5 replies to this topic

[Laura982]

Is it a specific requirement that the new 4 question decision tree be used for BRC or are we ok to still use the 5 question one?

 

Thanks 

[GMO]

The one most used in the UK is the Campden BRI one. 

I only mention that because it proves that "one size fits all" isn't necessarily the answer and you can use any method you like (even no decision tree) as long as you minute and justify it.

That said, if you're using a specific one and you should reference which one you use, it would be good practice to use the one which is most up to date. So for example, if you are using Codex, I'd use the most up to date codex one.

If you're approaching your audit window and you've not no time to update it to the latest version, have a meeting, record it as an action and give yourself some time to complete that action.

I wouldn't just leave it referencing an old decision tree without any action though. Not because it's "wrong" per se but because it looks like you're then out of date on keeping up with current regulations and guidance documents which is never a good look. Not BRCGS audits but I've often raised that HACCP documents reference things which are out of date (only ever as an observation) and that then makes me suspicious their HACCP plan is no more than just paper (and leads to me digging more).

Edited by GMO, 17 December 2025 - 11:01 AM.

[GMO]

Sorry, I should follow up, but if there is a specific decision tree you want to use but they've updated it in a way you don't like, do try looking at some other sources to see if their decision tree is similar to the one you do like. Guideline 42 is the Campden BRI guide which is good but the most recent version is Andrew going off on a tangent on Bowtie far too much for my liking. However, it's still valid (if a bit expensive) and some national regulators will have one on their website. 

[Tony-C]

Hi Laura982,

 

You can use any decision tree or methodology you like as long as you present the information and questions in a logical manner and document your assessment. I have posted relevant information below.

 

BRCGS Guidance:

There are a range of tools that may assist with the evaluation of hazards (e.g. quadrant graphs, scoring systems, logic tables or decision trees). The team may choose to use these tools but should keep a record of any that are deployed. Such tools may also help in establishing CCPs.

 

Clause 2.8.1 For each hazard that requires control, control points shall be reviewed to identify those that are critical. This requires a logical approach and may be facilitated by use of a decision tree. CCPs shall be those control points which are required in order to prevent or eliminate a food safety hazard or reduce it to an acceptable level.

 

BRCGS Guidance:

The Standard is not prescriptive on the tools used to facilitate this process; for example, a two- or four-question decision tree may be useful. The site must, however, be able to demonstrate that it has used a logical approach and, therefore, a copy of any decision- making tools used and the results (e.g. the results of the questions from the decision tree) must be recorded.

 

I would say that the BRCGS Global Standard Food Safety is representative of the UK given it is by far the most widely used certification scheme in the UK and it refers to only CODEX HACCP methodology. Codex Alimentarius HACCP principles are mentioned countless times, starting with:

Fundamental

The company shall have a fully implemented and effective food safety plan incorporating the Codex Alimentarius HACCP principles.

 

There is no reference to Campden HACCP methodology at all in either the BRCGS standard or the guidance. The Campden Decision Tree is the same as the old CODEX one but with a new Q1 Is the hazard managed by prerequisite programmes? prior to going on to the old CODEX decision tree. I think either of the decision trees are better than using none at all.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

[GMO]

 

 

There is no reference to Campden HACCP methodology at all in either the BRCGS standard or the guidance. The Campden Decision Tree is the same as the old CODEX one but with a new Q1 Is the hazard managed by prerequisite programmes? prior to going on to the old CODEX decision tree. I think either of the decision trees are better than using none at all.

 

 

There wouldn't be, it's a private company. But it's still the private company most people used for their level 3 or 4 training, at least initially and their adoption of a common sense "let's not make everything a CCP" approach predated many others. It's widely accepted in the UK by auditors.

[Tony-C]

There wouldn't be, it's a private company. 

 

 That is simply not true GMO.

 

There are references to Campden in the BRCGS standard:

Appendix 3 Table 5 Equivalent processes to achieve 70°C for 2 minutes

This table is reproduced with permission from Campden BRI Guideline 51 – Pasteurisation: A Food Industry Practical Guide (second edition, 2006).

Appendix 12 Acknowledgements

BRCGS is grateful to the members of the working groups and steering committee who helped to develop Issue 9 of the Global Standard Food Safety. Their names are listed alphabetically below.

Richard Leathers Campden BRI

 

There is also a reference to Campden in BRCGS guidance is: A number of best- practice guidelines have been published on the validation of cleaning (e.g. Campden BRI Guideline 59 – Validation of Cleaning to Remove Food Allergens).

 

Campden HACCP methodology would almost certainly be accepted by BRCGS but it is not advocated by BRCGS as you are implying.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony