- Bridge Foods, Inc
- Issuing Office:
- New Orleans District Office
| || |
Department of Health and Human Services
|Public Health Service|
Food and Drug Administration
New Orleans District
404 BNA Drive
Building 200 – Suite 500
Nashville, TN 37217
Telephone: (615) 366-7801
FAX: (615) 366-7802
April 22, 2015
WARNING LETTER NO. 2015-NOL-08
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
Delivery Signature Requested
Henry N. Chigbu, President/Owner
Bridge Foods, Inc.
16500 Chef Menteur Highway
New Orleans, Louisiana 70129-2432
Dear Mr. Chigbu:
During February 5, 6, 9 – 11, and 13, 2015, a United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigator inspected your seafood processing facility, located at 16500 Chef Menteur Highway, New Orleans, Louisiana. This inspection found that you have serious violations of the seafood Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) regulation, Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations
, Part 123, and the Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulation for foods, Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations
, Part 110 (21 CFR 123 & 110). In accordance with 21 CFR 123.6(g), failure of a processor of fish or fishery products to have and implement a HACCP plan that complies with this section or otherwise operate in accordance with the requirements of Part 123, renders the fish or fishery products adulterated within the meaning of Section 402(a)(4) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), [21 United States Code
(USC) 342(a)(4)]. Accordingly, your ready to eat finished dried/smoked catfish is adulterated, because it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby itmay have been rendered injurious to health. You may find the Act, the seafood HACCP regulation and the Fish and Fisheries Products Hazards & Controls Guidance through links in FDA's home page at www.fda.gov
Your significant violations were as follows:
1. You must conduct a hazard analysis to determine whether there are food safety hazards reasonably likely to occur and have a HACCP plan that, at a minimum, lists the critical control points, to comply with 21 CFR 123.6 (a) and (c) (2). A critical control point is defined in 21 CFR 123.3(b) as a "point, step, or procedure in a food process at which control can be applied and a food safety hazard can as a result be prevented, eliminated, or reduced to acceptable levels." However, your firm’s HACCP plan for dried smoked catfish does not list the critical control point (CCP) of labeling for controlling the food safety hazards of allergens and finished product storage to control Staphylococcus aureus.
2. Because you chose to include a corrective action plan in your HACCP plan, your described corrective actions must be appropriate, to comply with 21 CFR 123.7(b). However, your corrective action plans for dried smoked catfish at the following CCP’s which do not address correcting the cause of the deviation from the critical limit.
a. The corrective action procedure at the CCP of (b)(4) prior to cook step states, (b)(4) and (b)(4)
b. The corrective action procedure at the CCP of (b)(4) to smoke flavor the product states, (b)(4) and (b)(4)
3. You must monitor sanitation conditions and practices during processing with sufficient frequency to ensure compliance with current good manufacturing practice requirements in 21 CFR Part 110, to comply with 21 CFR 123.11(b). However, your firm did not monitor the maintenance of hand washing, hand sanitizing, and toilet facilities as evidenced by the absence of hand washing and hand sanitizing facilities in the fish processing facilities located outside of your building.
4. You must maintain sanitation control records that, at a minimum, document monitoring and corrections set out in 21 CFR 123.11(b), to comply with 21 CFR 123.11( c). However, your firm did not maintain sanitation monitoring records for safety of water that comes into contact with food or food contact surfaces, including water used to manufacture ice, condition and cleanliness of food contact surfaces, prevention of cross-contamination from insanitary objects, maintenance of hand washing, hand sanitizing, and toilet facilities, protection of food, food packaging material, and food contact surfaces from adulteration, proper labeling, storage and use of toxic chemicals, control of employee health conditions, and exclusion of pests required for the processing of dried smoke catfish on six occasions from July 25, 2014 through February 3, 2015.
We may take further action if you do not promptly correct these violations. For instance, we may take further action to seize your product and/or enjoin your firm from operating.
You should respond in writing within 15 working days from your receipt of this letter. Your response should outline the specific things you are doing to correct these violations. You should include in your response documentation such as HACCP and verification records, or other useful information that would assist us in evaluating your corrections. If you cannot complete all corrections before you respond, you should explain the reason for your delay and state when you will correct any remaining violations.
This letter may not list all the violations at your facility. You are responsible for ensuring your processing plant operates in compliance with the Act, the seafood HACCP regulation (21 CFR 123), and the Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulation (21 CFR 110). You also have a responsibility to use procedures to prevent further violations of the Act and all applicable regulations.
Section 743 of the Act, [21 USC 379j-31], authorizes FDA to assess and collect fees to cover FDA’s costs for certain activities, including re-inspection-related costs. A re-inspection is one or more inspections conducted subsequent to an inspection that identified non-compliance materially related to a food safety requirement of the Act, specifically to determine whether compliance has been achieved. Re-inspection-related costs means all expenses, including administrative expenses incurred in connection with FDA’s arranging, conducting, and evaluating the results of the re-inspection and assessing and collecting the re-inspection fees, [21 USC 379j-31(a)(2)(B)]. For a domestic facility, FDA will assess and collect fees for re-inspection-related costs from the responsible party for the domestic facility. The inspection noted in this letter identified non-compliance materially related to a food safety requirement of the Act. Accordingly, FDA may assess fees to cover any re-inspection-related costs.
Your reply should be directed to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Attention: Mark W. Rivero, Compliance Officer, at the above address. If you have questions, concerning the contents of this letter, you may contact Mr. Rivero at (504) 832-1290, extension 1103.
Ruth P. Dixon
New Orleans District