Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

SOPs based only on CCPs - has anyone heard of this?

SOP CCP

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

#1 SQFTIRED

SQFTIRED

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 3 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 04 July 2020 - 04:50 PM

Hello, 

 

I am currently working in the Hemp industry at a new company and their approach to Standard Operating Procedures is to only have them for their processes that contain a CCP. They have stretched the definition for CCP to include something they call a Quality CCP as well. They want to have standalone work instructions for everything else.  Additionally they want forms to be associated with SOPs or stand alone, however, not to be associated with work instructions.  I feel that this is very confusing as it is hard to follow the process in the documentation and there are gaps for important processes because they don't contain a CCP and it is difficult to include process in a work instruction.  Any thoughts? ideas? help?

 

Thanks



#2 SQFconsultant

SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,424 posts
  • 869 thanks
738
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:American Patriot
    WWG1WGA
    Never give up, never give in
    HICKORY, NORTH CAROLINA USA

Posted 04 July 2020 - 05:50 PM

Looks like a full revamp is needed.


Kind regards,
Glenn Oster
 
GOC Group | +1.800.793.7042 | Serving the Food, Food Packaging & Food Storage Industries
SQF Development, Implementation, eContinuity & Certification Consultants 
 
In a nutshell we help small to large businesses to get their act together (as needed), help them to co-develop
entire SQF documentation systems, make recommendations as to installations and repairs in order
to get certified and continue with on-going support thru our popular eConsultant program and we do
all within 30 days so your staff can implement with our assistance to retain and get new business!
 
Serving the new Republic of the United States of America & Alliance Countries

http://www.GlennOster.com


Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Ryan M.

Ryan M.

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,060 posts
  • 406 thanks
201
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham, AL
  • Interests:Reading, crosswords, passionate discussions, laughing at US politics.

Posted 04 July 2020 - 09:08 PM

What regulatory framework and/or certifications does the facility have or is seeking?



#4 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,037 posts
  • 5051 thanks
1,070
Excellent

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

Posted 05 July 2020 - 12:49 PM

Hello, 

 

I am currently working in the Hemp industry at a new company and their approach to Standard Operating Procedures is to only have them for their processes that contain a CCP. They have stretched the definition for CCP to include something they call a Quality CCP as well. They want to have standalone work instructions for everything else.  Additionally they want forms to be associated with SOPs or stand alone, however, not to be associated with work instructions.  I feel that this is very confusing as it is hard to follow the process in the documentation and there are gaps for important processes because they don't contain a CCP and it is difficult to include process in a work instruction.  Any thoughts? ideas? help?

 

Thanks

One wonders what the original justification for these curious manouevres was ? Minimise paperwork ?

 

As per Post 3, is the facility CFIA-approved ??


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#5 SQFTIRED

SQFTIRED

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 3 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 06 July 2020 - 02:38 PM

The facility is Health Canada approved and is moving towards being GACP certified by the end of the year and then looking towards having some sort of GFSI certification within the next year.  

 

I'm not sure why they chose this approach, I think they feel that is how it is addressed in the GACP guidelines, however I can't seem to see that anywhere  I would like to do a full revamp.







0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users