**Depressing:**

Plant location data:


**Figure 4** of the depressurization stage is shown below:

The hazards identified in each of the operations of the depressurization stage are detailed in **Table 4**, as well as the critical control points (CCP) based on the HACCP methodology:

The location of the depressing plant in a cold climate mitigates somewhat the risk of contamination by undesirable microorganisms compared to slaughter plants located in warm climates. Likewise, being located in an urban area, the presence of domestic animals, pests, and flying crawlers is reduced compared to a plant located in a rural area with a warm climate.

*Biological* hazards during this stage are caused by deficient or inadequate disinfection practices (when chicken or dams are dropped on the floor during all operations), since the dosage of disinfectant in the water (milliliters of disinfectant per liter of water) is not correctly carried out, or the retention times of the disinfectant are not met, and therefore, there is no guarantee that microorganisms will be effectively eliminated. In addition, during the visit, it was observed that a dam fell during the depressurization process and was not immediately collected for disinfection and reincorporation into the process. And in the marinating area, when placing the prey in baskets for later storage, one prey was observed to fall and was rinsed with water but not disinfected.

### **Figure 4.**

*Desprese stage. Source: Own elaboration based on the visit to the depressing plant.*

Temperature and time variations in refrigeration and freezing operations are a risk factor for the growth of undesirable microorganisms; however, during the visit, it was observed that the temperature of the cold rooms was monitored by filling out forms, thus demonstrating the control of the risk.

With respect to *chemical* hazards, there is contamination by disinfectants, due to incorrect dosage (addition of more disinfectant than defined), longer retention time, or no rinsing (in cases where this should be done). This type of hazard is observed throughout all the operations of the stage, since any chicken or prey that accidentally falls on the floor must be disinfected and incorporated back into the process. Likewise, in the depressurization and marinating processes, the cutter and marinating equipment has spaces that are difficult to access, making cleaning and disinfection difficult and leaving disinfectant residues on the equipment. There are also chemical hazards during the marinating process, specifically in the dosage used to prepare the brine. This is because it contains phosphates, stabilizers, and emulsifiers and is mixed with water in exact measures.

Finally, brine as raw material and packaging for final product contaminated with detergents or disinfectants may exist; however, this risk is low in the production plant, since there is evidence of storage of packaging in rooms separate from storage of inputs or raw materials and storage of cleaning and disinfection elements, in compliance with GMP.


*Identification and Analysis of Safety Hazards and CCPs in a Chicken Meat Production Chain DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109721*


*Identification and Analysis of Safety Hazards and CCPs in a Chicken Meat Production Chain DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109721*


### **Table 4.**

*Hazards and CCPs in the depressing stage.*

In relation to *physical* hazards, feathers are present in the depressing stage, which are a verification criterion in the reception of the chicken, and if they exceed the limit established in the sampling, the lot is rejected. Another danger is that fractions or pieces of plastic packaging may be present during the packaging process due to quality defects in the packaging supplied by the supplier; however, this risk is low, since there has been no evidence of such contamination by production plant personnel, and no complaints have been filed by customers or consumers.

Although there is a risk of nuts or elements falling from the marinating equipment and mixing tanks, the risk is low, given that they would not be incorporated into the product since the brine is injected through needles. In addition, at the exit of the sealing machine, the dams are manually placed in the baskets, where they are inspected, and any defects are removed. During the visit, it was found that preventive and corrective maintenance of the equipment is carried out at the frequency indicated by the supplier, and no physical contamination has occurred for the aforementioned reason. Finally, for physical hazards, there are hairs, which can fall in any of the operations that have direct contact with food handlers, such as unloading, weighing, receiving, depressurizing, and packaging operations. However, this risk is low, since they wear a cap that completely covers their hair and ears, reducing this risk to a minimum, especially in the packing process.

In the depressing stage, there are no CCPs, since none of the operations were designed to reduce or eliminate a hazard in the first place, nor can contamination reach unacceptable levels in these operations, given that during slaughter (pre-cooling and disinfection), a disinfection process was carried out on the carcass.

### **Consumption:**

Consumption location data:


**Figure 5** of the consumption stage is shown below:

 The hazards identified in each of the operations of the consumption stage are detailed in **Table 5** , as well as the critical control points (CCP) based on the HACCP methodology:

*Biological* hazards during this stage are presented by deficient or inadequate disinfection practices (performed on utensils, tables, environment, i.e., everything that is in contact with the chicken meat) because the dosage of the disinfectant in the water (milliliters of disinfectant per liter of water) is not correctly carried out, or the retention times of the disinfectant are not complied with, and therefore, there is no guarantee that microorganisms will be effectively eliminated.

 **Figure 5.**  *Consumption stage. Source : Own elaboration based on the visit to the consumption site.* 

*Identification and Analysis of Safety Hazards and CCPs in a Chicken Meat Production Chain DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109721*


*Source: Own elaboration based on the visit to the consumption site.*

### **Table 5.**

*Hazards and CCPs at the consumption stage.*

Temperature and time variations in refrigeration and freezing operations are a risk factor for the growth of undesirable microorganisms; however, during the visit, it was observed that the temperature of the refrigerators was monitored by filling out forms, which shows risk control.

Finally, there is the cooking process, where there is a risk of not reaching a temperature of 74°C in the center of the product, and therefore, the elimination of pathogenic microorganisms would not be achieved.

The only CCP identified during the consumption stage is *cooking*, since, although it is not an operation specifically designed to eliminate or reduce a hazard, contamination can reach unacceptable levels, which are not eliminated later, given the immediate consumption of the food.

With respect to *chemical* hazards, there is contamination by disinfectants, due to incorrect dosage (addition of more disinfectant than defined), longer retention time, or no rinsing (in cases where this should be done). This type of hazard is observed throughout all stage operations, when disinfecting refrigerators, tables, utensils, pans, walls, floors, ceilings, cutting boards, knives, plates, spoons, forks, knives, and, in general, all elements that may come into contact with food.

In relation to *physical* hazards at the consumption stage, feathers are present, and if they are found, they are removed from the chicken prey; however, this type of finding is not frequent, according to the food handlers. Another physical hazard is hair, which can fall in any of the operations that have direct contact with food handlers, such as receiving, cooking, and serving operations.

### **3.2 Definition of corrective and risk control measures**

According to the CCPs identified above, as well as what was evidenced during the visits made to the different plants or sites that make up the chicken meat production chain, the corrective and control measures proposed for the CCPs in each of the stages of this poultry company are defined below, starting with the hatchery stage, as shown in **Table 6**.


**Table 7** shows the corrective and control measures in the fattening stage. For the slaughter stage, corrective and control measures are presented in **Table 8**.

### **Table 6.**

*Corrective and control measures at the hatchery stage.*


**Table 7.**

 *Corrective and control measures at the fattening stage.*

**Table 9** shows the corrective and control measures for the depressurization stage: As mentioned above, there were no CCPs in the depressurization stage; however, there are control measures in critical stages such as those involving temperature management:


*Source: Own elaboration based on the visit to the slaughter plant.*

### **Table 8.**

*Corrective and control measures at the slaughter stage.*


*Identification and Analysis of Safety Hazards and CCPs in a Chicken Meat Production Chain DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109721*

*Source: Own elaboration based on the visit to the depressing plant.*

### **Table 9.**

*Corrective and control measures at the depressing stage.*

Finally, in relation to the consumption stage, corrective and control measures are presented as detailed in **Table 10**.

### *Poultry Farming – New Perspectives and Applications*


### **Table 10.**

*Corrective and control measures at the consumption stage.*

1 These control and corrective measures were the result of adjustments made with the advice of an expert on the subject (Andrea Varón10F, Lead Instructor training FSPCA - Foreing Supplier Verification Programs - Train the trainer HACCP); however, to carry out their implementation, they must be validated in the different plants through methods that allow checking their effectiveness, especially those related to the use of disinfectants, where they must be verified through microbiological sampling. Likewise, the economic viability of their implementation must be evaluated by means of a cost–benefit analysis.
