2 replies to this topic

[aditya.sharma2023]

Dear All,

 

I am working on a project of re-defining the methodology for raw material hazard analysis at my workplace, we have plants in Canada and US. I have learnt that in the past we grouped our raw materials like a hazard assessment done for flavour was considered to be sufficient for all kinds of different flavours like strawberry, vanilla, etc and whether it was a natural or artificial. I am changing this but we make a lot of products and have around 1800 RM/PM suppliers, AFAIK we have a number of suppliers providing same product as well.

 

In order to keep it simple and appropriate, I intend to group my suppliers who provide same product as per our defined raw material characteristics thus 1 RM (from multiple suppliers) => 1 assessment response on RM Hazard analysis table i.e. separate responses for brilliant yellow sugar, coarse white sugar, fine white sugar. And let's say there are 4 suppliers for fine white sugar then reviewing their controls together against the potential hazards (under P/C/B) => applying risk methodology => justifying the decision of risk rating in gist =>  where required applying additional controls against a supplier.

 

Does it make sense? Please let me know your thoughts about it any possible consequences that you foresee like any scenarios leading us to deviate from FSMA / SQF/ BRC/ CFIA requirements?

[Scampi]

I would have one matrix for the raw material and a separate one for the vendors----way to cumbersome to blend them together

 

There are flaws in putting ingredients in baskets the way you suggest

 

Eg   Vanilla

 

Natural vanilla is much more likely to be fraudulent (particularly right now more than doubles in $ in the last 12 months)  BUT fewer ingredients than artificial

 

Same goes for the risks with artificial colours

[aditya.sharma2023]

Thanks Scampi, I totally agree with you on this and therefore the intention of having a/any supplier against a particular RM/PM in my Hazard analysis table is to review and consider their (suppliers') applied controls in order to deliver us a safe product. All I am hoping from this is:-

a. we will have a clear view of actions from suppliers.

b. identify which supplier needs improvement by sharing best practices with them and applying additional controls over them to avoid any surprises later. furthermore in future, benchmarking them.

c. all materials will get grouped by specifications and not by generic names

 

For food fraud, since it is economically motivated and has impact on product quality rather than safety hence I created and implemented another matrix a couple of months back which does not consider food safety hazards and purely focuses on factors that contribute towards likelihood of occurrence & likelihood of detection.

 

I am sorry if in my initial post I didn't explain the intention well. Please review again and let me know your thought.

 

Thanks for your time