Food Safety Management System Beyon HACCP

3/15/17
Food Safety Management System :

Beyond HACCP
Presented in Seminar “ BUILDING PREVENTIVE FOOD SAFETY MEASURES”

Food Review Indonesia,Bogor March 15, 2017
Ratih Dewanti-Hariyadi
Department of Food Science and Technology and
Southeast Asia Food Agric Sci & Technol. (SEAFAST) Center
Bogor Agricultural University
Bogor, Indonesia
OUTLINE
•  Perkembangan Sistem Manajemen Keamanan
Pangan
•  Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point
(HACCP)
•  Tantangan Keamanan Pangan Global
•  Pertahanan Pangan (Food Defense)
•  AS : - Intentional Adulteration (IA) Rule
- Vulnerability Assessment
- Food Defense Plan
•  Inggris: - PAS 96 2014 (BSI)
- Threat Assessment Critical Control
Point (TACCP)
Ratih Dewanti-Hariyadi/IPB/2017 1
3/15/17
Perkembangan Sistem Manajemen

Keamanan Pangan Safety Management*
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
Process Criteria
Testing
HACCP
(Q)RA
FSO
Bogor Agricultural University *adopted from Zwittering 2013

Perkembangan Peraturan
Hazard Analysis Critical Control

Point (HACCP)
•  Sistem yang mengidentifikasi, mengevaluasi
dan mengendalikan bahaya (hazard) yang
penting untuk keamanan pangan *
•  Pertama kali dikembangkan tahun 1959 oleh
Pillsbury Co and US Natick Army untuk
menjamin keamanan makanan astronot
•  Dianggap sebagai pencegahan yang mampu
meningkatkan jaminan keamanan pangan
untuk industri pangan
*Codex Alimentarius General Principles of Food Hygiene)
3/15/17
HACCP
Prinsip HACCP :
•  Analisis Bahaya (Hazard Analysis)
•  Penetapan CCP
•  Penetapan Critical Limit
•  Penetapan Monitoring Procedures
•  Penetapan Corrective Action
•  Penetapan Verification Procedures
•  Penetapan Documentation System
Bahaya
•  Senyawa (biologi, kimia dan fisik) dalam pangan
yang dapat menyebabkan ganggunan kesehatan
kontaminasi alami, ketidaksengajaan, akibat
kekuranghatihatianatau ignorance orang yang terlibat
Perkembangan HACCP
•  Prinsip HACCP diadopsi dan diintegrasikan ke

berbagai sistem manajemen keamanan pangan:
- Safe Quality Foods (SQF 2000)

-  ISO 22000: 2005 Food Safety
Management System in Food Chain
-  Food Safety System Certification (FSSC)
-  British Retail Consortium (BRC)
-  GFSI (Global Food Safety Initiative)
-  Hazard analysis Risk-Based Preventive
Control (HARPC, FSMA)
3/15/17
Tantangan Keamanan Pangan Global
•  Sistem pangan yang semakin kompleks

•  Kerentanan (Vulnerable)terhadap serangan
•  Interconnectedness, menyebar cepat, luas
•  Terjadi fraud/tampering yang tidak dapat
diprediksi atau dikendalikan melalui HACCP
- melamine dalam Powder Infant Formula
- S. Typhimurium sengaja ditambahkan ke
salad
•  Perlunya Food Defense
PERTAHANAN PANGAN (FOOD DEFENSE)

Niat untuk menyebabkan Niat untuk menyebabkan
celaka/kematian kerugian ekonomi
TERRORISM SABOTASE ECONOMICALLY

MOTIVATED
ADULTERATION
Pertikaian
Pribadi
Bogor Agricultural University From : FoodProtection.UMN.EDU, 2016
3/15/17
FOOD DEFENSE
MOTIVASI KEMAMPUAN
Niat lawan untuk Pengetahuan lawan
mencelakai tentang adulteran, taktik
ANCAMAN
FOOD
DEFENSE
KERENTANAN
Kondisi aksesibilitas dan peluang
menyebabkan dampak
Dari: FoodProtection.UMN.EDU, 2016

ISTILAH TERKAIT FOOD DEFENSE

Food Protection
•  Prosedur yang dilakukan untuk menghalangi dan
mendeteksi kecurangan/penipuan/pemalsuan pada
pangan baik disengaja maupun tidak
Food Defence
•  Prosedur untuk menjamin keamanan makanan dan
minuman dan rantai suplainya dari serangan bermotif
jahat dan ideologis yang mengakibatkan
kontaminasi atau gangguan suplai (BSI, 2014)
Food Defense
•  Upaya untuk melindungi pangan dari kegiatan
pemalsuan (adulteration) yang disengaja (http://
www.fda.gov/food/fooddefense/).
3/15/17
FOOD DEFENSE – AS
Evolusi Kebijakan Food Defense AS
n
tio
l
ule iona
nta for
co d
na
rds
g
Re an
sin
mi
co es
oc r
n R nt
Pr fo
of ent
t
es
Ac
De lin
tio Inte
r & ines
nt lity
a n sh m
nd uide
m
ol
i
ris
era A
me ab
To
9
hte el
ce
ult SM
8
en bli
sa A G
ro
8
ce
ug uid
D
ss er
PD
an
er
PD
int sta
SP
se uln
Ad A F
Sla S G
ot
po FD
id
HS
la
Ma E
SP
SH
Bi
As A V
Gu
FD
A
Dis /
I
S
A
FS
S
FD
DH
A
DH
DH
FD
FD
I
FD
FS
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2011 2013 2016
n
HS rs es
ct
tio
Pla a
21
nts
nA
so lin
s n of
e
rta
se ing
tiv
hip ce
PD
es uide
PD
me
rn ety
tio
po
tra
cili atio
fen lop
rt S Noti
HS
SP
ns
de af
iza
Pr y G
tio inis
De eve
Fa istr
Mo od S
tie
a
es y
Im rior
DH
r
lin urit
ten dm
od rit
-T
oc
od eg
od D
n
D
Fo ecu
Of A P
po
Fo
Fo IS –
ide ec
De A A
Fo A R
Gu IS S
for IS S
FD
FD
FD
FS
FS
FS
FOOD SAFETY MODERNIZATION ACT
Latar Belakang FSMA
•  Dokumentasi mengenai
kontaminasi dan recall di industri
pangan AS
•  9.3 juta penyakit bawaan pangan (1 dalam 31) per
tahun, 53,245 dirawat RS dan 2,377 kenmatian
•  Pergeseran fokus industri menuju strategi pencegahan
bernasiskan “science-based standards”
•  Pangan impor harus memiliki persyaratan sama dengan
pangan lokal
•  Ditandatangani 4 Januari 2011
3/15/17
FSMA– US
FSMA– US
Rules
the 7 rules oF FsMA
preventive controls - preventive controls – intentionAl

produce sAFety
huMAn Food AniMAl Food AdulterAtion
Foreign supplier 3rd pArty

sAnitAry trAnsport
veriFicAtion progrAM AccreditAtion
rule FinAl rule requireMents deAdline For

coMpliAnce
Preventive Controls: September 17, 2015 One year after final rule: general September 19, 2016
Human Food Two years after final rule: small business* September 18, 2017
Three years after final rule: very small business September 17, 2018
(<$1 million) plus PMO (Pasteurized Milk Ordinance)
Supply chain: plus six month supplier’s compliance

Preventive Controls: September 17, 2015 CGMP compliance date September 19, 2016
Animal Food One year after final rule: general September 18, 2017
Two years after final rule: small business* September 17, 2018
Three years after final rule: very small business
(<$2.5 million)
Preventive controls compliance date: plus one year
from above
Supply-chain: plus six months of supplier’s
compliance
Produce Safety November 27, 2015 One year after final rule: general** November 27, 2016
Two years after final rule: small business November 27, 2017
($250,000-$500,000)** November 27, 2018
Ratih Dewanti-Hariyadi/IPB/2017 Three years after final rule: very small business
($25,000-$250,000) ** 7
Intentional Adulteration May 27, 2016 Three years after final rule: general General: July 26,
Four years after final rule: small business* 2019
Five years after final rule: very small business (<$10 Small businesses:
million) July 27, 2020
Very small
businesses: July 26,
2021
3/15/17
Final Rule: Protecting Food Against

Intentional Adulteration (IA)
http://www.fda.gov/fsma
Strategi Mitigasi untuk Melindungi Pangan dari

Adulterasi yang Disengaja (Mitigation Strategies to
Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration)
•  Proposed on December 24, 2013

•  Public comments: More than 200 for the original proposal
•  Final rule publication date: May 27, 2016
Peraturan tentang Intentional

Adulteration (IA)
•  Menetapkan persyaratan untuk mencegah
atau meminimalkan secara signifikan
kegiatan yang bertujuan untuk
mengakibahkan bahaya kesehatan
masyarakat pada skala luas
•  Menggunakan pendekatan serupa HACCP,
dengan perbedaan pada “Preventive
Controls for Human Food”
•  Berbasiskan risiko dan fleksibel
3/15/17
Persyaratan untuk Peraturan IA
•  Rencana Food Defense

–  Vulnerability assessment
–  Strategi Mitigasi
–  Prosedur monitoring untuk food defense
–  Prosedur corrective action untuk food defense
–  Prosedur verifikasi untuk food defense
–  Perekaman
•  Training
Vulnerability Assessment
•  Proses mengidentifikasi dan prioritasisasi

titik-titik, langkah proses, prosedur, dalam
fasilitas pengolahan pangan yang rentan
terhadap adulteration yang disengaja
•  Dapat membantu mengidentifikasi:
–  Actionable Process Steps
–  Area operasi dimana Strategi Mitigasi
harus diaplikasikan
3/15/17
Metode Vulnerable Assessment

Methodology
Tiga faktor paling penting untuk
dipertimbangkan :
•  Aksesibilitas: ukuran kemudahan bagi seorang
penyerang dapat menjangkau secara fisik target yang
ingin diserang
•  Vulnerabilitas: ukuran kemudahan bagi suatu
kontaminan dapat diletakkan dalam jumlah yang cukup
untuk mencapai tujuan penyerang (setelah target
dijangkau)
•  Kritikalitas (impact) : apakah dampak kontaminan
terhadap produksi/ gangguan kesehatan
Skala Accessibility
(Dapatkah saya mencapai target?)
CRITERIA SCALE
Easily Accessible (e.g., target is outside building and no
perimeter fence).
9 – 10
Accessible (e.g., target is inside building, but in unsecured part of
facility).
7–8
Partially Accessible (e.g. inside building, but in a relatively

unsecured, but busy, part of facility).
5–6
Hardly Accessible (e.g., inside building in a secured part of

facility).
3–4
Not Accessible (e.g., there are physical barriers, alarms, and

human observation to prevent reaching the target).
1–2
3/15/17
Skala Vulnerability
(Setelah mencapai target, bisakan saya meng”adulterate” pangan)
CRITERIA SCALE
Highly Vulnerable (e.g., product is openly exposed and there is lots of 9 – 10
time to allow for easy introduction of contaminants without being seen).
Vulnerable (e.g., product has some open exposure and there is sufficient 7–8
time to almost always allow for introduction of contaminants without being
seen).
Somewhat Vulnerable (e.g., product has limited exposure points and 5–6
limited times when contaminant can be added without being seen).
Barely Vulnerable (e.g., product has limited exposure points but is almost 3–4
always under observation while in production).
Not Vulnerable (e.g., product is in sealed vessels/pipes with no practical 1–2

exposure points or it is under full and controlled observation).
Skala Criticality
(Jika saya dapat meng”adulterate” apa dampaknya?)
CRITERIA SCALE
Very Large Volume Impact (e.g., a single instance of contamination
at this point would contaminate multiple days of the production of this 9 – 10
line).
Large Volume Impact (e.g., a single instance of contamination at
this point would contaminate multiple shifts of the production of this 7–8
line).
Medium Volume Impact (e.g., a single instance of contamination at
this point would contaminate one shift or less of the production of this 5–6
line).
Small Volume Impact (e.g., a single instance of contamination at
this point would contaminate two hours or less of the production of 3–4
this line).
Low Volume Impact (e.g., a single instance of contamination at this
point would contaminate 30 minutes or less of the production of this 1–2
line).
3/15/17
Asesmen Vulnerability untuk Fasilitas
•  Lakukan vulnerability assessment dengan

metode yang tepat dan qualified individual(s)
•  Identifikasi da prioritaskan prioritize titik dalam
operasi pangan yang rentan (vulnerable) terhadap
intentional adulteration
•  Identifikasi actionable process untuk vulnerability
yang signifikan : a point, step, or procedure in a food
process at which food defense measures can be
applied and are essential to prevent or eliminate a
significant vulnerability or reduce such vulnerability
to an acceptable level.”
Elemen Vulnerability Assessment

Untuk Fasilitas
•  Evaluasi senyawa yang dikhawatirkan
•  Buat tim Vulnerability Assessment (VA)
•  Menyusun diagram alir
•  Identifikasi Vulnerabilities yang signifikan:
–  Public health impact
–  Volume of product impacted
–  Downstream processing
–  Physical access to product
–  Ability of aggressor to contaminate product
•  Identifikasi Actionable Process Steps
3/15/17
Strategi Mitigasi
•  Strategi mitigasi harus diidentifikasi dan

diimplementasikan iuntuk tiap actionable process
step untuk memberi jaminan bahwa vulnerabilitas
diminimalkan atau dicegah
•  Strategi mitigasi harus disusun khusus (tailored )
untuk fasilitas dan prosedur-prosedur.
•  Contoh mitigasi : pagar disekeliling fasilitas untuk
mencegah outsider, cara lain mungkin diperlukan
untuk melindungi actionable process step dari
serangan “insider”
Strategi Mitigasi
Komponen Strategi Mitigasi
•  Monitoring: Establishing and implementing

procedures, including the frequency with which they
are to be performed, for monitoring the mitigation
strategies.
•  Corrective actions: The response if mitigation
strategies are not properly implemented.
•  Verification: Verification activities would ensure that
monitoring is being conducted and appropriate
decisions about corrective actions are being made.
3/15/17
Rencana Food Defense
Rencana Food Defense tertulis mencakup :

•  Vulnerability Assessment
•  Actionable process steps
•  Mitigation strategies
Monitoring
Corrective actions
Verification
Training
•  Recordkeeping
FOOD DEFENCE UK : PAS 96 2014
2014:
The British Standards
Institution (BSI) :
PAS 96 2014
Guide to protecting
and defending food
and drink from
deliberate attack
3/15/17
PAS 96 2014
Background
•  HACCP tidak digunakan untuk mendeteksi atau

mengurangi serangan yang disengaja dalam sistem
pangan yang menyebabkan bahaya keamanan pangan
maupun merusakn reputasi perusahaan(pemerasan dsb))
•  Faktor umum serangan disengaja: orang, motivasi
•  PAS 96 panduan bagi manajer industri pangan melalui
pendekatan dan prosedur untuk meningkatkan ketahanan
rantai pangan dari penipuan/bentuk serangan lain
•  Menekankan pada Threat Assessment Critical Control
Points (TACCP),
•  Proses TACCP diasumsikan dan dibangun di atas HACCP
Threat Assessment Critical Control

Point (TACCP)
TACCP
Manajemen risiko secara sistematis melalui evaluasi
ancaman (threats), identifikasi vulnerability, dan
penerapan pengendalian terhadap bahan dan produk,
pembelian, proses, fasilitas, jaringan distribusi dan sistem
bisnis dengan tim terpercaya dan berpengetahuan yang
diberi otoritas untuk mengubah prosedur
Ancaman
Sesuatu yang dapat mengakibatkan kehilangan atau
bahaya yang timbul karena orang yang berniat jahat
3/15/17
Jenis Ancaman
•  Pemalsuan bermotif ekonomi (Economically

motivated adulteration/EMA)
•  Kontaminasi karena unsur kejahatan (Malicious
contamination)
•  Pemerasan (Extortion)
•  Spionase (Espionage)
•  Pemalsuan (Counterfeiting)
•  Kejahatan cyber (Cyber crime)
Memahami Ancaman
•  Keberhasilan serangan (attack) yang

disengaja terhadap pangan atau rantai
pangan tergantung dari :
a)  Apakah penyerang memiliki motivasi dan dorongan
untuk mengatasi hambatan baik besar atau kecil
b)  Apakah penyerang memiliki kemampuan untuk
melakukan serangan?
c)  Apakah penyerang memiliki
kesempatan(=akses)untuk menjalankan serangan
d)  Apakah penyerang akan mengurungkan niatnya jika
terdeteksi atau ana kemungkinan dihukum?
3/15/17
Memahami Ancaman
•  Jenis Penyerang:
-  Pemeras (the extortionist)
-  Oportunis (the opportunis)
-  Ekstrimis (the extremist)
-  Perorangan yang tak rasional (the irrational
individual)
-  Perorangan yang tidak puas (the disgruntled
individual)
-  Hackivist dan penjahat cyber lainnya (the
hacktivist and other cyber criminals)
TACCP
Tujuan :
• mengurangi peluang serangan yang disengaja
• mengurangi dampak serangan (jika terjadi)
• melindungi reputasi organisasi
• menmberi jaminan pada konsumen. Pers, masyarakat
bahwa langkah-langkah pencegahan telah disiapkan
untuk melindungi pangan dari serangan yang disengaja
• Memuaskna harapan international dan mendukung
trading partners
• Mendemonstrasikan bahwa pencegahjan telah
dilakukan dan uji kelayakan telah dipraktekkan
3/15/17
Proses dalam TACCP
•  Dalam banyak kasus, TACCP seharusnya merupakan

kerja tim. Untuk bisnis skala kecil yang tidak praktis untuk
membuat tim, dapat menjadi tugas 1 orang
•  Tim TACCP harus melakukan exercise setidaknya 4
pertanyaan berikut :
a) Siapa yang mungkin ingin menyerang kita?
b) Bagaimana mereka akan melakukannya?
c) Dimana titik kerentanan (vulnerable) kita?
d) Bagaimana kita dapat menghentikannya?
Proses dalam TACCP
Tim TACCP dapat terdiri dari orang yang

menguasai :
• security;
• human resources;
• food technology;
• process engineering;
• production and operations;
• purchasing and supply;
• distribution;
• communications; and
• commercial/marketing.
3/15/17
Proses dalam TACCP

Langkah
•  Mengidentifikasi ancaman spesifik terhadap bisnis
perusahaan
•  mengases peluang suatu serangan dengan
mempertimbangkan : motivasi kandidat penyerang,
vulnerability proses, kesempatan dan kemampuan untuk
melakukan serangan,mengases dampak
•  Menimbang prioritas pada berbagai ancamandengan
memperhatikan likelihood and impact
•  Menetapkan pengendalian yang tepat untuk menghalangi
(discourage) penyerang dan membuat early warning
•  Memelihara sistem informasi dan intelijen untuk merevisi
prioritas
Proses dalam TACCP

15. Monitor horizon
Form scans and
TACCP emerging risks 14. Review and revise 13. Decide and
team implement
necessary
controls
1. Assess new
information 11. Likelihood v.
impact : priority 12. Who could
carry it out
2. Identify and
assess threat to 10. Determine if control 9. Identify which
organization procedures will supply points
detect the threats are most critical
3. Identify and
assess threat to
8. Consider
operation
impact of
threats identified
4. Select product
7. Identify key staff
5. Identify and and vulnerable
assess threat to 6. Device flowchart of points
product product supply chain
3/15/17
Asesmen Ancaman dalam TACCP

Ancaman terhadap tempat, misalnya:
•  Are the premises located in a politically or socially sensitive area?
•  Do the premises share access or key services with controversial
neighbours?
•  Are new recruits, especially agency and seasonal staff,
appropriately screened?
•  Are services to the premises adequately protected?
•  Are external utilities adequately protected?
•  Are hazardous materials, which could be valuable to hostile groups,
stored on site?
•  Are large numbers of people (including the general public) using the
location?
•  Do any employees have reason to feel disgruntled or show signs of
dissatisfaction?
•  Are internal audit arrangements independent?
Have key roles been occupied by staff for many years with little
supervision?
Asesmen ancaman terhadap organisasi :
• Are we under foreign ownership by nations involved in

international conflict?
• Do we have a celebrity or high profile chief executive or
proprietor?
• Do we have a reputation for having significant links,
customers, suppliers, etc. with unstable regions of the
world?
• Are our brands regarded as controversial by some?
• Do we or our customers supply high profile customers or
events?
3/15/17

Asesmen ancaman terhadap produk :
•  Have there been significant cost increases which have

affected this product?
•  Does this product have particular religious, ethical or
moral significance for some people?
•  Could this product be used as an ingredient in a wide
range of popular foods?
•  Does the product contain ingredients or other material
sourced from overseas?
Asesmen Vulnerability dalam TACCP

Untuk EMA:
•  Are low cost substitute materials available?
•  Have there been significant material cost increases?
•  Has pressure increased on suppliers’ trading margins?
•  Do you trust your suppliers’ managers, and their
suppliers’ managers?
•  Do key suppliers use personnel security practices?
•  Do suppliers think that we monitor their operation
•  and analyze their products?
•  Which suppliers are not routinely audited?
•  Are we supplied through remote, obscure chains?
•  Are major materials becoming less available (e.g. from
crop failure) or alternatives plentiful (e.g. from
overproduction)?
3/15/17
Untuk EMA:
•  How do suppliers dispose of excessive amounts of
waste materials?
•  Are we aware of shortcuts to the process which
could affect us?
•  Are our staff and those of suppliers encouraged to
report concerns (whistleblowing)?
•  Are accreditation records, certificates of
conformance and analyzes reports independent?

Untuk Malicious Contamination:
•  Are food safety audits rigorous and up-to-date?
•  Are personnel security procedures in use?
•  Is access to product restricted to those with a business need?
•  Do storage containers have tamper-evident seals?
•  Is the organization involved with controversial trade?
•  Is the organization owned by nationals from conflict areas?
•  Is there opportunity for access by sympathizers of single issue
groups?
•  Do any employees bear a grudge against the organization?
•  Is staff boredom, discipline, recruitment a problem?
•  Have business competitors been accused of espionage
•  or sabotage?
3/15/17
Asesmen Risiko dalam TACCP
Contoh Matriks untuk Skoring Risiko
Likelihood of threat Score Impact

happening
Very High Chance 5 Catastrophic
High Chance 4 Major
Some Chance 3 Significant
May Happen 2 Some
Unlikely to Happen 1 Minor
Asesmen Risiko dalam TACCP
Contoh Matriks untuk Skoring Risiko

Likelihood of Impact
threat Catas- Major Significan Some Minor
happening trophic t
Very High Threat

Chance 1
High Chance Threat 3
Some Chance
May Happen
Unlikely to Threat
Happen 2
3/15/17
Laporan TACCP
Bahan Bacaan
•  British Standard Institute. 2014. PAS 96 2014. Guide to protecting

and defending food and drink from deliberate attack
•  SGS. 2016. Understanding the US Food Safety Modernization Act
(FSMA)
•  USFDA. 2011. Food Safety Modernization Act.
https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FSMA/
ucm253380.htm
•  USFDA. 2016. Final Rule for Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food
Against Intentional Adulteration (IA).
https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FSMA/
ucm378628.htm
•  Food Defense Training Materials. FoodProtection.UMN.Edu
3/15/17
Thank You
Thank You
ratihde@apps.ipb.ac.id

Food Safety Management System Beyon HACCP

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Food Safety Management System Beyon HACCP

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

3/15/17

Food Safety Management System :

Presented in Seminar “ BUILDING PREVENTIVE FOOD SAFETY MEASURES”

Perkembangan Sistem Manajemen

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Bogor Agricultural University *adopted from Zwittering 2013

Hazard Analysis Critical Control

Bogor Agricultural University

• Prinsip HACCP diadopsi dan diintegrasikan ke

- Safe Quality Foods (SQF 2000)

Bogor Agricultural University

Tantangan Keamanan Pangan Global

• Sistem pangan yang semakin kompleks

Bogor Agricultural University

PERTAHANAN PANGAN (FOOD DEFENSE)

TERRORISM SABOTASE ECONOMICALLY

Bogor Agricultural University From : FoodProtection.UMN.EDU, 2016

Dari: FoodProtection.UMN.EDU, 2016

ISTILAH TERKAIT FOOD DEFENSE

Bogor Agricultural University

FOOD SAFETY MODERNIZATION ACT

Latar Belakang FSMA

Bogor Agricultural University

preventive controls - preventive controls – intentionAl

Foreign supplier 3rd pArty

rule FinAl rule requireMents deAdline For

Bogor Agricultural University

Final Rule: Protecting Food Against

Strategi Mitigasi untuk Melindungi Pangan dari

• Proposed on December 24, 2013

Bogor Agricultural University

Peraturan tentang Intentional

Bogor Agricultural University

Persyaratan untuk Peraturan IA

• Rencana Food Defense

Bogor Agricultural University

• Proses mengidentifikasi dan prioritasisasi

Bogor Agricultural University

Metode Vulnerable Assessment

Bogor Agricultural University

Partially Accessible (e.g. inside building, but in a relatively

Hardly Accessible (e.g., inside building in a secured part of

Not Accessible (e.g., there are physical barriers, alarms, and

Not Vulnerable (e.g., product is in sealed vessels/pipes with no practical 1–2

Bogor Agricultural University

Asesmen Vulnerability untuk Fasilitas

• Lakukan vulnerability assessment dengan

Elemen Vulnerability Assessment

Bogor Agricultural University

• Strategi mitigasi harus diidentifikasi dan

Bogor Agricultural University

Komponen Strategi Mitigasi

• Monitoring: Establishing and implementing

Bogor Agricultural University

Rencana Food Defense

Rencana Food Defense tertulis mencakup :

Bogor Agricultural University

FOOD DEFENCE UK : PAS 96 2014

• HACCP tidak digunakan untuk mendeteksi atau

Threat Assessment Critical Control

Bogor Agricultural University

• Pemalsuan bermotif ekonomi (Economically

Bogor Agricultural University

• Keberhasilan serangan (attack) yang

•  Prinsip HACCP diadopsi dan diintegrasikan ke

•  Sistem pangan yang semakin kompleks

•  Proposed on December 24, 2013

•  Rencana Food Defense

•  Proses mengidentifikasi dan prioritasisasi

•  Lakukan vulnerability assessment dengan

•  Strategi mitigasi harus diidentifikasi dan

•  Monitoring: Establishing and implementing

•  HACCP tidak digunakan untuk mendeteksi atau

•  Pemalsuan bermotif ekonomi (Economically

•  Keberhasilan serangan (attack) yang

•  Dalam banyak kasus, TACCP seharusnya merupakan

•  Have there been significant cost increases which have

•  British Standard Institute. 2014. PAS 96 2014. Guide to protecting