Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

BRCGS Section 4.6 risk assessments for version 9

Share this

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic
- - - - -

nalysis

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 19 January 2023 - 12:09 PM

Hi, I hope everything is going well at IFSQN. It's been long since I post anything here.
I am looking for something regarding Section 4.6 of the new BRC, please if anyone willing to share any risk assessments that are needed for version 9 of the BRC standard, please do source, share and/or discuss. Thank you very much in advance

Sent from my 2201116SG using Tapatalk



Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 4,288 posts
  • 1307 thanks
641
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:World
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 20 January 2023 - 05:57 AM

Hi @nalysisstaffskillsacademy,

 

Welcome back!

 

I presume that you are asking about risk assessments required as per BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 Section 4.6 Equipment.

 

If we look at the BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9, first of all clause 4.6.1

requires a documented purchase specification for any new equipment detailing the site requirements for the equipment. This is clearly a starting point as if your equipment is specified correctly then risks are minimised.

 

Clause 4.6.2 requires that the design and construction of equipment shall be based on risk, to prevent product contamination. For example, the use of the correct seals, impervious surfaces or smooth welds and joints, where they are exposed to product and could otherwise result in foreign- body, microbiological or allergen contamination of the product.

Clearly if equipment is for food contact then it should be specified correctly and inspected prior to use.

 

The need for further controls is covered in clause 4.6.3 which requires:

A documented, risk-based commissioning procedure shall be in place to ensure that food safety and integrity is maintained during the installation of new equipment to site.

Installation work shall be followed by a documented hygiene clearance procedure.

New equipment to site shall be inspected by an authorised member of staff before being accepted into operation.

The commissioning procedure shall include the update of any other site procedures that are affected by the new equipment, for example, training, operating procedures, cleaning, environmental monitoring, maintenance schedules or internal audits.

 

I use a Process Change Approval form for New Equipment with an assessment of risk involved in the change. This risk assessment will need to consider the severity of any potential hazards and the amount of product that could be potentially affected.

From the BRCGS Guidelines:

Risk assessments and resultant controls must be proportionate to the likely risk to the product; for example, the equipment’s proximity to product (e.g. use in production areas or open product areas), its significance to the production process, and its complexity (for example, a new production line or part of a production line will need significantly more consideration than a small item such as a plastic scoop).

 

Clearly a comprehensive Commission Checklist will be required for a new production line with new filling equipment (high risk).

 

This checklist is likely to include:

Specification sign off

Initial inspection

Plan and precautions for installation

Installation & monitoring of installation

Inspection & release for trials

Production trials

Training

 

Plus a sign off of:

Operation

Product Quality/Safety

Health & Safety

Hygiene including cleaning validation/verification

Engineering & Maintenance including calibration if necessary

Documented procedures for production, operation, maintenance, monitoring etc.

 

An item such a plastic scoop may be regarded as relatively low risk but if it is for food contact, it will still need to be specified for intended use, have relevant procedures issued & trained in such as usage/cleaning and inspected prior to use.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony



Thanked by 4 Members:

nalysis

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 20 January 2023 - 09:51 AM

Good morning,
Tony Thank you very much

Sent from my 2201116SG using Tapatalk



m.erzetti

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 63 posts
  • 26 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Italy
    Italy
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Perugia
  • Interests:Consultant for ISO 9001; ISO 17025; ISO 22000; BRC & IFS. I worked at the University of Perugia in the CERB (Italian Brewing Research Centre) as Quality Manager (ISO 9001 - ISO 17025)

Posted 24 January 2023 - 09:31 AM

Hi Tony your analisys is very cool.

I have simplify it describing in the procedure this kind of risk:

1. Structural work (possible dangers: foreign bodies) = intervention only when production has stopped or with suitable segregation of the area
2. Dirt on equipment (physical and microbiological hazards) = cleaning work before bringing equipment into area and subsequent cleaning and if necessary disinfection of equipment
3. Connection work on company equipment (possible dangers: foreign bodies and microbiological contamination of surfaces) = intervention only when production has stopped or with appropriate segregation of the area. Cleaning and if necessary disinfection of equipment at end of operation.
4. External personnel (physical-chemical-microbiological hazards) = compliance with hygiene behaviour practices.
 

What do you think about my simple analysis?

 

In Italy we have the Reg. CE 852-2004 where describe the principes about the allocation of new equipment.



Deanna G.V

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 February 2023 - 11:07 PM

Hello, does anyone have an example of a risk assessment they could share? Purchase specification checklist for supplier to provide prior to supply? 


Deanna G-V |

HACCP Coordinator

Harvest Meats, a Division of PB OLP

 


Jek Monte

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 22 September 2023 - 06:23 PM

Hello, does anyone have an example of a risk assessment they could share? Purchase specification checklist for supplier to provide prior to supply? 

Following on this.



mgourley

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,418 posts
  • 1004 thanks
278
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plant City, FL
  • Interests:Cooking, golf, firearms, food safety and sanitation.

Posted 24 September 2023 - 07:12 AM

We use this. It's basically a restatement of the requirements in 21 CFR 117.40.

 

Marshall

Attached Files



Thanked by 1 Member:


Share this

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users