I am more Vincent Cassel ... Too many botox treatments with Catherine
Like Valentin, I am working for a proper trader.
In my company, we are buying and selling frozen meat (pork, poultry, ovin and beef), we do not have any direct contact with the product.
The main issue is the following: We have to built an HACCP plan (and other different things linked to the IFS) but we are subcontracting more or less everything !
Concerning GMP, It's one of the different quality documents that we ask for during an audit in specific plant.
Do you think we have to make one ?
(We are not added any value to the product.)
I think we have to put ccp from the moment that one of our subcontractor load the product, at this time the product is our propety, "we are taking the risk".
One of the CCP can be an accident between the truck and another vehicules don't you think ?
Hi Pauline,
My apologies, i missed yr (last) post first time around.
TBH, I found the IFS broker standard rather confusing. I found the IFS broker-related faq document more intelligible but also occasionally confusing/contradictory with respect to the standard. Maybe because I’m unfamiliar with (Broker) aspects / requirements / procedures. The BRC broker document seemed much clearer / prescriptive at first sight.
For example, this (2.1.4) text in the IFS Broker faq / haccp segment looked important regarding scope –
The broker shall perform a risk analysis for all steps under his responsibility and for all steps of the broker services. The key is to define the broker responsibility very clearly.
BUT I also noticed there are restrictions on what can be included in the scope of the broker standard, eg para. 1.8 in the faq regarding warehousing, transport, distribution.
I deduce yr main query is with regard to the scope / requirement for a haccp-type hazard analysis.
The scope of any haccp-type hazard analysis will seemingly depend on what you are doing/contracted to do but within the context of the standard also.
If yr interpretation of yr scope is correct, the requirement to do a “hazard analysis” looks applicable to a relatively short path in comparison to the more extended chain shown by Valentine (different contracted responsibilities perhaps ?).
Either way, IMO as per my previous post, most of any potential hazards should be covered by Prerequisite programs (= GMP). The key to defining any significant hazards if not handled by a Prerequisite program is via Likelihood of Occurrence and Severity.
Typical, fairly easily adaptable, templates for food hazard analyses are available on this forum, eg
http://www.ifsqn.com...ge-7#entry50651
(the significant hazards shown derived from left-hand side would be directly CCPs in a traditional non-iso haccp plan)
I met some similar problems to what you are discussing when I started designing haccp plans for auditing purposes. I threw all scope-type queries to my intended CB who freely answered all of them. They have the experience and they want your business.