Food Defense Risk Assessment of an Edible-Coating Processing Line: A Comparative Case Study Using TACCP and...

The U.S. FSMA Intentional Adulteration (IA) Rule and GFSI-recognized certification schemes such as IFS Food and BRCGS Food include requirements for establishing and maintaining a written food defense plan, including vulnerability assessment. This study evaluates the suitability and policy relevance of two established food defense risk assessment methodologies, TACCP and CARVER+SHOCK, when applied to the processing of whole oranges with edible coatings. A structured case study was conducted at a medium-sized citrus processing facility certified under IFS Food and BRCGS Food standards. Food defense threats were systematically identified along the entire production line using the FDA Food Defense Self-Assessment Tool. The identified threats were subsequently assessed using TACCP, which is based on likelihood and impact, and CARVER+SHOCK, a multidimensional quantitative approach integrating operational, economic, and psychological impact factors. Twenty-four potential intentional contamination threats were identified. Both methodologies consistently identified critical vulnerabilities at key control points, particularly in washing systems, chemical handling areas, and stages with unrestricted access. TACCP proved to be rapid, intuitive, and easily integrated into existing food safety management systems. In contrast, CARVER+SHOCK provided a more differentiated ranking of the identified threats because of its multidimensional scoring structure, thereby supporting the development of a structured and economically rational mitigation plan and offering value for policymakers and certification bodies seeking to harmonize risk-assessment practices.