Sauce factory audit: rodents, a 50 ppm sanitiser and an uncertified chilli supplier
A sauce factory in Shah Alam produces sambal and chilli paste for retail. During a pre-certification audit for MeSTI and Halal certification, the auditor finds rodent droppings behind a pallet of dried chillies, a 2 cm gap under the rear roller door, an open floor drain near the packing line, a cracked wall in the mixing room, and a fly near the cooling area. The cleaning log is signed daily, but the sanitiser bucket is labelled 'chlorine 50 ppm' when the SOP requires 100-200 ppm. A single wiping cloth is used for the preparation table, the floor and the outside of the mixer. The hand-wash basin has no soap. The chilli paste supplier delivers in unlabelled 20 kg buckets with no halal certificate and no batch code.
1. Rank the audit findings by risk and explain which must be corrected before any certification audit can pass. Include pest-control and premises-design reasoning.
Read the worked answer
Highest risk: active rodent activity. Droppings behind food material mean rodents are entering, feeding and urinating in the store. Rodents carry Salmonella and other pathogens and contaminate packaging and raw materials. Active infestation is normally a stop point for certification; the factory must not simply clean and continue.
Next: entry and harbourage points. The 2 cm gap under the roller door, the open drain and the cracked wall are all pest entry or breeding points. A gap of that size admits rats and mice; an open drain allows cockroaches and flies; a cracked wall prevents effective cleaning and can hold moisture. These are premises-design failures, not cosmetic defects. The roller door needs a brush or rubber seal, the drain a removable cover and cleaning schedule, and the wall a smooth, washable repair.
Next: fly near the cooling area and no soap at the hand-wash basin. A fly is a mechanical vector and shows that screening, air curtains, waste control or fly traps are inadequate. No soap makes hand washing ineffective and is a direct food-contact risk. Both should be corrected immediately, before the audit continues.
Lower but still non-compliant: sanitiser concentration and shared cloth. These are cleaning failures that can be fixed through the SOP and training, but they still require evidence of correction. In practice, the auditor should require a pest-control programme with monitoring records, proofing repairs, cleaning validation and a re-audit before certification is granted.
2. Evaluate the cleaning and sanitising failures. What is wrong with 50 ppm chlorine and the shared cloth, and what should the SOP say?
Read the worked answer
50 ppm chlorine is likely too weak for a food-contact surface. Hypochlorite sanitisers are typically used at about 100-200 ppm available chlorine for food-contact surfaces, with a defined contact time (often 1-5 minutes), after cleaning and rinsing. Concentration alone is not enough: pH, temperature, organic matter and contact time all affect killing power. A bucket labelled 50 ppm may also be inaccurate because it was not tested with strips. The factory should verify concentration at preparation and during use, and change the solution when it becomes dirty.
The shared cloth is a cross-contamination device. A cloth used on the floor and then on the preparation table transfers soil and microorganisms to a food-contact surface. The SOP should require colour-coded or single-use cloths, separate cloths for food-contact surfaces, floors and equipment exteriors, frequent replacement, and laundering or disposal after use. A two-stage approach is needed: clean with detergent to remove soil, rinse, then sanitise with the correct concentration and contact time, and air-dry. Buckets should be labelled, and staff should be trained not to dip a soiled cloth back into the sanitiser.
Records and verification: cleaning logs should record what was cleaned, when, by whom, the sanitiser concentration and contact time. The supervisor should verify with test strips and periodic swabs or visual checks. A daily signature on a log is not evidence if the concentration and method are wrong.
3. What must be done about the unlabelled chilli paste with no halal certificate for MeSTI and Halal certification?
Read the worked answer
The supplier is not approved for a certified system. The factory should:
- Quarantine the buckets and not use them in product intended for sale until they are verified. Unlabelled food with no batch code cannot be traced or recalled, which fails a basic HACCP and traceability requirement.
- Approve the supplier on evidence: a valid halal certificate from JAKIM or a body recognised by JAKIM, product specification, batch code, production date, allergen and raw-material information, and a certificate of analysis where relevant. For MeSTI, the supplier approval and incoming inspection records must be documented.
- Reject non-conforming deliveries and record the rejection. If the material has already been used, trace the affected batches, assess the risk and consider withdrawal; do not apply a halal mark or claim to product made with uncertified material.
- Correct the root cause: add the supplier to the approved supplier list only after verification, and set up incoming inspection for labels, batch codes, temperature and certificates.
Legal point: 'Halal' is a controlled claim. Using it without proper certification can breach the Trade Descriptions Act 2011 as well as the certification scheme's rules. For HACCP, this is supplier verification under hazard analysis; for Halal, it is a prerequisite for certification. The auditor should see a corrective action report, the supplier's certificate and the updated approved supplier list before closing the finding.