7 replies to this topic

[CRix]

Hello everybody 

 

I am new to this forum & new to the firm i joined due to some issues (Manager passed away) currently i am the in charge of quality in my business until some replacement comes on board. 

 

 

Can anyone please show me a template of knife control policy . i will be really grateful. 

 

 

Thank you in advance.

 

Regards

 

 

[Slab]

Hi, Crix;

 

Here is what I use for SQF:

 

 Edged Utensil Policy.docx   23.98KB   1419 downloads

 Edged Utensil Register.docx   21.41KB   1195 downloads

 

It's fairly straight forward, but the methods may change depending on which guidance you follow, the type of processing you do, and type/number of edged utensils used in production.

 

Essentially you need to  establish;

 

• Control
• responsibility
• Monitoring
• Verification/validation
• Review

Welcome to the forums, and best of luck!

 

 

 

[Charles.C]

Hi, Crix;

 

Here is what I use for SQF:

 

Edged Utensil Policy.docx

Edged Utensil Register.docx

 

It's fairly straight forward, but the methods may change depending on which guidance you follow, the type of processing you do, and type/number of edged utensils used in production.

 

Essentially you need to  establish;

 

• Control
• responsibility
• Monitoring
• Verification/validation
• Review

Welcome to the forums, and best of luck!

 

Hi Slab,

 

Nice Procedures. Thks.

The Devils are usually in the details (WIs) of course.

 

Incidentally, in respect to other recent threads, I note that yr Procedure does not show (a) an “Approval Signature”, (b) a “Next Review” date, (c) any indication as to whether “Controlled” or not.

 

Is this because none of (a,b,c) are auditor required (or expected) by SQF (sec.2.2.1 is amazingly concise !) or that you have covered one or more of these aspects  in other documents, eg  a Document Control Procedure ? (Personally I include [c] for BRC [required])(Just curious).

[Slab]

Hi Slab,

 

Nice Procedures. Thks.

The Devils are usually in the details (WIs) of course.

 

Incidentally, in respect to other recent threads, I note that yr Procedure does not show (a) an “Approval Signature”, (b) a “Next Review” date, (c) any indication as to whether “Controlled” or not.

 

Is this because none of (a,b,c) are auditor required (or expected) by SQF (sec.2.2.1 is amazingly concise !) or that you have covered one or more of these aspects  in other documents, eg  a Document Control Procedure ? (Personally I include [c] for BRC [required])(Just curious).

 

Hi, Charles;

 

Those requirements are managed with a system document register. Originally It was much easier for the review process in having all in a centralized location, but will be adding some of the elements in (specifically approval, and date of review) in order to help expedite during audits.

[Charles.C]

Hi, Charles;

 

Those requirements are managed with a system document register. Originally It was much easier for the review process in having all in a centralized location, but will be adding some of the elements in (specifically approval, and date of review) in order to help expedite during audits.

 

Thanks. Yes, I came to the same conclusion, traditional documents are often a mass of boxes but splitting some items off seems to work better. It's tempting to do a similar manoeuvre with "revision history" but I found that less easy.

[Scampi]

Our tools are part of our foreign material program. The monitoring is as follows:

prior to start up, it is recorded how many knives are on the production floor, then once per 1/2 hour ALL hand tools are monitored for integrity. Also note: our policy is to STOP production if a knife breaks as we do not run with a metal detector

 

It's simply about managing the hazard(s) for your particular situation 

[Charles.C]

Our tools are part of our foreign material program. The monitoring is as follows:

prior to start up, it is recorded how many knives are on the production floor, then once per 1/2 hour ALL hand tools are monitored for integrity. Also note: our policy is to STOP production if a knife breaks as we do not run with a metal detector

 

It's simply about managing the hazard(s) for your particular situation 

 

Hi scampi,

 

From memory some previous Procedures/WIs  are perhaps more rigorous regarding traceability in that knives were individually identified and logged out to specific personnel.. Ultimately, individual OUT must = individual IN (condition checked OK) per person. And totals of course.

 

Such Procedures were then followed by a long discussion(s) on how to "mark"  knives.

[Guitardr85]

Additionally...this was the unit that originally peaked my interest...

 

https://www.restaura...DTpkaAv0Q8P8HAQ