Hi syju,
Thks for the excel.
I had a quick look through the tabs. A few comments are below but please remember these are only my opinions –
(1) "Waste water" flowchart box meaning unclear to me. Not sure why 1-3 in same box ?. Otherwise intelligible.
(2) Risk matrix is fundamentally illogical IMO but not necessarily unjustifiable. Notably with respect to scores (3,6). And, consequently, I disagree with some of the following risk assessments also.
(3) Pathogens not identified in hazard analysis.
(4) No column for control measures in hazard analysis.
(5) I disagree with the haccp logic in some of the "risk justifications", eg 1B. Also relates to (2)
(6) G11 wrong colour.
(7) I don’t use Codex Tree at all so no comments.
(8) I disagree with control measure/critical limits in CCPs tab for no.1. This is again in the context of (2). Also relevant to the option of using PRPs
Sorry but I have some reservations about the implementation of the haccp procedure as per the excel sheet. Regardless, it may well satisfy yr local requirements. I hope so.
Regarding non-use of PRPs, in principle the haccp methodology used is up to the user. But if the plan is going to be subsequently regulatory audited or used for a specific customer, there may be additional constraints.
IMEX most auditing bodies are currently familiar with a PRP-based presentation. So, If not used, be prepared for some “discussion”.
Personally, although I’m not keen on PRPs, I do have a lot of SSOPs. A question of semantics from a hygiene POV.
@smitty - you appear to have lost yr posted comment ?
PS - this haccp presentation would not be suitable for iso2200 purposes of course. I appreciate not currently yr objective.