AIB International

GMP Inspection Results Report

Consolidated Standards for Inspection: Food Distribution Centers

Contacts US Office:
1213 Bakers Way
PO Box 3999,
Manhattan, KS 66502-3999
(785) 537-4750 ● (800) 633-5137 ● Fax (785) 537-0106
UK Office:
PO Box 11,
Leatherhead, Surrey, KT22 7YZ
+44-1372-360553 ● Fax +44-1372-361869
Website http://www.aibonline.org
The AIB International Consolidated Standards for Inspection are statements that represent key requirements that a facility must meet in order
to keep products manufactured, processed or handled in a facility wholesome and safe. The Standards reflect what an inspector would
expect to see in a facility that maintains a food-safe processing environment.

This report details the findings from an AIB International inspection against the Consolidated Standards. The document contains the following
sections:

Document Section Description

Score and Rating x Description of the facility
x Number of findings and related risks
x Category scores and total score
x Rating
Participant Names Personnel from the facility who accompanied the inspector
Facility-Specific Questions Technical information about a facility. For example: bulk materials used, temperature
control equipment used.
Location Matrices Two matrices which categorize findings by Category and Risk
Findings with Risk Descriptions and recommendations related to all findings
Additional Comments Comments made by the inspector that have no risk assessment
Standards without identified Risks or Findings Standards that are applicable to the inspected facility, but based on random review and
observation samplings at the time of the inspection, the facility appears to be meeting re-
quirements
Standards Not Applicable Standards that are not applicable to the inspected facility

2 of 17
 The official version of this report is a certified pdf issued by AIB International

Score and Rating

Inspection Information:
Facility Name Flex Solutions, Inc. Standard Used Food Distribution Centers
Facility Address 3351 East Philadelphia Date(s) of Inspection 24-Feb-2014
Ontario, California 91761 Audit Type GMP
United States
Inspection Type Scored
Products Produced Dry food and non-food products. Announcement Type Announced
Account # 18300

Expected Scope Reinspection No

Variations From Expec- Terminated No
ted Scope

Score
Minor Issues Improvement
Serious Unsatisfactory
Category Noted Needed Scores
(140-155) <= 135
(180-195) (160-175)
Operational Methods and Personnel Practices 1 3 0 0 165
Maintenance for Food Safety 0 1 0 0 175
Cleaning Practices 2 0 0 0 190
Integrated Pest Management 1 1 0 0 175
Adequacy of Prerequisite and Food Safety Programs 4 5 0 0 160
Total Score 865

Disclaimer: AIB International Inc. states that this report as dated and provided herein is to be construed as its findings and recommendations, category
scores, total score, and rating. A passing score of 700 and above is not a certification of the facility, products, or programs. AIB International Inc. does not
accept or assume responsibility for the Prerequisite and Food Safety Programs in effect with the customer named on the title page of this report (the
customer). AIB International Inc. is only reporting the food safety conditions of the customer as of the date of this report and assumes no responsibility or
liability as to whether the customer does or does not carry out the recommendations as contained in this report.
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Participant Names
Name Role Inspection Closing Meeting
Isis Cruz Accounting Yes Yes
Lester Galicia Maintenance and Repair Yes -
Peter DeTorres Warehouse Manager Yes -
Tony Lopez Maintenance and Repair Yes Yes
Lorna Picado Auditor Yes Yes

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 4 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Facility-Specific Questions
# Question Comments
1.22 Does the site have temperature controlled areas such as coolers and No.
freezers?
1.22.a State the temperatures noted at the time of the inspection. State if N/A.
coolers are provided for quality or food safety purposes.
1.22.b State the method of temperature monitoring (manual or continuous). N/A.
1.22.c State if an alarm system is present. N/A.
3.2 Does the facility use sanitizers on food contact surfaces? No.
3.2.a Is sanitizing followed by a potable water rinse, where required by the N/A.
sanitizer label?
3.2.b Is the sanitizer concentration verified? N/A.
3.2.c Are corrective actions documented when results are not in compliance N/A.
with label directions?
4.3 Does the site manage their pest control program under other No.
guidelines?
4.3.a State the guideline used. N/A.
4.4 Are IPM services provided by a contractor? Yes.
4.4.a State the name of the service provider. Orkin Commercial Services.
4.5 Does the site require the use of IPM professionals (i.e., use of restricted No.
use pesticides and/or state or national government regulations)? If yes,
please state the reason.
4.5.a State the expiration date of the PCO license(s). June 30, 2015.
4.5.b If licensing of the PCO is not required, were training records current? N/A.
4.5.c State the expiration date of the business license. December 1, 2015.
4.5.d State the expiration date of the certificate of insurance. January 1, 2015.
4.6 Were pesticides used at this facility? Yes.
4.6.a List the names of the pesticides used, at a minimum, in the last 6 Cy-Kick CS, EPA Reg. #499-304; Contrac Blox, EPA Reg.
months or since the last AIB Inspection. #12455-133.
4.6.b Were current labels provided for the pesticides reviewed? Yes.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 5 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

4.6.c Were current chemical safety data sheets provided for the pesticides Yes.
reviewed?
5.2 Who was assigned responsibility for food safety at the facility? President.
5.2.a Does the facility have a current license to produce, manufacture, or Yes, state of California.
store food products (local health department, state, or other agency)?
5.2.b Has the site implemented procedures to meet regulatory requirements Yes.
(i.e., allergen labeling and control, Reportable Food Registry, Food
Safety Modernization Act, etc.)?
5.10 Does the site have a documented Microbiological Control Program in No.
place?
5.10.a State if testing is for sanitation, environmental, raw materials/finished N/A.
product.
5.10.b State the microorganisms tested for. N/A.
5.10.c If the facility is testing for pathogens, indicate if the testing is N/A.
environmental only or if testing is done for raw materials, finished
products, or food contact surfaces.
5.10.d If the site tests for pathogens, is the product or raw material placed on N/A.
hold and not released until results indicating the food safety of the
product have been obtained?
5.10.e Are documented disposition procedures and records in place for N/A.
materials that test positive for pathogens?
5.10.f State if an in-house or outside lab is used. N/A.
5.10.g If an outside lab is used, are they accredited? List the accreditation N/A.
body.
5.11 Does this country have allergen regulations or does the site ship to Yes.
countries with allergen regulations?
5.11.a State the allergens handled at this facility. Wheat, soy and milk.
5.16 Has the site been inspected by a regulatory agency in the past year? No.
5.16.a State the name of the agency and the date of the inspection. N/A.
5.16.b State if the facility addressed findings identified in the regulatory N/A.
inspection.
5.25 Is there a HACCP program in place? No.
5.25.a List the CCP's. N/A.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 6 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

5.25.b State if the plan has been validated and who did the validation. N/A.
5.25.c State the date of the most recent assessment. N/A.
5.25.d State the names of the products falling under regulatory HACCP N/A.
produced or stored at this facility.
5.29 How does the facility use potable water, ice, or steam for product Water is used for cleaning and personnel use only.
contact?
5.29.a State the source of the potable water supply (well, city, etc.). City of Ontario.
5.29.b State the source of the records indicating potability. City's water quality report.
5.29.c Is ice made in-house or purchased? No.
5.29.d List the source of testing records for ice and if they indicated that it was N/A.
potable.
5.29.e Is food approval documentation provided for chemicals used for the N/A.
generation of steam for food contact?
5.29.f List the source of testing records for steam used for product contact. N/A.
5.29.g State if the back flow prevention devices are checked for function and Yes, July 2, 2013.
provide the last date of testing.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 7 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Findings by Location and Category

Adequacy of
Operational
Integrated Prerequisite
Methods and Maintenance Cleaning Totals by
Locations Pest and Food
Personnel for Food Safety Practices Location
Management Safety
Practices
Programs
Facility Overview 0 0 1 2 11 14
Finished Product Storage 4 1 1 0 0 6
Totals by Category 4 1 2 2 11 20

Findings by Location and Risk

Improvement Totals by
Locations Minor Issues Noted Serious Unsatisfactory
Needed Location
Facility Overview 7 7 0 0 14
Finished Product Storage 2 4 0 0 6
Totals by Risk 9 11 0 0 20

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 8 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Findings with Risk

.

# Risk Standard Standard # Requirement # Location

.
.

1 Improvement Needed (IN) Raw Material/Finished Product Inventory 1.5 1.5.1.2 Finished Product Storage
Finding: Insect-susceptible materials in storage longer than four weeks were not regularly inspected. Several pallets of flour were
found that were received on December 2013 and had not been inspected. There was no written procedure to re-inspect
the material.
Recommendation: A procedure should developed and implemented to ensure the materials are being inspected and aid in the prompt
identification of infested materials. The re-inspection date should be placed next to the receiving date.
.
.

2 Improvement Needed (IN) Finished Product Transportation 1.26 1.26.1.10 Finished Product Storage
Finding: Shipping vehicles were not consistently inspected for cleanliness or structural issues prior to loading. It was understood
that the vehicles were being inspected, but the inspections were not being documented.
Recommendation: The inspections should be documented to ensure the product is being loaded and shipped in an adequate manner.
.
.

3 Improvement Needed (IN) Health Conditions 1.33 1.33.1.5 Finished Product Storage
Finding: No blood borne/bodily fluids policies and procedures exist for this facility.
Recommendation: A written policy that specifies the procedures for handling/disposition of food or product contact surfaces that have come
into contact with blood or other bodily fluids should be written and implemented to ensure the safety of the product.
.
.

4 Improvement Needed (IN) Pest Prevention 2.11 2.11.1.2 Finished Product Storage
Finding: Gaps greater than Quarter in or 6 mm were noted in some areas. Gaps greater than Quarter in or 6 mm could allow pest
access into the facility. All the dock doors presented gaps at the bottom and on the sides.
Recommendation: The gaps should be repaired to provide a tight seal to the exterior and prevent pest entry.
.
.

5 Improvement Needed (IN) Interior Rodent Monitoring Devices 4.12 4.12.1.4 Facility Overview
Finding: Monitoring devices were inspected monthly by the PCO, and weekly in-house and found to be clean and functional.
However, the documentation for the in-house review was not complete. The reports indicate that the traps are being
documented every other week, so there is one week every month where the traps are not being inspected or
documented.
Recommendation: The traps should be inspected on a weekly basis and the inspection documented to ensure that any catches are being
promptly identify and removed to deter the attraction of secondary feeders.
.
.

6 Improvement Needed (IN) Training and Education 5.5 5.5.1.3 Facility Overview
Finding: Defined requirements for ensuring of understanding and comprehension of training were not addressed for all of the
Prerequisite and Food Safety Programs.
Recommendation: The facility should define how they are going to verify understanding of the training presented.
.
.

7 Improvement Needed (IN) Training and Education 5.5 5.5.1.5 Facility Overview
Finding: Annual refresher training was not completed in accordance with the defined program. The refresher training had not been

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 9 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

conducted in the past year.

Recommendation: Refresher training should be conducted at least once a year to comply with requirements.
.
.

8 Improvement Needed (IN) Written Procedure Audits 5.7 5.7.1.1 Facility Overview
Finding: A risk-based audit of procedures exceeded the defined annual frequency.
Recommendation: The facility should conduct an audit of programs and procedures annually to ensure they are working as expected.
.
.

9 Improvement Needed (IN) Receiving Program 5.15 5.15.1.2 Facility Overview

Finding: Inspection of materials by trained personnel was not consistently completed. The inspections were not being documented.
Recommendation: The facility should document the receiving inspections to ensure they are being conducted and facilitate follow up.
.
.

10 Improvement Needed (IN) Food Defense Program 5.17 5.17.1.3 Facility Overview
Finding: The Food Defense Plan did not include all elements as defined in this Standard.
Recommendation: The facility should expand the program to include the missing elements indicated in the AIBI standard.
.
.

11 Improvement Needed (IN) Recall-Withdrawal Program 5.19 5.19.1.3 Facility Overview

Finding: The facility did not test the Recall Program.
Recommendation: The facility should test the recall program at least twice a year to ensure the program is working as expected.
.
.

12 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Personal Items and Jewelry Control 1.32 1.32.1.3 Finished Product Storage
Finding: Personnel were not observed eating, drinking, or smoking in unauthorized areas. Six pieces of gum were found under the
working tables in the shipping area, and one on the floor in the warehouse.
Recommendation: The personnel should be reminded that eating should be conducted in the designated area only to prevent pest attraction.
.
.

13 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Product Zone Cleaning 3.5 3.5.1.1 Finished Product Storage
Finding: There were no written procedures for the cleaning of the racks or the dock doors.
Recommendation: Though the mentioned equipment was found in good clean conditions, it was suggested the procedures be written to
ensue the equipment is being cleaned as expected and facilitate training of new personnel.
.
.

14 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Non-Product Zone and Support Area Cleaning 3.6 3.6.2.1 Facility Overview
Finding: Non-food contact surfaces were clean and well maintained. However, a small sticky spill was found on the north perimeter
of the warehouse.
Recommendation: The area should be cleaned and measures taken to ensure that all spills are being promptly cleaned and thus prevent
pest attraction.
.
.

15 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Facility Assessment 4.2 4.2.1.1 Facility Overview
Finding: The annual facility assessment was documented and current. The last assessment was conducted on December 26,
2013. However, it was noted that the facility had changed the area where the insect susceptible materials were stored, but
the pheromone traps were not moved to the new area. Where the traps are, chemicals are being stored in the area,
making the pheromone traps not useful. No Indian meal moth activity was noted in the area where the insect susceptible
materials are stored.
Recommendation: The assessment should include the evaluation of the relocation of the traps to provide proper control where it is needed.
.
.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 10 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

16 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Written Policy 5.1 5.1.2.1 Facility Overview
Finding: The statement was not signed.
Recommendation: The statement should be signed to indicate the company's compromise to food safety.
.
.

17 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Written Policy 5.1 5.1.2.4 Facility Overview
Finding: Only supervisory staff was trained to understand and implement the Policy Statement.
Recommendation: The policy should be included in the employee refresher training to remind them the compromise to the customers.
.
.

18 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Self-Inspections 5.6 5.6.1.3 Facility Overview

Finding: Inspection results identified observations, Corrective Actions, specific assignments, and actual accomplishments.
Recommendation: The inspections should continue to be conducted in detail to ensure that issues such as the ones found during the audit
are being identified and corrected.
.
.

19 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Cleaning Program 5.13 5.13.1.2 Facility Overview
Finding: The formal documented Cleaning Program that included a Master Cleaning Schedule (MCS) for periodic cleaning
assignments, as well as a daily housekeeping schedule, was not fully developed and implemented in this facility.
Recommendation: The MCS should be expanded to include the racks and specific areas of the warehouse to facilitate follow up.
.
.

20 Minor Issues Noted (MI) Preventive Maintenance Program 5.14 5.14.1.1 Facility Overview
Finding: A formal Preventive Maintenance Program and work order system was used to prioritize problems in structural,
equipment, or utensil maintenance.
Recommendation: The PM program should be expanded to include the dock doors to ensure they provide a tight seal to the exterior and
prevent pest entry.
.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 11 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Additional Comments
.

# Risk Standard Standard # Requirement # Location

.
.

1 Food Defense Program 5.17 5.17.1.1

Finding: Evidence of registration under the FDA Bioterrorism Act was on file at the facility. The last registration was on February
20, 2014.
.
.

2 Food Defense Program 5.17 5.17.1.2

Finding: The facility had conducted a Vulnerability Assessment to identify food defense risks. The last assessment was conducted
on February 21, 2014.
.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 12 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Standards without identified Risks or Findings

Based on random review and observation samplings at the time of the inspection, the facility appears to be meeting the requirements of the following
Standards:

Standard Standard # Standard Goal

Rejection of Shipments/Receipt of Dry 1.1 Random review of records and programs related to safeguarding of food products by
Goods identifying and barring entry to potentially contaminated raw materials indicate they met the
requirements of the standard as applicable to this site.
Rejection of Shipments/Receipt of 1.2 Random review of the records and programs related to receipt of perishable products by
Perishables identifying and barring entry to potentially contaminated raw materials indicate they met the
requirements of the standard as applicable to this site.
Storage Practices 1.3 Materials appeared to be stored in a way that met the program requirements as defined by
this site, as well as the applicable requirements in the standard.
Storage Conditions 1.4 Raw materials and finished products appeared to be stored in a clean storage area and were
protected from contamination as observed during the inspection.
Pallets 1.6 Pallets examined were found to be clean and well maintained.
Waste Material Disposal 1.16 Waste material and waste material removal were managed to avoid product contamination.
Cross Contamination Prevention 1.23 Incompatible or hazardous materials observed during the inspection appeared to be
segregated and handled to prevent product contamination.
Hand Washing Facilities 1.27 Hand washing facilities examined during the inspection appeared to be appropriately located,
functional, and stocked to allow hand washing to occur.
Washrooms, Showers, and Locker Rooms 1.28 Employee welfare areas examined were maintained in good condition.
Personal Hygiene 1.29 No personal hygiene practices issues were identified during the inspection.
Non-Facility Personnel 1.34 Non-facility personnel were observed to be in compliance with the facility defined GMP
Programs.
Facility Location 2.1 No evidence of issues from local activities or the facility location were identified during the
inspection.
Outside Grounds and Roof 2.2 Facility grounds appeared to be well maintained. No issues were identified.
Security Equipment 2.3 Physical security measures were implemented at this facility.
Layout 2.4 No issues with placement of equipment and structures were identified. Appropriate access for
cleaning, inspection, and maintenance activities was noted.
Floors 2.5 Floor surfaces observed during the inspection were found to be in good condition.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 13 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Walls 2.7 Walls examined during the inspection were found to be in good condition.
Overhead Structures 2.8 Overhead structures that could be examined were found to be clean and in good condition.
Glass, Brittle Plastics, and Ceramics 2.9 No issues with glass, brittle plastics, or ceramics were identified during the inspection.
Control
Leaks and Lubrication 2.12 Catch pans or other devices were provided to protect product from contamination from
lubrication or leaks.
Cross Contamination Prevention 2.14 Segregation of operations based on process flow appeared to be practiced as observed
during the inspection.
Temporary Repair Materials 2.16 Temporary repairs noted during the inspection were consistent with the facility defined
program.
Transporting Equipment 2.19 Transporting equipment appeared to be well maintained at the time of the inspection.
Parts Storage 2.20 Parts were found to be clean and properly stored at the time of the inspection.
Hand Washing Facilities Design 2.21 Hand washing facilities were provided and were observed to be operational during the
inspection.
Cleaning 3.1 Cleaning appeared to be completed in a way to prevent contamination of raw materials,
products, and equipment.
Food Contact Cleaning Compounds and 3.2 Approval and verification procedures were in place for cleaning compounds and sanitizers
Sanitizers used at the facility for food contact cleaning. Approval documentation was provided for the
chemicals that were selected and reviewed.
Equipment and Tools 3.3 Cleaning tools and equipment appeared to be managed and maintained to prevent product
contamination. No issues were identified.
Daily (Housekeeping) Cleaning 3.4 No issues were identified with daily housekeeping practices observed during the inspection.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) 4.1 A written IPM Program outlining controls and processes to minimize pest activity were
Program defined.
Signed Contracts 4.4 Signed contracts between the facility and the external service provider defined the
requirements for pest management activities for this facility.
Credentials and Competencies 4.5 Qualifications examined for selected IPM service providers were documented and current.
Pesticide Documentation 4.6 Pesticide labels and chemical safety data sheets were provided for the pesticides randomly
examined during the inspection.
Pesticide Application Documentation 4.7 Pesticide application documentation was current and provided records to identify, document,
and verify use of pesticides randomly examined during the inspection.
Trend Analysis 4.9 Service records of monitoring devices and pest sightings reviewed appeared to be used to
identify and eliminate areas of pest activity as noted by the lack of significant activity observed

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 14 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

during the inspection.

Monitoring Device Documentation 4.10 Monitoring devices were mapped and maintained to ensure proper placement and monitoring
for pest activity and trending. The map appeared to be current based on observation during
the inspection.
Exterior Rodent Monitoring Devices 4.11 Exterior rodent control devices were placed and those randomly reviewed were maintained to
provide rodent monitoring and to deter entry into the facility.
Pheromone Monitoring Devices 4.14 Pheromone monitoring devices were installed and those reviewed were maintained to assist
in identification of stored product insect pests.
Bird Control 4.15 Bird control activities were addressed and the lack of activity noted during the inspection
indicated that the program was effective.
Wildlife Control 4.16 No issues with identification or elimination of wildlife habitat were noted.
Pest Habitat 4.17 No evidence of rodent, bird, insect, or other pest issues were identified during the inspection.
Accountability 5.2 Management authorization and support of supervisory compliance to programs, laws, and
regulations was defined for this site and appeared to be implemented.
Support 5.3 Human and financial resources were provided to support implementation of the Food Safety
and Prerequisite Programs.
Written Procedures 5.4 Written procedures randomly reviewed for food safety activities at the facility defined owners,
actions, and timelines.
Customer Complaint Program 5.8 A Customer Complaint Program was implemented to respond to customer concerns.
Protocols were in place to ensure that food safety issues were responded to in a prompt and
effective manner, whether it be at the facility level or as managed by corporate.
Chemical Control Program 5.9 A documented Chemical Control Program was implemented to provide a centralized approach
to manage and control purchase and use of nonfood chemicals. Random review of chemicals
and program requirements indicated that this program had been implemented as applicable
for this facility.
Allergen Control Program 5.11 Allergen controls were implemented to identify allergen control throughout the process from
receiving to distribution of product. Random review of the program, records, and observations
during the inspection indicated that the program was implemented.
Glass, Brittle Plastics, and Ceramics 5.12 A documented Glass, Brittle Plastics, and Ceramics Program was provided to identify
Program processes that prevent contamination of product. There were no identified deficiencies noted
during the inspection to indicate that the program was ineffective.
Regulatory Affairs and Inspections Program 5.16 A documented Regulatory Affairs and Inspections Program provided instructions for handling
of regulatory, third party, and customer inspections.
Traceability Program 5.18 The written Traceability Program defined the methodology to allow quick location of suspect

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 15 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

raw materials, food contact packaging materials, rework, and related finished products.
Nonconforming Product Program 5.20 The Nonconforming Products Program defined the guidelines for isolation, investigation, and
disposition of raw materials, packaging materials, work-in-progress, returned goods, and
finished products as applicable to the facility. Random review of records and observations
during the inspection did not identify any current deficiencies with this program.
Water Quality 5.29 Water, water sources, and water management strategies were implemented to ensure safe
water for product contact and use. Random reviews of the records indicated that programs
were implemented.

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 16 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page
 24-Feb-2014 Flex Solutions, Inc.
Announced Ontario, California United States

Standards Not Applicable

Standard # Standard Name
1.7 Designated Rework Areas
1.10 Sampling Procedures
1.20 Single-Service Containers
1.22 Temperature-Sensitive Materials
1.24 Containers and Utensils
2.6 Drains
2.10 Air Makeup Units
2.15 Equipment and Utensil Construction
2.17 Temperature Measuring Devices
2.23 Ammonia Control
4.3 Other Guidelines
4.8 Pesticide Control
4.13 Insect Light Traps
5.10 Microbial Control Program
5.25 HACCP Program
5.27 Release Procedures

The official version of this report is the pdf issued by AIB International 17 of 17
See Disclaimer on Score and Rating page