4 replies to this topic

[Quality-Assurance]

One of customer standard required to test finished product for coliform( ready to eat salad) but our qa made an error and tested it for thermotolerant coliform for few months. Is that a significant non-conformance for that standard? Please advise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Charles.C]

One of customer standard required to test finished product for coliform( ready to eat salad) but our qa made an error and tested it for thermotolerant coliform for few months. Is that a significant non-conformance for that standard? Please advise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hi QA,

 

thermotolerant coliforms are sub-group of total coliforms so the declared result probably underestimated the correct value for total coliforms.

 

Did you notice a "significant" decrease in the declared result as compared to the typical level preceding the change in procedure ?

[Quality-Assurance]

Hi QA,

thermotolerant coliforms are sub-group of total coliforms so the declared result probably underestimated the correct value for total coliforms.

Did you notice a "significant" decrease in the declared result as compared to the typical level preceding the change in procedure ?

we usually have coliform level less than 10 cfu/g. So do you think we cannot justify it to the auditor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Charles.C]

we usually have coliform level less than 10 cfu/g. So do you think we cannot justify it to the auditor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Which auditor ?

 

Thermotolerant coliforms is  a (possible) sanitation indicator, not, afaik, a safety factor per se.

 

I suppose from a customer's POV, it was a temporary blunder however IIRC the thermotolerant coliform value is actually regarded as a better sanitation indicator than total coliforms so that  there was no effective loss of "sanitation control".

 

If by <10 cfu/g you mean that the actual lab results for both total coliforms and the thermotolerant coliforms are/were invariably "nil detection" you probably have little or no NC to defend anyway.

[Quality-Assurance]

Which auditor ?

Thermotolerant coliforms is a (possible) sanitation indicator, not, afaik, a safety factor per se.

I suppose from a customer's POV, it was a temporary blunder however IIRC the thermotolerant coliform value is actually regarded as a better sanitation indicator than total coliforms so that there was no effective loss of "sanitation control".

If by <10 cfu/g you mean that the actual lab results for both total coliforms and the thermotolerant coliforms are/were invariably "nil detection" you probably have little or no NC to defend anyway.

Thank you. Your information helped me a lot. Much appriciated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk