Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Document Review Requirement for IFS PACsecure


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

#1 dbehrmann

dbehrmann

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 16 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 01 February 2018 - 04:57 PM

Hello,

I have scanned the IFS PACsecure standards and am unable to find a required "document review"; meaning: documents will be reviewed annually or every two years, etc.  Am I missing something--is there actually a requirement stating that all docs must be reviewed an a minimum every 2 years?

 

Thank you for any assistance.



#2 Danica

Danica

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 63 posts
  • 18 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Yoga, running, mediation, nature, cooking/eating, reading, learning, science/tech, life in general :)

Posted 07 February 2018 - 06:06 PM

Hi,

 

I have the PACsecure standards and it states in many sections that documents shall be reviewed annually or when there is a change to product formulation/configuration, new risks, etc.

 

IFS PACsecure audit requirements Sections 1.4.1, 4.18.4; 4.20.3; 6.1.2 for example require annual review. Also some SOPs need to be reviewed annually (product defense, product fraud, product recall, HACCP plan, PRPs, crisis management program). 

 

Depending on your internal audits also, you will have to determine which procedure requires to be updated.

 

Good Luck :)
DA



Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 dbehrmann

dbehrmann

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 16 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 07 February 2018 - 08:15 PM

Hello Danica,

Thank you for responding and taking the time to review the standard.  I believe I am clear now with regards to how we should proceed.  If I understand correctly, we will continue our annual review of the required documents and SOPs but our actual  "how to do your job" procedures will be left alone unless a change is needed?  Is that how you see it?

 

Kind Regards,

 

Daphne



#4 Danica

Danica

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 63 posts
  • 18 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Yoga, running, mediation, nature, cooking/eating, reading, learning, science/tech, life in general :)

Posted 07 February 2018 - 08:33 PM

Hi Daphne,

 

Yes that is how I understand it. Procedures that may change due to new legislation, modification of process (or new equipment=new risks), or things that do not work optimally and for which you might find that you have a collection of corrective actions are the ones I would target for document review. If you have a new risk/hazard, you have to review the documents that are related to the new risk/hazard.

Also, as you use your documents, you might see a better way to set them up and review/modify them. But some DO require to be reviewed no matter what once per year.

 

I hope my answer makes sense ;)

Good Luck :)

 

Cheers,

Danica



#5 dbehrmann

dbehrmann

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 16 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 07 February 2018 - 09:10 PM

Great--thanks again you have been very helpful!   

 

One question, do you have your general work instructions included in your Food Safety Plan, or only your actual documents required by the Standard?  When we first setup, we didn't really know so we pulled in all of our procedures (over 344) which is why I'm wondering about the annual review.



#6 Danica

Danica

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 63 posts
  • 18 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Yoga, running, mediation, nature, cooking/eating, reading, learning, science/tech, life in general :)

Posted 17 July 2018 - 03:06 PM

oups..I apologize for the late reply.

 

ah, to give you an idea: we have the PRP, the HACCP plan and related monitoring forms, 35 SOPs (including 2 SSOPs), 2 PMPs, 60 forms, RMS, product spec sheets, appendix (test results, Food fraud/prod defense mitigation plans, etc.). Our process flow-chart has 14 steps.

 

We have 6 thermoforming production lines (all different types of machines), we make approx.100+ different products (50% food-50% non-food), but our plant operates as if we were 100% food grade. So you can imagine for us, it is a bit complex to have once procedure per product, per material, per machine (the molding for 1 product can fit on multiple machines and one product can be made with more than one material).

 

We have established product specification and we must meet these, this is the most important parameter. In our plant, sometimes the environment in the plant is a couple of degrees hotter/cooler: the machines need setting 'x', then humidity is 5% more: equipment needs setting 'x1' so we have machinist and operators that optimize the production as they go, but the most important for us is that staff are aware of product specification and that these are consistently met. Un-compliant products are discarded.

 

I have based myself on the IFS PACsecure audit requirements, FSEP (Canadian food safety enhancement program manual), and our plant's QC program to write our food safety program (quality management system included).

 

Ouch..344 SOPs? Surely not all of them are mandatory for the IFS PACsecure standard? I find this a bit much to be frank.

I am not sure this answers your question...

 

Good Luck!



Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 Danica

Danica

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 63 posts
  • 18 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Yoga, running, mediation, nature, cooking/eating, reading, learning, science/tech, life in general :)

Posted 17 July 2018 - 03:09 PM

**training for us is the most important in production. Training, QC, and supervision.

Keep in mind, we are just implementing the std since March so this will probably change once we get audited. Maybe they will require one procedure per product..we got our first internal IFS audit, and the auditor did not mention to us we needed one procedure per product though..



Thanked by 1 Member:

#8 dbehrmann

dbehrmann

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 16 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 17 July 2018 - 04:21 PM

Appreciate your following up on this.  We have completed our 4th Annual IFS PACsecure audit and luckily scored well.  Albeit, I'm always trying to streamline our system whenever possible.  Many of our documents are named "Procedures" but in reality they could be reclassified as "Work Instructions".  I'm hoping to find some time to deal with that down the road!   

 

Thanks again!



#9 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 13,978 posts
  • 3853 thanks
459
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 18 July 2018 - 07:38 PM

Appreciate your following up on this.  We have completed our 4th Annual IFS PACsecure audit and luckily scored well.  Albeit, I'm always trying to streamline our system whenever possible.  Many of our documents are named "Procedures" but in reality they could be reclassified as "Work Instructions".  I'm hoping to find some time to deal with that down the road!   

 

Thanks again!

 

Hi Daphne,

 

Yes, indeed, the decision whether to classify documents as Procedures or Work Instructions is an old, old ISO chestnut. Many philosophical arguments exist over this,  often generating more heat than light. :smile:

 

Historically (ISO-wise) "Procedures" tended to be reserved for high  level "documents" as portrayed in the famed ISO triangle but many people preferred to stuff eveything into one document so the WIs >>> Procedures.

 

Nowadays, IMEX, there is a tendency to simply refer to a new, arbitrary, documented method as a "Procedure" sort of phasing out WIs. Traditions change maybe. Sounds like you have the opposite Trend !


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate