Chlorination Sampling Template Requested
Hi, I was just wondering if anyone had any links to a good Chlorination Sampling template.
TIA
Brian
Brian
What is the chlorine in? What application please
the chlorination system for our well water that supplies or plant.
For the technology? If you have in-line chlorine meter (wherein it sends signal to pump) then you may have lower frequency provided you have system for verifying the instrument (say weekly). For manual, what we practice in some plants is every 2 hours. The frequency if you ask we depend on our usage and size of the water reservoir.
Hi, I was just wondering if anyone had any links to a good Chlorination Sampling template.
TIA
Brian
Assuming there are no Regulatory requirements (???) the methodology depends on what you are sampling for/ what Standard/Requirements.
Assuming there are no Regulatory requirements (???) the frequency should be risk-based, eg what is current situation with respect to data ?
Some information as above would help.
TBH i would have anticipated that Regulatory requirements likely do exist but i daresay it depends on what the well water is specifically used for ?
I don't have a template, but I would use something like this for the well
Date Chlorine Test Results (ppm) Chlorine Added Y/N How much (litres) Chlorine Test Results (ppm)
For the plant
Date Location (main line, hand sinks etc) Chlorine Test results (ppm) Within Range Y/N
Out of curiosity, do you HAVE to chlorinate regularly? I've worked at lots of rural locations and the wells are only treated in the spring after the winter thaw
our water sampling test done by the public health department, twice yearly and the results are great. But where we're working in an RTE fish processing facility, CFIA wants us to ensure proper chlorination of the water.
Are you following FSEP?
I'm not understanding why CFIA is asking for the water to be chlorinated? That really shouldn't matter, just your micro results
You should however, be sampling your water monthly. If you have not yet run a chemical analysis , i suggest you do that as well
My background is in poultry, and CFIA was always satisfied with monthly samples (always main line, plus another location)
Fish Inspection Regulation (FIR)
We've been introducing the new Preventive Control Plan (PCP) format
Ah, are you canning?
No, we cook and package EEL (Anguilla rostrata/American Eel)
I'm asking all these questions because each process has it's own requirements for water (where i am now we chlorinate the cooling tunnel, but not the rest of the well water)
If you are retorting/pasteurizing, then that water should be chlorinated just in case the cans pull any of that water in.
PCP as per the FSEP program? Items A through G?
ok,then I am baffled why they want it chlorinated....unless you are using water to chill finished packages of any kind, then you do need to ensure potability of that water IF it is reused
ohhhhh thank you for that first link...had not seen it yet (and wow have I rocked the boat with them at my current post lol)
1) Adequate supplies of water that meet one of the following requirements shall be provided in every establishment under a minimum operating pressure of 140 kPa for fish processing, establishment cleaning and disinfection, ice making, employee sanitation and personal hygiene and the operation of toilets:
- the water has a coliform bacteria count, determined by a method acceptable to the President of the Agency, of not more than 2 per 100 millilitres; or
- the water is derived from a source approved by the President of the Agency.
(2) For the purpose of providing a safe and sanitary supply of water to an establishment, an inspector may require that water supply sources be chlorinated or otherwise treated.
So CFIA needs to tell you why they want it chlorinated, they cannot just arbitrarily tell you to spend money if you don't have to. You may have to until you get on a monthly schedule (if the water is always ok) If you are close to municipal water supplies, you can also reference their sampling in your water supply PCP. I used to print out the 3 closest municipal well water supply reports (yearly) that concurred my test results.
that's great to know, thank you
and these are the new regs for water (starting jan 15 2019)
Water — contact with food
70 (1) Any water that might come into contact with a food must be potable, unless it does not present a risk of contamination of the food, and must be protected against contamination.
Steam and ice — contact with food
(2) Any steam or ice that might come into contact with a food must be made from water that meets the requirements of subsection (1), unless the steam or ice does not present a risk of contamination of the food.
Water — cross-connections
(3) Any system that supplies water that meets the requirements of subsection (1) must not be cross-connected with any other system, unless measures are taken to eliminate any risk of contamination of a food as a result of the cross-connection.
Water given to food animals
(4) Any water or other source of hydration that is provided to food animals that are intended to be slaughtered in an establishment must not present a risk of injury to the health of those animals and must not present a risk of contamination of the meat products that may be derived from those animals.
Supply of water, steam and ice
71 (1) An establishment must be supplied, as appropriate for the food or the food animal that is intended to be slaughtered, as the case may be, and for the activity being conducted, with
- (a) water that is adequate in quantity, temperature, pH and pressure to meet the needs of the establishment;
- (b) steam that is adequate in quantity and pressure to meet those needs; and
- © ice that is adequate in quantity to meet those needs.
Treatment of water, steam or ice
(2) Any treatment of water, steam or ice must be applied in a manner that does not present a risk of contamination of a food.
Hi Scampi,
Possibly OT
As per my Post 5, an appropriate answer to OP (and its subsequent corollaries) appears to initially devolve as to (a) determining which Organisation (if any) has the Regulatory Power for the specific location / manufacturing application, (b) the consequent Regulatory BCP/radiological requirements and acceptable methods for achieving/verifying compliance.
Determining (a,b) appear to be a non-simple exercise for Canada. :smile:
A simple (but not necessarily Regulatory), oft-quoted, generic minimum safety requirement for food contactable water is "potability". The latter for Canada seems to be -
https://www.canada.c...mary-table.html
( or
Canadian Drinking Water(2017).pdf 284.88KB 9 downloads
@Biopes
PS - A template is simple enough - Time / Result / Acceptability but its input relates to yr methodology/SOP which is unknown. Perhaps you can clarify ? Or was that the actual object of yr OP request ?
My query Charles was why CFIA was telling poster that the water MUST be chlorinated......it is not within their mandate to arbitrarily demand things without just cause (i'm speaking legally here from years of experience dealing with the organization daily)
IME, the inspectors that roam from facility to facility are ill equipped to understand AND enforce the regulations as they are written and get their backs up when they are asked about something they've said
All Canadian manufacturers must follow the Canadian Drinking water guidelines for potability..........so if poster has never had a negative result......why chlorinate????? There is zero regulation/law stating that they MUST
You MUST do something if a sample comes back with an issue........but that doesn't mean chlorine all the time (could be a simple line flush)
Well water in Canada is generally speaking very safe (their are small pockets of geography where the wells are fairly shallow, in which case you would have to treat the water)
Hi Scampi,
I certainly agree with you that one would expect a Regulatory Authority (RA) to explain why a basic change in a "Process" is required. i would also anticipate that RA supply SOP/monitoring requirements.
I speculate that either the OP has misunderstood the CFIA's intentions or that data results viewed by the OP have either been misinterpreted (somewhere) or were incomplete.
As per my attachment in Post 19, the scope of potential items to be checked is extensive although the subsequently requested Chlorination would presumably relate to a microbiological factor. The latter appears to involve only a fairly small data set.
Or perhaps related data from some facility(s) in same locality has prompted the suggestion. ?
Hopefully the OP replies back to clarify!