Www.mpi.govt.nz New Zealand-led Drafting team Example 3b: MC for verifying the performance of a food safety control system.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Physical WG on the REVISION OF THE PRINCIPLES FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND APPLICATION OF MICROBIOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR FOODS EFSA, Parma, May 29 to June 1,

Advertisements

OPPD Policy Development Division Omaha, Nebraska

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS NOTICE CLARIFYING AND EXPANSION OF SAMPLING ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service 1 National Advisory Committee on Meat and Poultry Inspection August 8-9, 2007.

1 Andrew Howard UNFCCC secretariat International transaction log Checks, public information and modalities Intersessional.

Hazards to Human through Food Chain Bacterial Viral Toxins Drug Residues.

National Trichinae Herd Certification Program. Importance to industry Stigma for the pork industry Stigma for the U.S. Establish national certification.

Establish Verification Procedures (Task 11 / Principle 6)

Source attribution in Campylobacter jejuni Daniel Wilson Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine JR Microbiology Seminar 16 th.

What are DWSPs ? WHO Initiative Comprehensive risk assessment and risk management approach Source-to-tap Multiple-barriers HACCP Many elements will already.

Food Safety and Inspection Service Pathogen Reduction/HACCP.

Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points

1 Canadian Approach to Food Safety in the Food Continuum Federal - Provincial -Territorial Canadian Approach to Food Safety in the Food Continuum Version.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Role of Economics in Pathogen Control Regulations Daniel Engeljohn, Ph.D. Office.

1 MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE NATION’S FOODSERVICE AND RETAIL FOOD PROTECTION SYSTEM.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service 1 E. coli O157:H7 and Certain Beef Exporting Countries Sally White, Director,

Chapter 10 Verification Procedures. Objective In this module, you will learn: u How to define verification u What functions are part of HACCP plan verification.

Example 4: The establishment of a MC for lot-wise verification, based on a quantitative risk assessment Maarten Nauta and Jens Kirk Andersen on behalf.

Seafood HACCP Alliance for Training and Education Chapter 10 Principle 6: Establish Verification Procedures.

Allen Hepner Senior Planning & Performance Manager September 22, 2011

NZ strategy for the reduction of foodborne campylobacteriosis Peter van der Logt, Science Group.

DENNIS CRYER Veterinary Meat Hygiene Adviser Food Standards Agency

Thomas P. Oscar, Ph.D. USDA, ARS

Example 5b: Operationalising a Performance Objective with a Microbiological Criterion for a Risk-Based Approach Kerry L. Dearfield, Ph.D. Scientific Advisor.

The Safe Food Handler H.A.C.C.P. Test Review FD2.05 FC 4.05.

Managing Contamination Through Chain to Improve Public Health Outcomes Birds, Bacteria & Baselines.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Salmonella Initiative Program Isabel Arrington, PhD, DVM Sci. Advisor, RIMD.

Example 1: GHP-based microbiological criteria Rosa M. Peran i Sala European Commission on behalf of the drafting team New Orleans, 11 th November 2012.

1 Judi Lee/Janice Attrill, MPI J MPI Update for NZFMA – Mar 2014 Salmonella Strategy & Animal Feeds Review.

Example (5A) Operationalising a Performance Objective with a Microbiological Criterion for a Risk-Based Approach.

Applying Process Indicators to Monitor the Editing Process.

Regulatory Update National Turkey Federation 2012 Annual Convention February 15 – 18, 2012 Brett T. Schwemer.

The development and progress of a risk-based strategy for the control of Listeria monocytogenes in New Zealand Marion Castle and Scott Crerar.

THE CONCEPTS of PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, CUMULATIVE STEPS AND VALIDATION STUDIES Dr. John Kvenberg, Acting Director, Office of Field Programs July 15, 1999.

© 2011 Michigan State University and United Nations Industrial Development Organization, original at CC-BY-SA HACCP Principle.

1 Janice Attrill, Specialist Adviser, Animal Products Update for NZFMA - March 2013.

Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 2 HACCP Impacts on Contamination Levels in Meat and Poultry Products: FSIS Perspective Delila R. Parham, DVM Office of.

Dairy Industry Roadmap ► This was the first of 10 projects being coordinated by Defra, and applies to the entire liquid milk supply chain, from farm.

Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 4 May 7, 2002 The Costs and Benefits of Adopting Food Safety Interventions. Michael Ollinger.

Example (5A) Operationalising a Performance Objective with a Microbiological Criterion for a Risk-Based Approach.

—OWA send —OWA failure —OWA fast recovery —OWA verified as healthy —OWA send —OWA failure —OWA fast recovery —Failover server’s databases —OWA verified.

Presentation of Example 3A: MC for verifying the performance of a HACCP system by the FBO Drafting team: Claus Heggum (IDF) Jorge J. Guerrero Vallejos.

Proposed Rule: Modernization of Poultry Slaughter Inspection

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service 1 Public Health Based Slaughter Inspection: Rationale and Process August 7,

Public Health Lessons from HACCP-Based Inspection Models Project Presentation by Loren D. Lange August 7, 2007 United States Department of Agriculture.

Understanding AMAOs Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives for Title III Districts School Year Results.

Pathogen Reduction. Comparison/Contrast n Salmonella u Performed by FSIS n E. coli u Performed by Establishment.

 This notice provides new instructions to Enforcement Investigations and Analysis Officers (EIAOs) and Public Health Veterinarians who were trained in.

Explaining the FSIS Sampling Program for Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Raw Ground Beef Kristina Barlow, Priya Kadam, Stephanie Buchanan, Priscilla Levine.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Overview of Trim Sampling Compliance Guidelines and Discussion Daniel Engeljohn,

Presentation of Example 3A: MC for verifying the performance of a HACCP system by the FBO Drafting team: Claus Heggum (IDF) Jorge J. Guerrero Vallejos.

H azard A nalysis C ritical C ontrol P oint. HACCP : A systematic approach to the identification, evaluation, and control of food safety hazards. Hazard.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Public Health-Related Performance Standards Currently Under Consideration for.

Example 4: Example of a Risk Based Microbiological Criterion for food/pathogen with a high prevalent pathogen Jens Kirk Andersen Maarten Nauta Annette.

Purpose (what is intended to be achieved) To extend beyond the establishment and application of MC from GHP-based and HACCP- based (particularly lot acceptance.

Focus Schools Grant Monitoring and Support Consolidated Planning and Monitoring September 2015.

SEVESO II transposition and implementation: Possible approaches and lessons learned from member states and new member states SEVESO II transposition and.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Within Establishment Public Health Risk-Based Inspection for Poultry Slaughter.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service 1.

BRC Packaging ISSUE 5 Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials.

Controlling Salmonella and Campylobacter in Raw Poultry An Overview of the 2015 Draft FSIS Compliance Guideline Ashley B. Peterson, Ph.D. National Chicken.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service 11 ISSUES FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION: E. coli O157:H7 DANIEL ENGELJOHN, Ph.D. Deputy.

United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Draft Labeling Policy Guidance for N- 60 Testing Claims for Boneless Beef Manufacturing.

Grade A Dairy Equivalence

The Risk Assessment in the Food Industry

GFSI Certification What Top Management Needs to Know

الأستاذ المساعد بقسم المناهج وطرق التدريس

خطة سلامة الغذاء Food Safety Plan

Regional Seminar for OIE National Focal Points on Animal Production Food Safety Importance of collaboration between the Veterinary Services and industry.

Presentation transcript:

New Zealand-led Drafting team Example 3b: MC for verifying the performance of a food safety control system

Drafting team Costa Rica – Amanda Lasso Cruz Kenya – Moses Gichia Kiribati – Tebikau Noran New Zealand – Judi Lee, Marion Castle and colleagues Samoa – Ualesi Silva

Campylobacteriosis in New Zealand ,873 notifications (379 / 100,000) 1,179 hospitalisations

Source of human cases 2008

50% reduction in the incidence of foodborne campylobacteriosis after five years Regulator’s commitment to our Minister: Regulator’s Goal

Industry performance target Target: 3.78 log 10 CFU Campylobacter per carcass Purpose: to verify whether a food safety control system applied to the slaughter and dressing of broiler chicken achieves a regulated performance target for Campylobacter

Who should establish/who should apply Established: by regulator in consultation with industry Applied: by processors of broiler chickens. GHP and hazard-based measures are selected by individual processors that best meet the target.

Hazard-based measures

Point in food chain – food/food process Food: fresh raw broiler chicken carcasses Point of food chain: after slaughter, dressing and initial chilling to check status at the end of primary processing

Sampling plan /method of analysis Sampling plan: tailored to size of industry 3 whole carcasses selected randomly details provided in technical manual Method of analysis: direct plate enumeration (mCCDA)

Addition of latest processing period displaces the results from the oldest processing period samples 3 random samples per processing day Processing period = 5 processing days 15 samples/processing period = 45 samples per moving window Moving Window MW = 3 latest processing periods Interpretation: CPT moving window /failure description Each MWF scores 1. These are cumulative until reset to zero after the next compliant moving window 7 or more/ 45 samples from MW are greater than 3.78 log10CFU/carcass (Standard Throughput) Moving Window Failure (MWF) MW = 3 successive processing periods

Sanctions 58 or more Regulatory visit +/- sanctions 46-7 Sampling, + interventions 34-5 Processing Equip WOF, Farm review 22-3 GHP and HACCP review 11 Escalating ResponseHighest Cumulative Total (HCF or MWF) CPT failure: escalating response

Industry progress

Prevalence: in 2 nd quarter 2007 was 57% in 4 th quarter 2011 was 40%

Quarterly progress – all human campylobacteriosis cases

Notifications and hospitalisations Sourced from Ann Sears 2009, Otago University