Difference between PRP and oPRP in ISO 22000?

Never heard of oPRP what is it?

That's a concept fresh from the 22K....it means operational prerequisite programme.When you identify a clear danger which cannot be managed through a CCP (either beacause constant monitoring or absolute control is not possible) you set up an oPRP.Lots of people here shall explain it better than me

Never heard of oPRP what is it?

Bak calls it correct, it's just another term ISO 22000 uses to describe GMP's e.g. most of the requirements of standards such as BRC (cleaning, pest control, training etc.)

Regards,
Simon

Bak calls it correct, it's just another term ISO 22000 uses to describe GMP's e.g. most of the requirements of standards such as BRC (cleaning, pest control, training etc.)

Regards,
Simon

Simon, I think training would not be considered an oPRP, because in oPRPs the control measures are necessary to control identified hazards to acceptable levels. Am I right?

Simon, I think training would not be considered an oPRP, because in oPRPs the control measures are necessary to control identified hazards to acceptable levels. Am I right?

I don't know Frawat I've just read through the explanations of PRP's and oPRP's in ISO 22000 and I'm still not clear on it.

Can anyone give a clear explanation of PRP's and oPRP's (differences & practical examples if possible).

Simon

If you follow through the draft stages of the standard (say Draft N69), you will find that previously there was a "Decision Tree" for determining oPRP and Infrastructure & Maintenance PRP (imPRP).
However, there was a major amendment under FDIS & the eventual standard where this decision tree was removed as it was deemed confusing, but the wording PRP and oPRP was retained.
IMO, training of responsible people in the food chain (which basically means everybody and not just the chap that monitors the CCPs only) is a vital PRP program as it directly affects the food safety risk level of the end product and again, IMO, it should be classified as an oPRP and so should every PRP monitoring procedure as in every sense of the word, they are placed there to monitor identified/important areas that need regular or periodic surveillance which if not otherwise would be silly for us to put them there anyway.

Hello Everyone,

I totaly agree with Frawat, Training has an impact on the end product conformity but has no direct relationship to control and monitoring of the identified hazard. so it can`t be oPRPs. One of the purpose of training activities is to maintain general hygiene in the premises.

I have also problem with PRPs and oPRPs
7.2.3 c) and 7.2.3 f)
I read an article and says that 7.2.3 c) is a PRPs and 7.2.3 f) is an oPRPs, Can anyone help me with the difference of these clauses. Thanks


Regards,
Mahmut

Hi Bak,

We had also some discusion about the difference between oPRP and PRP and we concluded as follows:
PRP: has to do with design and planning before you produce anything, so infrastructure, layout of the building, training programs, product development, etc.
oPRP: all the day to day operations that ensure food safety, handling of goods according procedures, temp. control, claening etc.

Have a nice day, Okido

Hi Bak,

We had also some discusion about the difference between oPRP and PRP and we concluded as follows:
PRP: has to do with design and planning before you produce anything, so infrastructure, layout of the building, training programs, product development, etc.
oPRP: all the day to day operations that ensure food safety, handling of goods according procedures, temp. control, claening etc.

Have a nice day, Okido

I find Okido explanation very useful.
I sympathize with Mr. Chew comments however. I am personnally a little dissapointed with the definitions in the ISO 22000 standard, and cannot understad why one has to "interpret" things. The distinction between PRPs and oPRPs is not clear, and even the distinction between an oPRPs and CCPs.

In ISO 22004, it appears that the distinction between oPRPs and CCPs is a matter of degree, according to:
- impact
- severity
- need for monitoring

It does not explain why oPRPs do not have critical limits? or if the effectiveness depends on other control measures? or if oPRPs have to do more with the introduction of an identified hazard into the process environment or product itself? (is this not applicable for a CCP?)

I think the decision tree explained in the Codex HACCP would apply also for a oPRP, so why is this not better explained?

I am not worried for definitions per se, but rather if these definitions are useful for doing a better work.

The definitions that I've found most useful for PrP and oPrP are as follows:

PRP - related to the infrastructure (inculding human resources) and maintenance programes.

oPRP - Implemented to specifically control and monitor the potential biological, chemical and physical hazards (personnel hygiene, sanitation, disinfection).

This is from the Intermediate HACCP Training manual from International Hyiene Training Limited www.ihtl.co.uk

I hope this helps

James

PRP - related to the infrastructure (inculding human resources) and maintenance programes.

oPRP - Implemented to specifically control and monitor the potential biological, chemical and physical hazards (personnel hygiene, sanitation, disinfection).

Thanks for that James, I think I understand now.

Simon

Thanks for that James, I think I understand now.

Simon

May I give you some other examples of oPRP's. Say for example you have several metal detection systems or sieving systems in the process, in true HACCP terms only the last one is the CCP ( the last point at which a hazard can be detected) , however the other metal detection or sieving points in the process still need to be monitored and controlled, these are oPRP's.

Joy

Never heard of oPRP what is it?

Clear distinction between PRPs and Operational PRPs

The PRP's are not selected for the purpose of controlling a specific identified hazard, but for the purpose of maintaining a general hygienic production, processing and handling environment and may still have an effect on the end product safety if not included in the food safety system.

Operational prerequisites are those that are in place to directly manage or control measures that the hazard analysis has identified as necessary to control to acceptable levels and are not otherwise management by the HACCP plan.

It is therefore possible that no HACCP plan will be required. With no CCP's the main document for controlling food safety lies in the PRPs and in the Operational Prerequisite Plans.

lorne

It is therefore possible that no HACCP plan will be required. With no CCP's the main document for controlling food safety lies in the PRPs and in the Operational Prerequisite Plans.

Do members who are up to speed with ISO 22000 agree with Lorne?

Regards,
Simon

Simon, I think training would not be considered an oPRP, because in oPRPs the control measures are necessary to control identified hazards to acceptable levels. Am I right?

Hello all,

It seems lot of confusion was going around PRP, oPRP & CCP and infact that was also the reason with me landing at this forum.
I never understand , why these standard people make things more complex. Anyways getting to the point let me explain you in a very simple manner the difference b/w these 3 FSMS terms:


PRP : These are basically the generic controls in any type of food buisness operation. Mark the word GENERIC . These are to be applied in all types of food buisness so as to maintain a hygienic environment to reduce the risk to the Food Safety .
Eg - Plant Layout or infrasturcture control , pest control, personnnel hygiene, sanitation , work environment, food handling and storage , transporatation.

PRP are foundation of HACCP .


oPRP : These differ from PRP in the sense that these are SPECIFIC to particular industry /food operations . And these are arrived only after doing the hazard analysis. So, oPRP wil differ within the food industry while PRP could be more or less similiar. Therefore, after you conduct hazard analysis for a specific food chain and there comes a requirement/step where control is required to prevent /reduce the hazard it becomes oPRP .


CCP : CCP also arrive as a result of Hazard Aanlysis but difference b/w oPRP & CCP is the risk level of the identified hazard. If the hazard pose very high risk to food safety then it is CCP rather than oPRP(substantial risk) .
Also, while doing hazard analysis some steps are required to control the hazard but since the hazard is reduced /eliminated in further step , it is not considered a CCP , so in such case it's an oPRP

Hope I am able to bring in some clarity.

In case of some conflict do let me know .

Sonali

Hello all,

It seems lot of confusion was going around PRP, oPRP & CCP and infact that was also the reason with me landing at this forum.
I never understand , why these standard people make things more complex. Anyways getting to the point let me explain you in a very simple manner the difference b/w these 3 FSMS terms:

PRP : These are basically the generic controls in any type of food buisness operation. Mark the word GENERIC . These are to be applied in all types of food buisness so as to maintain a hygienic environment to reduce the risk to the Food Safety .
Eg - Plant Layout or infrasturcture control , pest control, personnnel hygiene, sanitation , work environment, food handling and storage , transporatation.

PRP are foundation of HACCP .

oPRP : These differ from PRP in the sense that these are SPECIFIC to particular industry /food operations . And these are arrived only after doing the hazard analysis. So, oPRP wil differ within the food industry while PRP could be more or less similiar. Therefore, after you conduct hazard analysis for a specific food chain and there comes a requirement/step where control is required to prevent /reduce the hazard it becomes oPRP .

CCP : CCP also arrive as a result of Hazard Aanlysis but difference b/w oPRP & CCP is the risk level of the identified hazard. If the hazard pose very high risk to food safety then it is CCP rather than oPRP(substantial risk) .
Also, while doing hazard analysis some steps are required to control the hazard but since the hazard is reduced /eliminated in further step , it is not considered a CCP , so in such case it's an oPRP

Hope I am able to bring in some clarity.

In case of some conflict do let me know .

Sonali

Hello Sonali, thank you very much for your input. As you posted your conclusions on three seperate threads (and emailed me) you must be pretty sure you are right.
Does everyone agree with Sonali's description?

Thanks again for your contribution Sonali, I hope you can stick around a while.

Welcome to the forums.

Regards,
Simon

I never understand , why these standard people make things more complex.

Hi Sonali,

maybe it's because many of them are consultants

Most of it was already mentioned. It is interesting to note that the concept of Pre-requisites assumes slightly different shapes when you search for this concepts worldwide.

Huss (http://www.fao.org/d...3e/y4743e00.htm) has provided some insight for this dicussion however not mentioning ISO 22000 has this article was published long before September 2005.

On August 2005, I questioned one of the developers of the standard John Surak for the need of a sylabus explaining in detail fundamentals and vocabulary as approapriate as there is for ISO 9000:2000. He told me that it was not planned to develop such a document.

Some insight for this specific differences are little explained in technical documents providing guidance on the implementation of ISO 22000:2005. Food safety is a continuing process. I expect to see more from ISO soon.

Jose

On August 2005, I questioned one of the developers of the standard John Surak for the need of a sylabus explaining in detail fundamentals and vocabulary as approapriate as there is for ISO 9000:2000. He told me that it was not planned to develop such a document.

Some insight for this specific differences are little explained in technical documents providing guidance on the implementation of ISO 22000:2005. Food safety is a continuing process. I expect to see more from ISO soon.

Hi there Jose; if not we could always try to put one together here?

Regards,
Simon