Indiana Dept. of Health Guidances Regarding Custom Cider Manufacture

Custom Pressing

Some people have apple trees on their property and wish to have apple cider made from these apples. Performing this service has its own risks that must be weighed by the apple cider processor. The liability issues concerning custom pressing cider may far outweigh the benefits to the operator and customer. It is strongly recommended that an apple press operator not process any of their own products on the same day that they offer custom pressing for the following reasons:

  1. Questionable quality of the apples that the customer brings in for processing. This could include the use of “drop”, decayed, and wormy apples, or apples that are stored or treated improperly with pesticides or fungicides.
  2. Potential for contamination carrying over to the next customer. A complete clean up between customers is not always feasible due to the low volume of product each customer has and the time involved.
  3. Customers using their own containers for pressed cider. The quality and sanitary condition of these containers is not known. The press operator should require customers to use new jugs for cider.

If custom pressing is done, it is recommended that a waiver or agreement be signed by the customer each time that includes the following information:

  1. A statement that the customer has followed all appropriate sanitary handling techniques as outlined, i.e., not using drops, properly storing and culling the apples.
  2. The product is intended only for their personal use, and not for sale. (The customer is prohibited from selling the cider)
  3. Information that the product has not been pasteurized or treated.

Carpe Diem Farmming LLC HACCP Plan for Safe Cider & Other Food Production

DATE:  March 15, 2020
RE:  Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) Plan

The First Order hazard to food produced on this farm is environmental contamination by microrganisms, macroorganisms, agricultural chemicals, and fomites (e.g, dirt) that are indigenous and omnipresent in a farm environment.

The Critical Control Point for addressing this hazard is the physical barrier between the farm environment and the enclosed space in which raw foods produced on the farm are disinfected, processed, and stored.

The Standard by which this physical barrier will be measured is adherence to all State and Federal regulations, including but not limited to adherence to any and all Standard Operating Procedures established by Carpe Diem Farming LLC that are applicable to a specific product (e. g., maple syrup, honey, apple cider) being produced. On occasion these Standard Operating Procedures will apply to specific agricultural products (e. g., apples) produced elsewhere and imported to the farm for processing and subsequent distribution.

The Second Order hazard to food produced on this farm is failure to adhere to Standard Operating Procedures during the production of foods within the physical barriers of the production facility.

The Critical Control Points for addressing this hazard are 1) assuring that these Standard Operating Procedures conform to all applicable State and Federal regulations and 2) assuring that these Standard Operating Procedures have been followed.

The Standard by which adherence to these procedures will be measured is real-time documentation that these standards have in fact been adhered to. Source documents for may be either a check list or notations in a notebook maintained during a processing of a crop. Since processing of a crop (e. g., maple syrup) may take several days between harvesting, processing, packaging, “real time” may extend to 48 hours from before the processing has begun to after the processing has been completed and a report form has been filed.

The Third Order hazard to food produced on thus farm is unforeseen circumstances.

The Critical Control Point for addressing this hazard is situational awareness.

The Standard by which situational awareness will be the interval of time between when, in retrospect, the hazard was first present and the time at which the hazard was first a) recognized and b) addressed. The interval between presence and recognition can only be used as a guide to subsequent awareness. The interval between recognition and response, however, can be used, albeit qualitatively more so than quantitatively, as a measure of institutional capacity.