Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Corrective Action for CCP Physical Contamination


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

Rosemary4

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 138 posts
  • 43 thanks
10
Good

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:ashbourne

Posted 16 December 2016 - 03:01 PM

Hi all,

We have just had our first BRC audit under v5 and received a minor ncr regarding the corrective actions for identified CCPs in the HACCP risk analysis. The actual statement is 'The corrective actions for the identified CCPs (CCP1 - bolts etc from tooling, CCP2 - paint flakes off machine components) failed to refer to the actual procedures to be followed regarding potentially contaminated product.'

I have rewritten our quality procedures to fit in with the Standard clauses. Product contamination control (4.9) where you would expect this section appears to focus on glass, brittle plastics, ceramics and similar materials control, sharps control, chemical and biological control.

Can anyone point me in the right direction for which clause covers the 2 CCPs please? We address them during the machine set up using the checklist which covers the CCPs but this wasn't sufficient.



Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,528 posts
  • 1318 thanks
717
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 16 December 2016 - 03:38 PM

Hi Rosemary, I don't think they should be CCP's and should be covered by prerequisite procedures.

By classifying the hazards as CCP's you have elevated them unnecessarily.

 

Regards,

Simon


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


Thanked by 1 Member:
GMO

Rosemary4

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 138 posts
  • 43 thanks
10
Good

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:ashbourne

Posted 16 December 2016 - 04:00 PM

Thanks for the response Simon. We have always had them as CCPs. As you're in the same line I believe, how do you address them in pre requisite documents?

 

Is the BRC Standard really only concentrating on the contamination issues aforementioned?



Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,528 posts
  • 1318 thanks
717
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 16 December 2016 - 04:50 PM

On the two mentioned your preventive maintenance program should address the condition of both the buildings, infrastructure, machinery and equipment to prevent contamination and also then you need other operational procedures such as pre-op checks, line clearance, cleaning and engineering safe handover following maintenance etc.

 

Hope this helps. :smile:

 

Regards,

Simon


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


Sharon (Dewsbury)

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 130 posts
  • 68 thanks
24
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:West Yorkshire UK

Posted 22 December 2016 - 01:25 PM

I agree,

They are better to be pre reqs. but the NC reads to me as if you did not reference the control procedure in the HACCP risk assessment table. Is that correct?

Even pre reqs need to be reviewed and risk assessed so they may appear in the HACCP RA in the same way and the procedure which covers acquaintance etc should be referenced in that table .

e.g.

 

hazard                                    control

Flaky paint                              Maintenance procedure QP xyz



GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,700 posts
  • 695 thanks
186
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 22 December 2016 - 01:45 PM

I agree with the other commentators that they are very likely to be PRPs.

 

But with respect to CCPs (or even PRP) corrective actions; I think it's useful to think of the past, present and future. 

 

The past is "what product has been impacted?" so if you have missing bolts or a metal detector failure say, you may want to put that product on hold and have some guidelines around what to do with it. 

 

The present is "what do we do now to prevent product becoming contaminated?"  So often it's as simple as "stop the line".

 

The future is considering all of the past and present including root cause analysis to decide how you got to where you are and what you're going to put in place to prevent it going forward. 

 

It seems to me that for your HACCP plan the non conformance related to a lack of clear action on what you'd do with potentially contaminated product but yes, definitely not a CCP.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users