Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Chlorine concentration as food contact sanitizer

Share this

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

ennyk

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 31 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Kiribati
    Kiribati

Posted 12 January 2024 - 04:53 AM

Happy New Year Everyone;

 

We are fish processing company and have just had an SQF certification audit and have this non-conformance raised for chlorine concentration of our food contact sanitizer is too low at 50ppm.

 

In our SOP, we are using 50-100ppm concentration during processing for our equipment such as knifes or bandsaw squeegee that are  on standby to be used throughout processing so instead of putting them directly on racks or in bins, we thought it would be more effective to have them placed in our equipment bin of 50-100ppm.For our overnight sanitise soaking of aprons/gloves etc. we use 100-200ppm.  

 

I do not have technical sheet for chlorine that stated how much needed for sanitizing food contact surfaces and therefore this was raised as a minor conformance stating that this is too low.

 

Does anyone have Sodium Hypochlorite 10-15% techinical data sheet that stated required concentrations for certain sanitising? or any USFDA, or WHO guide on chorine food contact sanitiser

 

Thank you in advance.


  • 0

Evans X.

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 331 posts
  • 159 thanks
117
Excellent

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

Posted 12 January 2024 - 09:31 AM

Greetings ennyk,

 

Many State Food Authorities as well as Universities researches around the world suggest 50-100ppm (a couple of cases mention 200ppm also as the upper limit but personally I find it too much) for sanitizing. A simple search in the web will get you results.

Could it be that the auditor may have mixed it up with the guidelines for disinfection which is 600-800ppm ???

Anyway he shouldn't have raised this as a N/C, much more so if you also have food contact surfaces swab analyses that verify your sanitizing effectiveness. Although trivial, I woud propably fight over it, but that's just my opinion.

 

Regards!


  • 0

kfromNE

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,228 posts
  • 323 thanks
382
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bicycling, reading, nutrition, trivia

Posted 12 January 2024 - 12:40 PM

You can use this as a technical sheet. In the USA - inspectors/auditors consider reference material from universities as appropriate documentation. 

 

https://ucfoodsafety...files/26437.pdf


  • 0

Safety_phile

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 12 January 2024 - 01:38 PM

Hi,

just for clarification: was the NC raised due to the low ppm ratio- or because of the missing specification/ technical data sheet? 

 

I ask, as there shall be enough data in your verification and validation study- including monitoring activities, show proof that the ppm ratio shows the defined & expected sanitation effect for your food contact surfaces! 

 

I would raise a NC in case of missing documentation / technical data sheets of chemicals in use, as they are the  base of a robust validation study. But an "opinion of an auditor" raising a NC as it feels to be a low ppm is not appropriate, as long you have all evidence of a good microbiological monitoring in your database as evidence. 

I would challenge the auditor, certification body and request their standard/guideline they use to define that your used ppm ratio is too low. 

Regards,


  • 1

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 6,029 posts
  • 1635 thanks
1,808
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 12 January 2024 - 03:40 PM

Why not use hot water sterilizers on the cutting floor?   

 

https://www.aesfoode...ife-steriliser/


  • 0

Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs


kingstudruler1

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,084 posts
  • 353 thanks
349
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 12 January 2024 - 04:56 PM

Hi,

just for clarification: was the NC raised due to the low ppm ratio- or because of the missing specification/ technical data sheet? 

 

I ask, as there shall be enough data in your verification and validation study- including monitoring activities, show proof that the ppm ratio shows the defined & expected sanitation effect for your food contact surfaces! 

 

I would raise a NC in case of missing documentation / technical data sheets of chemicals in use, as they are the  base of a robust validation study. But an "opinion of an auditor" raising a NC as it feels to be a low ppm is not appropriate, as long you have all evidence of a good microbiological monitoring in your database as evidence. 

I would challenge the auditor, certification body and request their standard/guideline they use to define that your used ppm ratio is too low. 

Regards,

 

yes, how do you meet this clause without these:

 

11.2.5.3 Detergents and sanitizers that have been mixed for use shall be correctly mixed according to the manufacturers’ instructions.....


  • 0

eb2fee_785dceddab034fa1a30dd80c7e21f1d7~

    Twofishfs@gmail.com

 


ennyk

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 31 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Kiribati
    Kiribati

Posted 12 January 2024 - 10:18 PM

Thank you all for the inputs that is so helpful. 

 

Will talk to auditor again if he can reconsiders!

 

Thank you


  • 0

MOHAMMED ZAMEERUDDIN

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 297 posts
  • 63 thanks
64
Excellent

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

Posted 13 January 2024 - 08:06 AM

200 ppm is too much. 50 ppm is enough.


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 4,632 posts
  • 1384 thanks
747
Excellent

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

Posted 15 January 2024 - 03:12 AM

Happy New Year Everyone;

 

We are fish processing company and have just had an SQF certification audit and have this non-conformance raised for chlorine concentration of our food contact sanitizer is too low at 50ppm.

 

In our SOP, we are using 50-100ppm concentration during processing for our equipment such as knifes or bandsaw squeegee that are  on standby to be used throughout processing so instead of putting them directly on racks or in bins, we thought it would be more effective to have them placed in our equipment bin of 50-100ppm.For our overnight sanitise soaking of aprons/gloves etc. we use 100-200ppm.  

 

I do not have technical sheet for chlorine that stated how much needed for sanitizing food contact surfaces and therefore this was raised as a minor conformance stating that this is too low.

 

Does anyone have Sodium Hypochlorite 10-15% techinical data sheet that stated required concentrations for certain sanitising? or any USFDA, or WHO guide on chorine food contact sanitiser

 

Thank you in advance.

 

Hi ennyk,

 

Have you consider using Peracetic Acid instead? I stopped using Chlorine and replaced it with Peracetic Acid many years ago. Chlorine can taint and realistically needs to be rinsed off food contact surfaces before use.

 

See - Peracetic acid disinfection in the food industry

 

It is even used in the Healthcare Industry - Peracetic Acid Sterilization

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony


  • 0

Practical HACCP Training for Food Safety Teams - Live Webinar next Friday May 09, 2025

Also immediately available via the previous webinar recording. 

Fantastic value at $97/per person, but don’t take our word for it, read the Customer Reviews here

 

Celebrating 15 years of IFSQN Implementation Packages: 

:cheers: 

 

IFSQN BRC, FSSC 22000, IFS, ISO 22000, SQF (Food, Packaging, Storage & Distribution) Implementation Packages - The Easy Way to Certification

 

Practical Internal Auditor Training for Food Operations - Live Webinar - Friday June 06, 2025 - Also immediately available via the previous webinar recording. Fantastic value at $97/per person, but don’t take our word for it, read the Customer Reviews here


ennyk

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 31 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Kiribati
    Kiribati

Posted 15 January 2024 - 09:31 PM

Hi Tony;

 

this is my first time to hear about this chemical. I will look into it.

 

thank you so much.


  • 0



Share this

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users