Certified ISO 22000:2018 FSMS Lead Auditor Training — Lesson 2: Examining PRPs, Hazard Analysis, Control Measures, OPRPs, CCPs, and Evidence

Learning Objectives

• Interpret the purpose, responsibilities, inputs, and decision points shaping examining prps, hazard analysis, control measures, oprps, ccps, and evidence.
• Apply the workflow and produce food-safety audit working papers that another practitioner can review.
• Analyze “a significant hazard has no validated control” and recommend a proportionate, evidence-based response.

Detailed Topics

• prerequisite programmes
• hazard identification
• hazard analysis
• control measure selection
• operational PRPs
• critical control points
• validation
• evidence sampling
• Governance, competence, communication, documentation, validation, risk, and follow-up considerations

Instructor Demonstration

The instructor demonstrates the examining prps, hazard analysis, control measures, oprps, ccps, and evidence workflow, identifies applicable responsibilities, records checkpoints in food-safety audit working papers, and contrasts the accepted state with a condition where a significant hazard has no validated control.

Hands-On Exercise

Complete a controlled implementation, management, audit, assessment, foundation, introduction, awareness, or transition exercise for Examining PRPs, Hazard Analysis, Control Measures, OPRPs, CCPs, and Evidence. Establish scope and criteria, collect or create evidence, examine “a significant hazard has no validated control,” reach a supported conclusion, and preserve the result in food-safety audit working papers.

1. Confirm objectives, scope, roles, criteria, stakeholders, and expected outputs.
2. Perform the planned activities while recording assumptions, evidence, and decisions.
3. Test a normal case, an exception, and a follow-up or improvement condition.
4. Document conclusions, owners, due dates, escalation, and verification requirements.

Scenario Analysis

• Identify the requirement or principle with the strongest influence on examining prps, hazard analysis, control measures, oprps, ccps, and evidence.
• Compare two defensible responses and explain their governance, risk, and evidence trade-offs.
• Determine how the food-safety audit working papers should be approved, retained, reviewed, and updated.

Troubleshooting Guidance

Separate missing evidence from ineffective practice, and distinguish a documentation issue from a control, process, governance, or competence failure. Use food-safety audit working papers to trace the earliest divergence. Treat “a significant hazard has no validated control” as a hypothesis until the response is validated against the applicable requirement and intended outcome.

Validation Checklist

• The scope, criteria, stakeholders, and intended outcome for examining prps, hazard analysis, control measures, oprps, ccps, and evidence are explicit.
• The food-safety audit working papers links statements and decisions to objective, reviewable support.
• Responsibilities, competence, communication, risk, legal duties, and change impact were considered where relevant.
• Findings, corrective actions, monitoring, review triggers, and improvement ownership are clear.

Lesson Outcome

Learners can apply Examining PRPs, Hazard Analysis, Control Measures, OPRPs, CCPs, and Evidence, explain the reasoning used, and defend the result through food-safety audit working papers.