Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

SQF 11.5.3.1 - Heavy Metal Testing in Water

sqf water potability

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

#1 Scampi

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,233 posts
  • 885 thanks
469
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 18 February 2021 - 08:53 PM

Hellllo, I know I fought an SQF auditor in the past re: heavy metal testing on a municipal water source.......am I missing something in the code or do we simply have to test for potability and not "quality". 11.5.3.1 Water shall comply with local, national, or internationally recognized potable water microbiological and quality standards, as required when used for Heavy metal testing is very expensive and I'd like to remove this from our current program  and truth be told-water with levels of lead or cadmium etc would never get past the municipal testing AND this building is only 20 years old so no old lead pipes or metal solder. Thoughts???


Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs


#2 Spidey

Spidey

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 83 posts
  • 24 thanks
30
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female

Posted 18 February 2021 - 09:28 PM

My facility only tests for coliforms and potability.  We also receive and review the city's Annual Water Quality Report which includes heavy metals.  This has not been a problem in the two SQF audits we have been through.

 

Our building is only 15 years old.


Edited by Spidey, 18 February 2021 - 09:29 PM.


#3 TaraMcKinzie

TaraMcKinzie

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 3 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:AZ

Posted 18 February 2021 - 09:37 PM

My facility only tests for coliforms and potability.  We also receive and review the city's Annual Water Quality Report which includes heavy metals.  This has not been a problem in the two SQF audits we have been through.

 

Our building is only 15 years old.

This has worked for me as well.  Make sure it's in your SOP and have the city report handy for the auditor.



#4 SQFconsultant

SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,501 posts
  • 887 thanks
762
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:American Patriot
    WWG1WGA
    Never give up, never give in
    Vineyard Haven on the island of Martha's Vineyard off the coast of Massachusetts, USA

Posted 18 February 2021 - 09:45 PM

We advise our clients to have at least 2 independent wq tests a year none of which include a hm section... we have never had an auditor raise an issue.


Kind regards,
Glenn Oster
 
GOC Group | +1.800.793.7042 | Serving the Food, Food Packaging & Food Storage Industries
SQF Development, Implementation, eContinuity & Certification Consultants 
 
Internal Auditor Training | SQF-GAP | Plandemic Fallout Specialist
 
Serving the American Republic, Centro America and Caribbean Islands

http://www.GlennOster.com


#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,197 posts
  • 5100 thanks
1,102
Excellent

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

Posted 19 February 2021 - 07:38 AM

Hellllo, I know I fought an SQF auditor in the past re: heavy metal testing on a municipal water source.......am I missing something in the code or do we simply have to test for potability and not "quality". 11.5.3.1 Water shall comply with local, national, or internationally recognized potable water microbiological and quality standards, as required when used for Heavy metal testing is very expensive and I'd like to remove this from our current program  and truth be told-water with levels of lead or cadmium etc would never get past the municipal testing AND this building is only 20 years old so no old lead pipes or metal solder. Thoughts???

 

For Ver 9, SQF (see website resouces/changes) have added "quality" to clause 11.5.3.1 however the (so far?) corresponding  dwl Guidance is for ver. 8.1. Nonetheless the latter already contained a strangely  ambiguous "quality" comment (see below).

 

From ver.9 -

 

 

11.5.3.1    Water shall comply with local, national, or internationally recognized potable water microbiological and quality standards, as required when used for:......

 

 

From the  8.1 Guidance -

The supplier must be aware of the national and/or international potable water standards and any microbiological or chemical water standards imposed by customers.  Analysis (refer to 11.5.6) must be conducted to ensure water continues to meet the required standard.

The rate at which water is tested should, ideally, be based on risk, owing to the potential for seasonal variations in the supply, but at minimum, water should be tested at least annually for potability and any additional quality or safety attribute.

 

Last 7 words above are sort of meaningless as stated.

 

I was unable to find any specific reference to "heavy metals" in Guidance material.

 

However IMO, specification-wise, "potability" of Process water should include, minimally, heavy metals. EU have an encyclopedical chemical list but IM(BRC)EX only a short selection from this list is expected, including heavy metals.

 

So Is there a Canadian Standard for Potability of Process water? And "Quality" ?

 

(IIRC, there is a USFDA-defined standard for bottled water which includes heavy metals).


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#6 Scampi

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,233 posts
  • 885 thanks
469
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 19 February 2021 - 01:09 PM

Yes Glenn, there is a standard. However, our water coming into the building is already tested as per regulations for heavy metals  (ours if from the great lakes)

 

I asked a co-worker here and it may be a Costco requirement.......jeesh.  Makes perfect sense to test for it if you have a really old building with lead pipes.........but in the commodity I'm working in now.....you don't (as in can't) eat the portion that would be in contact with water (for less than 30 seconds total)

 

Ambiguous testing without logic drives me nuts

 

Thanks all, my thinking was correct


Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users