Lowering CCP target temperature

Obviously if you have explained the cost and time saving benifits of lowering the CCP then there is not much else you can do. The one thing I would say (without knowing the minute details of your process) is that you do have a good bank of historical evidence to back up your CCP. Lowering might require, for example, verification that all of the meat in the pot reaches a core temperature of 75 for 26 seconds or its equivalent, or that there are no cold spots in the pot (unlikely from what you say, but as auditors have a reputation for saying, prove it). From a Quality Manager's perspective, I would have to say that it sounds great that your company are ignoring possible savings in favour of over the top food safety. That doesn't happen in many places these days, you know!

It might be worth running a few trials at lower temperatures to see how it affects the organoleptic properties of the final product perhaps? I would imagine cooking to a lower temperature would give a better final product texture, but this may be negligible if, for example, you are drowning the mince in a strongly flavoured sauce during the process.

Hi MM

The idea is good and I'm sure it will be welcomed by production. You will need to establish if there would be any shelf life concerns.

Any idea has to why the CCP target was initially set at 100 degrees.



Thanks

Hi Everyone,

I need some advice on lowering my one of the CCP target temperature. We add minced meat (at below 0⁰ C) to boiling water & cook meat to 100⁰ C. Our meat cooking CCP currently set at 90⁰ C and the target to reach is 100⁰ C. I want to lower the target cooking temperature to 95⁰ C or even lower. If I target 95⁰ C I would save about 2 hrs of cooking time in a day without compromising food safety. I have been opposed by stating that this has been done for last 20+ years. I understand that this is a big change for everyone on this site. I have tried explaining 6.5 and 7 log reduction requirements. I would appreciate some feedback for and against my aim of reducing the target CCP temperature.

Thanks

MM

Hi MM,

The temperature can be lowered from 100 to 95 but the things that needs to be considered when you are doing that is

Safety of the food product, which can be decided by microbial analysis
The quality of the product.( should be properly cooked and should adhere to the same taste.
The process has to be validated to ensure that all the hazards specially microbial hazard is taken care.

Thanks

Hi Everyone,

I need some advice on lowering my one of the CCP target temperature. We add minced meat (at below 0⁰ C) to boiling water & cook meat to 100⁰ C. Our meat cooking CCP currently set at 90⁰ C and the target to reach is 100⁰ C. I want to lower the target cooking temperature to 95⁰ C or even lower. If I target 95⁰ C I would save about 2 hrs of cooking time in a day without compromising food safety. I have been opposed by stating that this has been done for last 20+ years. I understand that this is a big change for everyone on this site. I have tried explaining 6.5 and 7 log reduction requirements. I would appreciate some feedback for and against my aim of reducing the target CCP temperature.

Thanks

MM

Hi,
Lowering the cooking temperature sounds like a good idea. A CCP with a limit of 75 degrees celsius will allow for effective pathogen destruction. I recommend that you also include a cooking time which allows for thorough heat distribution throughout the entire batch. Shelf life testing and how you intend to package and store the product after cooking will need to be determined. Also condider any further risks if any further ingredients are added after cooking. And of course you will have already considered storage and contamination risks prior to cooking just in case a heat stable toxin could be present.

Thanks

Dear All,

The basic response to the OP is IMO simple and short - Validation and Verification.

It appears that there had been no interest in such for approx. 20 yrs.

I also wonder if this product has a specification ??

My advice will depend somewhat on why "someone" believes that 100degC is mandatory ? (calibrated thermocouple ??)

Rgds / Charles.C