- Home
- Sponsors
- Forums
- Members
- Resources
- Files
- FAQ
- Jobs
-
Webinars
- Upcoming Food Safety Fridays
- Recorded Food Safety Fridays
- Upcoming Hot Topics from Sponsors
- Recorded Hot Topics from Sponsors
- Food Safety Live 2013
- Food Safety Live 2014
- Food Safety Live 2015
- Food Safety Live 2016
- Food Safety Live 2017
- Food Safety Live 2018
- Food Safety Live 2019
- Food Safety Live 2020
- Training
- Directory
- Upgrade
- Store
- More

Guide To The Issue 2 Revisions
Started by Simon, Sep 07 2004 08:21 PM
4 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 07 September 2004 - 08:21 PM
BRC/IoP Global Standard - Food Packaging and Other Packaging Materials
SaferPak have reviewed Issue 2 of the Standard and created a guide to the revisions:
Download Review Document (pdf 147kb)
The Standard may be purchased at the following link:
http://www.tso.co.uk...ctID=0117022225
Regards,
Simon
SaferPak have reviewed Issue 2 of the Standard and created a guide to the revisions:
Download Review Document (pdf 147kb)
The Standard may be purchased at the following link:
http://www.tso.co.uk...ctID=0117022225
Regards,
Simon
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html
#2
Posted 16 September 2004 - 08:47 AM
Simon,
Thanks for the guidance notes. I have now had my audit against the new standard and it went pretty smoothly.
Its worth mentioning for those people that allow watches (Category A) that the new standard states (7.6.1) Watches shall not be worn, unless for ethnic, medical or religious reasons.
Wasn’t a problem for us as we don’t allow them anyway..
A few more interesting observations whilst being audited -
Traceability, the auditable clauses are 4.7.1 - The company shall ensure that its suppliers have appropriate traceability systems in place, 4.7.2 - An appropriate system shall be in place to ensure the customer can identify a product.
What about us as manufacturers of packaging - what is the auditable requirement for traceability
6.3.2 - Effective precautions shall be in place to prevent pests entering the premises - no problem with this but why do we then need clauses 6.3.6, 5.1.4 & 5.1.5?
For info 6.3.6 - The building shall be suitably proofed against the entry of all pests including ducts and cable entry points, 5.1.4 - External silos, pipe work or other access points for product and/or materials shall be appropriately sealed so as to prevent pest entry, 5.1.5 - Drains shall be properly trapped or otherwise protected so as to prevent entry of pests.
Surely If you meet 6.3.2, you meet 6.3.6, 5.1.4 & 5.1.5!!
Anyway that’s my observations, pedantic or otherwise
Regards
Richard
#3
Posted 17 September 2004 - 08:55 PM
Good point - what did you and the auditor conclude?What about us as manufacturers of packaging - what is the auditable requirement for traceability
Another good point. Perhaps they should invite you on the next review panel.6.3.2 - Effective precautions shall be in place to prevent pests entering the premises - no problem with this but why do we then need clauses 6.3.6, 5.1.4 & 5.1.5?
Pedantic no. A nit-picker maybe...but NEVER pedantic! :PAnyway that's my observations, pedantic or otherwise.
Regards,
Simon
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html
#4
Posted 27 September 2004 - 03:27 PM
Hi Simon,
“Good point - what did you and the auditor conclude?” -
Effectively the conclusion was that it is not possible to give minor non conformances against the standard for our traceability (4.7), however this does not mean that we can do without a traceability system as we would then have a 'substantial failure to meet the requirements of the statement of intent' = major non-conformity.
Although not recommended, in theory you should be able to scrape through 4.7 with a poor traceability system. This said I would suspect the auditor would find a way of ensuring this is reflected somewhere.
With respect to picking holes in the standard - I have to be fair to the Technical Advisory Committee, I am sure it is very difficult to pick up duplication, omissions etc when reviewing pages of text around a table.
My observations were picked up from the actual audit where I had to demonstrate compliance in a live situation.
Do you know if the Technical Committee does trial run audits during the review / drafting phases of new standards? It does seem to highlight problems fairly quickly..
#5
Posted 27 September 2004 - 03:49 PM
My feeling is they don't run trial audits, but I may well be wrong. Excellent idea though. Maybe someone in the know could tell us more about the review process.Do you know if the Technical Committee does trial run audits during the review / drafting phases of new standards? It does seem to highlight problems fairly quickly..
Regards,
Simon
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users