Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

BRCGS 4.3.1 - Layout, Product Flow and Segregation

Share this

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

JCB

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 15 November 2023 - 12:54 PM

Looking for an help / insight into clause 4.3.1 Layout, product flow and segregation in BRC version 9,  specifically around the Risk Assessment for zoning assignment. 

 

I have submitted my CA, however NSF keeps rejecting it:(



Evans X.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 331 posts
  • 158 thanks
116
Excellent

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

Posted 15 November 2023 - 01:23 PM

Greetings Jeff,

 

Please provide more context. what is the wording of the N/C, what did you do in your CA and what is the response from NSF on rejecting it ?

 

Regards.



Dorothy87

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 177 posts
  • 53 thanks
51
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:York
  • Interests:Antiques, Art, Sailing, Furniture renovation

Posted 15 November 2023 - 01:34 PM

Hi, 

 

Can you please share your risk assessment? 

 

;)



JCB

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 15 November 2023 - 01:42 PM

Minor -  Site maps showed production areas, employee breakroom and facilities, and the warehouse, however the zones are not designated per the BRCGS definitions (low risk; enclosed products with no High Risk, High Care or Ambient High Care). There was no documented risk assessment for zone assignment.

 

CA - A risk assessment was conducted on the production risk zones based off the BRCGS definitions. This includes High Risk, High Care, Ambient High Care, Low Risk and Non-Product Areas. See Personnel Movement Map and the Zone Risk Assessment.

 

Reviewer Comments - submitted evidence does not provide sufficient info on designation of zones as per BRCGS definitions - please provide corrective action on this matter. 14thNov - submitted site map still does not include zones as per BRCGS definitions - low risk, enclosed products, high care or ambient high care, etc where applicable). Please update submitted document with relevant terminology and where within the site those are located

 

 

Attached Files



Thanked by 1 Member:

Evans X.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 331 posts
  • 158 thanks
116
Excellent

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

Posted 15 November 2023 - 02:46 PM

I may be wrong, but I fail to see how the terminology is not included in the R.A. you have provided. Is there a chance the reviewer hasn't understood that the coloring in the first excel tab corresponds to the coloring in the second ??? Maybe add some written clarification for them ? Maybe also rename the second tab like "Personnel Movement & Zones".

It kind of feels silly in my opinion at the moment, but maybe I miss something that another expert in the forum can detect.

 

The only thing I would argue is that the R.A. can't only take into consideration "Severity" but other elements too, like Possibility of occurence or Likelihood or Possibility of detection through current measures etc (the terminology for this is quite extensive) and the result derives from a set calculation. However, this is another matter for another day.



Thanked by 1 Member:

Dorothy87

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 177 posts
  • 53 thanks
51
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:York
  • Interests:Antiques, Art, Sailing, Furniture renovation

Posted 15 November 2023 - 05:05 PM

Hi, 

 

Please see document attached, I believe there is lack of consideration and I would remove staff zone movement. 

 

;)

Attached Files



Thanked by 2 Members:

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 4,280 posts
  • 1306 thanks
640
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:World
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 16 November 2023 - 04:33 AM

Hi Joell,

 

Your assessment appears to have been accepted by NSF and so now you need to address the zoning in your map plus the other items listed below from clause 4.3.2 below. Your map appears to designate equipment as areas rather than the whole area. For example, it looks like your low risk open product area is in fact from T1 to BJ1 x T32 to BJ32 on your excel sheet Personnel Movement.

 

BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 clause 4.3.2 states:

There shall be a map of the site. At a minimum, this map shall define:

• production risk zones, where product is at different levels of risk from pathogen contamination – for example, high-risk, high-care, ambient high-care, low-risk and enclosed product areas (see clause 4.3.1 and Appendix 2)

• access points for personnel

• access points for raw materials (including packaging), semi-finished products and open products

• routes of movement for personnel

• routes of movement for raw materials (including packaging)

• routes for the removal of waste

• routes for the movement of rework

• location of any staff facilities, including changing rooms, toilets, canteens and smoking areas

• production process flows

• any areas where time segregation is used to complete different activities (for example, time segregation for high-care areas).

 

BTW I would advise you to change your username from your email address as it is likely to attract spam.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony


Edited by Tony-C, 16 November 2023 - 04:35 AM.

  • JCB likes this

Thanked by 1 Member:
JCB


Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users