Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Do we need a specification sheet for non-direct contact boxes?

packaging - supplier - sqf

Best Answer , 07 April 2021 - 02:16 PM

Hi, Caroline;

 

No, they do not have to be GFSI but they still are required to meet regulatory guidance and should be able to demonstrate this is some manner via the Approved Supplier Program (2.3.4)

 

I have always maintained specifications for corrugated master cartons (dimensions, additives, ECT, preprint/color, etc.), However no auditor has ever looked for this beyond direct (primary) packaging but it is a good practice as a continuity measure. Here is the code from 9th ed. without the guidance part:

 

 

2.3.2.6 Verification of packaging shall include a certification of all packaging that comes

into direct contact with food meets either regulatory acceptance or approval criteria.
Documentation shall either be in the form of a declaration of continued guarantee
of compliance, a certificate of conformance, or a certificate from the applicable
regulatory agency.
In the absence of a certificate of conformance, certificate of analysis, or letter of
guarantee, analyses to confirm the absence of potential chemical migration from the
packaging to the food contents shall be conducted and records maintained.

 

 


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

caroline2771

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 14 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 07 April 2021 - 01:57 PM

Hi everyone

 

Quick question : 

 

We are under SQF system, and I can't recall this information  ; 

 

For material which aren't in direct contact with our product (boxes), do we need to have a specification sheet for that ?

I have the supplier's garantee letter filled but no specification sheet for the '"box". 

 

Also, do these supplier (which supplies non-direct contact material) need to be GFSI ? 

 

Thank you !!



Slab

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 426 posts
  • 200 thanks
99
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Heel of the Boot
  • Interests:Reading (history, science fiction), Photography, drawing,food safety, metrology, TQM, hoplology, etc.

Posted 07 April 2021 - 02:16 PM   Best Answer

Hi, Caroline;

 

No, they do not have to be GFSI but they still are required to meet regulatory guidance and should be able to demonstrate this is some manner via the Approved Supplier Program (2.3.4)

 

I have always maintained specifications for corrugated master cartons (dimensions, additives, ECT, preprint/color, etc.), However no auditor has ever looked for this beyond direct (primary) packaging but it is a good practice as a continuity measure. Here is the code from 9th ed. without the guidance part:

 

 

2.3.2.6 Verification of packaging shall include a certification of all packaging that comes

into direct contact with food meets either regulatory acceptance or approval criteria.
Documentation shall either be in the form of a declaration of continued guarantee
of compliance, a certificate of conformance, or a certificate from the applicable
regulatory agency.
In the absence of a certificate of conformance, certificate of analysis, or letter of
guarantee, analyses to confirm the absence of potential chemical migration from the
packaging to the food contents shall be conducted and records maintained.

 

 


Food Safety News  Marine Stewardship Council

 

"Some people freak out when they see small vertebra in their pasta" ~ Chef John


caroline2771

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 14 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 07 April 2021 - 02:18 PM

Thank you ! 

That answers very well my question :)  Have a nice day !

Hi, Caroline;

 

No, they do not have to be GFSI but they still are required to meet regulatory guidance and should be able to demonstrate this is some manner via the Approved Supplier Program (2.3.4)

 

I have always maintained specifications for corrugated master cartons (dimensions, additives, ECT, preprint/color, etc.), However no auditor has ever looked for this beyond direct (primary) packaging but it is a good practice as a continuity measure. Here is the code from 9th ed. without the guidance part:






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users