Chapter 4 - Inspection Criteria for a Sugar Bush Establishment
4.13 Labeling and coding

This page is part of the Guidance Document Repository (GDR).

Looking for related documents?
Search for related documents in the Guidance Document Repository

4.13.1 Labels and labeling

Principal

A verification system makes it possible to ensure that the labeling is appropriate and corresponds to the product.

Assessment Criteria

Label verification system

  • labels arranged tidily in storage
  • disposal of outdated labels
  • before labeling, visual examination of the top and bottom of the pile of labels to avoid errors
  • labels affixed correspond to the correct product
  • good separation of the different labels at the labeling station
  • any ingredient substitution or change of formulation causes a change in the corresponding label (products not subject to the MPR)

Note: the verification of labels and the advertisements for compliance with Maple Products Regulations and other regulations is part of the product inspection tasks.

Rating I - Examples

  • Product containing undeclared allergens due to poor label management (products not subject to the MPR).

Rating II - Examples

  • Product containing undeclared ingredients likely to cause a reaction (ex. lactose, MSG) due to poor label management or the use of obsolete labels (products not subject to the MPR).

Rating III - Examples

  • Label displaying a grade that does not match the packaged product due to a label mix-up.

References

4.13.2 Production Code

Principal

  • Each maple product container is identified with a production code on the label or on the container.

Assessment Criteria

Production code

  • present on the label or on the container
  • legible
  • identifies the batch, according to the established meaning

Note: When a non-coded product is recalled, the entire production may be recalled.

Coding by embossing metal containers (when used)

  • does not compromise the integrity of the container
  • use of letters and coding blocks that are in good condition

Visual examination of the embossed coding

  • at regular intervals OR
  • after each setting OR
  • after modifications made to the coder, for detecting
    • damage to the enamel
    • cracks in the metal
    • perforations

Rating I - Examples

  • N/A

Rating II - Examples

  • N/A

Rating III - Examples

  • Missing or illegible codes
  • Coding by embossing: metal perforation detected

References

  • Food Recall/Emergency Response
Date modified: