Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Documentation requirements for PRP's


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

Vicki

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 16 May 2006 - 05:50 AM

I am from Australia and have just gone through a 22000 audit. We already had HACCP and 9001. I still have to do some paperwork as I have to do the PRP as a table showing hazard, risk, corrective action, section (where PRP applies in the audit table) and records. Has anyone else had to do it like this. While setting up the paperwork for 22000 I did a search on the web for PRP setup and it was nothing like the auditor is asking for here in Australia.
Any ideas?



Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 52 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 16 May 2006 - 09:38 AM

Hello Vicky

Must say its an interesting call from the auditor. I am sure you are aware that what the auditor is asking you to do is to prepare a Hazard Analysis Table for what :dunno: If the issue of "risk or hazard" is referred to a CCP then this is taken cared off by the Haccp Plan but not required for OPRP.

I am very familiar with the Australian HACCP Set-Up Format and is currently using the same style for the ISO 22000 Pilot Scheme that I had set up earlier and also for the current clients.

By the way, is your appointed auditor IRCA Food Registered because from what I know there is only one such qualified Auditor in Australia and he lives in Brisbane.

IMO, Australian Auditors particularly with AQIS background or (QSA) at the minimum should have the best and most number of ISO 22000 qualified auditors globally today. Why it has failed to do so puzzled me?

Charles


Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com

Vicki

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 16 May 2006 - 09:50 PM

Hello Vicky

Must say its an interesting call from the auditor. I am sure you are aware that what the auditor is asking you to do is to prepare a Hazard Analysis Table for what :dunno: If the issue of "risk or hazard" is referred to a CCP then this is taken cared off by the Haccp Plan but not required for OPRP.

I am very familiar with the Australian HACCP Set-Up Format and is currently using the same style for the ISO 22000 Pilot Scheme that I had set up earlier and also for the current clients.

By the way, is your appointed auditor IRCA Food Registered because from what I know there is only one such qualified Auditor in Australia and he lives in Brisbane.

IMO, Australian Auditors particularly with AQIS background or (QSA) at the minimum should have the best and most number of ISO 22000 qualified auditors globally today. Why it has failed to do so puzzled me?

Charles



Thanks Charles

I already have the Hazard Analysis Table when HACCP was formed. This is a different table showing all the CCP and CP relating not only to the original audit but also any new ones. The auditor we use does come from Brisbane and has been our auditor for a couple of years. I suppose due to 22000 being new to us there really is not any precedents set in Australia.

the headings I am using are as stated in my previous note. Do you believe this is all I will need?


Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 52 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 17 May 2006 - 12:55 AM

Hi Vicki

a. The HACCP Plan is no different from the one you already have under the HACCP Program which is based on the Codex CCP Decision Tree....so its a home run on this one

b. Through a combined of measures, these OPRP and PRP can be categorized in the HAT .....good idea to show it on the flow diagram as well. The issue here is about indicating what your "combined measures" are.

Although, we highlighted the PRP in a different way, I know why your auditor is asking you to do it this way and he is smart.

Personally, after giving it a deeper thought, I accept the auditor's point of view. I retract my earlier opinion but admittedly I have learned some thing as well. Thanks for bringing this up.


Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users