Radiological hazards are chemical hazards.
Radioactive chemicals emit harmful radiation that at large doses is harmful soon after exposure and at small doses is harmful years or decades later. Our food may become contaminated through the absorption of radioactive chemicals found in soil or water. Radioactive chemicals in air may settle onto food, water, or soil. Terms used to describe radioactive chemicals include: radioactive isotopes, radioactive elements, and radionuclides. Examples include: radioactive cesium, uranium, and strontium.

You may be familiar with radon testing before purchase of a home; this is standard practice in real estate. I was at the house we were purchasing when the radon test was done – it was a beautiful day, but I could not open the windows or the test would be invalid. Radon is a gas. When a radon test is done inside a house, the air is tested for a given time. (Our house passed the radon test.) Radon is not a chemical hazard of major concern in the food industry.

Radioactive chemicals are naturally present in some rock formations. As rainwater filters through soil and is collected in aquifers below the surface, the water may pick up radioactive chemicals. If your facility uses well water, research the location of the aquifer. What is known about the soil and rock formation surrounding the aquifer? Is the location known to have a risk of radioactive chemicals? If your facility uses municipal water, your water treatment facility tests for radioactive chemicals. Add your annual water report from your water treatment facility to your food safety plan. If you have questions on the report, talk with your local water treatment facility.

When you write your hazard analysis, include radiological hazard as a chemical hazard once for your water supply.
In the hazard analysis you may determine that the hazard does not require a preventive control and will remain as a Good Manufacturing Practice for potable water.

Approve suppliers using your own criteria.
If ingredients for your product include a crop, you may have concerns about the location of the field and water used for irrigation. Theoretically, there could be an uptake of radioactive chemicals if present in the soil or if present in the water used for irrigation. Know the location for the crop and communicate with your supplier if you have any concerns.

Radioactive chemicals are of concern after nuclear power plant accidents. In the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident in what is now the Ukraine, plumes of radioactive material were sent into the air in updrafts from a steam explosion and resulting fire. The radioactive material settled into the surrounding area as the wind blew away from the facility. In the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant accident in Japan, a tsunami hit the coast. Loss of electricity to cooling pumps caused a reactor meltdown, explosions, and release of radioactive material to the air, ground water, and the Pacific Ocean.

What can you do about the potential for a nuclear power plant accident near you? First, locate the nearest nuclear power plant to your facility. The website for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has a feature for locating nuclear power plants. Second, determine if you are within an emergency planning zone and review the plume exposure pathway. If your facility is within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant and an accident occurs, there is a ban of contaminated water and food.

When you write your hazard analysis, include radiological hazard as a chemical hazard for your location.
If your facility is within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant, identify a hazard requiring a preventive control and write an emergency plan. Being prepared for an emergency is the best insurance that it won’t happen.

Please comment on this blog post below. I love feedback! Still have questions? The ConnectFood website has free resources, and the folks at ConnectFood are here to help! Contact us.

Kathy Knutson, Ph.D., Lead Instructor for Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF), Preventive Controls Qualified Individual (PCQI), and trained in prevention of Intentional Adulteration (IA). She has food safety expertise in microbiology, hazard analysis, and risk assessment. As a recovering academic, she resides in Green Bay home-of-the-Packers, Wisconsin with her brilliant husband and two handsome sons. Learn more about her consulting services at https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathyknutsonphd.

I was on a flight to Boston, and in my hand was the FDA draft guidance, Seafood HACCP and the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act: Guidance for Industry. HACCP is hazard analysis and critical control points, and the Seafood HACCP rule was published in 1995. I had received the FDA guidance document at the previous Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF) workshop that I taught in Seattle. In Seattle, I had several workshop participants who worked in the seafood industry. I had dined on delicious salmon in Seattle and was dreaming of eating fresh seafood in Boston.

A substantial difference between the Seattle workshop and the Boston workshop was that the Boston workshop was comprised of people from the milling and baking industry, not seafood. Darn. Seafood HACCP has a life of its own in regulation, and I was looking forward to learning more about seafood from the workshop participants. Reading the guidance would not further my expertise as a Lead Instructor for the Boston workshop, but nevertheless I was in the mood to read this compact document. As I skimmed the introductory material, I came to a nice question and answer (Q & A) format. The FDA always does a nice job of communicating important information through the format of Q & A. Sometimes it is just nice to see plain English from the FDA, and that’s what a Q & A provides.

I did learn some information specific to the seafood industry from the guidance document, but it was the general information from the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) that piqued my interest. Do you know the following three facts?

    1. Training and training records are now required.
    FDA is making a big deal out of training. Every person employed in the manufacturing, processing, packing or holding of food must be trained in food safety. There must be training records kept for each individual showing the individual is a “qualified individual” to perform his or her job. Supervisors must have additional training to demonstrate they are qualified to do their job.

    Who organizes the training records at your facility? The inspector will ask to see training records of employees. The more organized your company is, the easier it will be to show these records to the inspector. Training records can be paper, electronic, or a combination. FDA is focusing on training, so be prepared.

    2. Written sanitation procedures are not required for GMPs.
    Subpart B of the PCHF rule is Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) and replaces GMPs found in 21 CFR 110. Subpart B does not require written sanitation procedures. This means that the chemical concentrations, equipment, times and temperatures for a cleaning or sanitizing procedure are not required to be written, but you should. See my previous blog post on Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures (SSOPs).

    The sanitation crew at most facilities has a lot of turnover and little supervision for an extremely important job. Writing the procedures will facilitate training, consistency and effectiveness of cleaning and sanitizing. Written monitoring procedures and corrective action records are required.

    3. Written sanitation procedures are required for sanitation preventive controls.
    In Subpart C of the PCHF rule, this is how the logic flows in the rule:

    1. A written food safety plan is required 21 CFR 117.126(a)(1).
    2. A food safety plan includes preventive controls 21 CFR 117.126(b)(2).
    3. Preventive controls must be written 21 CFR 117.135(b).
    4. Sanitation preventive controls are procedures, practices and processes 21 CFR 117.135(3).

Therefore, if a facility identifies a sanitation preventive control in the hazard analysis, written sanitation procedures are required.

If a facility has an allergen in one product, but not in another product from the same line, the facility will have a sanitation preventive control for the allergen clean procedure. If a facility produces a ready-to-eat product, the facility will have a sanitation preventive control for the cleaning and sanitizing procedure to control pathogens. Like Subpart B, written monitoring procedures and corrective action records are required.

Even with plain English, information can be confusing. When I am teaching the PCHF course, I warn the participants that the answer to a question may be, “You have to take that to legal.” I encourage you to visit the FSMA website and review FDA guidance documents. Boston was my 17th PCHF workshop, and I am still learning.

Please comment on this blog post below. I love feedback! Still have questions? The ConnectFood website has free resources, and the folks at ConnectFood are here to help! Contact us.

Kathy Knutson, Ph.D., Lead Instructor for Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF), Preventive Controls Qualified Individual (PCQI), and trained in prevention of Intentional Adulteration (IA). She has food safety expertise in microbiology, hazard analysis, and risk assessment. As a recovering academic, she resides in Green Bay home-of-the-Packers, Wisconsin with her brilliant husband and two handsome sons. Learn more about her consulting services at https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathyknutsonphd.

Preventive controls are actions your company takes to ensure the product is safe. The FDA recognizes five types of preventive controls in the Preventive Controls for Human Food rule. They are process, allergen, sanitation, supply chain, and other preventive controls.

Food companies with more than $1 million in annual revenue are required under FSMA’s Preventive Controls for Human Food rule to conduct a hazard analysis and identify preventive controls. The company will consider biological, chemical, physical, and radiological hazards. The hazard analysis drives the discussion and decisions on preventive controls. For every hazard, there are actions the company takes to control the hazard.

Most food companies have a process preventive control and monitor time and temperature. The time and temperature are combined to control a biological hazard. Most companies have a metal detector, inspection of packaging to match the product and label allergens for an allergen preventive control, and monitoring of sanitation preventive controls for the control of environmental pathogens. FDA’s current thinking on environmental monitoring is detailed in the draft Listeria guidance. Process preventive controls and sanitation preventive controls may be designed to prevent foodborne illness, but did you know most recalls are due to the hazard of allergens? The food may be perfectly made, but if the packaging is wrong, the company will have a recall. Follow this link for just one example.

Some companies have so many redundant steps that it is difficult to name the step which is a preventive control. In this case, the food safety team should talk through their process and imagine taking away a step. I talked with a company that had multiple filters for their stream of product. To name every filter as a preventive control creates a lot of work and is unnecessary. Failure of the first filters was not a food safety issue because later filters work. The company visualized which filters were the most important for food safety by visualizing the removal of each individually. Where failure could result in a food safety hazard, the step was named as a preventive control.

If the hazard is controlled by the supplier, the receiving company must verify the hazard was controlled. An example is ice cream inclusions, like nuts. Imagine how the receiving company could verify the safety. COAs of course. Will the supplier share their food safety plan? An audit is required. Does the supplier have a validated process? Supply chain preventive controls are all about verification.

In addition to the four types of preventive controls mentioned above, the FDA also gives industry the option of other preventive control. I look at this type in two ways. First, your food safety team may disagree on naming the type of preventive control. For example, is an allergen clean a sanitation or allergen preventive control? It doesn’t matter! It only matters that it gets done. The second way that other can be used is if new scientific information emerges and does not fit into one of the four types of preventive controls. Current scientific understanding (below) means that we are always learning, and new information on hazards is always emerging. With the latest information, a company may need to reanalyze their food safety plan.

Here is the definition of preventive controls from the rule:

Preventive controls means those risk-based, reasonably appropriate procedures, practices, and processes that a person knowledgeable about the safe manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding of food would employ to significantly minimize or prevent the hazards identified under the hazard analysis that are consistent with the current scientific understanding of safe food manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding at the time of the analysis.”

The knowledgeable person ultimately is a Preventive Controls Qualified Individual (PCQI) in cooperation with engineers, microbiologists, and other food safety experts. The PCQI works with his or her food safety team to write the hazard analysis and identify preventive controls. The food industry has trained over 40,000 PCQIs in less than two years. PCQIs are your go-to people for food safety. If you are a small company in need of food safety expertise, the folks at ConnectFood are here to help.

Please comment on this blog post below. I love feedback! Still have questions? The ConnectFood website has free resources; click here to Contact us.

Kathy Knutson, Ph.D., Lead Instructor for Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF), Preventive Controls Qualified Individual (PCQI), and trained in prevention of Intentional Adulteration (IA). She has food safety expertise in microbiology, hazard analysis, and risk assessment. As a recovering academic, she resides in Green Bay home-of-the-Packers, Wisconsin with her brilliant husband and two handsome sons. Learn more about her consulting services at https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathyknutsonphd.

As I sit drinking my Jamaican Me Crazy morning coffee, I open the newest FDA recall announcement, and it is for Death Wish Coffee’s Death Wish Nitro Cold Brew. First, that’s an unfortunate name given that the recall is for the potential of botulism which is deadly. Putting that aside, I have been waiting for the first recall or outbreak of cold brew coffee. I have been telling anyone who listens that it is only a matter of time before there is a recall or outbreak. The business of food safety is secure.

The beauty of coffee is that it is made with hot water. Most of us have seen on TV or, in some cases, in person the harvesting, gathering, and shipping of coffee beans. The process is nasty. Mud, birds, and rodents are intimately involved in the process. The beans are roasted, but microbiologists like to say, “dirt in, dirt out.” Some of us don’t say “dirt.” After the beans are roasted, they are ground. Have you ever ground beans at the grocery store? I bet that piece of equipment never gets cleaned. What about at commercial roasters? How often does the equipment get cleaned? Or at your gas station/ convenience store? You get the picture.

Again, the beauty of coffee is that it is made with hot water. Folks, this is a needed kill step. FDA recently gave us Chapter 6 of the Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food: Draft Guidance for Industry in draft form. Chapter 6 is Use of Heat Treatments as a Process Control. Every food manufacturer should review this guidance.

This recall of coffee is of canned cold brew coffee. There was no kill step for Clostridium botulinum, and there is the potential for botulism. The company is faced with the fact that they cannot can cold brew coffee without destroying the flavor profile. Smart on their part is to announce that they have suspended the production of this product. It is also smart to work with a process authority like ConnectFood CEO Matthew Botos. There are nonthermal ways to approach the manufacture and packaging of cold brew coffee. That will cost upward of a million dollars, so profit margin needs to be high.

This is what we do at ConnectFood. We support; we educate. Right now though, I need more coffee.

Please comment on this blog post below. I love feedback! Still have questions? The ConnectFood website has free resources, and the folks at ConnectFood are here to help! Contact us.

Kathy Knutson, Ph.D., Lead Instructor for Preventive Controls for Human Food (PCHF), Preventive Controls Qualified Individual (PCQI), and trained in prevention of Intentional Adulteration (IA). She has food safety expertise in microbiology, hazard analysis, and risk assessment. As a recovering academic, she resides in Green Bay home-of-the-Packers, Wisconsin with her brilliant husband and two handsome sons. Learn more about her consulting services at https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathyknutsonphd.