Food Safety Inspection Report

FOOD SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT

#SYS-D-138SYS-D-138

FreshPoint North Florida
3100 Hilton St
Jacksonville, FL 32209-2750FreshPoint North Florida
3100 Hilton St
Jacksonville, FL 32209-2750

By

PATRICK LENNONPATRICK LENNON

Food Safety Inspector

January 20, 2009January 20, 2009

AIB International Inc.

1213 Bakers Way • PO Box 3999 • Manhattan, KS 66505-3999
(785-537-4750) • (800-633-5137) • Fax (785-537-1493)

RATING

A Prerequisite and Food Safety training inspection was conducted at this facility on January 20, 2009. The writer was accompanied throughout the inspection by Mr. Ernie Lane, Safety Director and Mr. Tom Kleeman, Director of Operations.

The writer received excellent cooperation and, on some occasions, the items were immediately corrected.

At the conclusion of the inspection, a meeting was held to discuss the observations, recommendations, and rating.

Based on the observations made, the information obtained, and the criteria set forth in the AIB International Inc. Consolidated Standards for Inspection of Food Distribution Centers, the overall food safety level of this facility was considered to be:

TRAINING

The “Serious” or “Unsatisfactory” items are shaded, boxed, and bolded in the text of the report. Refer to the definitions in the AIB International Inc. Consolidated Standards for Inspection.

The “Improvement Needed” items are designated in bold type and require prompt attention.

AIB International Inc. states that the report as given herein is to be construed as its findings and recommendations as of the date of this report. AIB International Inc. does not accept or assume responsibility for the Prerequisite and Food Safety Programs in effect with (customer). AIB International Inc. is only reporting the food safety conditions of (customer) as of the date of this report and assumes no responsibility or liability as to whether (customer) does or does not carry out the recommendations as contained in this report.

RATING ANALYSIS

DATE OF INSPECTION: January 20, 2009

TYPE OF INSPECTION: UnannouncedUnannounced

OVERALL RATING: TRAINING

RATED ITEMS

UNSATISFACTORY ITEMS:

Item #5.25

SERIOUS ITEMS:

Item #3.2

Item #5.9

IMPROVEMENT NEEDED ITEMS:

Item #1.16

Item #1.32

Item #2.5

Item #2.15

Item #2.21

Item #2.22

Item #3.3

Item #3.5

Item #4.2

Item #4.4

Item #4.5

Item #4.7

Item #5.4

Item #5.5

Item #5.7

Item #5.11

FACTUAL OBSERVATIONS AND SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

OPERATIONAL METHODS AND PERSONNEL PRACTICES

1.1All transports/containers and ingredients were inspected upon receipt for cleanliness, pest activity, structural defects, or other issues that could jeopardize product integrity. Inspection documentation, including rejected shipments, was maintained. Minimum temperature requirements were defined for perishable materials. Documentation of received material temperatures indicated compliance to requirements.

1.2Food products were stored and removed from storage to prevent product contamination. Materials were stored off the floor and 18 inches (45 cm) away from the wall to facilitate cleaning, inspection and pest management operations. Space was provided between rows of product to allow access for cleaning and inspection. Receiving dates were visible on materials to facilitate stock rotation.

1.3Storage areas were clean, well-ventilated and dry. Materials in storage were adequately protected against contamination. Packaging materials, toxic chemicals, non-product materials, and research and development materials were segregated. Infrequently used materials, and packaging supplies were inspected on a defined frequency for evidence of infestation. An 18 inch (50 cm) painted inspection line was along floor wall junctions around the interior perimeter.

1.4Ingredients, packaging supplies, and other materials were rotated on a “First-In, First-Out" basis or other verifiable method to ensure stock rotation.

1.5Pallets were clean, dry, and in good repair. Slipsheets were provided to protect ingredients and product from damage.

1.6A designated rework area was provided to segregate rework and salvage materials. Rework was processed on a minimum of a weekly basis to prevent excessive inventory. Rework materials were identified for traceability.

1.16Trash or inedible waste was stored in properly identified containers and handled in a way that didnot provide a source of contamination. Trash disposal met regulatory requirements or was disposed of by a licensed contractor. It was recommended that all trash containers be covered. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

1.20Single-service containers were not reused and were crushed, punctured or otherwise disposed of to prevent product contamination.

1.22Materials, work-in-progress, and finished products capable of supporting the rapid growth of pathogenic microorganisms were properly stored. Temperature sensitive materials were stored at 40⁰F or below as defined by country requirement. Thermometers were calibrated and maintained. Coolers were provided with vinyl strip doors or other effective methods to maintain temperatures.

1.23Incompatible materials were stored under conditions that prevent cross contamination. This includes segregation of raw and cooked materials and hazardous ingredients, such as allergens. Systems were in place to reduce any potential physical, chemical or microbiological contamination risks. Where needed, measures were in place to prevent material contamination that could cause consumer complaints. Protective measures were provided in areas where iced down product was stored over like or dissimilar items.

1.24Containers and utensils were constructed, handled, and maintained to prevent contamination. Misuse of containers or utensils was not observed.

1.26All shipping vehicles were inspected prior to loading for cleanliness and structural defects that could jeopardize product integrity. Inspection documentation was maintained and included lot code designation, amounts, and the point of distribution to ensure traceability and recall. For perishable loads, documentation included the temperature of the precooled vehicle and perishable material temperatures. Transportation breakdown procedures should be documented to ensure the integrity of materials during transport. Security seals were provided on and documented for all outbound vehicles. Transport refrigeration units are properly fitted with temperature recording devices and procedures are in place to maintain temperatures and allow air circulation.

1.27Adequate hand washing and sanitizing stations were located at appropriate locations and were stocked with single use towels or hand dryers. “Wash hands” signs were displayed in restrooms, lunchrooms,smoking areas, and by sinks and entries to work areas.

1.28Washrooms and locker rooms were maintained in an acceptable sanitary condition. Lockers were inspected as a sanitary control and no open food or drink was allowed in them.

1.29Trained supervisors were in place to monitor compliance to Personnel Practices. Personnel were observed washing hands appropriately and good personal hygiene practices were observed. Hand washing procedures were monitored periodically for effectiveness.

1.32Personnel were not observed eating, drinking, or smoking in unauthorized areas. All personal property was stored in appropriate locations defined by company programs. The facility did not define any exceptions to personnel practices programs. However a cigarette butt was observed in a box in the ammonia compressor room and some orange peel was observed in trash container in the same area. Two employees in the tomato re-pak area with facial hair were not wearing the required beard nets. It was recommended that these issues be addressed to ensure employees are complying with GMP’s and company policies. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

1.33Effective procedures were in place to ensure that personnel with boils, sores, infected wounds, infections or other communicable diseases were not permitted to come in contact with food, as required by law.

1.34All non-facility personnel, including visitors and contractors, followed the facility personnel practices requirements.

MAINTENANCE FOR FOOD SAFETY

2.1Facility boundaries were defined and controlled. Measures were in place to prevent contamination from local activities or neighboring properties that could impact the facility.

2.2Outside grounds were mostly maintained in a way that prevents product contamination. Measures included, but were not limited to, managing drainage, litter, weeds, and dust and maintaining waste and equipment graveyards to eliminate pest attraction to the facility. There was some debris buildup observed under the rear of the freezer trailer by the loading dock. It was recommended that the area be cleaned more often to eliminate the buildup.

2.3Some measures were taken to maintain facility security. Security strategies included:fencing, security cameras, night time security service, truck seals, and employee screening.

2.4Adequate space was observed between equipment and structures to facilitate access for cleaning and maintenance activities.

2.5Floors, walls, and ceilings throughout the facility were well constructed and maintained. Drainage was designed and maintained to allow access for cleaning and to prevent product contamination. Roof leaks were observed in several areas of the facility, these leaks have been identified by facility personnel and plans were in place to replace the roof. No evidence of product contamination from these leaks was observed. It was recommended that the facility continue with plans to replace the roof. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

2.6Fixtures, ducts, and pipes were properly installed and maintained to prevent contamination from leaks, condensation, or insulating material. There was no evidence of flaking rust, paint or other loose materials, such as insulation, on or in a product zone.

2.7All fluorescent light tubes, essential glass, brittle plastics, and ceramics in the facility are of the safety type or otherwise protected from accidental breakage, or were accounted for in the Glass, Brittle Plastics, and Ceramics Program.

2.8.Adequate ventilation was provided in the facility. Filters were in place in air makeup units to remove particles of 50 microns or larger. Fans, filters, and blowers were maintained on the Preventive Maintenance schedule, were accessible for cleaning, and were operated in a way to avoid product contamination. Ventilation systems adequately minimized odors, fumes, and dust as appropriate to the process. Insect screens were provided on windows or doors used for ventilation to prevent pest entry.

2.9Adequate barriers were in place to prevent rodents, insects, and birds from entering the facility. Cracks, crevices, and other pest harborages were eliminated and doors were pest proofed to less than ¼-in (6mm) to prevent pest entry.

2.10There was no evidence of leaks or excessive lubrication in product zones where contamination was likely.

2.12Operations were separated to prevent product contamination. The process flow was arranged based on personnel, airflow, materials, and equipment. Toilet rooms did not open directly into material storage areas. Where appropriate, wash bays or areas for cleaning activities were located away from work or storage activities.

2.15The facility should develop a written temporary repair program that defines food grade materials appropriate for use with temporary repair materials. Repairs should be dated and replaced with permanent repairs as soon as possible. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

2.16Food contact surfaces were smooth, corrosion-free, constructed of non-toxic material, and there was no evidence of spot or tack welds.

2.17Temperature measuring devices were monitored frequently. It was recommended that a mechanical failure alarms be in place that activate when temperatures exceed set limits. A calibration program that is traceable to a national standard should be in place for all food-safety related regulating and recording controls.

2.19Transporting equipment was maintained to prevent contamination of products being transported. This equipment was listed on the Preventive Maintenance Schedule.

2.20Parts were stored off the floor in a clean environment. Only clean parts and equipment were observed in the parts storage areas.

2.21Potable water, including water, ice, and steam used for food contact, was supplied from an appropriate source. A program was in place to monitor water quality. Documentation of water quality reports was maintained. Food approval documentation was provided for any chemicals used to treat water, ice, or steam. Documentation indicated that use of these chemicals met label requirements through concentration testing or other verification. Back siphonage or backflow prevention devices were provided on water installations. It was recommended that routine checks be documented to verify that the units were functioning properly. Sewage disposal was properly designed and maintained to prevent direct or indirect product contamination. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

2.22Hand washing facilities provided hot and cold running water. Hand washing facilities should labeled and separate from utensil washing facilities. Mix valves were provided. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

CLEANING PRACTICES

3.1Cleaning was done in a way that prevents contamination of materials, products, and equipment.

3.2Food approval documentation was provided for cleaning chemicals and sanitizers used to clean food contact surfaces. It was recommended that documentation be maintained that cleaning chemicals and sanitizers were used in accordance with the product label. In cases where chemical and/or sanitizer concentrations did not meet requirements, Corrective Actions should be taken and retesting records indicate that chemical usage complied with requirements. Chemicals were properly labeled and secured. (SERIOUS)

3.3Adequate cleaning equipment and tools were available and stored away from work areas. Cleaning tools should be labeled or color-coded to separate them based on their intended use. Separate and distinct utensils should be used to clean food contact surfaces (product zones), structures (product areas), restrooms, and floor drains. Cleaning utensils were cleaned and properly stored after use. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

3.4Daily housekeeping cleaning activities were carried out in a way that prevented contamination. Housekeeping activities were assigned to the appropriate department to maintain work and support areas during working hours. Water used for housekeeping activities was restricted to prevent product contamination.

3.5Deep cleaning of equipment and structures was conducted according to the Master Cleaning Schedule to prevent the development of microorganisms, insects, or foreign material. Periodic cleaning tasks complied with written procedures. Air hoses were only used for cleaning inaccessible equipment when the facility was not in operation. Dock levelers, racks, storage shelves, perimeters, and recoup and salvage areas were cleaned frequently enough to prevent product contamination. Drains in meat, dairy and produce areas are routinely sanitized. It was recommended to include precise chemicals and solution strengths in the cleaning procedures. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

3.6Maintenance cleaning was completed in a way that prevents product contamination. Maintenance debris, tools, lubrication, and other items generated during maintenance activities were removed from the work area. The work area was inspected after use to identify any debris that could contaminate product. Maintenance personnel followed the Personnel Practices Program when working on product zones and equipment. Maintenance personnel used clean tools and cloths.

3.7Food contact surfaces and utensils were cleaned often enough to destroy pathogenic microorganisms and remove contaminants. Utensils, containers, and product zones were cleaned to prevent residues from being transferred to other products.

INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT

4.1A formal Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program with written procedures that included requirements of the facility’s Prerequisite Programs was in place. The IPM Program was written and implemented by licensed contractors.

4.2An annual facility assessment that addressed all areas inside and outside of the facility should be conducted and documented. Results and Corrective Actions should be documented and used to develop and update the IPM Program. Assessments should be conducted by trained IPM personnel. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

4.4A signed agreement was in place with the Steritech Pest Control Company to provideIPM services. A copy of the service agreement included: the facility name, facility contact person, term of contract, Frequency of service, and description of service. It was recommended that the contract include, emergency procedure and contact, records to be maintained, approved chemical list, notification of change procedure. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

4.5Current copies of certification or registration documents were on file for all persons providing IPM services for the facility. Where certification or registration was not required, training records were provided for persons providing IPM services. IPM service providers were supervised by licensed or registered personnel, where required by law. Current copies of the company license, where required by regulation, as well as a copy of the certificate of insurance were on file. Verification of GMP training of the applicators who service the facility should be conducted and maintained on file. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

4.6Current copies of the pesticide specimen labels and Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) were on file for all pesticides listed as being applied at the facility.

4.7Documentation of all pesticides, including rodenticides, applied on the premises included: materials applied, registration number, target pest, amount applied, specific area where pesticide was applied, method of application, rate of application or dosage, date treated, and applicator's signature. When required, the service provider certification number. Documentation indicated that the applications were made according to label directions. It was recommended that lot numbers and time of treatments be included in the documentation. (IMPROVEMENT NEEDED)

4.9The outside IPM service left a service report after each visit. These records provided documentation of the checks and findings for pest monitoring devices, descriptions of the current levels of pest activity, and recommendations for actions needed to correct conditions allowing a potential for pest activity. It was recommended that a trend analysis be provided at least quarterly and that the pest sighting log be utilized.

4.10A current site map that lists the locations of interior and exterior pest control devices was on file. Services to all pest monitoring devices services were documented and matched the defined frequencies.

4.11Exterior rodent monitoring devices were installed around the exterior perimeter of the facility at appropriate intervals. These stations were tamper resistant, properly positioned, anchored in place, secured, and properly labeled in compliance with regulatory requirements. All pest monitoring devices were serviced at least monthly. Fresh bait had been supplied in the stations that were randomly examined. The service and results of the checks were documented in the log book.