Hi All,
We are a restaurant and serve products either cooked on flame or in oven.
Pasta is cooked over flame and temp is monitored by probe thermometer.However, pizza, chicken wings, calamari etc are baked at 371C.
Cooking record shows oven display temp for few items like pizza(371). However, chicken wings and other seafood etc are manually probe to check core temp.(75 or above)
My concern is that should I keep critical limit as 75C for all items and use probe thermometer to monitor temp OR should set different limit for baking of Pizza and rely on calibrated display to avoid probing all times?
Hope I was able to explain it clearly....
Hi HinaAmmar,
As in yr previous thread, the answer might depend on what FS Standard (if any) is involved. Not yet known.
There are numerous discussions on this Forum and elsewhere regarding the appropriate (haccp) control of oven cooking operations.
Regarding "oven" processes in general, IIRC you can find some "support" for any of these possibilities, -
(1) setting a validated oven temperature as a CCP-critical limit, (seems statistically fairly common)
(2) setting no CCP/critical limit at all (seems statistically fairly common for dough-related products, I hv not, offhand, seen any use for poultry)(typically assumes that appearance of an inadequately heat-treated item [ie where temperature non-attains critical limit] will be visibly unacceptable therefore auto- rejected [ie = no hazard]).
(3) setting a validated oven temperature as an OPRP (only potentially relevant for iso-haccp, eg FS Standard fssc22000)
(4) setting a validated oven temperature as a PRP (seems relatively uncommon)
afaik the probe temperature is typically not used as a routine haccp monitoring datum for oven processes since more convenient to use oven temperature however probe data will be required for validation purposes.
Any validation (eg based on achieving a minimum core temperature 75 degC [at slowest heating point of the largest size item used] will need to consider temperature/time profile of oven, ie locating the coolest point.
Based on previous threads here, auditors seem to generally expect use of (1) or (2) for non-iso haccp. Auditors favouring (1) may require a detailed defence if the auditee implements (2).
Offhand, I would suspect that some of the items you mentioned in OP may not meet the specific criterium noted in (2) ? If not, and assuming traditional Codex haccp, I suggest No.(1) is preferable.
If using iso-haccp, additional factors may be involved with respect to No.(3).