Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101

www.elsevier.com/locate/foodcont

HACCP certification of food services in Philippine

inter-island passenger vessels
Ma. Patricia V. Azanza *

Department of Food Science and Nutrition, College of Home Economics, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City 1101, Philippines

Received 24 February 2004; received in revised form 18 September 2004; accepted 18 September 2004

Abstract

This paper presents the efforts of the Bureau of Quarantine and International Health Surveillance (BQIHS), Department of
Health (DOH), Philippines to launch a Good Manufacturing Procedure (GMP)–Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP)
Certification Program for food services operating in Philippine inter-island water vessels. The BQIHS improved its food sanitation
audit system for inter-island ships by including in its traditional walk-through evaluation of GMP the review of documents for both
GMP and HACCP, and the verification of HACCP implementation. The BQIHS is now identified as a GMP–HACCP certification
provider to specific sectors of the local food service industry on a national level.

2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: HACCP; Food services; Passenger vessels

1. Introduction is therefore almost inevitable that a re-examination

In recognition of the need to update the capability of
the Department of Health (DOH), Philippines to moni-
tor the food service sector under the control of the
Bureau of Quarantine and International Health Surveil-
lance (BQIHS), a Comprehensive Food Safety Program
was launched mid-year of 2002 (Sabitsana, 2002).
Amongst the reasons to update the capability of the
BQIHS was the increasing number of reports over the
years regarding cases of gastroenteritis of crew and pas-
sengers of local inter-island passenger and cargo vessels
in ship logs. These data were left unnoticed for quite a
long time because an effective method of consolidation
and evaluation of these reports is yet to be established.
Perhaps the ineffectiveness of the old food safety audit
system of the BQIHS is also due to the fact that the
existing system has been left unmodified since 1958. It
*
Tel.: +63 2 928 6512/920 5301/6552; fax: +63 2 920 2091.
E-mail addresses: ma_patricia.azanza@up.edu.ph, mpv_azanza@
yahoo.com
and improvement of this system was needed.
The auditing of Hazard Analysis Critical Control
Point (HACCP) system compliance in tandem with
Good Manufacturing Procedure (GMP) in food service
institutions affiliated with both air and shipping lines
under the regulatory control of BQIHS is to be imple-
mented for the first time in the country. As part of this
overall new food safety program, this paper will discuss
the protocols adapted by BQIHS, DOH to develop and
initially launch the enhanced food safety audit system
for food service institutions in local inter-island passen-
ger water vessels.
2. Philippine BQIHS
The imposition that food industries become responsi-
ble for the development and implementation of their
respective HACCP programs is based on the premise
that the responsible government regulatory agencies
are able to efficiently monitor and assess its proper

0956-7135/$ - see front matter
2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2004.09.007
94 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101
implementation (Ababouch, 2000). As early as 1998, the
Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health
Organization already articulated that national govern-
ment agencies should be able to assess HACCP systems
in their food regulatory audit programs (Motarjemi,
2000). The Philippine BQIHS is undertaking a lead in
monitoring the implementation of HACCP-based food
safety programs in airports, seaports and its associated
vessels (NQO DOH, 1992).
Similarly, the Ministry of Health (MOH) of Malaysia
is responsible for HACCP assessment of food industry
operations on a national level (Merican, 2000). How-
ever, agencies in other countries aside from the health
department were reported to be also responsible for
HACCP assessment. The Ministry of Agriculture and
Fisheries in New Zealand (Lee & Hathaway, 2000),
and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency in Canada
(Gagnon, McEachern, & Bray, 2000) are examples of
other agencies responsible for HACCP regulatory
audits. Also in the US, HACCP regulation is delegated
to various legislative bodies like the United States
Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Admin-
istration and the National Marine Fisheries Service
(Kvenberg, Stolfa, Stringfellow, & Garrett, 2000).
The BQIHS has been in control of the food sanitation
evaluation of the food service institutions in inter-island
water vessels for 46 years to date. The inspection proto-
col utilized by BQIHS has been guided primarily by the
various sanitation parameters found in the International
Health Regulation of 1969, which was adopted by
World Health Assembly, WHO (IHR, 1983). The previ-
ous food sanitation inspection scheme of the BQIHS
only included an on-site evaluation of the food prepara-
tion, storage and service areas of GMP implementation
within the ship being evaluated. Intermittently, food and
water samples were obtained for chemical and micro-
biological analyses.
The cited regulatory function of BQIHS is based
upon the stipulations of the Revised Quarantine Rules
and Regulations of the Philippines (Administrative
Order No. 118-C, series of 1992) (NQO DOH, 1992),
and Chapter XV of the Code on Sanitation of the Phil-
ippines (PD 856) (DOH, 1998). The current enhanced
food safety program of the BQIHS is similar to what
is already being implemented in Australia (Souness,
2000) which moved towards shifting from just a walk-
through inspection to an auditing mode that requires
both visual inspections of GMP and HACCP systems
with documents reviews.
3. HACCP assessment
Commitment of the Philippine Government to ensure
HACCP implementation by food institutions in the
country is based on its membership to the World Trade
Organization (WTO). As a member and specifically as a
signatory to the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade
Uruguay Round Final Act, the country is to adhere to
the provisions under the Treaty on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures (SCRA,
1997). The country must harmonize its national food
safety control measures and activities with international
codes and standards, primarily those that are recom-
mended by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Annex
to CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 3 1997). The HACCP system
has been part of the fundamental recommendation of
Codex for food safety control as early as 1993.
4. Food safety program for inter-island passenger vessels
The improvements for the BQIHS food sanitation
assessment system are embodied in an enhanced food
safety audit tool, written guidelines and training proto-
cols for sanitation officers who are to use the enhanced
audit tool, and a general procedure for food service
institutions on how to secure the GMP–HACCP certifi-
cation from BQIHS. The conceptualization and the pre-
liminary steps for implementation of this improved food
safety audit protocol of BQIHS involved the participa-
tion of people from BQIHS, academe, affiliated govern-
ment regulatory agencies involved with control of air
and sea vessels and their ports, and shipping lines.
5. Enhanced food safety audit tool
A food safety audit is the verification of the develop-
ment, documentation and effective implementation of
food safety management systems like HACCP in a food
establishment (Souness, 2000; Suwanrangsi, 2000). Mor-
timore (2000) and Ababouch (2000) also identified docu-
ments review and on-site verification of implementation
as the two essential stages of HACCP system audit. Like-
wise, effective HACCP systems to be evaluated should be
based on sound GMP implementation as the prerequisite
program of HACCP (Ababouch, 2000).
The general user guideline is the narrative instruc-
tional material of the new BQIHS food safety audit sys-
tem that gives directives for the sanitary auditors of the
BQIHS on how to use the enhanced GMP–HACCP
audit tool for food service institutions in inter-island
passenger water vessels during inspections. This Guide-
line describes the food safety audit tool in terms of con-
tent, the physical structure and the different aspects to
be evaluated during audit. It also details the schedule
of audit, the sampling plan used during audit, and the
grading system that would be employed. The Guide-
line instructs that each sanitation audit should be
implemented for facilities, utilities, and equipment of
operational areas of the water vessels pertinent to
 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101 95

safeguarding public health and food safety. These
areas should include those used during food storage,
preparation, serving and handling and leftover
management.
The new food safety audit tool of the BQIHS consists
of an introduction to the audit protocol and details
referring to both GMP and HACCP sections of the tool
(Table 1). The new food safety audit program of the
BQIHS also considered that GMP implementation is
needed to streamline the development and operationali-
zation of the HACCP program in concerned food estab-
lishments so as to prevent the eventual institution of too
many control points in their HACCP plans (Souness,
2000). The introduction to audit protocol section of
the tool detailed the following: explanation of the man-
date of BQIHS, types of water vessels for audit, schedule
of audit, and the HACCP generic food flow that can
apply to the various food operations being carried out
in the different food service establishments in local inter-
island water vessels. The GMP and HACCP sections of
the food safety audit tool were correspondingly divided
into the documents review and verification of implemen-
tation sub-sections that were essentially focused on
various operational areas in ships where public health
and food safety concerns for passengers and crew
are pertinent. Documents review for GMP and HACCP
as well as verification of its implementation is in fact
a very novel strategy included in the food safety
audit scheme of the BQIHS. This evaluation of docu-
ments should attest that the plans, procedures and mon-
itoring of the two food safety systems are being
implemented.
Tables 2 and 3 show the documents review sub-sec-
tion and a portion of the verification of implementation
sub-section of the GMP section of the BQIHS food
safety audit tool as also explained in the general user
guideline material. The physical structures of the audit
tool consist of list of pertinent items to be audited, the
numerical rating column, deductions column and com-
ments column. The numerical rating column contains
the allotted points per item, while the deduction column
is allotted for corresponding minus points for any
infraction observed during food safety audits. Sanitary
auditors should use the comments column to qualify

Table 1
Sections of the enhanced GMP–HACCP audit tool of the BQIHS, DOH, Philippines for use to audit food safety in Philippine inter-island passenger
water vessels
Section Details
1. Introduction to audit protocol
BQIHS Mandate Philippine Quarantine Law; International Health Regulations, World Health Organization;
Sanitation Code of the Philippines
Vessels for audit Local and foreign passenger and cargo ships where food is prepared and served
Schedule of audit Monthly basis, on weekdays, 0800–1700 by BQIHS officers and designates
HACCP generic food flow Reference food flow reflective of basic food service operations in ships which are important during audit
2. GMP audit
Documents review GMP plans and procedures, monitoring and corrective action tools and records based on the following
criteria:
• grounds
• facilities and utilities
• equipment
• personnel health and hygiene practices
• food materials control
• storage and warehousing
• product trace and recall
Verification of implementation Implementation of GMP verified by observation and interview results
3. HACCP audit
Documents review HACCP plans, procedures, monitoring tool, corrective action, record and other documents based on the
following criteria:
• declaration of HACCP commitment
• documents of HACCP team membership
• identified critical control process
• hazard analysis
• CCPs/CL documents
• corrective action logs
• monitoring procedure documents
• documentation procedures
• verification procedure documents
Verification of implementation Implementation of HACCP verified by observation and interview results
96 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101

Table 2
Details of entries in the documents review sub-section of the GMP section of the enhanced BQIHS food safety audit tool
Documents review Na Db Comments
A. To be obtained from Master of Vessel or his designate
1. Valid sanitary permit for food services operating in ship 5
(concessionaires or ship owned) to operate for the year

• Shall be posted in a conspicuous part of the establishment

2. Valid health certificates from BQIHS or accredited laboratory(s) 5

• Shall be renewed every year

• Shall be updated

3. Deratting/deratting exemption certificate 10

4. Document for other GMP concerns 10

• CheckerÕs receipt/log for incoming food supplies

• Logs for food storage facilities especially for (time/temp records)
– Freezer
– refrigerator/ chiller
– dry storage facilities
• Food supplier accreditation record
• Cleaning and sanitation logs
• Inspection and Maintenance logs
• Logs of sick leaves and other immediate medical concerns of personnel
• Corrective action logs

Note: other documents

• Immunization certificate requirement (when required)

• When appropriate, clinical record of all cases treated during voyage

Total deductions
a
N—numerical rating.
b
D—deductions to rating.

Table 3
Sample entry in the verification of implementation sub-section of the GMP section of the enhanced BQIHS food safety audit tool

deductions made in the numerical ratings per item. No mains unscored for whatever reason, then a suitable
‘‘Check Item’’ can be scored until all relevant areas un- comment must be placed in the comment column, e.g.,
der that item have been checked. If any check item re- ‘‘unable to verify’’ (Table 4).
 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101 97

Table 4
Example of an item in the BQIHS audit tool with an entry in the comments column that explains deferment of rating
General items to be inspected Numerical ratings Deductions to ratings Comments
Common-use facilities
Toilet/Batha
• Clean, tidy and organized; 2 Unable to verify; womenÕs toilet padlocked
in good state of repair; with appropriate during audit. Follow-up audit(s) must be scheduled
provisions of personal hygiene supplies
a
Note: No ‘‘check item’’ can be scored until all relevant areas under that item have been checked. For instance, the item under toilet/bath cannot
be scored until all toilet and bathrooms have been inspected.

Similarly, Tables 5 and 6 show the documents review
and verification of implementation sub-sections of the
HACCP section of the BQIHS food safety audit tool
as outlined in the general user guideline. The HACCP
audit tool sub-sections have similar structures as that
of the GMP audit tool sub-sections. The BQIHS food
safety audit tool complies with the recommended com-
ponents of an audit tool as described by Mortimore
(2000) wherein the 7 HACCP principles were used as
heading with corresponding detailed points to be as-
sessed in each heading.
Table 7 shows the basis for percent deductions in
numerical rating per item in the enhanced BQIHS food
safety audit tool as presented in the general user guide-
line. Deductions for the item ratings are only considered
for 65 faults or infractions found that would not di-
rectly compromise the safety of the food. A 100% deduc-
tion is given for items where >5 faults are already
recorded but do not directly affect food safety, and/or
in cases when there is at least 1 infraction that has a
definitive effect on the safety of the food.
The general user guideline of the audit tool specifies
that the numerical ratings for the GMP and HACCP
sections should total 100 points each. Table 8 provides
ratings and their equivalent descriptions for the overall
scores per audit. To obtain a final rating expressed as
percent value, the total of the GMP and HACCP ratings
is divided by 2. A rating of 81% with an equivalent
description of fair is considered the least passing score
for an audit. Equally, the Department of Fisheries in
Thailand imposed a minimum passing rate of 80%
in HACCP audits on fish processors (Suwanrangsi,
2000).
6. GMP–HACCP certification
The enhanced food safety scheme of the BQIHS
would enable DOH, Philippines to issue GMP–HACCP
certification for food service institutions in inter-island
passenger water vessels in the country. The annual audit
certification to be issued by BQIHS is based on the mean
rating of the audits conducted monthly from the imme-
diate previous year. The issued certificate will bear the
seal and the endorsement of the director of the BQIHS.
The certificate is to be posted at the most conspicuous
area of the food service premises for the entire period
of certificate effectivity.
The first month of the year audit would be an an-
nounced audit and should include both document
review and validation of implementation. The 11
succeeding unannounced monthly audits should include

Table 5
Details of general entries in the documents review sub-section of the HACCP section of the enhanced BQIHS food safety audit tool
HACCP audit Nb Dc Comments
1. Document review. Evaluation of HACCP plans, procedures, monitoring
tool, corrective action, record and other documents existing for the following criteriaa
1.1. Written declaration of commitment to HACCP by management 4
1.2. Documents of HACCP team formation and membership function 4
1.3. Hazard analysis document 4
1.4. Written documents on identified critical control points 4
1.5. Critical limits documents 4
1.6. Monitoring procedure documents 4
1.7. Corrective action logs 4
1.8. Documentation procedure 4
1.9. Verification procedure documents 4
1.10. Validation procedure documents 4
a
Points for evaluation in each of the specific criterion are not shown in the table.
b
N—numerical rating.
c
D—deductions to rating.
98 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101

Table 6
Details of entries in the verification of implementation sub-section of the HACCP section of the enhanced BQIHS food safety audit tool
HACCP audit Na Db Comments
2. Verification of implementation. Evaluation of implementation of
HACCP programs carried out as planning for the following:
2.1. Declaration of commitment to HACCP by management 10
• employees and workers are aware of HACCP programs
of the company
2.2. Memberships and functions of HACCP team 10
• members aware of their functions
• multidisciplinary
2.3. HACCP process line identification 10
• products conforming to description and intended use
• process flow of product is implemented as described in the plan
2.4. Hazard analysis/critical control points/critical limits 10
10
• required critical limits at CCPs for hazards identified has been met,
being monitored in critical control points

2.5. Corrective action 10

• when applicable, corrective action implemented in food flow and
other HACCP related activities as designed in the corrective action logs
2.6. Verification procedure 10
• verification procedure to monitor critical limits of hazard control
at critical control points being done (either as observed or through
interview with responsible personnel)

Total deductions
a
N—numerical rating.
b
D—deductions to rating.

Table 7
Basis for percent deductions in numerical rating per item in the enhanced BQIHS food safety audit tool
Deductions (%) in I numerical rating per item Details
0 Outstanding, no fault found, 100% level of acceptability
25 Very satisfactory, only 1–2 faults found that would not compromise food safety
50 Satisfactory, just 3–4 faults found that would not compromise food safety
75 Marginal, 5 faults found, that would not compromise food safety
100 Failure, >5 faults found, that would not compromise food safety,
and or P1 fault found that would compromise food safety, basis for follow-up audit(s)

only the verification of implementation of the plans for 7. Implementation approach

GMP and HACCP. Likewise, New Zealand conducts 12
monthly compliance audits before a performance-based
rating is issued (Lee & Hathaway, 2000). The MOH of
Malaysia similarly issues HACCP certifications valid
for 1 year based on surveillance audits conducted from
the previous year (Merican, 2000). Table 9 further shows
items for consideration for the acquisition of GMP–
HACCP certification from BQIHS by food service
institutions in local inter-island passenger vessels. The
issuance of the BQIHS HACCP certification is based
on an appreciation that HACCP certification should
not give false assurance to all parties concerned but
rather should be supported by a continued verification
and monitoring of compliance process (Ababouch, 2000).
The BQIHS designed a multi-step approach for the
implementation of its new food safety audit system in
local inter-island passenger vessels. This approach was
adapted based on the appreciation that a slow and cal-
culated implementation scheme is more appropriate to
address any forthcoming resistance by those who would
be subject to the new scheme. Resistance by the ship
owners and food service concessionaires in ships to the
implementation of the new food safety audit system
was anticipated because the existing program to be re-
placed has been in effect since 1958 and therefore the
inertia of previous practice was presumed to be inevitable
(Gilling, Taylor, Kane, & Taylor, 2001). In brief, the
 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101 99

Table 8 industry, auditors and inspectors to achieve a level of

Ratings and equivalent descriptions used for GMP–HACCP food international equivalence of food safety standards
safety audit
(Williams et al., 2003). National level training of regula-
Ratings (%) Qualitative description tory auditors, as that being proposed under the new
96–100 Outstanding BQIHS food safety program, has been generally consid-
91–95 Very satisfactory ered as a popular mode to attain consistency in surveil-
86–90 Satisfactory
81–85 Fair
lance of industry required to implement food safety
680 Unsatisfactory programs like HACCP (Ababouch, 2000; Souness,
2000; Williams et al., 2003). In Australia, a strategy
developed to achieve national consistency in the applica-
multi-step approach used consisted of the following tion of food safety reforms is through the development
activities: of a training competency standard to ensure consistency
in the competency for auditors of food safety systems
1. Training of BQIHS auditors who are to become core (Souness, 2000). Similarly, the Royal Institute of Public
trainers and orientation of additional regional audi- Health and Hygiene of the United Kingdom administers
tors who would eventually be directly involved with standard training for industry-based HACCP team
the implementation of the new food safety audit members and government regulatory auditors (Morti-
system. more, 2000). Cuba sponsored a number of training pro-
2. Orientation of ship owners and food service conces- grams for their regulatory auditors as early as 1998
sionaires to the new audit system who would be sub- when their new HACCP concept was being launched
ject to the new scheme and acquisition of their for the first time on a national scale (Torres, 2000).
feedback. The initial training of 3 BQIHS auditors identified to
3. BQIHS assessment of feedback by ship owners and eventually become core trainers was conducted in 2003
food service concessionaires and development set of to first orient them to the new food safety audit scheme.
directions as reaction to the feedback obtained in This initial training of the prospective core auditors was
No. 3. done in the facilities of local flight catering firms, which
4. Implementation of the identified set of directions. were established to have the most efficient HACCP pro-
5. Development of a continuous evaluation protocol in grams in place in the country and which have already
the implementation of the new scheme. undergone and passed several international food safety
audits that evaluated efficient HACCP implementation.
As early as 1995 it was already recognized that there It is viewed by the BQIHS that the management of food
is a need for standardized HACCP training of the food safety in local inter-island passenger water vessels would

Table 9
Bureau of Quarantine and International Surveillance (BQIHS)-issued guidelines for the acquisition of GMP–HACCP certification for food services
in inter-island water vessels
Items
1. Schedule of GMP–HACCP audit
2. Authorized auditors of BQIHS
to conduct food safety audit
3. Access to records and facilities
for evaluation
4. Release of audit results
5. Settlement of disputes
6. Issuance of annual GMP–HACCP
certification
7. Imposition of penalties
8. Other services of BQIHS
Details
• Monthly GMP–HACCP audits, 1 announced involving documents review and verification of
implementation evaluation, 11 succeeding audits involving verification of implementation only
• 1–2 trained and authorized BQIHS auditors to conduct the monthly audit
• Food services in inter-island vessels shall make available all documents for review and give access
to inspection facilities, utilities and equipment to validate implementation of plans
• Release of audit results 3 weeks after the food safety audit, passing rate is P 81%
• Disputes should be resolved by an AD HOC committee of food safety experts headed
by the Director of BQIHS
• Annual certificates issued every January based on the weighted average obtained from
12 audits of the previous year
• Certificate bears the signature of the Director and seal of BQIHS and used as basis for
issuance of permit to operate with one year effectivity
• Itemized list of conditions subject to penalties based on the rules and regulations of the BQIHS
• Requests for other services of BQIHS outside regular audit will be charged with additional fees
100 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101
eventually parallel the level of implementation of the
food safety programs being implemented in the local
flight catering firms.
The exposure training of 3 BQIHS auditors intended
to be the core trainers was implemented for a period of
1 month in the local flight catering institutions in Metro
Manila, Philippines including Philippine Airlines In-
flight Catering Services, Miascor Catering and Macro
Asia—Eurest. Those who were trained to be core
BQIHS auditors were then asked to provide preliminary
orientation to other regional auditors of the BQIHS
regarding the new food safety system to be imple-
mented. This orientation was just intended to familiarize
the regional auditors to the new food safety scheme. It
was planned that the regional BQIHS food auditors
would further undergo a similar comprehensive training
obtained by core auditors only with local inter-island
shipping vessels as the training venue. Through this
training approach, national consistency in food safety
regulatory audit is hoped to be attained eventually.
For BQIHS to eventually involve the shipping lines
and their affiliated food service concessionaires it was
first necessary to obtain the cooperation of the manage-
ment of the shipping lines and food service concessio-
naires and also get their feedback regarding the new
scheme as part of the initial approach to the implemen-
tation of the new BQIHS food safety program. In 2 con-
sultative meetings sponsored by the BQIHS to meet with
the members of the Philippine Ship Owners Association
Incorporated and affiliated food service concessionaires,
the anticipated violent reluctance to implement the new
scheme presented was due to the following reasons:
• familiarity and comfort with the old inspection
system;
• afraid that the new audit system would be translated
to additional costs to meet new requirements;
• new program would be more stringent and therefore
would make stake players more liable to receive
penalties and/or reprimands from BQIHS;
• no knowledge about the new HACCP concept and
therefore perceived it as something negative;
• concern that the new system would not have any
beneficial effects to their operations anyway.
The implementation of HACCP-based audit systems
in New Zealand was similarly met by serious concerns
of industry stakeholders regarding its cost-effectiveness
and need for guarantees of due process from local regu-
latory agencies (Lee & Hathaway, 2000). Based on the
cited reasons for the strong reluctance of the ship owners
and food service concessionaires towards immediate
implementation of the new food safety program, the
BQIHS conducted a series of internal meetings with the
BQIHS auditors to assess results of feedback obtained
from ship owners and food concessionaires. It was con-
cluded that the negative reactions of the ship owners to-
wards the new system may be based on lack of in-depth
understanding of HACCP as food safety tool and how its
operationalization would help them systematize the pre-
sent safe handling of food in their respective ships.
Therefore, the BQIHS decided to first work with at least
two friendly shipping lines and their affiliated food serv-
ice concessionaires who are amendable to be subjected to
the new food safety audit system under the proposed new
food safety program. As part of this direction towards
implementing the new program, it was realized the par-
ticipating shipping lines should be provided first with free
training regarding HACCP plan preparation, using some
of their representative food flows as examples. Tutorial
steps to prepare GMP–HACCP plans were provided
by BQIHS to help the participating shipping lines and
food service concessionaires.
The preliminary implementation of the HACCP-
based food safety program of the BQIHS in the partic-
ipating shipping lines was scheduled from the last
quarter of 2003 to the first quarter of 2004. It was
unfortunate though that the larger of the two cooperat-
ing shipping lines that agreed to be used as models for
the new food safety scheme had to temporarily defer
its participation to the project because of an untimely se-
vere sea accident that occurred involving one of their
ships early 2004 (Malicse, 2004). For this reason it was
decided that the implementation of the new food safety
audit of the Philippine BQIHS for the two models had
to be postponed to the last quarter of 2004 based on
the articulated request of both of the participating ship-
ping lines.
8. Summary and recommendations
The efforts of the Philippine BQIHS to implement a
new food safety audit scheme was initially based on
the fundamental premise that the audit system of this
regulatory body should be based also on HACCP and
not solely on GMP. It was also to address the increasing
number of gastrointestinal reports in ship logs of local
inter-island passenger vessels. To implement a new food
safety scheme, one major hurdle that the BQIHS must
first address was the very strong reluctance of the ship-
ping lines and affiliated food service concessionaires to
a new food safety audit system. Until recently, the food
safety evaluation in ships was conducted only by GMP
audit through walk-through inspection. It was therefore
very difficult to gain the cooperation of shipping lines
and food service concessionaires towards the implemen-
tation of the new food safety audit scheme. It was dis-
covered that to be able to work with the various local
shipping lines, there is still the need to tutor them with
the very fundamental concepts of HACCP implementa-
tion for use in their respective vessels. Fortunately, there
 Ma.P. V. Azanza / Food Control 17 (2006) 93–101
were a number of shipping lines willing to work with
BQIHS in achieving its goal. The BQIHS decided to
use a new strategy by slowly utilizing the cooperating
shipping lines to serve as models where the food safety
audit system could be implemented.
In as much as the enhanced HACCP-based food
safety scheme is still being incorporated into the operat-
ing systems of the shipping lines, future work of the
Philippine BQIHS would include
1. eventually involving all shipping lines in the imple-
mentation of a HACCP-based food safety program,
2. finally using the enhanced GMP–HACCP audit tool
for the shipping lines,
3. ensuring that competent auditors be involved in the
actual food safety audit.
The successful implementation of a HACCP-based
food safety audit scheme may be ensured when the food
safety auditors conducting the audit are trained accord-
ing to internationally recognized standards. It may be
accomplished through trainings that could be provided
though the help of appropriate international organiza-
tions (Orriss & Whitehead, 2000).
When the new food safety audit scheme of the Philip-
pine BQIHS has been in effect and fully implemented for
at least 2–3 years, the scheme should be validated to
determine its efficacy in ensuring safe foods in inter-
island passenger water vessels in the country. A period
of 3 years was cited by Mortimore (2000) to be sufficient
to determine if the operating food safety system is satis-
factory. It is expected that by that time, the full benefits
of the new program both to ship owners and to passen-
gers alike would be finally realized.
Acknowledgments
This paper was made possible through the collabora-
tive effort of the Project Proponent and the BQIHS,
DOH, Philippines headed by Dr. Edgardo Sabitsana
and Dr. Minda Villa. The author would also like to
acknowledge the participation of the shipping lines
WG&A and MBRS, through the assistance of Dr. Ray-
mond Joniga and Mr. Rey Clavecilla, respectively. The
author likewise acknowledges the research assistants of
the project including Edward Dennis Centeno, Charity
Jaggielyn dela Paz, Mylene Mera, Melba Ortega, Abig-
ail Rustia and Sharon Ventura.
101
References
Ababouch, L. (2000). The role of government agencies in assessing
HACCP. Food Control, 11(2), 137–142.
Codex Alimentarius Commission (1997). Hazard Analysis and Critical
Control Point (HACCP) system and guideline for its application.
Annex to CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 3.
Department of Health (DOH). (1998). Implementing rules and
regulations of Chapter XV. In ‘‘Port, Airport, Vessel and Aircraft
Sanitation’’ of the Code on Sanitation of the Philippines (Presiden-
tial Decree 856). Manila, Philippines: Environmental Health
Service, Department of Health.
Gagnon, B., McEachern, V., & Bray, S. (2000). The role of the Canadian
government in assessing HACCP. Food Control, 11(5), 359–364.
Gilling, S. J., Taylor, E. A., Kane, K., & Taylor, J. Z. (2001).
Successful hazard analysis critical control point implementation in
the United Kingdom: Understanding the barriers through the use
of a behavioral adherence model. Journal of Food Protection, 64(5),
710–715.
International Health Regulations (IHR). (1983). 3rd annotated ed.
Geneva: World Health Organization.
Kvenberg, J., Stolfa, P., Stringfellow, D., & Garrett, E. S. (2000).
HACCP development and regulatory assessment in the United
States of America. Food Control, 11(5), 387–401.
Lee, J. A., & Hathaway, S. C. (2000). New Zealand approaches to
HACCP systems. Food Control, 11(5), 373–376.
Malicse, Y. (2004). 112 Ferry victims still missing. Hope dims for
passengers as PCG presses probe on Aboitiz ship fire. Manila
Bulletin, 374(29), 1.
Merican, Z. (2000). The role of government agencies in assessing
HACCP—the Malaysian procedure. Food Control, 11(5), 371–372.
Mortimore, S. (2000). An example of some procedures used to assess
HACCP systems within the food manufacturing industry. Food
Control, 11(5), 403–413.
Motarjemi, Y. (2000). Regulatory assessment of HACCP: A FAO/
WHO consultation on the role of government agencies in assessing
HACCP. Food Control, 11(5), 341–344.
National Quarantine Office, Department of Health (NQO, DOH).
(1992). Revised quarantine rules and regulations (Administrative
Order No. 118-C, series of 1992). Manila, Philippines: Department
of Health.
Orriss, G. D., & Whitehead, A. J. (2000). Hazard analysis and critical
control point (HACCP) as a part of an overall quality assurance
system in international food trade. Food Control, 11(5), 345–351.
Sabitsana, E. C. (2002). Memorandum of Agreement. Development of
a Food Safety Program. Manila, Philippines: Bureau of Quarantine
and International Health Surveillance (BQIHS), Department of
Health.
Souness, R. (2000). HACCP in Australian food control. Food Control,
11(5), 353–357.
Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA). (1997). Tañada vs Angara
(Vol. 272, pp. 18, 40–41). Quezon City, Philippines: LPB, Inc.
Suwanrangsi, S. (2000). HACCP implementation in the Thai fisheries
industry. Food Control, 11(5), 377–382.
Torres, D. H. (2000). Role of government in HACCP audit: A Cuban
perspective. Food Control, 11(5), 365–369.
Williams, A. P., Smith, R. A., Gaze, R., Mortimore, S. E., Motarjemi,
Y., & Wallace, C. A. (2003). An international future for standards
of HACCP training. Food Control, 14(2), 111–121.