Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

BRC exam question on cleaning validation

Share this

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

Bansal

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 82 posts
  • 16 thanks
14
Good

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 04 May 2022 - 02:29 PM

Goodmorning Food safety Professionals,

I got a question in BRC exam and my answer was wrong , just curious what you guys think ?


How might cleaning process be validated?

1). Ask the detergent supplier to provide cleaning instructions.

2). Routinely undertake microbiological swabbing and cleaned surfaces .

3). Undertake at [= a ?] trial of cleaning effectiveness under worst case conditions.

4) Ensure regular checks are carried out on detergent dosing equipment.

Thanks in advance!


Edited by Charles.C, 05 May 2022 - 08:28 AM.
[ ] typo ?

  • 0

RyH

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 24 thanks
18
Good

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 04 May 2022 - 02:38 PM

Hi Namishka,

Number 2?...

What was your answer?

Kind regards,

Ry


Edited by RyH, 04 May 2022 - 02:44 PM.

  • 0

olenazh

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,364 posts
  • 442 thanks
434
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Toronto
  • Interests:My job, church, reading, gym, horror movies

Posted 04 May 2022 - 02:40 PM

I think # 3 - because, # 1 is prerequisite (you cannot perform cleaning without knowing the dosage of detergent), # 2 - routine control measures, # 4 - again prerequisite (detergent dosing equipment must me checked regularly to ensure it works properly)


  • 1

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 5,903 posts
  • 1601 thanks
1,776
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 04 May 2022 - 03:51 PM

What you describe, (IMHO) are verifications, not a validation (which is what they asked for)  but you'd have to double check what BRC considers them to be 

 

What about titrations?  Checking dosatrons for functionality isn't the same as titrating the solution


  • 1

Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs


kingstudruler1

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,015 posts
  • 335 thanks
332
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 04 May 2022 - 04:03 PM

I found that test to be hard because of questions like this.   I think I would choose 3.   But I also think the 2 is correct.   

 

Heck,  i'm not even sure what "a trial of cleaning effectiveness" means.  


  • 0

eb2fee_785dceddab034fa1a30dd80c7e21f1d7~

    Twofishfs@gmail.com

 


Bansal

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 82 posts
  • 16 thanks
14
Good

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 04 May 2022 - 05:27 PM

Hi Namishka,

Number 2?...

What was your answer?

Kind regards,

Ry


Hi RyH, thanks for your answer
My answer was 2 too which was wrong :(.

  • 0

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5689 thanks
1,550
Excellent

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

Posted 05 May 2022 - 08:34 AM

Hi RyH, thanks for your answer
My answer was 2 too which was wrong :(.

 

The "clue" is maybe to match the options against the Codex (+ BRC)  definition/interpretation of Validation.  > 3. (since "trial","effectiveness")

 

Although I have little doubt that SQF would happily accept 2 and perhaps FSIS also (= "ongoing" Validation). :smile:


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


mlong32

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 17 posts
  • 5 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 05 May 2022 - 02:25 PM

#3....Undertake at [= a ?] trial of cleaning effectiveness under worst case conditions. In order to validate a process you have to show that it works using several data points of data and under real life conditions you'd expect to experience. If your procedure can stand up against the worst case scenario conditions after repeated trials, then you know its effective. 


  • 3

Thanked by 2 Members:

sqflady

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 250 posts
  • 63 thanks
37
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 06 May 2022 - 04:10 PM

ATP swabs - verification (daily)
APC swabs - validation (monthly)


  • 0

olenazh

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,364 posts
  • 442 thanks
434
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Toronto
  • Interests:My job, church, reading, gym, horror movies

Posted 06 May 2022 - 04:14 PM

ATP swabs - verification (daily)
APC swabs - validation (monthly)

It should be one of suggested answers:)


  • 0

Foodworker

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 356 posts
  • 236 thanks
35
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 May 2022 - 09:58 AM

 think it should be 3 as the answer allows for different methods of cleaning and different ways of judging cleanliness..

 

Cleaning refers to more than the removal of micro-organisms. Material can remain in equipment as a sterilised, physical contaminant, including allergenic material. The cleaning solution itself can remain behind after ineffective rinsing and be a contaminant in its own right.

 

Hence the worst case scenario.

 

Use the parallel of washing hands or using a sanitising gel. The gel will (possibly) kill the bugs, but it won't remove the dirt.


  • 0

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5689 thanks
1,550
Excellent

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

Posted 07 May 2022 - 01:05 PM

 think it should be 3 as the answer allows for different methods of cleaning and different ways of judging cleanliness..

 

Cleaning refers to more than the removal of micro-organisms. Material can remain in equipment as a sterilised, physical contaminant, including allergenic material. The cleaning solution itself can remain behind after ineffective rinsing and be a contaminant in its own right.

 

Hence the worst case scenario.

 

Use the parallel of washing hands or using a sanitising gel. The gel will (possibly) kill the bugs, but it won't remove the dirt.

Hi Foodworker,

 

Note the use of the word "might" in the objective. So interpretation is permitted.

 

I could hypothesise potential contexts in which any of 1-4 could "validate" a specific "cleaning process".

 

BRC trick question ?

 

(My guess is that in actuality, further restrictions were given on the exam paper [eg Codex terminologies] which have been omitted in the OP )


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


sztgyi

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Hungary
    Hungary

Posted 07 May 2022 - 03:08 PM

Clearly #3 is most close to what's defined as 'validation' i.e. under worst case conditions, and this will do for a Food 8 exam.

 

A comment for the enthusiasts, who already might have read the BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9 draft -- under 2.12, in the HACCP validation section the draft reads: "For existing HACCP or food safety plans [validation] may be achieved using the established processes detailed in clauses 2.12.2 and 2.12.3 [such as, internal audits; review of records where acceptable limits have been exceeded; review of complaints by enforcement authorities or customers; review of incidents of product withdrawal or recall]".

So BRCGS Food 9 appears to accept historical verification-style data in for HACCP validation. The same does not apply for Cleaning validation however so routine ATP/APC swabs are not considered as full validation.


  • 0

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5689 thanks
1,550
Excellent

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

Posted 08 May 2022 - 03:27 PM

Clearly #3 is most close to what's defined as 'validation' i.e. under worst case conditions, and this will do for a Food 8 exam.

 

A comment for the enthusiasts, who already might have read the BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9 draft -- under 2.12, in the HACCP validation section the draft reads: "For existing HACCP or food safety plans [validation] may be achieved using the established processes detailed in clauses 2.12.2 and 2.12.3 [such as, internal audits; review of records where acceptable limits have been exceeded; review of complaints by enforcement authorities or customers; review of incidents of product withdrawal or recall]".

So BRCGS Food 9 appears to accept historical verification-style data in for HACCP validation. The same does not apply for Cleaning validation however so routine ATP/APC swabs are not considered as full validation.

Hi sztgyi

 

Off-Topic

If you are correct, it also appears that BRC do not accept the chronological aspects of Validation as espoused by Codex. Perhaps that's why it is a draft.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


beautiophile

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 276 posts
  • 84 thanks
43
Excellent

  • Vietnam
    Vietnam
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 May 2022 - 01:20 AM

Validation: proactive verification of that the process is suitable for later use.

# 1: not a verification

# 2: post-process verification

# 4: in-process verification


  • 0



Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users