FSSC 2200 Audit Finding

Hi All

I need assistance below please.

Finding:

-The methodology described in the HACCP study is not complete in that it does not indicate what should happen with risks categorized as High, Medium or Low. Whether they should be controlled or not - it stops at categorization. (Please see attached document for finding)

Corrective Action:

-Review methodology in HACCP Study , describe whether  they should be controlled or not in the risks categorized as High, Medium or Low (please see document for corrective action)

Auditor reviewed response on corrective action:

-The definition of a PRP states that it ensures basic hygiene conditions. 

- PRP's are not suitable for controlling significant risks. 

-The correct terminology must be used in the method

Please assist with which suitable wording can be used.

1) Your categorization is not suitable and as per recommended practice.

2) It seems you have not mentioned or linked controls to each categorized hazard. For example if you have identified ABC hazard and XYZ should be used to control that hazard, your documentation is not clear to link ABC and XYZ. Probably no one can easily understand which hazard, especially critical one, is controlled by which control measure.

HACCP methodology is very simple to understand and implement.

1) Identify all the existing and potential hazards

2) Assess all hazards individually and categorized each as either critical, moderate or insignificant based on risk-matrix (severity x likelihood model).

3) Identify and mention in HACCP study the control measures you intend to implement against each hazard. (CCP for critical, OPRP or PRP for moderate and PRP for insignificant).

Lot of material is available on internet in the form of formats and examples to assist you in making methodology and procedures. Codex and IFSQN websites are two of the best resources.

Regards.

Muhammad Zeeshan.

Hi All

 

I need assistance below please.

 

Finding:

-The methodology described in the HACCP study is not complete in that it does not indicate what should happen with risks categorized as High, Medium or Low. Whether they should be controlled or not - it stops at categorization. (Please see attached document for finding)

 

Corrective Action:

-Review methodology in HACCP Study , describe whether  they should be controlled or not in the risks categorized as High, Medium or Low (please see document for corrective action)

 

Auditor reviewed response on corrective action:

-The definition of a PRP states that it ensures basic hygiene conditions. 

- PRP's are not suitable for controlling significant risks. 

-The correct terminology must be used in the method

 

Please assist with which suitable wording can be used.

Dear R.F

Auditor reviewed response on CA is absolutely correct. you should define first what is serious hazard (as stated in your attachment), what is significant hazard and controlled hazard. As i can see in your attachment you have made serious hazard as significant hazard. Better you use only two terms significant hazard and non-significant hazard and you have to control significant hazard by OPRP or by CCP and non-significant hazards by PRPs. 

Regards

Mahantesh

Need to improve to describe specific details and to define clearly the actions to be taken.