Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

HACCP Risk Assessment

Share this

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

Zeyno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Denmark
    Denmark

Posted 24 November 2023 - 02:30 PM

Hi everyone 

l have a assessment about sugar.  Can anyone help me ?

 

Perform a HACCP Risk assessment looking at the Biological, Chemical and Physical risks. You need to assess the risk of the material before mitigation of risk and after mitigation of risk.

Material: Sugar supplied in bulk in volume of 10 metric ton.

Process flow description: Milling of the sugar followed by dry blending with other ingredients and without any heat treatment.

After dry blending the material is sieved on a 0.75mm screen. A process magnet is in place followed by a control magnet to measure the amount of metal left on the magnet. After packaging in bags the finished product is metal detected.

Sugar is used up to 50 % of the finished product from the manufacturer. Specifications on the material with results on CoA:
Microbiological specifications:

  • -  APC max 200 CFU/g

  • -  Yeast and mould max 40 CFU/g

    Cristal size:

- Max 2% > 0.250mm

Use the following 3x3 matrix to evaluate the risk of sugar if there were no mitigations (sieve, magnet and metal detector). Evaluate the risk of sugar after the mitigations (what is the risk of Biological, Chemical and Physical contamination from the sugar in the manufacturers final product?)

 

Thank you :) 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 



kingstudruler1

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 907 posts
  • 300 thanks
284
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 24 November 2023 - 03:11 PM

im not sure what 3x3 matrix they are using, but here are my thoughts.  

 

1.   I think i'm doing someone's homework.

2.   The biological risks are the same as there is no reduction step to reduce them.   While sugar for the most part will not support the growth of pathogens, there is still the opportunity for pathogen introduction at all processing steps from unclean equipment.   Unknown risk of the what "other" ingredients the sugar is blended with.

3.  The chemical risks are the same there is no mitigating steps.   Cleaners, sanitizers, lubes, unapproved "other" ingredients or risk from other ingredients that the sugar is blended with.  

4.  Without the sieving, magnets and metal detectors, the likelihood of metal contamination could be quite high as mills could be a source of metal production as could blending and sieving (damaged screen).   Sieving, magnets and metal detectors would reduce the risk.  

5.  If the sieve, magnet, and metal detector were removed - the sieve would no longer pose a risk of being a source of metal contamination.  Removing them would also remove their risk of adding chemical and biological hazards associated at those steps.  

6.   Again, it states "blending with other ingredients"   depending on what these are there could be other hazards.  


eb2fee_785dceddab034fa1a30dd80c7e21f1d7~

    Twofishfs@gmail.com

 


Thanked by 1 Member:

Zeyno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Denmark
    Denmark

Posted 24 November 2023 - 04:40 PM

im not sure what 3x3 matrix they are using, but here are my thoughts.  

 

1.   I think i'm doing someone's homework.

2.   The biological risks are the same as there is no reduction step to reduce them.   While sugar for the most part will not support the growth of pathogens, there is still the opportunity for pathogen introduction at all processing steps from unclean equipment.   Unknown risk of the what "other" ingredients the sugar is blended with.

3.  The chemical risks are the same there is no mitigating steps.   Cleaners, sanitizers, lubes, unapproved "other" ingredients or risk from other ingredients that the sugar is blended with.  

4.  Without the sieving, magnets and metal detectors, the likelihood of metal contamination could be quite high as mills could be a source of metal production as could blending and sieving (damaged screen).   Sieving, magnets and metal detectors would reduce the risk.  

5.  If the sieve, magnet, and metal detector were removed - the sieve would no longer pose a risk of being a source of metal contamination.  Removing them would also remove their risk of adding chemical and biological hazards associated at those steps.  

6.   Again, it states "blending with other ingredients"   depending on what these are there could be other hazards.  



Zeyno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Denmark
    Denmark

Posted 24 November 2023 - 04:42 PM

 

im not sure what 3x3 matrix they are using, but here are my thoughts.  

 

1.   I think i'm doing someone's homework.

2.   The biological risks are the same as there is no reduction step to reduce them.   While sugar for the most part will not support the growth of pathogens, there is still the opportunity for pathogen introduction at all processing steps from unclean equipment.   Unknown risk of the what "other" ingredients the sugar is blended with.

3.  The chemical risks are the same there is no mitigating steps.   Cleaners, sanitizers, lubes, unapproved "other" ingredients or risk from other ingredients that the sugar is blended with.  

4.  Without the sieving, magnets and metal detectors, the likelihood of metal contamination could be quite high as mills could be a source of metal production as could blending and sieving (damaged screen).   Sieving, magnets and metal detectors would reduce the risk.  

5.  If the sieve, magnet, and metal detector were removed - the sieve would no longer pose a risk of being a source of metal contamination.  Removing them would also remove their risk of adding chemical and biological hazards associated at those steps.  

6.   Again, it states "blending with other ingredients"   depending on what these are there could be other hazards.  

 

l am new here and can you see the matrix which l have uoploded ? 



kingstudruler1

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 907 posts
  • 300 thanks
284
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 24 November 2023 - 08:10 PM

l am new here and can you see the matrix which l have uoploded ? 

no to add an atachement you have to be in the "more reply options"   once you selected you have to click it agoain as i recall


eb2fee_785dceddab034fa1a30dd80c7e21f1d7~

    Twofishfs@gmail.com

 


Zeyno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Denmark
    Denmark

Posted 24 November 2023 - 08:19 PM

l did it, l hope you can see it ? 

 

Attached Files



Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 5,633 posts
  • 1541 thanks
1,660
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 24 November 2023 - 08:21 PM

Sorry---won't help you cheat on your homework!

 

There is a lot of information out there on HACCP plans, and hazards associated with sugar

 

If we do it for you========you won't learn :(


Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs


Thanked by 1 Member:

Zeyno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Denmark
    Denmark

Posted 24 November 2023 - 08:29 PM

øv :( l am also searching. so l will combine with this forums answer. :( 

Sorry---won't help you cheat on your homework!

 

There is a lot of information out there on HACCP plans, and hazards associated with sugar

 

If we do it for you========you won't learn :(



MOHAMMED ZAMEERUDDIN

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 295 posts
  • 62 thanks
63
Excellent

  • India
    India
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Sharing the Knowledge

Posted 25 November 2023 - 06:30 AM

Answer to your question "(what is the risk of Biological, Chemical and Physical contamination from the sugar in the manufacturers final product?) " is:

 

No biological contamination or hazard

Chemical Hazard is Pesticide residues ( Pesticide testing at least once in a year.)

Physical hazard is Metal ( Metal detector shall be a CCP)



Thanked by 1 Member:


Share this


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users