Hazard Hunter Worksheet
Culinary Arts & Food Safety • HACCP Protocol
Hazard Hunter Worksheet
MODULE 04: CCP AUDIT
Student Name
Date
Class / Period
Station No. / Score
HACCP Decision Check: What Qualifies as a Critical Control Point (CCP)?
Standard USDA / FDA Metric
1. Significant Hazard: Does this step present an unacceptable biological, chemical, or physical safety risk?
2. Essential Control: Is control applied here strictly necessary to prevent, eliminate, or reduce hazard to safe levels?
3. Subsequent Steps: Will a later step eliminate this hazard? If YES, this is an SOP/Prerequisite, not a CCP!
Operation Case: The Daily Griddle • Crispy Chicken Deluxe
Your team is conducting a safety review of the signature deep-fried chicken sandwich line. Trace the operational flow below from dock receipt to service. Determine whether each step is a Critical Control Point (CCP) or governed by general Standard Operating Procedures (SOP / PRP), and provide your technical justification.
1 Process Flow Hazard Analysis Matrix
Check ONE designation per stage & explain rationale
Step
Process Operation & Hazard
Classification
Technical Justification & Control Measure
01
Receiving Raw Poultry Biological: Salmonella, Campylobacter
CCP SOP / PRP
02
Walk-in Cooler Storage Biological: Pathogen multiplication
CCP SOP / PRP
03
Breading & Station Prep Cross-contamination; allergen mixing
CCP SOP / PRP
04
Deep Frying (Cooking) Survival of vegetative pathogens
CCP SOP / PRP
05
Hot Holding Cabinet Spore germination: C. perfringens
CCP SOP / PRP
06
Sandwich Assembly & Pack Physical hair/debris; Norovirus transfer
CCP SOP / PRP
Analysis Synthesis: Why isn't raw prep trimming (Step 03) classified as a CCP even though raw chicken harbors Salmonella?
Part 2: CCP Parameters & Emergency Response
Student Name: _______________________
2 HACCP Control Protocols for Identified CCPs
Define exact scientific parameters and operational controls
CCP 1: Cooking (Step 04) Thermal Kill
Critical Limit (Exact Temp & Time):
Monitoring Procedure (Tool, Method, Who):
Corrective Action if Below Critical Limit:
CCP 2: Hot Holding (Step 05) Bacterial Stasis
Critical Limit (Minimum Safe Temp):
Monitoring Procedure (Tool, Frequency, Log):
Corrective Action if Temp Drops Below Limit:
3 Case Study: Incident at the 12:45 PM Peak Rush
Critical Deviation Audit
The Incident: During a random quality audit at 12:45 PM, Sous Chef Elena calibrates her digital thermocouple probe and tests four cooked crispy chicken breasts resting in the hot-holding cabinet. The digital display reads 121°F, 122°F, 119°F, and 123°F. According to the batch production ticket, this tray was placed inside the warming unit exactly 40 minutes ago after initial frying. The kitchen line cook suggests: "Just pop them back into the deep fryer for 45 seconds to flash them hot—nobody will notice, and the lunch rush is backed up!"
Q1. Hazard Analysis: Why is holding poultry between 119°F and 123°F an extreme microbiological hazard? Identify the temperature zone and primary pathogen threat.
Q2. Corrective Action Evaluation: Should Chef Elena accept the cook's suggestion to "flash fry" the patties? Based on FDA Food Code reheating and holding rules, explain the exact protocol she must mandate.
Q3. Documentation & Verification: Under HACCP Principle 6 & 7, what three entries must be formally recorded in the station corrective action log before service can resume?
Evaluation Rubric: Part 1 (18 pts) • Part 2 (12 pts) • Part 3 (15 pts) • Total: 45 pts
Instructor Sign-off: ___________________________
