FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

THE SANITARY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF FOOD

PRODUCTION FACILITIES
Troller, John A.
John A. Troller Consulting Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

Keywords: Thermal processing, microorganisms, ISO 9000, HACCP, GMP, sanitation,

clean design, bio-films, sanitation programs, food-borne diseases

Contents

1. Introduction
2. Programs
2.1 ISO 9000
2.2 HACCP

S
TE S
2.3 Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs)

R
AP LS
3. The Product
4. Site Selection and Plant Design
5. Plant Layouts
C EO
5.1 Lighting
5.2 Process Equipment: Placement and Installation
5.3 Walls
5.4 Floors
5.5 Ceilings and Roofs
E –

5.6 Doors and Windows

H

5.7 Cafeterias
PL O

5.8 Restrooms, Locker Rooms, and Shower Facilities

6. Equipment
M SC

7. The “Enemy”: Bio-Films

8. Placement of Equipment
9. Valves
SA NE

10. Pumps and Piping

11. Thermal Processing Equipment
12. Conveying Systems
U

12.1 Screw Conveyors

12.2 Belt Conveyors
12.3 Air and Water Conveying
13. Containment Vessels
14. A Perspective
Glossary
Bibliography
Biographical Sketch

Summary

The application of engineering concepts to the protection of the worlds food supply has
long been a goal of the food industry. Basic sciences, such as chemistry, physics,
microbiology, and molecular biology have provided the necessary underpinnings for

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

food safety and nutrition programs throughout much of the world. Once haphazardly
applied and ineffectively organized and utilized, many of the factors that reduce risks in
processed food have now been identified and enhanced. This development has been
accomplished to the point that contemporary commercial food processes are some of the
most effective and efficient in the industry. This is reflected in epidemiological data
showing significant improvements in the incidence of many food-borne diseases
afflicting consumers of commercially processed food products. Important improvements
in attitudes and management of food protection, as well as quality programs such as
HACCP and ISO, have similarly augmented and improved strategies for controlling
risks. Pre-emptive approaches, based on the identification of critical process control
points and their integration into overall hazard control schemes, have been particularly
well-received and effective. While food-borne disease will probably continue to occur
in the future, albeit less frequently, modern scientific and engineering approaches assure
that severity and frequency will be significantly reduced.

S
TE S
1. Introduction

R
AP LS
In the dim, distant past of human history, early humans were essentially nomadic,
largely carnivorous creatures forced to live in close proximity to large concentrations of
C EO
animals from which they obtained much of their sustenance, clothing, tools and even
shelter. Most of these animals conveniently existed in large concentrations: herds of
animals, large flocks of birds and huge schools of fish and crustaceans. Naturally, this
concentration of prey required that contact be maintained between the hunted and the
hunter; hence, it was necessary to continuously follow migrating animal food sources.
E –

Harvesting such food also probably involved significant danger to the hunter/gatherer
H

both from the intended “victim” and from other predators with which these early bipeds
PL O

competed for food. Other sources of danger included climatic disturbances, which made
food gathering a difficult and often dangerous task.
M SC

Perhaps the greatest source of risk, however, was the almost continuous preoccupation
with the vital, but energy inefficient, function of food gathering. The task of
SA NE

manufacturing and equipping easily transportable homes, designed to facilitate

following the seasonal migration of prey, for example, must have been enormous.
Portable dwellings were required, which poorly protected their inhabitants, with the
U

result that diseases and other contingencies of living in inadequate surroundings had to
be contended with. The need to maintain fresh supplies of energy-yielding fresh meat
must have been all-encompassing and exhausting, especially during periods of
movement which might have lasted for months. Unlike their competitors, these early
humans gradually began to improve upon their existence, and one of the earliest
advances consisted of the preservation and storage of food to provide sustenance during
times of food scarcity. Certainly, the examples of food storage by animals, such as
squirrels, bees and even some quadruped carnivores, must have been observed and
emulated. Modern anthropologists are aware that honey and tree nuts were consumed
regularly, and one is led to the conclusion that the preservation of meat by drying and/or
smoking was also practiced. Someone must have noticed that certain plants and their
extracts made food taste good and, more importantly, masked the flavor of spoiled
meats. Eventually, foods to which these materials were added did not deteriorate as
rapidly, thus expanding the ways that food could be prepared and preserved. Heating

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

foods was also found to produce a product that was less subject to spoilage and, like the
preceding techniques, gave its practitioners a competitive survival advantage.

Once preservation techniques were developed and adopted, the need to follow migrating
food sources was, to an extent, obviated. Eventually, a mode of existence that once
demanded almost constant and exhausting movement was supplanted by a more
permanent way of life. The development of an agrarian culture followed the discovery
that food could be created by growing specific plants, which frequently could be
preserved by the same techniques that were used so successfully to preserve animal
flesh. It was also learned that animals that were formerly hunted could now be
“cultivated.”

This empowerment was not without risks, however. Those who attempted to preserve
foods eventually became aware of the fact that for some foods, consumption resulted in
illness, sometimes with fatal consequences. Ancient Egyptian and Coptic cultures were

S
TE S
aware of these problems and even studied the “forces” that controlled them. The walls

R
AP LS
of ancient granaries throughout Egypt were often embellished with gods of humidity
and temperature, who received such recognition in the fervent hope that the food the
granaries contained be maintained in an edible and safe condition.
C EO
The first inkling that foods could cause illness when consumed may be seen in some of
the early proscriptions, usually religious in nature, concerning the consumption of
specific foods at certain times of the year. Many of these have been retained in modern
times, even though the reasons for their existence have long been obviated by
E –

improvements in harvesting, processing and storage.

H
PL O

Relatively more recently, the processing of foods has moved from individual homes
where the homemaker was responsible for food processing and preservation as well as
M SC

its safety. Where foods were implicated in disease, the number of persons affected was
often limited to immediate family members. Occasionally, however, outbreaks occurred
in large gatherings (for example church picnics) where local health authorities became
SA NE

aware of a problem when overworked hospital staffs complained of sudden onslaughts

of patients possessing similar symptoms. These often resulted in local and state
proscriptions of their own, along with advice on safe food processing to the people
U

responsible for preparing the food for the family.

At this time (the early 20th century) the first fledgling governmental agencies dedicated
to the production of safe foods began to be formed. Concurrently, the site of food
preparation and processing began to shift dramatically to large-scale production in huge
“factories” owned by enormous companies. It soon became apparent that the mass
production of food, by its very nature, put huge numbers of consumers at risk when
something went wrong. Laws and regulations relating to the production of safe food
were eventually promulgated throughout much of the world, and the agencies created
became responsible for safeguarding our food supplies. The system is not perfect, as
witnessed by the continuing reporting nearly every year of outbreaks involving
thousands of consumers. With this comes the realization that each new technology
relating to the mass production of a food seems to bring with it a new set of problems
relating to its safety. The concept of “emerging pathogens” is now widely accepted and

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

carries with it the implication that specific pathogenic bacteria have existed all along.
The food preparation (not the offending organism) has changed to the extent that an
opportunity for contamination and growth, which allows the pathogen to “emerge,” may
have been created. While advances in food technology that create more nutritious, more
convenient foods are welcomed, it is seldom that a revolutionary food or process is
designed with consideration of food safety issues in mind. In fact, the creation and
control of food processes to produce safe and wholesome food, of course, is the goal of
modern food sanitation, and must be preemptively built into the product and be a part of
every aspect of the process from its inception, rather than an afterthought.

The major thrust of this article is to briefly describe strategies, schemes, engineering
designs, and procedures that can recognize and prevent conditions and situations that
contribute to health risk in food production situations. It should also be stated that in
addition to commercially produced food products, other sources of prepared food could
produce foods that cause significant illness. In fact, outbreaks from the consumption of

S
TE S
home-prepared food and food prepared by food service organizations far outnumber

R
AP LS
those occurring from the consumption of commercially-prepared food products. Such
statistics are subject to significant differences depending on a number of factors, such as
the country involved, cultural and sociological differences and, quite simply, reporting
C EO
reliability. For example, a homemaker who inadequately bakes a meat pie and fails to
refrigerate the product may promptly produce a very small, family-sized outbreak.
Those made ill may have severe and memorable symptoms, but medical help is seldom
sought and, in any event, the outbreak may not be considered of epidemiological
significance. Thus, it is unreported. On the other hand, illness caused by commercially-
E –

prepared foods potentially affects many people, and often attracts a great deal of public
H

attention. A list of some factors that complicate the surveillance of food-borne illness is
PL O

shown in Table 1.
M SC

1. Under-reporting
2. Difficulty in determining role of causative organism in disease process
3. Inability to determine etiological agent
SA NE

4. Failure or inability to relate illness to a specific place, event, or food consumed

Table 1: Factors influencing the surveillance of food-borne disease in the U.S.

U

2. Programs

2.1 ISO 9000

The various sanitation programs available to food sanitarians are generally not
exclusive, and effectively interrelate within the overall sanitation program. ISO 9000 is
a series of standards (Table 2) established by the International Organization for
Standardization, a worldwide federation of national standards bodies that operate
through a series of technical committees. Their activities consist primarily of a very
broad program designed to establish the existence of a quality control plan. The ISO
9002 standard is generally established in conjunction with, and can be applied to, a wide
variety of materials, including processed materials such as food.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

ISO 9000 Quality management and quality assurance standards. Guidelines for
selection and use.
ISO 9001 Quality systems. Model for quality assurance in design/development,
production, installation, and servicing.
ISO 9002 Quality systems. Model for quality assurance in production and
installation.
ISO 9003 Quality systems. Model for quality assurance in final inspection and test.
ISO 9004 Quality management and quality system elements- guidelines.

Table 2: The ISO 9000 series of quality standards

2.2 HACCP

Another type of quality system, the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP)
program, is now widely accepted throughout the world. In fact, some countries require

S
TE S
its application by law to certain types of processes, for example processors of meat. The

R
AP LS
basis of HACCP lies in a mode of failure system originally developed by the U.S.
Army’s Natick Laboratories. In this type of scheme, a food process is treated as an
interlocking total system. Each part is then broken down and analyzed for its
C EO
contribution to the overall level of risk associated with consumption of the product.
Implicit in this type of approach is the recognition that “produce and analyze” programs
traditionally used in the food industry are unreliable. These programs depend on
methods that poorly predict (sometimes days after actual production) the
microbiological risk inherent in the product and/or process. In HACCP programs, each
E –
H
portion of the production sequence, from raw materials production to consumption, is
analyzed for its influence on the product's safety. In this way, each production step is
PL O

isolated and evaluated for its ability to achieve control within the overall process. Such
microbial control factors as temperature, pH, water activity (see Colligative Properties)
M SC

and oxidation-reduction potential can easily be measured and applied to existing

knowledge about their effect on microorganisms. Thus, physical and chemical limits (as
opposed to biological limits, i.e., microbiological count levels), that can be continuously
SA NE

and accurately monitored, are relied upon to ensure the process is under microbiological
control.
U

2.2.1 Establishment and Facilitation of HACCP Programs

The first step in the establishment of an HACCP program is to obtain complete

management commitment to this endeavor. This usually ensures that financial resources
will be available, and that there is a commitment to the implementation of the program.
Additional steps are listed in Table 3, which among other things emphasizes the
importance of detailed flow diagrams. Also important are the operational principles
(Table 4) that govern the actual implementation of the program on a day-to-day basis.

1. Identify members of the HACCP team.

2. Consider the nature of the food to be processed.
3. Determine the intended use of the food and who will consume it.
4. Develop the flow diagram.
5. Verify the flow diagram.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

6. Analyze hazards and list preventive measures.

7. Establish a “paper trail” of actions and verifications of actions

Table 3: Steps in the development of HACCP programs

1. Conduct a hazard analysis of the entire process.

2. Identify critical control points.
3. Establish critical control points.
4. Establish monitoring requirements.
5. Establish corrective actions.
6. Document the HACCP system.
7. Establish procedures for verification.

Table 4: HACCP Principles

S
TE S
The existence of a well-conceived HACCP program is, without a doubt, a rational
approach to superior process control systems. Whether adoption of these programs has

R
AP LS
achieved a significant (or even detectable) diminution in the incidence of food-borne
disease is debatable, and probably will never be known with certainty. Nevertheless, the
increasing endorsement of, and requirement for, such programs by regulatory agencies
C EO
throughout the world has now become a fact of life. Like all strategic plans of this type,
intelligent implementation of the plan on a day-to-day basis is necessary for optimum
effectiveness. The scope of this subject is extensive and well beyond the limitations of
this article; however, excellent resources exist in the literature that provide practical and
E –

informative details. Several of these are noted in the Bibliography at the end of this
H

article.
PL O

2.3 Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs)

M SC

A third sanitation-related program that is widely employed throughout the U.S. food
industry is published in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations and is generally known as
Good Manufacturing Practices. These regulations are somewhat more detailed and
SA NE

specific than either the more general ISO or HACCP programs. In fact, GMPs are not
programs at all, but represent minimal sanitary requirements that must be met by a food
plant operating in the U.S. Enforcement is the responsibility of the various FDA
U

districts, which have the prerogative of removing non-complying products from

interstate (U.S.) commerce.

3. The Product

Specific products may involve specific hazards depending on their nature and type. For
example, a plant and/or process for the production of yogurt will be much different from
one producing a dry breakfast cereal. For this reason, it is mandatory that those involved
in process and plant design have a thorough understanding of the product's chemical and
physical properties. A useful arrangement may be the inclusion of food engineers,
development personnel and food sanitarians on the committee that oversees the design
of such production facilities. In this way, alterations can be made during the design
phase rather than attempting to make costly and difficult changes after the plant is
constructed and the process equipment installed.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

4. Site Selection and Plant Design

Many of the site requirements for a food plant are similar to those for any
manufacturing facility. For example, good drainage is important to prevent periods of
flooding that lead to contamination. Locations near wildlife refuges, waste disposal
sites, and bodies of water, or on flood plains, should be avoided. Sites with sufficient
area to accommodate future plant expansion should be chosen. Overcrowding of
processing facilities greatly increases risk, primarily because processing equipment
requires regular maintenance and cleaning, neither of which can be accomplished
efficiently in a crowded interior area. Another important requirement is that sites near
outdoor equipment storage areas, waste dumps, and other undesirable locations be
avoided because they often harbor pests. Landscaping in the vicinity of the building
should be minimal because, like storage areas mentioned above, plant materials, earth
berms, decorative ponds, and other landscaping features attract pests. Most food
sanitarians recommend that a grass-free strip be provided, 30 to 36 inches wide,

S
TE S
immediately adjacent to the exterior walls. This strip is covered with gravel and

R
AP LS
provides a barrier to rodents and convenient access for inspection of traps and bait
stations placed against the exterior wall. A perimeter fence, usually a chain-link fence,
should be provided to prevent the incursion of children, pets and incidental waste such
C EO
as windblown paper and plastic wrappers. Fences should be regularly cleaned and
maintained.

5. Plant Layouts
E –

There are two primary factors to be aware of in designing the layout of food plants. The
H

first is to ensure that adequate space is enclosed to accommodate the process itself,
PL O

allowing generous access to process areas to accommodate cleaning, as well as space

for future expansion. A “clear” zone of a minimum of 36 inches surrounding each piece
M SC

of process machinery should be achieved. The second factor is to establish a product

flow through the process area that is virtually linear and does not permit contamination
by entering raw materials or cross-over of the product stream.
SA NE

A useful approach is to reserve manufacturing areas for that purpose only. Analytical
tasks (including flavoring test product) should be performed only in laboratories
U

separated from process areas. Similarly, heating and air conditioning, administrative
areas, meeting rooms, and offices should not be open to the processing area. Interior
spaces within food plants should be categorized as either food production areas, or as
areas devoted to support functions. This distinction dictates that areas devoted to
production activities should be under stricter control with regard to sanitation. Non-
production areas, while required to be clean and orderly, are not ordinarily subject to the
same stringent standards for construction, inspection, and maintenance as production
areas.

Most modern food plants are single-floor structures. Where gravity-feed systems are
required, these can usually be installed on mezzanines. The disadvantage of single-floor
installations is that utilities such as wiring conduits, exhaust ducts, and in-place cleaning
systems must be placed in the floor, suspended from the ceiling, placed in an overhead
“crawl space,” or installed in a utility corridor adjacent to the process area. The last,

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

from the sanitation point of view, is much preferred, providing that the corridor does not
have direct access for personnel into the process area, and is kept pest-free and clean.
Generally, the goal should be to reduce overhead utilities of all types to a minimum, and
either to seal (dustproof) them in conduits or chases, or provide access for frequent
inspections and cleaning.
-
-
-

TO ACCESS ALL THE 25 PAGES OF THIS CHAPTER,

Visit: http://www.eolss.net/Eolss-sampleAllChapter.aspx

S
TE S
Bibliography

R
AP LS
Christian J.H.B. (1994). Problems with HACCP. Food Australia. 46, 650-655. [A rational approach to
what HACCP may or may not be expected to accomplish].
C EO
Frank J.F. and Koffi R.A. (1990). Surface-adherent growth of Listeria monocytogenes in association with
increased resistance to surfactant sanitizers. J. Food Prot. 58, 550-554 [Discusses the difficulty inherent
in preventing growth of a food-borne pathogen in adherent films].

ICMSF (1988). Application of the hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) system to ensure
microbiological safety and quality. Microorganisms in Foods Vol. 4. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific
E –

Publications. [Comprehensively discusses the principles and applications of HACCP].

H
PL O

Imholte T.R. (1984). Engineering for Food Safety and Sanitation. 283 pp. Crystal, MN, USA: Technical
Institute of Food Safety Publishers. [Presents a thorough discussion of the sanitation-related design
M SC

requirements for food plants].

Jowitt R., ed. (1980). Hygienic Design and Operation of Food Plants. 292 pp. Westport, CN, USA: AVI
Publishers. [This edited book primarily discusses the sanitary design of food processing equipment].
SA NE

Lindsay D., Geornaras I., and von Holy A. (1996). Bio-films associated with poultry processing
equipment. Microbios 86, 105-116. [A research article that discusses the importance of adherent
populations in food plants].
U

von Schothorst M. and Baird-Parker A.C., eds. (1994). Special issue on HACCP: Basic principles,
applications and training. Food Control 5(3). [Presents many aspects of HACCP implementation].

Shapton D.F. and Shapton N.F. (1991). Principles and Practices for the Safe Processing of Food. Oxford,
UK: Butterworth-Heinemann Publishers. [A practical and detailed discussion of sanitation as it relates to
operations in food plants].

Troller J.A. (1993). Sanitation in Food Processing. 2nd Ed. New York, USA: Academic Press. [Written
by the author of this article; a comprehensive discussion of food sanitation and its implications].

U.S. Department of Agriculture (1995). U. S. Inspected Meat and Poultry Plants. A Guide to
Construction and Layout. Handbook 570. Washington, DC, USA: U.S. Govt. Printing Office. [Presents
detailed specifications for the construction of meat and poultry plants].

Vail R. (1994). Fundamentals of HACCP. Cereal Foods World 39, 393-395. [A discussion of HACCP
applications].

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

FOOD ENGINEERING – Vol. IV - The Sanitary Design and Construction of Food Production Facilities - Troller, John A.

Biographical Sketch

John Troller Following his retirement from Procter & Gamble Company in 1992, John Troller formed
his own consulting firm, JTI Inc, which specializes in food processing and regulatory issues. Prior to this
time, his professional career was spent in Research and Development and Professional and Regulatory
Relations sectors at Procter & Gamble. He has authored a volume on Food Sanitation (Academic Press),
followed by a second edition in 1993. His research interests have centered on moisture as related to
growth and virulence of food borne disease organisms. He co-authored a book, Water Activity and Food
(Academic Press), with J.H.B. Christian (CSIRO-Australia) in 1978 on this subject. He has published
nearly 100 peer-reviewed research articles and has lectured at universities and institutions throughout the
world during his professional career, which spans more than 40 years.

S
TE S
R
AP LS
C EO
E –
H
PL O
M SC
SA NE
U

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)