Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Will FSSC 22000 5.1 - 2.5.1 apply to equipment calibration service to gain accreditation - ISO 17025?


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

#1 Koko LMQ

Koko LMQ

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 122 posts
  • 26 thanks
4
Neutral

  • Thailand
    Thailand

Posted 04 April 2021 - 12:43 AM

Dear members, just would like to get your opinion. Will the FSSC 22000 Version 5.1 - clause 2.5.1 applied to equipment calibration service to gain the ISO 17025 or equivalent? Firstly I think, from version 5.0 it is specific to only product safety parameter testing/analysis but now it looks like FSSC would like to apply for "equipment calibration" with ISO 17025 as well. Why? I have a look the "GFSI self evaluation checklist" which FSSC prepared for GFSI Ver 2020.1 Benchmarking and adding the equipment calibration with GFSI clause FSM 19.1.  Best regards, KOKO_LMQ



#2 Evans X.

Evans X.

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 16 thanks
6
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 April 2021 - 09:41 AM

Greetings KOkO LMQ,

 

Concerning paragraph 2.5.1 and its requirements, you have to prove that the service you are being provided with is legit and performed in a way that is backed up by law or an approved method or accreditation for the case of laboratories and not some random report provided by some random person.

Whatever service is provided (calibration in your case) in your facilities needs to be done by a legitimate approved provider. However what you expect from this provider depends on food safety. For example if you weigh additives then it should be done by an accredited lab or by someone who can prove that the reference equipment used maintain traceability to the International System of Units (SI) through specific standards. If you weigh the transport vehicles before and after being loaded then you certainly don't need ISO 17025 accreditation (though they should still provide you with the data that testify its good performance).

The key point in the first case is that you can prove it in different ways. The best way is to use an accredited calibration lab, but this is often expensive to do for all your equipment. A simpler/less expensive way is to use a calibrated piece of equipment, for example a thermometer where temperature is concerned, which will be accompanied by its calibration certificate and will be used to check all your other relevant equipment and keep a record of these internal checks.

 

Regards.



#3 Koko LMQ

Koko LMQ

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 122 posts
  • 26 thanks
4
Neutral

  • Thailand
    Thailand

Posted 06 April 2021 - 01:53 AM

Dear Evans,

Thanks for comment.

My point is the GFSI requires only the product testing/analysis with ISO 17025 but FSSC did the GFSI Benchmarking Self-Assessment by including the equipment calibration with ISO 17025, so that's why I ask members' opinion on this matter.

See GFSI/FSSC benchmarking self assessment no. FSM 19.1.

KOKO

Attached Files






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users