Cheese Composition Standards Verification
5. Completing the Cheese Composition Verification Report
This page is part of the Guidance Document Repository (GDR).
Looking for related documents?
Search for related documents in the Guidance Document Repository
Transpose the data collected from the worksheet (Appendix III) and any CFIA lab test results to the identical fields on the Excel Cheese Composition Verification Report. In column A, always enter any UF milk data in the last line, due to programmed calculations. The report will determine the % casein in the cheese derived from the ingredients in column A (% CDM), for each vat/batch assessed and the overall average of the three.
5.1 Satisfactory Inspections
The cheese verification is considered satisfactory when the average % CDM value of the three vats/batches meets or exceeds the % CDM requirement for the cheese variety assessed. When the cheese is assessed as satisfactory, place a check-mark in the satisfactory box, on the Cheese Composition Verification Report. If any individual vat/batch is below the % CDM, make note of this on the CFIA/ACIA 950 form, and inform the company. Print and sign the Cheese Composition Verification Report. Keep copies of the reports in the establishment file and inform the company of the satisfactory result by phone, email or fax or during the next visit. A copy of the Report can be sent to the company if requested.
5.2 Non Satisfactory Inspections
The cheese is considered non satisfactory if the overall average of the three lots/vats is under the minimum required % CDM. When the cheese is below its required % CDM level, place a check mark in the non-satisfactory box on the Cheese Composition Verification Report.
Actions taken should coincide with the degree of non-satisfactory, as follows:
- If the non-satisfactory result is ≤ 1% of the minimum % CDM (e.g. for a cheese with a minimum % CDM of 63% a result of 62% < 63%), notify the company in writing of the results and perform a follow-up verification within 3 months on the same variety/recipe of cheese.
See Appendix VII.
- If the non-satisfactory result is > 1% less than the minimum % CDM (e.g. < 62% for a cheese with a minimum % CDM of 63%), notify the company in writing of the results and request an action plan. The corrective action plan should be received by the CFIA office within 3 weeks of the date of the letter and should include a change to the formulation within a specific timeframe. See Appendix VI. Perform a follow up visit to verify that the corrective action was taken on the non-satisfactory formulation and that it was effective.
When a corrective action plan is requested, it should address the formulation that was found to be non satisfactory along with any other formulations that may be affected.
At a follow-up visit, verify that corrective action was taken on the non satisfactory cheese variety. The formulation(s) for the non-satisfactory cheese(s) should be reviewed for changes. If no corrective action has been taken, detain any cheese from that formulation. Perform another verification on that formulation using only the vat/batch records from the detained lots. Collect directed samples for protein analysis by CFIA from the detained lots. In this case the verification will be based on the individual lot rather than the average of three lots. Copies of all documents and/or records used to gather the information should be kept and attached to the inspection report.
If the detained cheese is found to be non-satisfactory, the plant will have to bring it into compliance before it can be released and the formulation will need to be corrected.
Where an inspector identifies significant non-compliance, for example where there are continued or subsequent incidents of non-compliance, and the person or company does not correct the product, the inspector should complete an Inspector's Non-Compliance Report (INCR). The appropriate Program Specialist should be informed. If necessary, a Management Review Team will review the case and recommend possible enforcement actions to be taken based on the degree of harm, history and intent posed by non-compliance.
- Date modified: