Raw material risk assessment BRC issue 6 Clause 3.5.1.1
I have hit a blank, and my creative flare has come to a halt. - Doe anyone have any forms or insipartions to help me combat this clause?
BRC issue 6 3.5.1.1
The Company Shall undertake a documented risk assesment of each raw material to identify potential risks ....
Account for
Allergen Contamination
Foreign Body Risk
Micro Contamination
Chemical Contamination
Chemical risk
Microbiological risk
Physical risk
Allergen risk
Impact on quality of the product
Total risk (which was a combination of the above 5)
I graded all of this high, medium or low.
Basically I only thought about contamination risks from my knowledge of the ingredient and supplier and previous experience wrt my product and process. I then used this assessment to work out the audit frequency.
Sorry I don't like to attach the actual documents because they belong to our company and my approach might not be sensible for you. I mean, this document was only 3 pages long because we don't buy that many ingredients but for, say, a ready meal manufacturer which might have thousands it would make more sense to group things together, e.g. spices, dairy, raw meat, cooked meat etc.
We're starting to work on the same assessment. I've included a sample of the direction we're going with it, although it is not complete. We're opting for the "group of raw materials", and I can see already that we need to separate them a bit more. Hope this gives you food for thought.
Hope it came through this time.
Attached Files
It would be the same format as any of your other Hazard Analysis for your Process Flow Charts.
You should be able to get most of the information required from the Product Specification sheets from the ingredient manufacturer.
Here is an example:
Marshall
Attached Files
The standard does mention safety, legality and quality. "Quality" is (BRC) undefined of course. "Contamination" is defined in the glossary.
This is BRC covering (due diligencing) the (final) receiver's backs as far as possible.
Basically this paragraph is asking you to (risk) validate yr specifications for input materials (eg how did you decide on what to check ?, how to check it?,).
As illustrated in previous posts, the safety-related part (and maybe some overlapping legality) should have been done for yr hazard analysis. Presumably "quality" is the non-safety "contamination" part here (and maybe overlapping legality again).
Or perhaps some people ignore the non-safety bit ?
Rgds / Charles.C
Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)
This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.
As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...
Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.
I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.
RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls 37.5KB 4901 downloads
Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.
Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)
This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.
As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...
Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.
I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.
RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls 37.5KB 4901 downloads
GMO, couldn't agree more with your comment that:-
we're not great at recording in HACCP where things [i]aren't[/i] an issue.
At the risk of making for extensive documentation which I have seen with some clients,if you've assessed a hazard / risk combination and reached the conclusion ( in your opinion ) that the overall risk rating (severity of effect / likelihood of occurrence) is "Low" get the thought process and conclusion down on paper.
At least this demonstrates that you have considered all potential risks / hazards and the logic behind your decision that the overall risk rating is "Low".
Get it down on paper!
Many thanks
Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.
Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)
This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.
As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...
Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.
I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.
RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls 37.5KB 4901 downloads
Here you go:) Hope this will give you an idea
Attached Files
Here you go:) Hope this will give you an idea
Hi Geetika,
Thanks for the attachment and welcome to the Forum !
I deduce the Program included was not specifically addressed to BRC but interesting nonetheless. Thks.
Hi I have been working most of the day on updating my supplier approval risk assessment and still struggling to find a scoring system for it. I then found this article and it throws a different light on approval of suppliers. Does anyone have a recent template to use? We are a fresh fruit salad supplier with long standing supplier relationships and rarely change suppliers.
Thanks in advance for your help :helpplease:
Bizarre as this may sound, I think this goes above and beyond most HACCP plans simply because we're not great at recording in HACCP where things aren't an issue.
Personally this is in my quality manual but I see no reason not to put it into your HACCP plan if you want (although the 'quality' issue might stick with some people including me.)
This was mentioned in the BRC briefing I went to. As far as I understood it, the point of this wasn't necessarily to change the checks you did at intake but to justify your overall SQA controls including intake checks, SAQs, audit frequency etc. The point David Brackston made was flour is a pretty low risk ingredient but to a bakery, flour is vital so the 'quality' aspect is about what influence that ingredient has on the quality of your product. I remember working in ready meals where we had issue after issue with fresh herbs. These were being put on top of a ready meal and so were very visible to the consumer. Our supplier didn't understand this and it was only when I explained how we were using them that the quality improved. For another customer using them in a sauce, the appearance wouldn't have been a big deal.
As I said though, this is as much to justify a lack of checks than to give yourself more to do and I'm certainly not always great at recording that in HACCP especially at such a detailed level, i.e. I don't need to go and audit the salt supplier because...
Actually I was wrong, I've just checked my procedure and I've done it by supplier. The auditor was fine with it though.
I've taken off the business critical stuff from my form and attached it now.RM Supplier Base Risk Assesment Matrix v7.xls
Thank you. I have one similar but the BRC auditor sign this NC "3.5.1.1 Different raw materials and packaging are not evaluated within specific hazard analysis to evaluate the risk"
I was not present during the audit but the Client said to me the the procedure was not correct. Hmmmmmm
Thanks all for sharing the excel & sheet. Helped us a lot
Thank you. I have one similar but the BRC auditor sign this NC "3.5.1.1 Different raw materials and packaging are not evaluated within specific hazard analysis to evaluate the risk"
I was not present during the audit but the Client said to me the the procedure was not correct. Hmmmmmm
Hi M.eretti, I had the same problem !!! How did you solve it?
Hi M.eretti, I had the same problem !!! How did you solve it?
Hi Diana,
You are querying a 1-year old post so maybe some delay although the poster still looks in occasionally.
My guess is the NC meant that the specific hazards were not properly defined (eg "pathogenic bacteria").
Hi Diana,
You are querying a 1-year old post so maybe some delay although the poster still looks in occasionally.
My guess is the NC meant that the specific hazards were not properly defined (eg "pathogenic bacteria").