Is a Pulper Tank a CCP or not?
I am currently creating a Hazard analysis for a Pulper tank and I am not sure if it should be a CCP or not. We only place paper and cardboard in it. I am also not sure what type of micros should be tested on the finish product.
I am currently creating a Hazard analysis for a Pulper tank and I am not sure if it should be a CCP or not. We only place paper and cardboard in it. I am also not sure what type of micros should be tested on the finish product.
Very mystical.
Food Product = ?
Process = ?
Beginning Trials on Food Trays ( there will be food inside the plastic bag then the item will be placed in the tray, Egg cartons and Non food grade items. Not sure if we need an authorized Authority to commission the thermo-forming process for non food grade items. Not sure if micros need to be performed on the mentioned items.
I had a client that ran a paper converting company and the end product was egg cartons in various confrigerations.
They had several pulpers.
They did not have the Pulper as a CCP.
A new customer came on board and asked about the pulper not being listed as a CCP for micro's.
The customer said either they wanted the pulper tested for a couple of different micro's - so our client did that and found presense of Sam, so that went one step further and tested right after thermo forming.
And the test came up negative.
They did this several times and it was finally determined to not make the pulper the CCP but to do a risk analysis and do random testing after forming -- after a year they still did not have an positives.
I would take a look at aftermath areas.
This is great information. Thank you! If the thermoforming process were to eliminate the micros would the thermoformer be the CCP? What if the thermoformer does not eliminate the presumptive micro? Is there a process authority who can come in and validate the process?
This is great information. Thank you! If the thermoforming process were to eliminate the micros would the thermoformer be the CCP? What if the thermoformer does not eliminate the presumptive micro? Is there a process authority who can come in and validate the process?
I'm not a Packaging person but I anticipate the answer to yr query / hazard analysis will depend on -
(1) Standard involved,eg whether traditional Codex-type haccp or iso22000-type haccp
(2) The detailed process/hazard analysis including after thermoforming.
The need for a micro. control measure / CCP at the thermoformer will logically depend on the likelihood of Salmonella (or any other pathogenic micro hazard) being present in the input materials entering the thermoformer. (either intrinsic to original input or from subsequent cross-contamination). Presumably depends on source/supplier.
If a need exists, the ability for a thermoformer to eliminate the hazard (eg > CCP) will relate to the (validatable) time/temperature profile of materials in the thermoformer and the subsequently generated process lethality. For example, approximately, in a routine food matrix pasteurization, achievance of temperatures > 75degC at the slowest heating point of item would typically ensure a targetted 6D microbial reduction of all vegetative species having heat resistance <= L.monocytogenes which is often (for food) regarded as the reference species to "remove".
I anticipate that thermoformers provide much higher temperatures/associated lethalities than the above. Typical, validatory, operational data/requirements hopefully exist in the Literature as a precursor to observations such as mentioned in Post 4. (example packaging haccp plans certainly exist).
afaik, Cardboard-based packaging is customarily regarded as non-hazardous from a microbial POV due to the high temperatures involved in its process and assuming subsequent hygienic handling procedures.
@Glenn - thks for Process comments, prior this thread I had never heard of a Pulper Tank. :smile: