5 replies to this topic

[Charles Chew]

Clause 7.3.5.1 of the ISO 22000:2005 standard states that flow diagrams shall be clear, accurate and sufficiently detailed. It also mentioned that the FSMS Team shall verify the accuracy of the flow diagram in accordance with clause 7.8 by on-site checking.

Therefore, 7.3.5 shall be read in conjunction with 7.8 which says verification shall include confirming that the PRPs are implemented as per (7.8.a) including the documented HACCP Plan and OPRPs (7.8.c) as well as other sub-requirements

My curiosity is to exchange your understanding and views of these clauses? I am sure Charles C. would take a shot on this one.

[Charles.C]

Dear CharlesChew,

Thank you for the compliment which obliges me to read this masterpiece of a complexity of a standard yet again.

I’m not entirely sure which aspect most interests you however my most immediate response after studying the referred clauses was – What happened to Validation ? I would hv expected a section on “Planning for Validation” before the 7.8 one on Verification. It actually gets a total of 14 lines (8.1,8.2), almost as an afterthought. This is in contrast to Figs 2, 3 in ISO 22004 plus the expanded discussion of its significance and its interaction with verification (eg 7.8, last para.).
(To be frank, 22004 almost looks like an apology for 22000 in this respect, to me anyway.)

Hopefully the above not completely off intended topic

Rgds / Charles.C

added - Ahem, just noticed the posted thread name although am sure you intended a more general query . Nonetheless, I was rather surprised by the expected detail required for the flow diagram, eg 7.3.5.1."b, e" Certainly not typical of traditional HACCP plans IMEX.

[Charles Chew]

Hello Charles C,

Yes the mother of all masterpiece the ISO 22000:2005 isn't for the faint-hearted. Deciphering it is itself a monstrous task.

Clearly, the flow diagram needs to be verified before further activity can take place. It would appear that under 7.8.a there is a need to verify that PRP implementations are suitably implemented. Follow through, the rest appears to be part of the standard 7 Codex HACCP Principles requirements.

Agan, 7.3.5.1.b requires flow diagram to include "out-sourced processes and sub-contracted works" and 7.3.5.1.d involves reworking / recycling. It would also appears that if these "external / additional process activities" are not included as part of the overall requirements of the 5 preliminary steps, the HACCP Plan is flawed!

Wonder how may certificated FSMS ISO 22000 had taken these into account!

[Charles.C]

Dear CharlesChew,

there is a need to verify that PRP implementations are suitably implemented

To take a specific example, from my experiences with various factories' implementation of chlorination systems, I would hv said that "validation" was more urgent than "verification"

Or do I mean "verified" validation ? Perhaps better to call it Check 1, Check 2 ??

Rgds / Charles.C

[vivan]

CAN ANYONE SUGGEST ONE EXAMPLE OF FLOW DIAGRAM - FOR EXAMPLE FOR MILK PROCESSING OR FRUIT FROZEN PROCESSING OR ANY FOOD PRODUCT YOU ARE FAIMILIAR WITH FOR BETTER UNDERSTANDING

[Charles Chew]

Dear Charles C.

In line with requirements of the 5 preliminary steps, the flow diagram has got to be verified for accuracy before we move forward and hence, the issues I had raised on clause 7.3.5.1 requirements.