Hazard control and cross-contamination — foreign matter and category specifics

Plain-language summary

Foreign-matter management with a justified choice of detection equipment and breakage controls, plus specific rules for functional packaging, lairage inspection and feed additives.

What the clause is really asking

This clause adds category-specific hazard controls on top of ISO 22000 8.5. For every category except brokers and traders, foreign-matter management must start with a risk assessment that decides whether foreign-body detection equipment is needed and of what type — magnets, metal detectors, X-ray, filters, sieves — with documented justification where none is required; a documented procedure for managing and using the equipment chosen; and controls covering breakages that could contaminate product (metal, ceramic, hard plastic). Category-specific additions: BIII, C and I need specific requirements where packaging provides a functional effect on food such as shelf-life extension; C0 needs an inspection process at lairage and/or evisceration to confirm animals are fit for human consumption; Category D needs procedures for ingredients and additives with adverse animal-health potential.

What auditors look for

Auditors ask why you have (or do not have) a metal detector and want the risk assessment that answers it. They test the detector with the check pieces, look at the breakage register and ask what happened the last time a glass item broke near open product.

Typical evidence

Foreign-matter risk assessment with equipment decision and justification; detection-equipment procedure, test-piece records and calibration; breakage procedure and register; functional-packaging requirements (BIII, C, I); lairage/evisceration inspection records (C0); adverse-additive procedures (D)

How to comply — recommendations

Write the foreign-matter risk assessment as a real decision — by product, process step and hazard — rather than a justification of the equipment you already own. Keep a glass and brittle-materials register and make the breakage procedure a stop-and-clear rule everyone knows.

Common nonconformities

Detection equipment with no risk assessment behind it; no justification for having none; breakage register not maintained or procedure not followed; functional packaging with no specific controls; C0 or D category items missing

Resources for this clause

• ArticleHACCP plan explained: the 12 steps, a worked hazard analysis, and where CCPs end and OPRPs begin
• ArticleFSSC 22000 Version 7 explained: what changed, the dates that matter, and how to prepare for the upgrade audit
• Toolkit · $29HACCP Plan ToolkitA complete HACCP study in one workbook: rate likelihood and severity and the significance answers itself; answer five plain-English questions and the workbook tells you whether it is a CCP, an OPRP or a prerequisite programme.
• Free downloadFSSC 22000 V7 Gap ChecklistEvery change from FSSC 22000 Version 6 to Version 7 as a tracked project — V6 audits end on 30 April 2027, and this is the file that gets a site to its upgrade audit with the evidence ready.
• Free downloadHACCP Flow & Product Description TemplateThe first five steps of a HACCP study — the two documents every hazard you find later is built on, and the two where more studies go wrong than anywhere else.
• Free masterclass · ~18 minFSSC 22000 V7 MasterclassV6 audits end 30 April 2027. Every V7 change clause by clause — the new ISO 22002 family, allergen testing, culture evidence, fraud/defence competence, food loss & waste targets — and a 90-day plan.