The Missing HACCP File
A Dubai restaurant is inspected. The inspector asks for the food safety management system based on HACCP principles. The manager produces a folder containing a generic HACCP plan downloaded from the internet, with no site-specific hazard analysis, no critical control points (CCPs) identified for the kitchen, and no monitoring records for the last 3 months. The kitchen does cook chicken to 74°C and does check chiller temperatures, but there is no written record. The inspector also finds that the pest control contractor visits quarterly but no reports are on file, and that the cleaning schedule is verbal only. The restaurant has 40 covers per service and serves high-risk foods including sushi and cold desserts.
1. Assess the restaurant's compliance with the requirement to have a food safety management system based on HACCP principles. What is missing?
Read the worked answer
The restaurant has the elements of control (cooking to 74°C, checking chillers) but not a system. A HACCP-based food safety management system requires:
- A site-specific hazard analysis - the generic downloaded plan is not evidence of identifying the hazards in this kitchen. Sushi (raw fish, Listeria/Anisakis risk) and cold desserts (dairy, Listeria) demand specific analysis.
- Identified CCPs - cooking (74°C), chilling, cold holding (≤5°C) and hot holding (≥63°C) should be CCPs with defined critical limits.
- Monitoring - the checks are done but not recorded. Unrecorded monitoring cannot be verified and is treated as not done.
- Corrective actions - no documented procedure for when a limit is breached.
- Verification - no review, audit or trend analysis.
- Supporting programmes - pest control reports and cleaning schedules are missing or verbal.
Conclusion: The business cannot demonstrate control. The absence of records is the decisive failure, because HACCP is about demonstrable control, not good intentions.
2. Draft the minimum CCP table the restaurant should have for its high-risk foods, with critical limits and monitoring.
Read the worked answer
| CCP | Hazard | Critical limit | Monitoring | Corrective action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cooking (chicken, fish) | Survival of pathogens | Core ≥74°C for ≥2 min (or equivalent time/temperature) | Probe each batch; record | Re-cook to limit or discard; investigate probe calibration |
| Chilling (cooked foods) | Growth of B. cereus, C. perfringens | 63°C to 5°C within 90 min (blast chiller) | Probe and record start/end times | Discard if not achieved; review blast chiller performance |
| Cold holding (sushi, desserts) | Listeria, Salmonella | ≤5°C | Twice-daily probe; data logger | Discard if >5°C for >4 hours; repair chiller |
| Hot holding | Growth and toxin formation | ≥63°C | Every 2 hours | Reheat to ≥74°C or discard |
| Receiving (raw fish, dairy) | Contamination, temperature abuse | ≤5°C on arrival; supplier approval | Check and record each delivery | Reject delivery; record rejection |
Note: Critical limits must be justified by the site's own hazard analysis and validated (e.g. by reference to recognised time/temperature tables). The table is a starting point, not a substitute for the analysis.
3. The manager argues 'we do the checks, the paperwork is just bureaucracy'. How should the inspector respond, and what must the restaurant do within a defined timeframe?
Read the worked answer
Response to the manager: Records are not bureaucracy - they are the only evidence that control happened. A check that is not recorded cannot be verified, and in an incident investigation or inspection it is treated as not performed. Records also allow trend analysis (e.g. a chiller creeping up over weeks) that a single check cannot reveal.
What the restaurant must do:
- Within 24–48 hours: Implement written monitoring records for all CCPs and start recording immediately.
- Within 1–2 weeks: Complete a site-specific hazard analysis covering sushi and cold desserts; identify CCPs and critical limits; write corrective action procedures.
- Within 1 month: Obtain and file pest control reports; write a cleaning schedule with frequency, method, chemical and responsible person; train staff and record training.
- Ongoing: Verification by the food safety officer (weekly log review, quarterly audit) and retention of records for the required period.
Regulatory framing: The requirement is to operate a food safety management system based on HACCP principles and to be able to demonstrate it. Failure to do so is a compliance failure, and repeated non-compliance can lead to further enforcement action. The restaurant should treat the inspection as an opportunity to build the system, not to argue about paperwork.