This clause sets up the need for an organization to implement process planning and development for food safety in its production activities. This means that the business must consider food safety as an intrinsic part of any overall operational planning as well as with specific development areas, e.g. product development, new line commissioning, etc. Thus, the business operates an ‘intelligent’ food safety system with hazards identified at the planning and development stage and controls introduced in an efficient and effective manner. For example, an ingredient may be substituted to eliminate a hazard, or a process adapted to reduce a level of risk or enable it to be controlled by an existing CCP. This proactive approach to food safety is more cost-effective and successful in managing risk than a reactive approach.
In practice, this means that the business must take a logical, systematic approach to the production of safe products with food safety as a core organizational objective. Focusing on production volume, and treating food safety as a complementary activity that will intervene only when problems arise, is neither efficient nor effective. PRPs must be designed to deliver and maintain a food-safe status, with
programme activities conducted in a manner and at a frequency that will ensure a consistent standard of operating conditions. For example, sanitation activities should take place according to a structured schedule designed to keep the production area in a ‘steady state’ of good hygiene, rather than one that allows conditions to reach to the margins of acceptability before restoring a high standard of cleanliness.
Similarly, when selecting suitable control measures, the preference should be for those that eliminate the hazard or keep it within acceptable limits on an ongoing basis, over those that merely trigger the rejection or rework of nonconforming product. It is only when safe products are achieved through planning and intentional design that the food safety system can be deemed to be ‘managed’.
Assemble the HACCP team 1.
Describe the product 2.
Identify intended use 3.
Construct flow diagram 4.
On-site confirmation of flow diagram 5.
List all potential hazards Conduct a hazard analysis Determine control measures
Principle 1
Conduct a hazard analysis 6.
Determine CCPs Principle 2
Determine the CCPs 7.
Establish critical limit for each CCP Principle 3
Establish critical limit(s) 8.
Establish a monitoring system for each CCP Principle 4
Establish a system to monitor control of the CCP
9.
Establish corrective actions Principle 5
Establish the corrective action to be taken when monitoring indicates that a particular CCP is not under control 10.
Establish verification procedures Principle 6
Establish procedures for verification to confirm that the HACCP system is working effectively
11.
Establish documentation and record keeping Principle 7
Establish documentation concerning all procedures and records
appropriate to these principles and their application
12.
Logic sequence for application of HACCP (12 steps) Seven principles of the HACCP system
Figure 4.1 – The relationship between the 7 principles and 12 steps of HACCP in Codex Alimentarius
The inclusion of food safety hazard analysis in all planning and development activities of the business supports both operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness. It presents the business with an opportunity to eliminate hazards by ‘engineering out’ potential problems at the design stage, rather than having to introduce additional control measures at the operational stage or carry out costly remedial work such as adaptations to process equipment.
exAMPLeS:
example 1 – Product deelopment
By applying HACCP principles during the development of a new product, the R & D team of a large manufacturer identified that the cheese flavouring used in the product contained seafood extract. This presented an allergen risk that the team decided was avoidable. By requesting a reformulated flavouring from the flavour supplier, the company eliminated the problem before going into production. Whilst other allergens, i.e. dairy, were still present in the final formulation the company reduced the scope of the risk and the potential number of consumers who might be impacted.
example 2 – engineering design
During the planning stage for the installation of a new product line, a food safety team leader identified that the proposed layout would result in a high-level conveyor crossing over another conveyor carrying hot product from an oven. It was noted that steam from the hot product on the lower outtake conveyor would condense on the underside of the upper conveyor and drip down on the finished product below. This created both a contamination risk and a potential impact on finished product shelf life through an increased moisture level. The layout of the conveyors for the new line was amended to avoid this. By including a food safety representative on the project team, the company eliminated a potential hazard that could have resulted in food safety non- compliance, consumer complaints and might have required costly re-engineering to resolve.
example 3 – Process technology
A company experienced problems with mould growth in the pre-mixer section of a new extrusion process line, where dry ingredients were blended with water to form a dough. To resolve this, the process equipment had to be adapted to include steam injection into the pre-mixer. However, this increased the dough temperature and initiated cooking of the dough at an earlier stage, and subsequent process time/temperature parameters had to be adjusted to achieve the correct finished product attributes. The re-engineering of the line and further production trials delayed the launch of a new product, and necessitated additional costs. Had the project team conducted a detailed hazard analysis at the design stage, the potential for mould growth in the cool, moist conditions of the pre-mixer would have been identified and addressed sooner and at less expense.
Figure 4.2 illustrates the components of an effective FSMS and shows the relationship between ISO 22000:2005 and the Codex Alimentarius ‘Hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) system and guidelines for its application’.
7.5 Establishing the
operational PRPs 7.6 Establishing the HACCP plan 7.3.2 Food safety team
4.2 & 7.7 Documentation
requirements
7.2 PRPs
7.3.3 Product characteristics
7.3.4 Intended use
7.3.5.1 Flow diagrams
7.3.5.2 Description of process steps and control measures
7.4.2 Hazard identification and determination of acceptable levels
7.4.3 Hazard assessment
7.4.4 Selection and assessment of control measures
8.2 Validation of control measure combinations
7.8 Verification planning
Steps addressed by the Codex Alimentarius HACCP guidelines Steps specific to ISO 22000
NOTE Cross-references refer to ISO 22000:2005.
Key
1 12
2
3
4 & 5
2 & 6
6 & 7 7, 8 9 & 10 6
6
11
Source: ISO/TS 22004:2005
Figure 4.2 – Planning of safe foods
The following checklist is provided to help the reader indicate where requirements have been met (Yes) or need to be addressed (No).
CHeCkLISt
Yes No Do you have a project plan in place for developing and implementing the system? ❑ ❑
Do you have a procedure for completing HACCP requirements for new product development? ❑ ❑
Do you have clear sign-off responsibility for new products or processing technology prior to their introduction? ❑ ❑