Improvements to HACCP

I have found a useful link on Risk assessment and thought this would be useful.

http://www.ccohs.ca/...assessment.html

While I was looking at the link that Jean kindly provided, I wondered if anybody have tried something different, that thought would be valuable to improve HACCP methodology.

What was the auditor comments about it?
Was the addition to the orthodox implementation of HACCP readily accepted?

I hope somebody can share any experience.

Regards,

FSSM

Dear FSSM,

Are you referring to hazard analaysis??

While I was looking at the link that Jean kindly provided, I wondered if anybody have tried something different, that thought would be valuable to improve HACCP methodology.

What was the auditor comments about it?
Was the addition to the orthodox implementation of HACCP readily accepted?

I hope somebody can share any experience.

Regards,

FSSM

The HACCP methodology is tried, tested and works if applied correctly. Coming from a packaging background we have a degree of freedom to be a little more creative with pure HACCP and extend it beyond chemical, physical and microbiological hazards to include quality defects that are critical to consumer safety - I like that. This is also required by the BRC Packaging Standard e.g. to carry out a hazards assessment of defects critical to consumer safety. Examples could be missing print on ingredients, incorrect designs, mixed designs, holes in barrier packaging etc.

Regards,
Simon

Dear FSSM,

Are you referring to hazard analaysis??

Dear Jean, including Hazard Analysis, anything around the HACCP methodology.

The HACCP methodology is tried, tested and works if applied correctly. Coming from a packaging background we have a degree of freedom to be a little more creative with pure HACCP and extend it beyond chemical, physical and microbiological hazards to include quality defects that are critical to consumer safety - I like that. This is also required by the BRC Packaging Standard e.g. to carry out a hazards assessment of defects critical to consumer safety. Examples could be missing print on ingredients, incorrect designs, mixed designs, holes in barrier packaging etc.

Regards,
Simon

Simon, thanks for your input, no doubt it is a good methodology, but there must be something that could be better. Taking into account the ISO (22000) focus on continuos improvement, it is a must. If the issue of PRPs and OPRPs was clearer, I think it could be an example of what I´m looking for.

Regards,

FSSM