Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

BRC Packaging Standard Ver. 3: Packaging Category Decision Tree


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

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,528 posts
  • 1318 thanks
717
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 22 February 2008 - 08:40 AM

Version 3 of the Packaging Standard has three categories of supplier with differing requirements (1-3) 1 being high and 3 being low. Take a look at the PDF document below on BRC website.

Packaging Category Decision Tree Determination: Discussion and examples

Regards,
Simon


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
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

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


BBrandDesign

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 26 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia

Posted 27 May 2011 - 08:11 AM

I must say that packaging on food products or any products which is difficult to handle must have packaging so that there is safety of product.



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,860 posts
  • 5248 thanks
1,226
Excellent

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

Posted 27 May 2011 - 08:23 AM

I must say that packaging on food products or any products which is difficult to handle must have packaging so that there is safety of product.


Dear BBD,

I certainly concur that toothpaste is difficult to handle. Relevance is perhaps less certain.

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,860 posts
  • 5248 thanks
1,226
Excellent

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 12:14 AM

Dear Simon,

It’s only my personal opinion but I find that the concept where packaging not intended for direct food contact is all grouped into one category (ie2) rather simplistic and potentially encouraging the use of inappropriate packaging material.

I noted the example in the attachment where the above classification logic is applied to the common situation of use of an inner plastic bag in a cardboard box. Obviously the risk of contamination from the cardboard layer is highly (ideally totally) reduced. However IMEX there are significant caveats to this assumption, eg in deep-frozen products, inappropriate choice of plastic material can lead to cracking of the bag and “direct” contact, this risk is in contrast to non-frozen situations where the physical stress should be markedly different (reduced).

My comment is that the classification width is possibly too “generous” although I can understand the convenience factor.

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users