Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

ISO 22000 FSSC Clause 4.6.7 Requirements


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

nkonstas

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 23 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece

Posted 04 October 2021 - 07:29 PM

Hi everyone,

I am very thank full for all the support from everyone here to any request from food safety / QA departments.

I work as a QA manager in afood company dealing 5 years with BRC, but now I started as a "onsultant" and my first project is the implementation of a fssc 22000 (with additional GMPs).

I am very confused with the ISO22000 standard. I want to implement the 4.1, 4.2, 5, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7 requirements and even if i read so much in this forum, I am still not very familiarized with these req.

Lets start from the begining:

4.1 -> 1 document with internal & external issues, review this doc in Manag.Review Meeting

4.2 -> 1 doc with the list of interested parties (ostumers, legislation etc), review in MRM

5 -> Leadership, no doc or Proced required (IMO) and review all clauses of 5.1 on MRM

6.1 -> 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 sum up all of this in a SWOT analysis and desribe actions of mitigate the Weak points & Threats

6.2 -> KPIs???? a document regarding KPI like zero recall. less than 2 complaints per costumer etc etc

6.3 -> if there is no changes right there is no need to issue a procedure. Right?

7? are there documented or only audited?

 

Thank you



Evans X.

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 90 posts
  • 44 thanks
28
Excellent

  • Greece
    Greece
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Food safety, Lab quality, Reading, Travelling, Online&board gaming, Movies&series, Swimming, Basketball.

Posted 05 October 2021 - 09:01 AM

Greetings nkostas,

 

That's quite some discussion but in short you need to address these clauses as described in the standard. More specifically what will help get you started are the notes under the clauses.

If you read closely you don't have to have an actual list of them (though it is easier that way for quick references) but all these can be combined in 6.1 when you do the SWOT analysis and be mentioned there. But again the standard doesn't ask you to have a written procedure or follow a certain methodology for the risk assessment. It can as well be a very detailed (and a bit long) mention in the M.R.M.. Having a quantified result of the impact is just the auditor's personal taste and not a requirement. The method you approach this is up to you.

 

5.1 is self-proofed through the policy, the availability of the needed resources, trainings, the lack of legal issues etc. This can be a small mention in the M.R.M. or not at all.

 

6.2 can be a part of your M.R.M. in each issue you address or a separate document where you will have all your KPI in one place. It kind of depends on how often you review them but it's a personal preference how you present them. Just make sure that these are mostly quantifiable (it's more useful) and that you track the progress eg we wanted less than 10 complaints and we got 7 or we wanted to have completed the new production line by 5/10/21 but it is 80% ready due to covid delays(!). For more serious issues of not achieving the KPI a risk may occur.

 

7 is half audited half documented. Meaning you have to do a providers assessment, you do need training records or a way to prove the competence, you do need a procedure on how the documented information are handled and what the document coding means when you look at one or the responsibilities/authorizations of communication.

 

Hope it's a starting help,

Regards!



nkonstas

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 23 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece

Posted 05 October 2021 - 09:55 AM

Thank you Evans X,

it is very helpfull your responce. From my point of view ISO22000 feels very difficult to understand hoe to implement the requirements. Although BRC is more familiar to me the implementatiopn is more clear



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,860 posts
  • 5248 thanks
1,226
Excellent

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

Posted 05 October 2021 - 10:19 AM

Thank you Evans X,

it is very helpfull your responce. From my point of view ISO22000 feels very difficult to understand hoe to implement the requirements. Although BRC is more familiar to me the implementatiopn is more clear

Hi nkonstas,

 

I expect yr difficulty arises from the fact that BRC is essentially a prescriptive (ie relatively "defined") Standard whereas iso22000 is more generic (ie relatively "vague") in structure.

This distinction was one major cause of iso22000 not being GFSI compliant and which subsequently led to the release of fssc22000.

iso2200 is perhaps more readily accessible if you are familiar with iso9001.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users