad]

Hello All : can any one advise is the BRC V7 Has new requirment for Haccp

 

[Scotty]

As far as I can tell - no 'new' requirement as such - some rewording or additions:

 

2.1.2 The scope of each HACCP plan, including the products and processes covered, shall be defined. (was 2.3.1 in v6);

2.4.1 The intended use of the product by the customer, and any known alternative use, shall be described,...;

2.6.1 The HACCP food safety team shall verify the accuracy of the flow diagrams by on-site audit and challenge at least annually...;

2.14.1 (added to list)  ...following a recall... and ...new developments.....

 

Regards

[ahmedmourad]

Thanks Scotty

 

is the Process flow verification , required A documented form for this and be signed by date

do you have one as example

[Scotty]

As in v6 yes - process flow needs to be verified.

 

In regards to records, the way we do it is to sign a copy of the process flow document (originator, HACCP team leader/Technical Manager & Production/Operations signature) - we do not use separate 'record' as such.

 

 

Regards

[Charles.C]

Hi ahmedmourad,

 

Regarding BRC7 changes, this document may assist you -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...indpost&p=83519

[HJD1272]

I just attended a BRC training session on issue 7 and there are no new changes to HACCP portion.  Although you will need to have any referneces used for your haccp plan to be made available during the audit. 

There are however alot more changes with regards to food fraud, supplier approval, vulnerablity assessments, senior mgmt needs to participate in opening of audit.

 

[trubertq]

Some smart ass told a colleague of mine that training had to be recorded on a monthly basis.... 

[shea quay]

HACCP is a very fluid system, and changes happen much faster then BRC can keep up. A lot of the "changes" are minor non-conformances that auditors have reported to the BRC. It is their job to find flaws, and no HACCP system will be perfect, so it is a Catch 22 situation. To a properly run HACCP system that enjoys the full respect and input of senior management, there are no real changes. To the isolated Quality Manager, there are extra areas where you may have to forge signatures. I'll give you this example - in bakery, the only way, outside physical contamination, you can really kill someone is to wait until the product goes stale and then use it to bash the final customer's skull in. Now the risk of this happening has to be quantified. On doctor's advice, I'm marking this as a high risk, myself, but it may be lower for others. I hope that this helps others, as it's too late for me. 

[ahmedmourad]

Thanks All for Your comments , attached the Haccp section in the BRC 7 , I cant see the requirement for the Reference for haccp Plane or the Training Monthly can you please advise

[ahmedmourad]

Attached,

Attached Files

•  Haccp Section.xlsx   26.11KB   112 downloads

[mgourley]

2.3.2 requires that all relevant information needed to conduct the hazard analysis be collected, maintained, documented and updated. It also requires that the HACCP Plan be based on "comprehensive information sources, which are referenced and available on request".

 

These information sources are your "references".

 

There is no requirement for monthly training.

 

Marshall

[Tony-C]

Thank you Marshall.

 

To add to this the following is from the BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Interpretation Guideline Issue 7:
Sources of information
Up-to-date background information must be taken into account when preparing the HACCP plan.
Therefore, suitable information must be collated and maintained.
There are many sources of information, particularly on the internet; for example, Codex Alimentarius, European Food Safety Authority, US Food and Drug Administration or the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF). Sources of information must be referenced in the HACCP plan and be recoverable/available on request (using an internet search engine to find the information during an audit is not acceptable, as this implies that the information was not collected and maintained for use during the HACCP plan development). A list of legislation and codes of practice referenced may be helpful.
Many membership organisations provide useful information. Where membership information is referenced, this also needs to be available on site (either electronically or in hard copy).
The Standard gives some guidance on the types of information that may be considered in developing the HACCP plan. These include:
• the latest scientific literature
• historical and known hazards associated with specific food products (good practice is to be as specific as possible, giving, for example, the name of the micro-organism(s) that are known hazards to the product, rather than just listing ‘bacteria’)
• relevant codes of practice
• recognised guidelines
• food safety legislation relevant for the production and sale of products in destination countries, states or territories
• customer requirements

 

Regards,

 

Tony

[Koko LMQ]

What is the  "alternative use"? Kindly help to explain.

[ahmedmourad]

Hello :

I think this means you have to mention all the possible intended use for the products as example if you have RTE product but may be used as RTC 

[Tony-C]

What is the  "alternative use"? Kindly help to explain.

 

Hi Narongchai,

 

BRC Interpretation of Identify the use:
The HACCP team needs to consider and document the intended use of the products by the customer and the ultimate consumer to ensure all the risks have been assessed. For example, the team should consider:
• the target population (e.g. does this include high-risk groups such as infants, elderly people or allergy sufferers?)
• handling and preparation (e.g. will the product be consumed without further cooking?)
• the customer supply chain
• storage (e.g. frozen, or the requirement for chilled storage after opening the pack).
Where there is a known alternative use for a product, including the potential for a customer or consumer to misuse or mistreat the product in a way not intended by the manufacturer, this information should be included in the description so that any implications can be considered as part of the subsequent hazard analysis. For example, where a product looks ready to eat (but requires cooking) there is the potential for a consumer to insufficiently cook the product.

 

Regards,

 

Tony

[mgourley]

Raw cookie dough for example. There was an outbreak of E. coli back in 2009 that was attributed to people eating raw, store bought cookie dough.

 

Marshall