In part three of FSMA Fridays: Debunking FSMA’s Myths And Gaps, SafetyChain Software’s VP of Marketing, Jill Bender was joined by The Acheson Group’s (TAG) VP of Scientific Affairs, Dr. Peyman Fatemi, and TAG’s Senior Food Safety Manger, Christopher Snabes, to discuss common myths, misconceptions, and gaps regarding FSMA. Here, in the fourth, and final, portion of the series, Bender, Fatemi, and Snabes address questions from the webcast’s live audience.
In part one of FSMA Fridays: Debunking FSMA’s Myths And Gaps, SafetyChain Software’s VP of Marketing, Jill Bender is joined by The Acheson Group’s (TAG) VP of Scientific Affairs, Dr. Peyman Fatemi, and TAG’s Senior Food Safety Manger, Christopher Snabes, to discuss and clarify common myths, misconceptions, and gaps regarding FSMA. Here, in part two, the trio continues their discussion.
SafetyChain Software’s VP of Marketing, Jill Bender is joined by The Acheson Group’s (TAG) VP of Scientific Affairs, Dr. Peyman Fatemi, and TAG’s Senior Food Safety Manger, Christopher Snabes, to discuss and clarify common myths, misconceptions, and gaps regarding FSMA.
With FSMA, and accompanying rules, now finalized, the countdown to enforcement is on. In order to make food available to consumers in the U.S. market, it is important to ensure food is exported according to applicable laws.
Many stakeholders are involved in the implementation of the new nutrition label requirements including raw ingredient suppliers, nutrition labeling software vendors, graphics design and packaging companies, food manufacturers, and private label brand owners. For a successful implementation, it is imperative that each of these key stakeholders develop a comprehensive knowledge of the new requirements.
The FDA recently released draft guidance (the “Guidance”) on controlling Listeria monocytogenes (LM) and ready-to-eat foods (RTE) in conjunction with the final rule, Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF rule). Any FDA-regulated facility that manufacturers, processes, packs, or holds RTE foods needs to take the time to read this new draft Guidance. Why? For three reasons. First, as we all know, draft guidance can often take years before it turns to final guidance, and in the interim, FDA inspectors still rely on it as gospel. Second, whether it’s considered draft or final by the FDA, we all know the reality is guidance is often treated like directive, which in turn is often treated just like regulation. If we don’t follow it, we have a lot of explaining to do. Third, there are a few waves contained in this guidance that we, as an industry, all need to be aware of now!
All departments of any company (food production or not) need training from several perspectives, such as safety, job-specific roles, business acumen, and human rights. And other departments — accounting, production, quality assurance, upper management — they all have their roles that need training. Of course, sanitation needs to know how to clean, maintenance needs to know how to repair and upkeep, warehouse needs to know how to ship and receive. But, how important is training in the role of food safety? In a word: vital.
Food safety is a team sport; you can have the best programs in the world, but it takes people to carry out those programs. Many food safety programs fail for one very simple reason: there is not a culture fostered that promotes food safety at every level. From the very top, throughout the entire organization, there needs to be a commitment to food safety and a commitment to continuous improvement.
Two cornerstones of FSMA’s final rule on Preventative Controls for Human Food are record keeping and sanitation. Food manufacturers and processors, along with companies importing goods into the U.S., are now being held to a much higher standard of sanitation, documentation, and compliance to better protect the health of the U.S. public.
In spring 2016, the FDA released its long-awaited Final Rule on Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food (the Rule). The regulation, which constitutes one of seven final rules implementing FSMA, was closely watched by many throughout the industry — and for good reason. Based on the earlier proposed version of the Rule, many commentators feared the Rule, in its final form, would be an inflexible regulation with the potential to impact the very way that food transporters operate — and not always in ways that made sense.
FSMA, for some, is now a regulatory compliance issue. For others, it comes into effect over the next couple of years. The intention of this article is to identify current responses GFSI and benchmarked schemes (BRC, FSSC 22000 and SQF) have put into place and to support companies in meeting the various requirements within the Food Safety Modernization Act.
Robots are becoming safer, smarter, more flexible and moving upstream
SQF has gone through many changes to keep up with industry standards and the benchmarking requirements of GFSI. When the eighth edition of SQF comes out next month, will you be ready for it?