Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Raw Material Hazard Analysis - Quality


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

#1 rzhang

rzhang

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 25 April 2019 - 01:16 AM

Hi Everyone,

 

My company recently had an audit SQF (we are a bakery) and one of the minors we had was that we do not have a hazard analysis for raw materials which affect product quality.

 

We do have a raw material hazard analysis for Biological, Chemical and Physical hazard and I was hoping to add a few quality points (Integrity and Sensory) but I am just confused on all the possible quality hazards and how to rank the risk assessment (high, medium, low, negligible). 

For instance milk chocolate wafers

 

Integrity - color might be off, size of the wafers might not be to specification

Sensory - aroma and flavor could be off (old lot/not correct chocolate) 

 

Of course the following would affect the final product.

 

Can I use a likelihood x severity table to determine the risk? If so, how would I do that with so many factors that could deviate the ingredient quality. 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Rita

 

ps. We do have a food fraud and vulnerability assessment done for each ingredient. We thought that that assessment would be enough to cover the quality aspect as we included our supplier CoA frequency, country of origin, supplier relationship etc, however the auditor deem it not sufficient. 



#2 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,393 posts
  • 4841 thanks
944
Excellent

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

Posted 25 April 2019 - 01:57 AM

Hi Everyone,

 

My company recently had an audit SQF (we are a bakery) and one of the minors we had was that we do not have a hazard analysis for raw materials which affect product quality.

 

We do have a raw material hazard analysis for Biological, Chemical and Physical hazard and I was hoping to add a few quality points (Integrity and Sensory) but I am just confused on all the possible quality hazards and how to rank the risk assessment (high, medium, low, negligible). 

For instance milk chocolate wafers

 

Integrity - color might be off, size of the wafers might not be to specification

Sensory - aroma and flavor could be off (old lot/not correct chocolate) 

 

Of course the following would affect the final product.

 

Can I use a likelihood x severity table to determine the risk? If so, how would I do that with so many factors that could deviate the ingredient quality. 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Rita

 

ps. We do have a food fraud and vulnerability assessment done for each ingredient. We thought that that assessment would be enough to cover the quality aspect as we included our supplier CoA frequency, country of origin, supplier relationship etc, however the auditor deem it not sufficient. 

 

Hi rzhang,

 

afaik there are no "quality" requirements if intending certification to the SQF Manufacturing Standard.

 

Which Standard is involved ?


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#3 rzhang

rzhang

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:24 AM

Hi Charles C,

 

I hope I am answering your question correctly, but we were being audited with SQF code 8 standards. 

 

The auditor was looking for quality hazard analysis done for our raw ingredients.

 

I am just confused on how to go about this and if I should apply the likelihood x severity table to determine the risk associated to the quality (ie. severity - customer has no issues to customer no longer purchases the product; likelihood (ex. off color for filling) uncommon to frequent). 

 

Am I on the right track here?

 

Thanks,

 

Rita 



#4 SQFconsultant

SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,090 posts
  • 788 thanks
652
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Truth is like a delicious slice of watermelon... you just want more and more!

Posted 25 April 2019 - 02:29 AM

Was this a standard SQF 8.0 manufacturing audit or an SQF 8.0 Quality manufacturing audit?

 

As it - what level - it use to be 1, 2, 3 -- most at 2 and the 3rd level was quality.   -- 3rd level is now the Quality - so how were you audited -- standard or Quality?


Kind regards,

 

Glenn Oster
 
GOC GROUP / +1.772.646.4115 / Food - Food Packaging - Food Storage/DC

SQF, BRC & IFS System Development, Implementation & Certification Consultants

Serving Small-to-Mid-Size Businesses | Now accepting: BTC, XRP, ETH, DAI, USDCoin & LTC

Internal Auditor Training | eConsultant | FSVP | United States - Panama - Costa Rica

http://www.GlennOsterConsulting.com  -- 

 

 

Red October? Possibly - more like Green

Get the GOC C-CUR Guide (PDF)

https://bit.ly/36hW9Z2

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

#5 rzhang

rzhang

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:12 AM

Hello,

 

Sorry for the confusion.

 

Our plant is SQF level 3 and we were audited based on the SQF edition 8 for both safety and quality. My question is related to the quality aspect particularly section 2.4.3.8.

 

Thanks,

 

Rita



#6 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,393 posts
  • 4841 thanks
944
Excellent

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

Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:15 AM

Hi Rita,

 

As per previous Post there are 2 possibilities.

afaik, it is necessary to achieve certification for the Manufacturing (-Safety only) before can be further certified to Quality Standard although IIRC you can be audited for both simultaneously.

 

There exists an example for a Quality "haccp" Procedure here -

 

https://www.ifsqn.co...lan/#entry90692

 

PS - posts overlapped.

if you are certified to lvl3 you must have developed a Quality "haccp" plan already.

 

PPS - to save time, what is 2.4.3.8 ?


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#7 rzhang

rzhang

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:46 AM

Hi Charles. C,

 

Our plant was simultaneously audited for both safety and quality. 

 

We do have a quality plan in place but it not very complete.

 

Section 2.4.3.8 is in reference to section 2.4 Food Quality Plan in the SQF ed  Quality Code which we had our minor.

 

Thanks,

 

Rita



#8 3560lynne

3560lynne

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 55 posts
  • 23 thanks
13
Good

  • United States
    United States

Posted 25 April 2019 - 10:47 AM

I thought SQF Quality Code (formerly level 3) was pass or fail and has no effect on the rating for Safety For Manufacturing (formerly level 2), no?



#9 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,361 posts
  • 992 thanks
263
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 25 April 2019 - 11:29 AM

Hi Everyone,

 

My company recently had an audit SQF (we are a bakery) and one of the minors we had was that we do not have a hazard analysis for raw materials which affect product quality.

 

We do have a raw material hazard analysis for Biological, Chemical and Physical hazard and I was hoping to add a few quality points (Integrity and Sensory) but I am just confused on all the possible quality hazards and how to rank the risk assessment (high, medium, low, negligible). 

For instance milk chocolate wafers

 

Integrity - color might be off, size of the wafers might not be to specification

Sensory - aroma and flavor could be off (old lot/not correct chocolate) 

 

Of course the following would affect the final product.

 

Can I use a likelihood x severity table to determine the risk? If so, how would I do that with so many factors that could deviate the ingredient quality. 

 

Thanks,

 

Rita

 

Hi Rita,

 

Your process should be similar to HACCP but for 'Quality Hazards' so likelihood vs. severity is fine. You should be prioritizing based on the % of ingredient in the final product and it's effect on the quality of the final product. 

For bakery the quality of flour immediately jumps out as the main priority? Maybe butter/fats/oil are the next priority as they can have off flavours. Yeast if required to produce a raised product? Similarly baking powder? So work from the highest priorities down.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony



#10 rzhang

rzhang

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 26 April 2019 - 12:03 AM

Hi Tony,

 

Thank you for your reply.

 

I just want you to review the following example to see if my thoughts are in the right place with the likelihood vs severity risk assessment.

 

Flour (important commodity since our plant makes bread)

 

Final product results if flour was not good quality/flour was not used:

 

[Severity] - Integrity (bread does not properly form); Sensory (cake will taste off) therefore HIGH RISK

[Likelihood] - Ingredient has decent shelf life, stored at ambient temperature, reliable supplier, no cases of fraud, therefore: LOW RISK 

 

Overall it is still a Critical material since the ingredient affects the final product.

 

I am thinking in the right direction?

 

Sincerely,

 

Rita 



#11 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,393 posts
  • 4841 thanks
944
Excellent

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

Posted 26 April 2019 - 02:10 AM

Hi Tony,

 

Thank you for your reply.

 

I just want you to review the following example to see if my thoughts are in the right place with the likelihood vs severity risk assessment.

 

Flour (important commodity since our plant makes bread)

 

Final product results if flour was not good quality/flour was not used:

 

(a) [Severity] - Integrity (bread does not properly form); Sensory (cake will taste off) therefore HIGH RISK

(b) [Likelihood] - Ingredient has decent shelf life, stored at ambient temperature, reliable supplier, no cases of fraud, therefore: LOW RISK 

 

Overall it is still a Critical material since the ingredient affects the final product.

 

I am thinking in the right direction?

 

Sincerely,

 

Rita 

 

Hi Rita,

 

I'm not a SQF user (and not a supporter of doing CQP analyses) but, offhand, I think there are at least 2 basic errors -

 

(1) Severity / Likelihood are not designated as RISKS, eg line (a) should read -

 

Severity] - Integrity (bread does not properly form); Sensory (cake will taste off) therefore HIGH RISK

(2) for a typical 3x3 risk matrix, a Low(b) and a High(a) probably yields  a Low Risk (unless you wish to generate a large number of CQPs).

 

I suggest you review the attachment I linked to earlier. And the SQF Guidance.

 

I do not know if one is "allowed" by SQF to designate "Quality Prerequisite Programs" for a Food Quality Plan ???. (I suspect not?)


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate