Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

OPRP and HACCP

Share this

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

Koko LMQ

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 122 posts
  • 28 thanks
9
Neutral

  • Thailand
    Thailand

Posted 09 February 2008 - 07:47 AM

Hi Friends,

Can anyone help me to interprete ISO 22K clause 7.4.4 using to categorize the OPRP and HACCP? I am not sure the methodology to category by application of cluase 7.4.4 a) - g). Is it needed to use them all or some of them.

Quoted from ISO 22K
The selecetion and categorization shall be carried out a logical approach that includes assessments with regard to the following:
a) its effect on identified food safety hazards relative to the strictness applied
b) its feasibility for monitoring (e.g. ability to be monitored in a timely manner to enable immediate corrections)
c) its place within the system relative toother control measures
d) the likelihood of failure in the funtioning of a control measure or significant processing variability
e) the severity of the consequence (s) in the case of failure in its functioning
f) whether the control measure is specifically estabished and applied to eliminate or significantly reduce the level of hazards(s)
g) synergistic effects (i.e. interaction that occurs between two or more measures resulting in their combined effect being higher than the sum of their individual effects)

NY



Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,826 posts
  • 1363 thanks
880
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 10 February 2008 - 08:23 PM

BUMP for Monday.


Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 180 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


Modarres

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 22 posts
  • 10 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Iran
    Iran
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tehran

Posted 11 February 2008 - 05:48 PM

Hi!

Dear alls!

I tested this assessment method, it was useful, Please use the table and feedback me.

Thanks:
Modarres - FSMS Consultant and Auditor :clap:

Attached Files


Best Regards,
Modarres

Thanked by 1 Member:

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,826 posts
  • 1363 thanks
880
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 13 February 2008 - 09:51 PM

Hi!

Dear alls!

I tested this assessment method, it was useful, Please use the table and feedback me.

Thanks:
Modarres - FSMS Consultant and Auditor :clap:

Thanks very much for sharing Modarres. :spoton:

Has anyone tried it or going to try it? NY is this assessment tool helpful?

Regards,
Simon

Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 180 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


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 14 February 2008 - 01:11 AM

Dear Modarres,

Very challenging, to me anyway! :thumbup:

Can see the table is a form of risk matrix but didn’t quite understand some of the details.

“a” = what?, … “g” = what? (added, sorry, as per 7.4.4 of course, was Monday am when I first saw it and the google bot blurred my vision :smile: ; very neat, maybe!?)
Seems to give equal weight to a >>g. Debatable ?? (d,e wud appear to be prime, f also?, is a "shortcut" from the old Dtree system I think?)

Divisions for HACCP/oprp at “18”. Why “18” ?? (the usual question of course)

Certainly full marks for brevity :thumbup:

Do you hv a table for differentiating prp / oprp also ? That wud be almost equally valuable perhaps??

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Modarres

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 22 posts
  • 10 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Iran
    Iran
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tehran

Posted 15 February 2008 - 04:46 PM

Hi!

Thanks for your attention, I hope the attatchment could help you.

Modarres :smarty:

Attached Files


Best Regards,
Modarres

Thanked by 1 Member:

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 16 February 2008 - 08:01 AM

Dear Modarres,

Thks for the addendum. Very thoughtful and ingenious, especially the So-Sos :smile: .

I agree with you that the “18” is inevitably arbitrary if one wishes to follow a (semi-) quantitative route (this is partly why many people don’t of course).

I personally would hv thought that a control measure which was not feasible to be monitored would simply fail the whole data set, eg score zero in the multiplicative style or a big minus in the additive method. After all, this is one of the axioms of the HACCP system, I think.??

I note that the last para. in 7.4.4 of ISO 22004 suggests that some simplification of ISO 22000 might be acceptable by prioritising certain sub-items from (a-g). I think that would be my preferred choice if I interpret the standard correctly (likelihood so-so :smile: ) but yr presentation is surely less argumentative to auditors, a critical practical factor.

I wonder what other people do ?.

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


nil

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece

Posted 16 February 2008 - 01:54 PM

hi all

very useful the addendum but who is the writter of this?
is it accetable for a 22k study?


Edited by nil, 16 February 2008 - 02:00 PM.


arya

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Indonesia
    Indonesia

Posted 03 May 2008 - 04:47 AM

Dear Modarres,

I'm new in these interesting forum. I work as auditor at CB a few year ago, now I joined in the Univ.
Well, good approach was obtained, anyhow what do you means by a,b,c,... in the first raw. Kindl explain me more details.

Regards
Arya

Hi!

Dear alls!

I tested this assessment method, it was useful, Please use the table and feedback me.

Thanks:
Modarres - FSMS Consultant and Auditor :clap:



Erasmo

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 135 posts
  • 19 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Mexico
    Mexico

Posted 13 May 2008 - 06:04 PM

hi all

very useful the addendum but who is the writter of this?
is it accetable for a 22k study?


No. ISO-22000 both CCP's and opPRP's requires VALIDATION, if its not feasible to validate a control measure (CCP's or opPRP's) it should be classified as PRP's. No matter what is the score in the addendum.


duente

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 8 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Greece
    Greece
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:mountains, bicycles, capoeira, yoga and being positive!

Posted 20 May 2008 - 03:05 PM

Modarres I think it is a good work and for sure acceptable from auditors. !!!

Nil I think that a way to validate a ccp or oprp is through the bibliographies, scientific studies etc. which all of us use in order to set a measure. I do not think that we pick it up from our mind. So all we have to do is to write down the source! Correct me if iam wrong.



James Chen

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 9 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • China
    China
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beijing

Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:41 AM

Firstly thanks for what all friends have posted here about the study of OPRP &HACCP.

This topic is very interesting and challenging.

Factors from a to g need to be considered when making the category of HACCP and OPRP , but the importance diffence exits in these factors, how to balance them?


chen_zhigui@msn.com.

Glad to talk about food safety with you all friends here.

firatozel

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 7 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Turkey
    Turkey

Posted 18 July 2008 - 11:34 AM

thank you modarres



firatozel

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 7 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Turkey
    Turkey

Posted 28 July 2008 - 10:16 AM

what is the source of 18 ???. can you explain please!





Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users