Chocolate Peanut Butter Brownie Mix, packaged in a plastic bag which is placed in a…
Rabbit Creek Products Inc. recalled this product and the FDA reported the enforcement action on 12 October 2016 as Class I. The recall was initiated by the firm. Bread, muffin, and brownie mixes may have been manufactured with flour contaminated with E. coli O121
The record
Every field below is published by the FDA in the openFDA food enforcement database. Check the FDA notice before acting on any recall: this page is a reading of the public record, not a substitute for it.
Product
Chocolate Peanut Butter Brownie Mix, packaged in a plastic bag which is placed in a cardboard box, net wt. 12.2oz, UPC 010749011526
UPC
010749011526
Reason for recall
Bread, muffin, and brownie mixes may have been manufactured with flour contaminated with E. coli O121
Distributed nationwide to specialty shops and some products were sold online through the firm's website as well as Amazon.
Initiated
9 August 2016
Reported by FDA
12 October 2016
Terminated
10 January 2018
Firm notified by
Two or more of the following: Email, Fax, Letter, Press Release, Telephone, Visit
Product codes
Rabbit Creek Products brand: best by Feb 2017 and March 2017 The Farmers House brand: best by March 2017
Reading this record
Five things about this record are not in the record itself, and each one changes how it should be read.
Class I means the FDA judged a reasonable probability that the product would cause serious health consequences or death. The class is assigned by an agency health hazard evaluation under 21 CFR 7.41, not by the firm.
The firm started this recall itself. Most FDA food recalls are voluntary, and a recall is a food safety plan working rather than failing. The circumstances in which the agency asks for one instead are set out in 21 CFR 7.45.
This is one of 114 records covering the same recall event. The FDA opens one enforcement record per product code, so a recall of a product line appears here many times. Counting these records as 114 separate recalls, which almost every published figure does, overstates it by a factor of 114. Every product code in this event is listed together on the record that covers the whole recall, which is the page a search engine is pointed to for all 114 of them.
The recall ran for 17 months, from 9 August 2016 to termination on 10 January 2018. Termination means the agency judged that all reasonable effort had been made, under 21 CFR 7.55, and it says nothing about whether product remained in circulation.
The FDA published the enforcement report 2 months after the firm began the recall.
Recalls of milk or a dairy product run a median of 7 months, so this one was longer than usual for its category. Dairy recalls split between pathogen contamination in products that skipped or under-ran pasteurisation and undeclared milk in products that should never have contained it, which is the same allergen viewed from two directions.
Shiga toxin-producing E. coli recalls concentrate in foods eaten raw or lightly cooked, where no step in the process is hot enough or long enough to be a kill step.
A preventive controls plan covers E. coli contamination under the clauses below. This is where the control belongs, not a finding against any firm named on this page: a recall record states a reason, and most of these recalls were initiated by the firm itself.
21 CFR 117.135(c)(1)
Process controls: the controls that apply a treatment, such as a validated kill step, at the point where it reduces the hazard to a safe level.
21 CFR 117 subpart G
Supply-chain programme: the approval and verification a receiving facility runs on a supplier when the hazard is controlled before the ingredient arrives.
21 CFR 120
Juice HACCP: the hazard analysis and critical control point system required for juice processors, including a treatment achieving a 5-log pathogen reduction.
These are the closest records in the corpus: the same kind of food, recalled for a hazard this record also names. Unlike the firm’s own records below, they come from different companies, which is what makes them a pattern rather than a history.
21 CFR 117.135(c)(1) is the clause behind this recall, and it is one somebody has to produce evidence for at their next audit. Krolda maps supplier documents to the clause they satisfy in FSSC 22000, IFS Food and 21 CFR 117, and routes the corrective action when the evidence is missing.
Recall records come from the openFDA food enforcement API, published by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the public domain. Krolda adds the hazard classification and the clause mapping; neither is an FDA determination. Always check the FDA notice before acting on a recall.
