Understand packaging security risks

At the packaging safety seminar held in Itasca in February, the key issue was to understand the security risks and correctly assess the probability of accidents and their possible consequences. The seminar was hosted by the American Packaging Machinery Manufacturers Association. The seminar attracted more than 140 visitors, including packaging manufacturers, material suppliers, and third-party commentators.

The seminar was only started in the first few weeks of the conference. The preparation time was very rushed and the number of participants was not many. At the last moment, David J. Armstrong, deputy director of the FDA's Institute of Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Center Doctors gave the attendees a big surprise.

Dr. Chuck Sizer, director of the National Food Safety Technology Center in the United States, and Dr. Peter Slade, his assistant, also joined Dr. Armstrong’s discussion. The three of them, to varying degrees, introduced the FDA’s recently announced “Regulatory Plan for Food Safety”. During the seminar, the public and companies were also solicited for these proposals. The discussion period is also until the end of this year, when the FDA will finalize the final version.

What is repeatedly emphasized in discussions throughout the day is that these guidelines - even after finalization - can be used by companies to decide whether to adopt these rules. These rules can be found on the website. In addition, Dr. Armstrong said that he can also send E-mails to request copies.

Next, Armstrong presented a set of slides to the Center for Food Safety Prevention Testing. The first slide suggested that companies review the current procedures and make improvements and improvements; encourage managers and employees to assume obligations; and recognize that standards are not Both are applicable to each company; support the use of Operational Hidden Risk Management (ORM) to enable companies to prioritize improvements and improvements.

According to Armstrong, the rules cover a wide range of fields, including food safety management, mechanical equipment, employees, computer systems, raw materials and packaging, operations, and final products. He said that each company should establish a set of security policies, including responding to destructive incidents, criminals, or terrorist incidents in a timely manner and take measures to restore strategies and other steps. Armstrong pointed out that many of the recommendations made by people are mainly basic methods, and many companies have already adopted them, such as controlling personnel entering factories (especially laboratories or warehouses for storing dangerous goods), and strictly screening staff.

He also suggested that companies should train employees on food safety so that they not only understand the regulations and restrictions in this area, but also be able to join the safety procedures and become a pair of "safe eyes." For raw materials and packaging, FDA recommends that manufacturers strictly control the loading of goods, require the use of locked and sealed containers, ensure safety, and check the quantity of goods received with the order quantity, and make detailed inventory records. In addition, the materials used for the test should also be included.

I. Detailed assessment of hidden dangers Mr. Slade and Mr. Iater described in detail how companies face potential risks and dangers and their possible consequences, and assigned priorities to hidden risk control methods/methods.

Slade elaborated on the well-known ORM program (Operational Hidden Trouble Management). ORM includes six steps that can predict potential risks and reduce the potential losses. These steps include identification of hidden dangers, assessment of their severity, analysis of control methods, development of hidden hazard control decisions, implementation of control plans, and final supervision and review of the plans.

Slade said that these steps can help the company minimize the chances of major disaster accidents. In addition, some steps have other advantages. For example, in order to ensure security, some of the company's key areas can be monitored with a camera. This method does Can reduce the occurrence of product and material theft.

Helm's hidden trouble management plan is slightly different, he also explained how to analyze hidden dangers. He elaborated on a typical assessment example. First, the company identified various hidden dangers and then determined its probability coefficient and severity coefficient to determine which risks must be immediately controlled. However, he emphasized that since the “9.11” incident, the aircraft driving factor has also become one of the potential hidden dangers. People realize that the similarities of certain situations that are happening are becoming more and more prominent, and therefore force us to work more often. Reduce your risk rate.

He said: After the “9.11” incident, the company must re-evaluate the possibility of hidden dangers. Moreover, if or when danger occurs, the company needs to establish procedures or techniques to control the hidden danger results and reduce its severity. In the past, the main hidden danger of the company was that the products could not be listed and sold in time. At present, for a company, hidden dangers threaten the lives of employees and may cause major disasters. He said: "But we can take various feasible measures to prevent this incident from happening. Moreover, we must determine what is the most critical hidden danger and take appropriate measures to minimize it."

Second, the focus of attention is that Packer's speech covers most of the history of packaging destruction in the United States, and reviews some laws and ordinances that can help improve the safety of packaging. However, he added that packaging is the first line of defense to ensure food safety. He encouraged everyone to expand the scope of packaging, not just containers or packaging, but could even be extended to farms and shops.

Sizer repeatedly emphasized that the FDA has introduced some packaging concepts, including the safe storage of containers, and even shipping boxes and shipping pallets. However, he pointed out that the FDA has not actually established a standard for any obvious damage to food packaging. Therefore, he provides a test method to evaluate whether there is any obvious damage to food packaging. He said that in the FDA's book it is recommended to take 6 to 12 samples and try to sneak some common items into the package.

For food packaging, he strongly agrees with the practices that have been completely sealed, and when the packaging is destroyed, the contents cannot be fully revealed. He discussed house-shaped juice cartons with screw-in mouth closures, can-shaped containers with panel ends and ring handles, inflatable packaging, wide-mouth bottles with vacuum buttons, sealed paper packages, or plastic flexible packaging.

3. Discussion on Markem's Jonadthan Oakes, who described barcode technology and other technologies, all of which have a certain resistance to counterfeiting and counterfeiting.

The final event in the afternoon was a panel discussion. The sole representative of the packaging company was Ms. Judy Fischer, senior packaging engineer at Sargento. Other team members included Michael Richinond of Packaging & Technology Integrated Solutions, Bill Zito of Enercon Industries, and Juli of 3M Packaging Systems Div. Okal, Gary Parish of Complete Inspection Systems and John Raterman of Nordson.

In the beginning, Ms. Fischer talked about the starch granules on the roll flexible packaging material and paid attention to the contamination of anthrax. She said: "Our suppliers have turned from light dusting to a little dusting, not even dusting." Fischer also said that Sargento checked the safety of the factory and explained that at present almost does not invite others to visit the factory. She said: “Any visitors must go through the deputy manager's approval before they can visit and they are escorted and escorted by 100% of the people in the factory.”

Later, Ms. Fischer said that as early as the "9.11" incident, the company had developed detailed specifications, but they were only part of Sargento's hidden danger analysis.

When discussing the seal of the shipping case, Raterman said that most of the damage was done at the bottom of the box and it was difficult to find. He said that the company is now looking for a new technology that can provide significant damage to the bottom seal. He spoke of an incident involving computer products that stole computer parts from the bottom of a box and stuffed a phone with similar weight to impersonate the original.

Finally, the host of the conference, Ben Miyares, pointed out that PMMI may hold similar security seminars on the eastern and western coastlines before this summer, and that the potential safety hazards are also among the Pa Expo Intl conferences that will be held in Chicago in November of this year. Part.