Sanitation and Hygiene in Food Processingpresentation PDF

Sanitation & Hygiene in Food Processing
Dr. Keith Warriner, University of Guelph

Sponsored by the CSSA Ontario Chapter www.cssa.com
HACCP
Sanitation & Hygiene Sanitation Control Procedures
in Food Processing Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
Dr. Keith Warriner

Department of Food Science
University of Guelph
kwarrine@uoguelph.ca
Sponsored by
Hosted by Paul Webber CSSA Ontario Chapter
paul@webbertraining.com Mill Road, #G-10
www.webbertraining.com Etobicoke, Ontario M9C 4W7
Phone: (416) 620-9320 or (800) 561-1359
1874 MARGARINE
FACTORY Sanitation
• Equipment
• Environment
• Air
• Water
Bilmar Foods 1998

• Frankfurters
…modern • Listeria monocytogenes
sanitation was one
of the greatest 80 Cases 21 deaths (6 stillbirths)
public health
accomplishments
of the late
Recall: 17m kg of Product
19th and early Direct loss: $76m
20th centuries.
Loss sales: $200m
Litigation: $5m
A Webber Training Teleclass

Hosted by Paul Webber paul@webbertraining.com
www.webbertraining.com Page 1
Canadian Federal Food Safety

Pilgrim’s Pride 2002 Agencies
• CFIA (Can. Food Inspection Agency)
deli meats – Inspection Services for HC, AAFC, and DFO
– Food safety inspections and audits
Listeria monocytogenes • Health Canada (HC)
14m kg recall – Health hazards in the food supply
– Food safety policies and recalls
46 cases 10 deaths (3 stillbirths) • Agriculture and Agrifood Canada (AAFC)
>$100m loss – Research and regulatory support for agriculture and
food production
• Department of Fisheries and Oceans
– Sustainable use of fisheries resources, facilitate
marine trade and commerce
John Tudor & Sons 2005 Canadian Federal Food Legislations
• Deli meats • Legislations with focus on food safety

¾Canada Agricultural Products Act
• Escherichia coli O157 ¾Fish Inspection Act & Regulations
¾Meat Inspection Act & Regulations
• >150 cases ¾Food and Drug Act & Regulations
¾Consumer packaging and labeling Act
– http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/reg/rege.shtml
• 1 death
Sanitation is Important Provincial Food Inspection Agency

(Ontario)
35% of foodborne illness cases attributed to poor
sanitation
• Three ministries involved in food safety:
– OMAFRA (Ont. Min. of Agriculture, Food,
• 19% Poor personnel hygiene and Rural Affairs)
• 16% contaminated equipment/environment – MOH (Min. of Health)
– OMNR (Ont. Min. of Natural Resources)

Municipal Level Code of Practice

• Municipal By-Laws affecting food safety • Sanitary facilities
– Building codes with appropriate sanitary env. • Air quality
– Potable water
– Environmental and health issues affecting the
• Water quality
food industry (waste water, emissions etc.) • Facility Construction
– Food service establishments • Sanitation procedures
– Retail stores
• Hygiene and Health requirements
• Training
Facility
Regulations •Drains
Sufficient number and construction
Food & Drugs Acts 1985
• Floor slopes uniformly to the drain
• Walls
Hard
7. No person shall manufacture, prepare, Smooth
preserve, package or store for sale any Constructed to enable cleaning
food under unsanitary conditions. • Food contact Surfaces
Non
- absorbent
Free from pitting,crevices and loose scale
Capable of withstanding repeated cleaning.
Code of Practice Cold Stores

• Guidelines to meet the regulatory • Reduce the risk of
requirements of the Food & Drugs Act condensation
Codex Alimentarius Commission • Relative humidity

Sanitary and Phyto
- sanitary (international)
Standards • Air flow
http://www.cfis.agr.ca/english/regcode/gpfh/gpfhc_e.shtml

Sanitation Performance Standards

(SPS)
• Sanitation Program • Standards based on The Food Code.
An effective sanitation program for
equipment and premises is in place to • Address the conditions within the facility
prevent contamination of food.
• Used in conjunction with SSOP’s
• Each processor ‘should’ have and
implement a written SSOP or similar
document that is specific to each location
SSOP plans
Sanitation Monitoring Program
• Provide a schedule for sanitation procedures
“Each processor ‘shall’ monitor the
conditions and practices during processing
• Provide a foundation to support a routine
monitoring program with sufficient frequency to ensure, at a
minimum, conformance with these conditions
• Encourage prior planning to ensure that and practices specified in the [GMP] that are
corrections are taken when necessary appropriate to the plant and food being
processed.”
• Identify trends and prevent recurrent problems
Sanitation Testing
• Ensure that everyone, from management to
production workers, understands sanitation • Monitoring: Elements of the sanitation
program are being performed correctly
• Provide a consistent training tool for employees (e.g sanitizer concentration, contact time).
• Lead to improved sanitation practices and

conditions in the plant.
• Verification: Long term effectiveness of the
sanitation plan (e.g. microbiological
testing).
See http://foodsafety.unl.edu/html/sop.html#appendix-a

Monitoring
• Why Monitor Sanitation Control Visual inspection in good light
Procedures Protein residue tests
ATP bioluminescence
• “ . . . to develop a culture throughout the • Indirect measure of viable cells
food industry in which processors assume • Automated logging
an operative role in controlling sanitation in
their plants.” BioTrace
BioControl
Sanitation Monitoring Forms Sanitation Verification

• 1. Specific sanitation conditions or practices to ATP (low risk areas)
be monitored
Product contact surfaces
• 2. Space to record observations and 24
- 48h to obtain results
measurements at the prescribed frequency • Contact plates
• Swab samples
• 3. Space to document any necessary • Sticky tape
corrections. Total Aerobic Count
Spoilage microflora
Fecal indicators
Monitoring Microbiological Criteria

Detergent
Contact time • No specific criteria
Sanitizer concentration • Trend analysis
Excess • ATP tests: 0 – 5000 cps acceptable
• Increased costs; Corrosion
Insufficient
Meat Processing Lines
• Low efficacy; Generation of
tolerant mutants • Total Aerobic Counts <10 cfu/cm2
• Enterobactereaceae <1 cfu/cm2

Sanitation Control Procedure 5 Steps

• Sanitation part of pre-requisite programs
Five Steps of Cleaning and Sanitizing
• Can also be incorporated into HACCP plan 1. Dry- clean

2. Pre
- rinse
3. Apply detergent
• Maintain sanitary conditions usually related 4. Post- rinse
to the entire processing facility or an area 5. Sanitize
SCP vs CCP’s
Hazard Control Program

Pathogen Time & temperature for CCP
Survival smoking fish
Contamination Wash hands before Sanitation

with pathogens touching product
Physically removing soils
• Brushes- - proper stiffness

Contamination Clean and sanitize Sanitation • Pads- - proper cutting properties
with pathogens food contact surfaces
• Pressure spray -- moderate pressure
Training is Key to the Success of Pads, brushes and brooms should be

Sanitation dedicated to tasks for which they are
designed
• Important to get staff involved
• Training must be focused and practical • Optimizes cleaning effectiveness
• Records of training and incentives • Minimizes cross- contamination between
areas of the plant
provided.
• Staff involved in developing plan,
implementation, monitoring and
verification.

Pre Rinse
• Rinse until visually free of soils. 5th Step !
• Use lowest effective pressure to
minimize aerosols and Sanitizing follows proper cleaning
condensation.
• Lower pressure reduces risk of 1. Dry
- clean
cross contamination and machine 2. Pre
- rinse
damage. 3. Detergent application
4. Post- rinse
5. Sanitizing
Step 6 ?: Rinse
Pros: Remove residues and reduces the
generation mutants
Multiple lap joints
Cons: No residual anti- m
icrobial activity
Types of Detergents Chemical Sanitation

• General Purpose (GP)
• Alkaline • Effectiveness Based on:
• Chlorinated (chlorinated alkaline) – Exposure Time
• Acid • More microorganisms - Longer exposure time
• Enzyme • Colonies die in logarithmic pattern
• Different types of organisms die at different rates
– Temperature
• Generally, the hotter the temperature, the more
effective the chemical sanitizer
Detergent application methods Effectiveness of Chemical Sanitizers

• Soak tanks
• Foam • Concentration
• Automated systems – Follow label
– CIP (clean- in
- pa
l ce) – More not necessarily better
– parts washers
• Manual (pails)
• pH
– Differs depending of Type of Sanitizer
• Cleanliness
– Soil can react with sanitizers and neutralize
them

Effectiveness of Chemical Sanitizers

Endospores
• Water Hardness • Outer spore coat: Physical barrier
– Calcium and Magnesium in hard water • Cortex, SASP: Glassy structure to protect DNA
neutralize Quats
– Can add chelating agent
• Bacterial Attachment
– Attachment to surfaces make bacteria more
resistant to sanitizers
Viruses Sanitizer Resistance

• Gram negative bacteria
more tolerant to
sanitizers.
• Outer membrane forms

physical barrier
• Less stable at alkali pH
Protozoa Pitting Provides Sites for Bacterial Attachment
Cyclospora
HOLE IN A HEAT-EXCHANGER PLATE

Biofilms Ideal Sanitizers

• Destroy vegetative microorganisms
• Work well in different environments
• Dissolve in water
• Inexpensive, easy to use, readily available
• Should not irritate skin
• Should not have offensive odor
Antimicrobial Tests Sanitizer Concentrations Commonly Used in Food Plants
(Required for EPA Registration)

Sanitizer Food Contact Non-Food Plant Water
Surface Contact
Product Test Required Organisms
Surfaces
General disinfectant AOAC Use Sal. cholerasuis ATCC 10708
Dilution Staph. aureus ATCC 6538 Chlorine 100
- 200 400 ppm - 10 ppm
3
Hospital disinfectant AOAC Use S. cholerasuis ATCC 10708
ppm
Dilution S. aureus ATCC 6538 Iodine 25 ppm 25 ppm
P. aeruginosa ATCC 1542
Quats 200 ppm 400
- 800
Sporicidal AOAC B. subtilis ATOC 19659
Sporicidal Cl. sporogenes ATCC 3584 ppm
Chlorine 100
- 200 100
- 200 - 3ppm
1
dioxide ppm ppm
Food Contact Surface Sanitizer

AOAC Germicidal Detergent Sanitizer Test Types of Sanitizers
99 ml Sanitizer Add 1 ml 30 second • Chlorine

Solution of E.coli or Contact
25ºC • Chlorine dioxide
S. aureus Time
0
• Ozone
(minimum of 7.5 x
107 CFU/ml) 15
• Iodophores
Enumerate 30
• Quaternary ammonium
Required Survivors compounds
Efficacy: • Trisodium phosphate
99.999% Kill in • Peroxyacetic acid
30 seconds at
25ºC CFIA Approved List Neutralize 1 ml
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/ppc/reference/v2e.shtml

Chlorine Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2)

• Sodium or Calcium Hypochlorite Powerful oxidizing agent (2.5 x greater than
chlorine)
• Cheap
• Relatively stable in the presence of
• Well established in the food industry organics.
• Chlorous acid antimicrobial form • Does not form chloroamines as a side

reaction.
• pH dependent
pH 6
- 8Chlorous acid
• Limited efficacy against viruses
pH < 6 Chlorine gas (toxic)
• Unstable at temperatures > 30˚C

• Sequestered by organic material
• Carcinogenic chloroamines can be produced. • Used to decontaminate Post-Office

affected by anthrax letters.
• Unstable at high temperatures
• Corrosive
Ozone
• Effective against vegetative cells, spores and • Generated on site via passing air through high
fungi. voltage fields.
• Limited efficacy against viruses • Powerful oxidizing agent.
• Can leave chlorine odor • Poor solubility (max 6ppm in water)
• Mechanisms still unknown but primarily • Negligible residues (used for treating bottled
oxidation of proteins. water)

Iodine Compounds Ionic Compounds

• Iodophors • Trisodium Phosphate
– Iodine alcohol solutions and Aqueous iodine
solutions
• Quaternary Ammonium Compounds
• Less germicidal than chlorine, but broader (QAC’s or QUAT’s)
effective pH range (2-5).
• Low concentrations pass chambers test
• Organic Acids
• More effective on viruses than other
sanitizers
Iodine Compounds - Advantages

Trisodium Phosphate (TSP)
• TSP inactivates bacteria by pH effect.
• Less corrosive than Chlorine
• Stable when Concentrated • 8% w/v TSP: pH 12
• Effective in hard water
• Can prevent mineral deposits • Strips membranes from cells
• Good Hand-dipping agent
• Amber color - Good indicator of active • Gram positive bacteria more resistant than
iodine Gram negative.
Disadvantages of Iodine compounds QACs

• More expensive than Chlorine • Non-corrosive
• Off- flavors in Foods • Stable at high temperature
• Vaporize at 50oC
• Effective against yeast, molds and Gram
• Stain and discolor equipment positive bacteria.
• Not as effective as Chlorine in low temperature
environments
• Less effective against Gram negative and
viruses.
• Foam formation (CIP)
• Inactivated by surfactants
• Residual activity

QACs : MODE OF ACTION Peroxy acid compounds

1. Adsorption to bacterial cell surface • Low Foam - CIP
2. Diffusion through outer layers of cell • Antimicrobial activity over broad
3. Binding to cytoplasmic membrane temperatures
4. Disruption of cytoplasmic membrane • Combine sanitizing and acid rinsing in one
5. Release of cell constituents (K+, large step
Mol.Wt. materials) • Non-corrosive
6. Coagulation of cell contents and cell • Tolerant to organic matter
inactivation • Effective against Biofilms
Resistance to Biocides
PRIONS
BACTERIAL SPORES
• Gram positive bacteria sensitive
PROTOZOA CYST/OOCYSTS
(e.g. Crytosporidium)
• Potential problem of generating resistant MYCOBACTERIUM NON-

NON-ENVELOPED VIRUSES
mutants.
FUNGI
VEGETATIVE BACTERIA
LIPID-
LIPID-ENVELOPED VIRUSES
Relative Biocidal Activity

QAS Pumps Endospores
Peroxyacids, glutaraldehyde,
Mycobacterium
formaldehyde, chlorine dioxide,
• Trans-membrane efflux pump Non-enveloped viruses ethylene oxide
Protozoa oocysts
• Linked to drug resistance

Mycobacterium Phenolics, Iodophors,
Non-enveloped viruses Hypochlorites
• Sanitizer rotation Fungi
Vegetative cells Quaternary Ammonium

Enveloped viruses Compounds, Organic Acids
Romanova et al., (2002) Appl Environ Microbiol. 68: 6405–6409.

Sources of Contamination Ready-to-Eat

• Listeria monocytogenes
• Raw materials
Raw Facility Food
Material Environment Handler
• Endemic: Drains, cold stores, difficult to
clean areas
Fresh Cut Produce Environment vs Raw Material

• Listeria monocytogenes Traditional view
• Salmonella • Post-process contamination
• E. coli O157 Listeria monocytogenes
• Hepatitis A • Raw material

• Cyclospora Salmonella
• Cryptosporidium E. coli O157
Meat Molecular Epidemiology

• Salmonella • Track and Trace Sources of microbial
contamination.
• Campylobacter
• DNA typing of isolates taken from different
• E. coli O157 sites.

Genetic relatedness (dendrogram) analysis
Forensic Science 9
2
5/5/99
6/21/99
1 22 3/1/00
30 6/27/00
• Fingerprints can be 31 6/26/00
23 3/21/00
used to differentiate 2 24 3/25/00
individuals 3 3 7/18/99
4 7/17/99
10 8/6/99
13 8/24/99
4 16 8/31/99
20 3/6/00*
*
12 8/11/99*
5 35 7/21/00
40 8/7/00
27* 5/21/00
6 28* 5/27/00
29 6/21/00
7 41 8/16/00
Source: A. Noller and M.C. McEllistrem
Molecular Typing of Pork and Beef

Forensic Science
Chain
• Dr Alec Jeffreys • Surfaces contaminated in the first 30 mins
of processing
• DNA fingerprinting
• Contamination derived from holding area

and transporter
• Sanitizer resistance predicted by genetic

lineage
Molecular subtyping using Holding Area and Transporter

restriction endonucleases
Bacterial chromosomal DNA • Difficult to sanitize
.
&
.
&
.
&
&. • Short-lived benefits

Electrophoresis
.
&
.
& .. • Increased sanitation decreases endemic
& .
&
populations
&
&= Restriction endonuclease (“molecular scissors”)

. = DNA sequence recognized by restriction endonuclease

Fresh-Cut Produce Hand washing

• Field acquired • most common source of contamination
contamination leading to illness is the fecal- ora-l route
• contaminated after using the restroom

• Wash water
• bacteria and viral contamination transferred
via contaminated food or utensils
• Bagging station
Food Handler Hand Washing Standards

• Salmonella • designated sink in the food preparation
• E. coli O157 area for hand washing
• Hot and cold running water
• Staphylococcus aureus
– hot water must have a minimum temperature
of 43 oC
• Enteric viruses (Norwalk, rotavirus) – Liquid soap is preferred
– Fingernail brush
• Only disposable paper towels or air dryer
• Hepatitis A are authorized for drying hands
Personal Hygiene and Identifying

Unhealthy Personnel
• Supervisors
– must identify unsanitary and unhealthy
personnel
– Observation is an effective means of
identifying health risks
– look for cuts/burns on fingers, hands, and
arms; oozing sores, pimples, or boils; and
significant coughing or sneezing
– Workers not allowed around food if they are
experiencing fever, vomiting, or diarrhea

Reduction in microbial loading on

Gloves
hands using different sanitizers
Mean change (log10 CFU)
• Advantages • Disadvantages
Minimize direct bare Discourage hand
hand contact with washing
product.
Failure to change
Easier to monitor/ gloves may enhance
enforce than hand risks
washing
Hand rubs for lightly soiled hands
HANDWASHING WHEN TO WASH HANDS

• AFTER TOUCHING THE BODY (NOSE, MOUTH, HAIR,
ETC.)
• AFTER USING THE RESTROOM
• AFTER EATING, DRINKING, OR SMOKING
• AFTER HANDLING SOILED EQUIPMENT
• AFTER TOUCHING RAW MEAT
• BEFORE AND AFTER PUTTING ON GLOVES
• AFTER TAKING OUT THE GARBAGE
Hand washing by food handlers Future Prospects

• 52% supervisors could describe the hand • Anti-microbial contact surfaces (e.g. silver
washing procedure zeolite)
• 48% of workers could demonstrate code-
compliant hand washing • Biological control
Bacteriophage
Competitive exclusion
Allwood et al., (2004) Journal of Food Protection: Vol. 67, No. 12, pp. 2825–2828.

Competitive Exclusion Other Webber Training Teleclasses

• Enterococcus durans
• Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis • February 23 – The Building as a Source and Vector of
Problematic Microorganisms
• March 9 – Pandemic Influenza

• Inhibit growth of Listeria monocytogenes in
drains • March 21 – Leadership in a Healthcare Environment
• March 30 – Critical Design for Acute Care
For more information refer to www.webbertraining.com

or paul@webbertraining.com
On-farm Sanitation
Protect water sources from manure contamination.
Clean, sanitize and chlorinate frequently.
Summary
• Sanitation is key to reducing foodborne
illness outbreaks.
• Success depends on SSOP, SAP and staff

training
• Novel sanitation methods to decontaminate

reservoirs of contamination


Sanitation and Hygiene in Food Processingpresentation PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sanitation and Hygiene in Food Processingpresentation PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sanitation & Hygiene in Food Processing

Dr. Keith Warriner, University of Guelph

Dr. Keith Warriner

Bilmar Foods 1998

A Webber Training Teleclass

Canadian Federal Food Safety

John Tudor & Sons 2005 Canadian Federal Food Legislations

• Deli meats • Legislations with focus on food safety

Sanitation is Important Provincial Food Inspection Agency

A Webber Training Teleclass

Municipal Level Code of Practice

Code of Practice Cold Stores

Codex Alimentarius Commission • Relative humidity

A Webber Training Teleclass

Sanitation Performance Standards

• Lead to improved sanitation practices and

A Webber Training Teleclass

Sanitation Monitoring Forms Sanitation Verification

Monitoring Microbiological Criteria

A Webber Training Teleclass

Sanitation Control Procedure 5 Steps

• Can also be incorporated into HACCP plan 1. Dry- clean

Hazard Control Program

Contamination Wash hands before Sanitation

• Brushes- - proper stiffness

Training is Key to the Success of Pads, brushes and brooms should be

A Webber Training Teleclass

Types of Detergents Chemical Sanitation

Detergent application methods Effectiveness of Chemical Sanitizers

A Webber Training Teleclass

Effectiveness of Chemical Sanitizers

Viruses Sanitizer Resistance

• Outer membrane forms

• Less stable at alkali pH

Protozoa Pitting Provides Sites for Bacterial Attachment

HOLE IN A HEAT-EXCHANGER PLATE

A Webber Training Teleclass

Biofilms Ideal Sanitizers

Antimicrobial Tests Sanitizer Concentrations Commonly Used in Food Plants

(Required for EPA Registration)

Food Contact Surface Sanitizer

99 ml Sanitizer Add 1 ml 30 second • Chlorine

A Webber Training Teleclass

Chlorine Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2)

• Chlorous acid antimicrobial form • Does not form chloroamines as a side

• Unstable at temperatures > 30˚C

• Carcinogenic chloroamines can be produced. • Used to decontaminate Post-Office

• Limited efficacy against viruses • Powerful oxidizing agent.

• Can leave chlorine odor • Poor solubility (max 6ppm in water)

A Webber Training Teleclass

Iodine Compounds Ionic Compounds

Iodine Compounds - Advantages

Disadvantages of Iodine compounds QACs

A Webber Training Teleclass

QACs : MODE OF ACTION Peroxy acid compounds

• Potential problem of generating resistant MYCOBACTERIUM NON-

Relative Biocidal Activity

• Linked to drug resistance

• Sanitizer rotation Fungi

Vegetative cells Quaternary Ammonium

A Webber Training Teleclass

Sources of Contamination Ready-to-Eat

Fresh Cut Produce Environment vs Raw Material