Spring/Summer 2010 - Robert M. Kerr Food & Agricultural Products ...

Spring/Summer 2010
Building your brand
The importance of branding
pg. 13
Robert M. Kerr Food & Agricultural Products Center Oklahoma State University
Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
Spring/Summer 2010 | 1

Adding Value to Oklahoma Volume 5 Issue 1
2 | fapc.biz
news
From the Director - FAPC bids farewell to one of its own 3
By Roy Escoubas, FAPC Director
Using social media to promote FAPC and connect with clients 4
By Kylee Willard, FAPC Communications Student
2009 peanut recall: Could it been avoided? 6
By Kim Angstadt, Food Science Undergraduate Student
Report released to reduce salt in processed, prepared food 7
By Mandy Gross, FAPC Communications Services Manager
industry perspective
Food industry snowball 8
By Gary Crane, Ralph’s Packing Company
fuels of the future
Dimethyl ether: A clean alternative fuel, but ... 10
By Nurhan Dunford, FAPC Oil/Oilseed Specialist
foundation focus
Memorial fund established in memory of Stanley E. Gilliland 12
By Chuck Willoughby, FAPC Business & Marketing Relations Manager
business & marketing
Building a brand: The importance of branding 13
By Jim Brooks, FAPC Business & Marketing Services Manager
Crumbs from the kitchen 14
By Andrea Graves, Business Planning & Marketing Specialist
Writing a business plan 15
By Erin Early-Johnson, Business & Marketing Client Coordinator
pathogen patrol
Protection of public health 16
By Peter Muriana, FAPC Food Microbiologist
from the test kitchen
Preserving food 18
By Darren Scott, FAPC Sensory Specialist
food processing
Why marketing? 20
By David Moe, FAPC Pilot Plant Manager
quality management
Providing quality training 22
By Jason Young, FAPC Quality Management Specialist
www.facebook.com/fapcosu
www.twitter.com/fapcosu
www.linkedin.com/groups?
gid=1988637&trk=hb_side_g
www.youtube.com/fapcosu
FAPC Director
J. Roy Escoubas
Managing Editor
Graphic Designer
Mandy Gross
Editor
Kylee Willard
Spring/Summer 2010
Building your brand
The importance of branding
pg. 13
Robert M. Kerr Food & Agricultural Products Center Oklahoma State University
Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
About the cover...
Building a brand identity is one of the
strongest competitive advantages a
business can have and nobody can take
it away. It creates a lasting value above
and beyond all the other elements of a
business. (Photo by Kylee Willard)
Oklahoma State University, in compliance with Title VI and VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 11246 as amended, Title IX of
the Education Amendments of 1972, Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990, and other federal laws and regulations, does not discriminate on
the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, age, religion, disability,
or status as a veteran in any of its policies, practices or procedures. This
includes but is not limited to admissions, employment, financial aid, and
educational services.
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, acts of May 8 and
June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Robert E. Whitson, Director of Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service,
Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma. This publication is
printed and issued by Oklahoma State University as authorized by the
Vice President, Dean, and Director of the Division of Agricultural Sciences
and Natural Resources and has been prepared and distributed at a cost
of $2346.96 for 700 copies. 0510

news
By Roy Escoubas
FAPC Director
roy.escoubas@okstate.edu
FAPC bids farewell
to one of its own
T
he Robert M. Kerr Food & Agricultural
Products Center experienced
the loss of a colleague,
leader, and friend. On January 6,
2010, Dr. Stanley E. Gilliland lost his
battle against cancer. Near mid-year of
2009, he was diagnosed with cancer
and was hospitalized immediately for
treatments. There was a time when it
appeared he was improving, but it was
temporary. The FAPC is saddened at
this loss, and know Gilliland had many
people who had great respect for him.
Gilliland was born and raised in
Minco, Oklahoma, and attended Oklahoma
State University from 1958 to
1963, earning his BS and MS degrees
in dairy manufacturing. He attended
North Carolina State University, where
he earned a PhD in food science in
1966. He stayed on at North Carolina
State as an instructor and later accepted
a position as an assistant professor
of food microbiology. He earned his
promotion to associate professor with
tenure in 1972.
Gilliland returned to Oklahoma in
1976 and joined the OSU Department
of Animal Science as a dairy and food
microbiologist with the appointment
of associate professor with tenure. In
1980, he earned his professorship. In
1986, he earned the title of Regents
Professor, and in 1998, he received
the Sitlington Endowed Chair in Food
Microbiology. He held this endowed
chair until his retirement, December
31, 2009.
Gilliland was an active scientist
with national associations. He held
officer and board positions in the
American Dairy Science Association,
Federation of American Societies of
Food Animal Science, American Society
for Microbiology, Institute of Food
Technologists, Oklahoma Section of
the Institute of Food Technologists,
Oklahoma Food Processors Association,
and the Society of Sigma Xi.
Gilliland received many Oklahoma
State University faculty awards
and many awards given by national
societies. Gilliland had more than
twenty-one prestigious local and national
awards displayed in his office.
He earned these awards because of
hard work and an attitude of giving
back for being blessed.
Gilliland served as a leader at the
FAPC and served as the first and interim
director of the FAPC. Gilliland
trained and graduated sixty-five master
of science and doctoral young professionals.
He faithfully taught thousands
of undergraduate students in his fortyfive
years of university instruction and
helped them launch their careers.
Gilliland published more than 115
peer-reviewed journal articles, twentyfour
book chapters, and presented
more than 110 conference papers.
He set high standards for faculty,
staff, and students. He will be remembered
for his contributions and
respected for his impact on lives. Dr.
Gilliland, we bid you a warm farewell.
From the Director
Spring/Summer 2010 | 3

www.facebook.com/fapcosu www.twitter.com/fapcosu
Using social me
fapc and connec
4 | fapc.biz
T
he FAPC has joined
the world of social
networking and is
available on Facebook, Twitter,
LinkedIn, and YouTube.
The goal was to develop a
“virtual community” of fans,
followers, and members to disseminate
news, events, and
videos to promote the FAPC,
said Mandy Gross, FAPC
manager of communications
services.
“Using social media
as a mean of distribution
is in addition to what the
center is already currently
doing to market
itself,” Gross said.
“The FAPC is using
Facebook, Twitter,
LinkedIn, and You-
Tube to develop this
‘virtual community.’”
Statistics
from Nielsen
Online show
that by the end
of 2008, social
networking had
overtaken e-mail in
terms of worldwide
reach. According to
the study, 66.8 percent
of Internet users across
the globe accessed
“member communities” last year,
compared to 65.1 percent for e-mail.
Social networking provides opportunities
for everyone to remain informed
about ongoing FAPC projects,
events, news, publications, and videos.
“The FAPC joined Facebook,
Twitter, LinkedIn, and YouTube as a
way to further promote the FAPC and
to listen and engage with the clients
who are connecting with the FAPC on
these social media sites,” Gross said.
The FAPC hopes to connect with
these clients instead of generating
“buzz” by following four steps: 1) Listen,
2) Share, 3) Build Relationships,
and 4) Repeat Steps 1, 2, and 3.
Not only does having a presence
on the social media sites benefit the
FAPC, but it also benefits those who
are connecting with the FAPC, Gross
said.
“More people are learning about
the center through the promotion on
the social media sites,” Gross said.
“However, clients who are connecting
with the FAPC on these sites are
receiving information that will help
them with their food and agricultural
businesses.”
As of May 12, 2010, the FAPC
has 193 people who like the FAPC on
Facebook, 172 followers on Twitter,
forty-one members on LinkedIn, and
eight subscriptions to the FAPC videos
on YouTube.

www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1988637&trk=hb_side_g
news
By Kylee Willard
FAPC Communications Student
kyleew@okstate.edu
dia to promote
t with clients
Want to learn how to use social media?
The FAPC is holding a Social
Media Training on July 15, 2010, to
help food companies better understand
social media and how it can
benefit businesses.
Bill Handy, visiting professor
for OSU’s School of Journalism and
Broadcasting, will discuss the background
of social media and why it is
important for businesses.
Participants also will learn how
to set up their own Facebook and
Twitter pages for their businesses.
“Although the number of people
who connect with us on the social
media sites are not as high as we like,
we see a need to continue to focus on
social media,” Gross said. “The FAPC
will continue to post news releases,
articles, projects, upcoming events,
videos, etc. through social networking
and work to increase the people who
like our page on Facebook, followers
on Twitter, members on LinkedIn, and
subscriptions to our videos on You-
Tube,” Gross said.
The purpose of the FAPC is to
help develop successful value-added
enterprises in Oklahoma - to bring the
products, the jobs, and the dollars back
home.
Cost for the training is $50 per
participant if registered by July 2,
2010. After this date, the registration
price is $75.
To register for the training,
call Karen Smith, FAPC workshop
coordinator, at 405-744-
6277, email karenl.smith@
okstate.edu or visit www.fapc.
biz/socialmediatraining.
The training is limited to
the first 25 registrants, so register
today.
“The FAPC is reaching
a new audience through
the social media outlets;
which in turn,
will attract new
clients to the
FAPC, including
start-up businesses,”
said Roy
Escoubas, FAPC
director. “The
center can help
these new businesses
get started
in industry, which
could lead to more
products and more
jobs in Oklahoma.”
www.youtube.com/fapcosu
Spring/Summer 2010 | 5

ne of the
biggest
food-related
national news stories
in 2009 has been the
massive peanut recall.
Products from
raw peanuts to ice
cream, and cookie
mixes containing
the contaminated nuts have
been recalled for safety and
health measures. Pistachio nuts
also have been recalled for the same
contamination found in the peanuts.
A question remains in some
American’s minds, how exactly did
an in-plant mishap like this become
such a national issue?
The base of this question
goes back to quality control
actions taken at the plant
level, how in-depth the inspection
and control procedures at the
plant are taken, and how seriously
the quality control personnel take
their jobs.
According to Merriam-
Webster, quality control is
defined as “an aggregate
of activities
(as design analysis
& inspection
for defects)
designed to ensure
adequate quality
especially in manufacturing
products”
(2009). Simply
meaning, a process
of checks
and balances are
6 | fapc.biz
news
By Kim Angstadt
Food Science Undergraduate Student
kim.angstadt@okstate.edu
2009 Peanut Recall
Could it have been avoided?
The following paper by Kim Angstadt placed second in the FAPC Undergraduate Technical
Writing Competition. For more information, visit www.fapc.biz/papercompetition.
taken at the plant level to make sure
the products being sold to the public
to consume are safe to eat. Based on
the definition, any peanut product that
was properly tested and found positive
to the Salmonella typhimurium
never should have been released from
the plant for further processing. Yet,
the positively tested S. typhimurium
product was released from a plant in
Georgia, and a nation-wide recall was
born (MSNBC, February 2009).
Obviously, someone was not properly
doing his or her job in Blakely,
Georgia, or the tainted peanuts never
would have been released from the
plant. It brings the question of how
efficient quality control technicians
are at their jobs and how closely they
pay attention to detail and variances
in readings they get from tests performed,
as well as, if some pertinent
tests were even performed at all.
There were initial reports of rats
found in the plant the contaminated
peanuts were from, and the source of
contamination could have come from
their interaction with the product.
While the sights of rats or other pests
or any kind of infestation was not evident
(ABC, February 2009), that’s not
to say the pests were not there. It also
was apparent positive tests were found
on the peanuts, but no one was prop-
erly notified of them (ABC, February
2009).
Situations such as pests or positive
readings on bacteriological tests
performed by the quality control
personnel at a plant should be signs,
which action needs to be taken to
prevent or control the problems. With
this being said, it is evident the quality
control personnel in this Blakely
plant could have done a much better
job at preventing contaminated product
from leaving their plant. Thanks to
their negligence, and responsibility to
their company, Peanut Corporation of
America has filed for bankruptcy because
of the massive recall and tarnish
to the peanut industry (FDA, 2009).
Unfortunately, this is not the only
recall issued during the past few years,
but it is the most recent to hit home
with a lot of people. What exactly is it
going to take to make some companies
and employees see that quality control,
what they do in their plant and how
efficient they are at testing and control
of product, is a big deal and could potentially
save lives?
If supervisors take more enforcement
at the plant, and quality control
personnel report more of their findings,
as well as take more care and
efficiency in their testing, perhaps recalls
in the future can be prevented.
References:
ABC. “Lawmakers Examine Peanut Recall.
. 21 April 2009.
MSNBC. “Cracking The Poison Processed Peanuts Case.”
. 21 April 2009.
USDS, Food & Drug Administration.
. 20 April 2009.

news
By Mandy Gross
FAPC Manager of Communications Services
mandy.gross@okstate.edu
T
he Institute of
Medicine released a report
by an expert committee recommending
the Food and Drug Administration
set standards for salt added to
processed foods and prepared meals.
The report indicates Americans,
on average, consume 50 percent more
sodium than the maximum amount
that is recommended. When compared
to the amounts considered adequate
for daily consumption, the level of
sodium being consumed by Americans
equates to almost 125 percent the levels
recommended.
“The committee’s task was to consider
what would be the best means
to reduce sodium levels in the U.S.
diet,” said Christina DeWitt, FAPC
food chemist. “It was determined that
voluntary methods would not be sufficient
as there had been more than 40
years of voluntary
efforts to reduce
sodium, and data
clearly shows in
that time period
sodium intake rose
steadily over a period
of years and has
remained steady at
the current levels for
nearly a decade.”
The committee also
reviewed the sources of sodium when
making its recommendations. The
research reviewed by the committee
indicated most sodium in the diet is
found in the processed foods and prepared
meals Americans purchase in
grocery stores and restaurants, DeWitt
said.
“The report cites industry has
made many efforts to reduce sodium,
but in a hearing before the committee
by industry representatives, it was
clearly illustrated that efforts to reduce
sodium was many times thwarted by
industry lacking a ‘level playing field’
with higher level sodium products,”
DeWitt said.
It also was noted anecdotally that
current regulations for claims placed
Report released
to reduce salt
in processed,
prepared food
on products with reduced or lower sodium
make it difficult for industry to
create products that are not obviously
different in flavor to the consumer
when compared to their higher sodium
counterpart.
It was suggested claims of “reduced”
or “low” sodium now send
“red flags” to the consumer causing
them to equate those products with
“poor” taste. The committee’s solution
was to suggest the FDA set standards
for the salt added to foods to “level the
playing field” for sodium reduction
efforts.
In addition, because the consumer
easily notes large reductions in sodium,
it was suggested by the committee
that sodium reductions be done gradually,
DeWitt said.
“The report cited research that
indicates, depending on the product,
small reductions can often be made
without consumers noticing a difference
in product flavor,” she said. “The
report, therefore, suggests the best way
to reduce the sodium levels consumed
in the U.S. is to set standards for the
salt added to processed and prepared
meals and reduce the salt allowed in a
step-wise gradual manner.”
Spring/Summer 2010 | 7

Food Industry
arious necessities such as
food, water, and energy affect
our daily lives, and the
way we live. Far too many people are
removed from direct contact with the
production and distribution of these
daily necessities, and do not understand
the manufacturing processes.
They take for granted the ease of food,
water, and natural resource consumption.
The United States has the most
abundant, easily accessible, and safest
food supply in the world. Americans
also are fortunate to have an abundant
supply of energy and potable water.
Many think the cost of water and energy
is too expensive, but if you realize
these are not evenly distributed by
nature, but by man, it makes the cost
more easily understood. We, as a nation,
have been blessed with wonderful
natural resources.
However, the food industry has
not been so blessed. The increasing
cost of following the rules and regulations
of the United States Department
of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection
Service, and the Environmental
Protection Agency or Department
of Environmental Quality has drained
8 | fapc.biz
the pocketbooks of small- to mediumsized
food processors.
We must meet certain standards
in our daily operations of production,
distribution, and storage of goods. The
non-meat products also must meet
certain standards, including water. The
government also expects us to educate
the American consumer on food safety.
It is a large problem for meat processors.
Once the product leaves the
facility, whether to the ultimate consumer,
grocery store, restaurant, or any
other customer, the processor has no
control over how the product is treated
and if it is kept safe. We should not be
expected to follow the customer home
and watch over their household food
supply.
These changes keep growing like a snowball going
downhill without a bottom and keep getting bigger
and rolling faster.
I have been associated with the
meat and livestock industry for more
than fifty years. Changes have always
been a part of meat processing; however,
changes have been coming at a
greater speed and in greater numbers
the last ten to fifteen years. The changes
are like a snowball rolling downhill;
they just keep growing. The problem
is this particular hill has no bottom.
Therefore, this giant snowball is going
to keep getting bigger and faster.
USDA and FSIS
Being a small meat processor,
many of the mandated government
policies for food safety are not necessarily
hard to overcome, but can be
very expensive. I am not against food
safety, but a firm believer. However,
many avenues the government is using
to enforce food safety are expensive,
and I think redundant.
On the horizon for meat processors
is Validation of Processes. Validation
is the process of proving your
Critical Control Points, or CCP, of
your Hazard Analysis of Critical Control
Points, or HACCP, plan is valid
and true.
To do this, plants will need to
retain meat scientists on staff or hire
an outside company to validate all
HACCP plans the company uses. This
“idea” is directly opposite to currently
accepted HACCP practices.
At the present time, we can use
proven scientific studies from government
research facilities to validate our
HACCP processes.
For example, it has been proven
many times by the scientific community,
the lethality stage for Escherichia
coli O157:H7 is 160 degrees Fahrenheit.
However, according to government
policy, this may not be a valid
CCP in my HACCP program, and I
may need to hire an outside company
to validate this process.
Small establishments do not have
the capital and resources to initiate a

validation study on the processes in
their facility. The problem to a small,
limited budget processor is the cost
of a professionally documented study,
which has a estimated cost of $9,000
to $15,000 each.
In our case, if we are required to
do a validation study for each of our
HACCP programs, it will consist of
sixteen different studies. At the above
estimated cost, we will be looking at a
tremendous outlay of cash.
Since there are proven studies by
the scientific community, I think we
shouldn’t have to recreate the studies
in individual processing companies. If
this goes forward as FSIS wants it to,
there will be more and more small processors
electing to go retail exempt,
or only sell wholesale to the amount
of $54,300 per year, and do away with
state or federal inspection.
EPA and/or DEQ
Another government agency
causing a monetary hardship to small
meat processors is the Department of
Environmental Quality, also known as
the Environmental Protection Agency.
These state or federal agencies are not
new to our country, but have matured
and grown quickly.
Water quality is of great importance.
However, in this modern
environment, the required laboratory
testing of water samples is a costly
and burdensome endeavor. Small businesses
do not have the financial ability
to have an in-house laboratory or
the technical personnel to comply
with the required guidelines set by the
government.
In our small business, the combined
costs of testing required by the
DEQ and the USDA totaled $5,000 for
2009.
I know we cannot do away with
testing of food and health safety. Nevertheless,
it is very frustrating when
multiple samples must be taken from
the same source and sent to the same
laboratory for DEQ.
DEQ’s reasoning is the samples
must go to different testing labs within
the department and cannot be shared
by the various departments. This
is another example of bureaucratic
wastefulness, which places the burden
of work and proof on small businesses.
Ultimately, these costs will be
passed on to the consumer as hidden
costs, while the government mandates
more and more testing to be completed.
Managing the
snowball
I am an advocate
of food
safety, but I’m
also a small meat
processor who is trying to
keep up with the changes.
industry perspective
By Gary Crane
Ralph’s Packing Company
tesscrane@suddenlinkmail.com
These changes keep growing like a
snowball going downhill without
a bottom and keep getting bigger
and rolling faster. All I know
to do is hang on and stay in front
of it.
Spring/Summer 2010 | 9

10 | fapc.biz
Dimethyl Ether:
A clean alternative fuel, but ..
A
s new regulations
requiring lower
engine exhaust
emission levels are being
implemented in the United
States, interests in alternative
fuels, new engine
designs, and fuel injection
systems have conformed
to the new rules. Dimethyl
ether (DME) has been
considered as a clean alternative
transportation
fuel since mid 1990s.
DME is a simple ether
that has the same number
of carbon, hydrogen,
and oxygen atoms in its
chemical structure as ethanol.
Addition of oxygen
containing compounds or
“fuel oxygenates” such as
DME and ethanol to the
petroleum fuels reduces
carbon monoxide and
ozone levels in the atmosphere.
DME is a good
fuel oxygenate because of
its high oxygen content,
35 percent by weight.
DME burns with a visible blue flame
and is sometimes referred to as “PRO-
ZONE,” “Ice Blue,” or “Blue Fuel.”
The physical properties of DME
are similar to liquefied petroleum
gases (LPG) propane and butane.
Since DME is a gas under normal
conditions, it needs to be stored in
pressurized vessels and handled in a
similar manner to LPG. Unlike methane,
DME does not require an odorant
addition to monitor potential gas leaks
from a system because of its natural
sweet ether-like odor.
Petroleum residues, coal bed
methane, coal, natural gas, and biomass
are some of the feedstock used
for DME production. Although natural
gas has been the main feedstock for
the last decade, research and development
work on DME production from
biomass specifically from forest residues
is gaining momentum.
To produce DME, the feedstock
of choice is first gasified to produce
syngas, which contains mainly carbon
monoxide and hydrogen gas. Then,
the conversion of syngas to DME can
be carried out in one reactor, which
is referred to as “direct process” or
DME is a simple ether that has the same number
of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms
in its chemical structure as ethanol.
through an “indirect process” involving
synthesis of methanol from syngas
followed by methanol dehydration to
produce DME.
DME is currently used in production
of many chemicals. It is also a
popular component in aerosol products
such as hairsprays and spray
paints, replacing chlorofluorocarbon
(CFC)-based propellants, which are
associated with ozone depletion in the
atmosphere.
DME is reported to be safe for
consumers and employees working
in production plants at 1000 parts per
million level in the air. DME is a good
alternative fuel to replace petroleum
diesel because of its high cetane number,
fifty-five or higher, soot, sulfur
free combustion, and excellent blending
properties, which allow blending
with LPG and diesel fuel.
Richard LeBlanc of Chemrec
USA said, “DME offers a very high
reduction of carbon dioxide emissions,
around 95 percent, compared to conventional
diesel fuel, and it can be produced
with very high conversion efficiency
at relatively moderate capital
cost and can be made from a variety of
renewable materials.”
The BioDME project (www.thenewsmarket.com/volvogroup)initiated
and coordinated by Volvo Group
and supported by several technology
providers including Chemrec, Delphi,

.
ETC, Haldor Topsoe, Preem, government
agencies, the Swedish Energy
Agency, and the European Union’s
Seventh Framework Program for
Research and Technological Development.
This involves development and
demonstration of a system would integrate
many aspects of advancing DME
as a transportation fuel. The integrated
system would include fuel production,
distribution network, filling stations,
and resources for development of new
engines or modification of current
diesel engines. DME is safe to use as
fuel. In this project, Bio-DME will be
produced from black liquor, a by-product
of paper pulp manufacturing, in a
demonstration plant in Sweden.
According to a press release
by Volvo Trucks in September
2009 (http://pnt.volvo.com/e/get-
Pdf.aspx?id=7643), “In 2010, Volvo
Trucks will be the first truck manufacturer
to start conducting comprehensive
field tests involving Bio-DME.
Testing is scheduled to run through
2012, and will cover the entire DME
chain, from biomass gasification to the
development of dedicated additives to
experiments using Bio-DME as a fuel
in a fleet of 14 trucks under ordinary
driving conditions.”
In the same press release Mats
Franzén, product manager engines
at Volvo Trucks said, “Volvo’s DME
truck uses a regular D13 engine, which
after some modifications to the tank
system, injection system, and engine
management software, functions perfectly
together with the biofuel. Behind
the wheel, it’s business as usual.
Performance and driving properties
are exactly the same as in the diesel
variant. The difference and the major
benefit with Bio-DME lies in its low
carbon dioxide emissions.”
fuels of the future
By Nurhan Dunford
FAPC Oil/Oilseed Specialist
nurhan.dunford@okstate.edu
DME can be a good alternative fuel to replace
petroleum diesel, but it is important to point
out DME has a number of disadvantages.
In an article published in Fleet-
Owner Newsline, a daily e-newsletter
written for executives and managers
of commercial-trucking fleets,
Jim McCandless of Alternative Fuel
Technologies said, “Although DME’s
energy density is lower than diesel, the
overall engine thermal efficiency is the
same or higher. DME also costs less
than diesel on an equal energy basis;
1.8 gallons of DME will cost less than
1 gallon of diesel, assuming $70/bbl or
higher oil price.”
He also said, “Fuel’s sootlessness
permits the use of very high exhaust
gas recirculation (EGR) rates to lower
oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions
without having to use after-treatment
devices such as particulate traps and
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
catalysts requiring the injection of urea
to lower NOx in the exhaust stream.
Another positive factor, the fuel injection
pressures can be much lower than
are currently needed by diesel engines.
DME engines need injection pressures
of about 6,500 psi, where diesel
engines currently require pressures upward
of 30,000 psi. The lower pressure
requirements greatly simplify the fuel
injection equipment.”
DME can be a good alternative
fuel to replace petroleum diesel, but
it is important to point out DME has
a number of disadvantages.
It has been reported
DME is not compatible
with many types of plastics
and rubbers, which
may lead to valve seal
failure if engine components
are not chosen
properly.
It also is a concern
that DME is significantly
more flammable (lower
flashpoint temperature
and lower auto-ignition
temperature) and volatile
than petroleum diesel.
Additional fuel handling
safety measures need be
implemented to minimize
the potential for fire or
explosion before switching
to DME from petroleum
diesel. DME fuel
tank and fuel lines have
to be grounded to avert
electrostatic charge buildup
and a potential spark
discharge.
Furthermore, DME is
a gas stored in liquid form
under pressure, which
dedicated filling stations
need to be installed.
References:
Troy A. Semelsberger, Rodney L. Borup, Howard L. Greene. Dimethyl ether (DME) as an
alternative fuel. Journal of Power Sources. 156 (2006) 497–511.
André L. Boehman. Developments in production and utilization of dimethyl ether for fuel
applications. Fuel Processing Technology 89 (2008) 1243.
http://fleetowner.com/green/archive/dme-alternative-diesel-0904/?smte=wr
http://pnt.volvo.com/e/getPdf.aspx?id=7643
http://www.thenewsmarket.com/volvogroup
Spring/Summer 2010 | 11

Memorial fund
established
in memory of
Stanley E. Gilliland
O
n January 6, 2010, the Oklahoma
State University family
lost a dear friend of the
food science and food industry – Dr.
Stanley E. Gilliland.
Gilliland lost his fight with cancer,
but it was his desire to continue
to have an impact on the lives of food
science students. In his last will and
testament, he specified a memorial
fund be established in his name to provide
scholarships for students of food
sciences. Thus, his family has initiated
The Stanley E. Gilliland Memorial
Fellowship in Food Science.
Gilliland was special to many
people. Gilliland, 1962 OSU graduate,
joined the faculty in the Department
of Animal Science in 1976, after serving
as an assistant professor at North
Carolina State University.
During the last thirty-four years,
Gilliland impacted the lives of hundreds
of students. As well, the food
industry has benefited from his many
accomplishments including his pioneering
efforts toward the establishment
of the Robert M. Kerr Food &
Agricultural Products Center, where
12 | fapc.biz
he worked the final
twelve years of
his life. While at the
FAPC, Gilliland served
as an advisor to his sixtyfifth
MS and PhD candidate.
He also served on numerous
candidate committees.
Please consider joining the
family of Gilliland and the FAPC
through a gift to The Stanley E. Gilliland
Memorial Fellowship in Food
Science to support graduate students in
food science at the FAPC.
Because OSU is currently in a
major scholarship campaign to include
a generous $100 million match from
Boone Pickens, the timing to provide
to this memorial endowment is very
important. To be eligible for the Pickens
match, gifts or pledges of $50,000
or more must be made before October
31, 2010. Gifts from multiple donors
may be pooled to meet the $50,000
requirement. More details about this
program are available at www.osugiving.com/PickensMatch.aspx.
The FAPC’s goal for this memorial
endowment is to raise $1.5 million
foundation focus
By Chuck Willoughby
FAPC Business & Marketing Relations Manager
chuck.willoughby@okstate.edu
during the
matching period.
This is a wonderful
opportunity to fund an ongoing
memorial to the legacy of Gilliland. So
this perpetual memorial to Gilliland’s
legacy is visibly apparent, a plaque
honoring Gilliland and listing all donors
regardless of level of giving will
be displayed at the FAPC. Whether
you give $5, $500, or $5,000 and up,
any gift in Gilliland’s memory is significant.
To learn more about how you can
contribute to Gilliland’s legacy and
impact the experience of a graduate
student at the FAPC, please contact
Chuck Willoughby, manager for business
and marketing relations. He can
be reached by phone at 405-744-6071
or by email at chuck.willoughby@
okstate.edu.

usiness & marketing
By Jim Brooks
FAPC Business & Marketing Services Manager
jim.brooks@okstate.edu
Building your
BRAND
The importance of branding
T
his article is one of a series addressing
some of the criteria in
building your brand.
A brand is the name attached to
a product or service. However, after
additional thought, a brand represents
many more intangible aspects of a
product or service. It can be a collection
of feelings and perceptions about
quality, image, status, or lifestyle. It
creates in the mind of the consumer a
perception of no product or service on
the market is quite like yours.
In essence, the brand offers the
consumer the guarantee of consistently
delivering and confirming their purchase.
It is a normal progression of
thought, if you build a strong brand,
you should be able to create a very
powerful marketing program.
However, if you can’t convince
consumers your product or service
is worthy of purchasing, there is no
amount of promotional dollars, unique
or fancy packaging that will help you
achieve your sales goals.
Successful branding programs
begin with superior products and ser-
vices, backed by excellent customer
service, and supported by everyone in
the organization.
One consistent factor in modern
business is there is almost nothing
your competitors can’t duplicate in
a matter of weeks or months. If you
have a great idea for a product or
service, you can be sure it will be noticed,
and someone will have a similar
version before long.
Not only will they try to replicate,
but they also may have more resources
than you and be able to do a better job
or sell the product or service at a lower
price.
The question then becomes, what
competitive edge do I have to offer,
and cannot be copied by anyone else?
The answer ... Your brand.
Building a strong brand identity
is one of the strongest competitive
advantages you can have. As a result,
consumers will think of your product
or service first when they think of your
brand category.
For example, when you think of
tissues, one of the first brands that
A brand is the one thing you can
own and nobody can take away
from you. It creates a lasting value
above and beyond all the other
elements of your business.
comes to mind might be Kleenex. If
you are looking for tape to wrap a
present, you’re first thought could be
the brand, Scotch.
The reason behind these strong
brand-product associations is these
companies have built rock solid brand
identities.
A brand is the one thing you can
own and nobody can take away from
you. It creates a lasting value above
and beyond all the other elements of
your business.
The value of a brand is commonly
called brand equity, or the worth of
the brand. Brand equity unlike other
intangibles can be quantified based on
history and consumer acceptance of
the product or service.
The importance and value of
branding becomes apparent when an
entrepreneur wants to sell his or her
company or seek an infusion of capital
or possibly take it to Wall Street for
public offering.
It is often the brand that a business
owner has to sell rather than the product
or service.
Spring/Summer 2010 | 13

What is a ”major food allergen?”
According to the Food Allergen
Labeling and Consumer
Protection Act of 2004, or FALCPA, a
“major allergen” is an ingredient or an
ingredient containing protein from one
or more of the following foods: soybeans,
eggs, milk, tree nuts, peanuts,
fish, and Crustacean shellfish. There
are more than 150 foods known to
cause food allergies, but about 90 percent
is a result of the top eight foods.
FALCPA only requires recognition for
these top foods in labeling regulations.
The FAPC will hold a Food Allergen
Workshop on June 24, 2010. Visit
www.fapc.biz/foodallergen to register.
14 | fapc.biz
business & marketing
By Andrea Graves
Business Planning & Marketing Specialist
andrea.graves@okstate.edu
Crumbs from the Kitchen
Q:
A:
Andrea Graves is a business planning
and marketing specialist at the FAPC.
If you have a (marketing or business)
question that you would like
answered in a future issue of fapc.
biz, please email questions to andrea.
graves@okstate.edu .
Q:
The Health Department
notified me that I needed
a process authority letter for my
new salsa product. What is it
and why would I need one?
A:
William McGlynn, FAPC horticulture
processing specialist
and process authority in Oklahoma,
defines the need for a letter as anyone
who is manufacturing a canned
low-acid or acidified food requires a
process authority’s input, often given
in the form of an authorized letter.
The process authority has the knowledge
and expertise of the thermal
processing requirements for low acid
foods and the requirements for acidified
foods. Additionally, the process
authority also has the equipment and
facilities to make determinations for
these kinds of foods. A process authority
will review the manufacturer’s
scheduled processes for these foods
to help ensure they are adequate to
maintain a food that will not permit
the growth of microorganisms having
public health significance under
normal, non-refrigerated conditions of
Crumbs from the Kitchen will be a recurring series
featuring frequently asked questions at the Robert
M. Kerr Food & Agricultural Products Center.
Each issue will include a few questions, which will be answered
by Andrea Graves, business planning and marketing
specialist.
storage and distribution. In turn, a letter
is generated stating the food manufacturer
must follow the guidelines as
noted in order to maintain a safe food
product such as salsa.
The FAPC will hold a Better Process
Control School June 14-17. For
more information, visit www.fapc.biz/
processcontrol.
FAPC Fact ...
Q:
Did you know the FAPC
can help companies
learn how to use social media?
A:
The FAPC is teaching a Social
Media Training on July
15, 2010. This workshop will teach
the basic skills of using Internet
marketing through Facebook and
Twitter. Food manufacturers will
learn how they can set up their own
pages and use this growing avenue
to broaden their marketing efforts.
Visit www.fapc.biz/socialmediatraining
to register.

usiness & marketing
By Erin Early-Johnson
Business & Marketing Client Coordinator
erin.joy.early@okstate.edu
Writing a ...
BUSINESS PLAN
A
new start up food business
may wonder the purpose of
writing a business plan.
What makes a business plan such
an important part of starting a business?
Would you start a trip without determining
a route?
Then, why would you start a new
business without a plan on how to run
it, what your goals are, and what the
financial forecast may be?
This article will review a few fundamental
reasons for writing a business
plan.
Six reasons for constructing a
business plan include:
1
2
See the present and the future
Putting the business plan together
will force the owner to view the company
in an objective and critical manner.
This helps the owner see their
company for what it is presently, and
what it could be in the future.
Focus on ideas to succeed
Writing a business plan can help
the business owner focus ideas and
look at the business’s chances to succeed.
3
Measure progress
With a finished business plan,
a company can use it to serve as a
yardstick to measure its progress and
evaluate any needed changes. With
a business plan available, it will be
easier for the company to know what
steps to take to improve the companies
position, if by chance it is not measuring
up to what is expected.
4
5
Determine management structure
A business plan can determine the
management structure of a business,
and what ways it is best for the company
to function within its industry.
Planning your organization structure
helps determine the talent needed to
build the business.
Communicate to outside sources
A business plan can communicate
the business to outside sources. Business
plans are written as a snap shot of
the business. It gives information on
the company’s purpose, management
structure, and financials.
Gain financial help
One of the main reasons for writing
a business plan is for a company
6
to gain financial help from a lending
source. A business plan is something
a loan officer would request as part
of the decision to assist the company
with a loan.
For a company to survive and succeed,
it is very important for the company’s
owner to plan.
With the failure rate of start-up
businesses being so high, the business
plan is a valuable source of information
for a new company.
Even if the business plan is considered
a valuable document, it must
be used to be valuable.
Not only, is it best for a new business
to write a business plan, but it is
also best if the plan is used to benefit
the company.
If you have questions about writing
a business plan or anything
concerning your start-up business,
please contact Erin Early-Johnson,
FAPC business and marketing client
coordinator, by calling 405-744-
6071 or emailing erin.joy.early@
okstate.edu.
Spring/Summer 2010 | 15

PROTECTION OF
Occurs in different mechanis
Food safety in the United States is not dependent on a single regulatory or testing agency, but on the ability
to interconnect responsible industry together with regulatory such as the Food and Drug Administration and
United States Department of Agriculture, and non-regulatory agency functions such as the Centers for Disease
Control.
The examples cited in the text demonstrate the protection of public health occurs by different mechanisms in
different situations. One is the direct response by a primary or secondary food manufacturer through its prudent
testing that can possibly identify and prevent illnesses before they occur by regulatory agency testing. Another is by
virtue of the health department’s vigilance of illness and outbreaks to help identify unknown sources of outbreaks
once they do occur.
Perhaps, the final piece of the network still needs work connecting with the everyday consumers regarding
current large and widespread outbreaks or recalls. Right now, this final mechanism is dependent on someone
catching wind of it on the news or on the Web. Should there be a dedicated section in a corner of the newspaper front
page or Web site, not much different to the small area describing major stock index or current news titles listing links
to the full articles?
Reportable Food Registry
and PulseNet Network
The Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007 has
directed the FDA to establish a Reportable
Food Registry for the food
industry, also known as the RFR.
The RFR is an electronic portal
used by the food industry to report
when there is a reasonable likelihood
food items may adversely affect public
health. The RFR applies to all FDAregulated
categories of food and feed
16 | fapc.biz
except dietary supplements and infant
formula.
The regulation requires any FDAregulated
facilities manufacture,
process, pack, or hold food for human
or even animal consumption to
report when there is a possibility of
consumption or exposure to the food
product, which may adversely affect
the health of humans or animals.
Although, there have continually
been recalls and outbreaks, the recent
outbreak related to Salmonella in peanut
butter, whereby the Peanut Cor-
poration of America allegedly failed
to act on product found to be tested
positive for Salmonella, played an important
part in pushing for the mandate
of such a registry.
The reference to include animals
likely is the result of the recent involvement
of melamine poisoning in
the pet food of dogs and cats.
Regarding questions of what
constitutes reasonable likelihood to
cause illness, the FDA’s position is
anything that could trigger a Class 1
recall would be included. There also

pathogen patrol
By Peter Muriana
FAPC Food Microbiologist
peter.muriana@okstate.edu
PUBLIC HEALTH
ms in different situations
are separate complaint instructions for
retailers and consumers to report foods
they think may be a problem.
Salmonella Tennessee and
Hydrolyzed Vegetable
Protein (HVP)
The FDA recently disclosed a
product used as a “flavor enhancer”
in numerous food products that was
found with Salmonella contamination.
The types of food items include
dressings, dips, soups, salads, chilli,
hotdogs, stews, gravies, seasoned
snack foods, and many others.
The contaminated product was
manufactured by Basic Food Flavors,
Incorporated, in Las Vegas, Nevada,
and was caught early before any illnesses
were reported.
However, a customer of Basic
Food Flavors identified the presence
of Salmonella in its’ HVP ingredient
during routine testing, and through the
reportable food registry portal, FDA
triggered to test on its own.
Basic Food Flavors began a voluntary
recall on February 26, 2010. In
this instance, it appears as if an indirect
customer identified the contami-
nant in a product, reported it, and was
able to trigger the recall putting the
FDA into action.
Because of the nature of the ingredient
and its widespread use in a
multitude of products, hundreds of
products had to be recalled.
The company is recalling all hydrolyzed
vegetable produce manufactured
from September 2009. However,
there have been no illnesses reported
because of this contamination. Many
of the products or consumer uses involve
the heating of the food products.
Salmonella Montevideo
outbreaks tied to
black and red pepper
Public health officials examined
an outbreak of Salmonella Montevideo
in mid-January 2010 in Rhode Island
of people who consumed Italian-style
meat products, or salami, manufactured
by Daniele International, Incorporated.
It was later identified the suspect
ingredient was black and red pepper,
and additional recalls were tied
to suppliers of this spice, including
Wholesome Spice and Mincing Spice
Overseas Company, as well as other
food manufacturers who used this ingredient.
Outbreaks were seemingly connected
because DNA fingerprinting
isolates Salmonella Montevideo obtained
from clinical cases all demonstrated
similarity in DNA pattern.
Because of the network of health
departments from various states,
together with CDC base system,
PulseNet, as well as FDA and USDA
labs, there was quick identification
possibly linking 252 cases of illnesses
from forty-four states since July 2009
through March 2010.
Without such connectivity and
networking among public health departments
and government agencies,
the magnitude of such outbreaks could
have easily been several orders of
magnitude larger.
The examples cited in
the text demonstrate
the protection of public
health occurs by different
mechanisms in different
situations.
Spring/Summer 2010 | 17

Preserving food
“An army marches on its
stomach.”
Napoleon
The step our ancestors took from
hunting and gathering food to
cultivating and growing was significant.
However, the accompanying
achievement of being able to preserve
it is equally important.
Prior, one of the tasks near the top
of our ancient ancestors’ daily list was
procuring the next meal. Significant
amounts of time were spent, not only
during the actual hunt, but also preparing
for the next one.
Ancient agriculture and subsequent
preservation techniques would
have broken this cycle and in the process
would have given our forebears
the precious commodity – time.
There would have been more time
to think, to invent, to explore, and to
build. Without methods for storing the
food, they were only slightly better
off than the early hunters, who would
have been stuck in a cycle of hunt, eat,
sleep, hunt, eat, sleep…
It is interesting to note many of
the early techniques worked for preserving
food also worked for preserving
other things.
Archeologists working in Egypt
around 1800s unearthed a large sealed
earthen pot. After breaking the seal,
they looked inside and found a dark,
viscous liquid.
18 | fapc.biz
Curious, they inserted their fingers
and carefully tasted honey. They enjoyed
several handfuls of the ancient
treat before noticing something just
beneath the surface. After carefully
tipping the pot over and pouring out
the remaining honey, they discovered
perfectly preserved human remains.
Not all preservation discoveries
were quite that macabre. During
the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815),
the French government offered a reward
for an inexpensive and effective
method for preserving large amounts
of food.
Sugar, often used as a preservative,
was in short supply because of
the war, and there was a general desire
to reduce dependence on foreign imports
of food.
Ultimately, the reward would be
claimed by Nicolas Appert, a French
chef who was responsible for developing
the basis of modern canning.
He would place food into specially
designed glass containers (initially
champagne bottles), which were then
sealed and placed into canvas bags.
The bags protected the containers and
captured broken glass. Should any of
the bottles explode during processing,
they were then placed into boiling water
baths.
Glass containers were commonly
used until 1810, when Peter Durand
patented the use of “tinplate canisters”
in Britain.
While these containers would have
roughly resembled the cans we use
today, they were certainly not identical.
Large, bulky, and sealed with lead
solder, they had to be opened with a
hammer and chisel or smashed open
with a rock.
It wasn’t until 1855, the first can
opener was patented by Robert Yates
in Britain. Ezra Warner patented the
first can opener in the United States in
1858.
However, the first major demand
for canned food in the United States
didn’t occur until the Civil War in
1861.
Canned foods consumed by Union
and Confederate soldiers included
meat and vegetable stew, pork and
beans, condensed milk, oysters, and
green beans.
While there are many different
methodologies used, all food preservation
techniques share the same basic
goal of providing a safe, stable product,
which can be eaten at a later date.
However, they also have played
a role in the development of human
society.
References:
Pickled, potted, and canned: How the art and science of food preserving changed the world.
2000. Shephard, Sue. Simon and Shuster Paperbacks. New York, NY.
Pickled to perfection. September 1996. Brandt, Laura. Food Product Design.
Rediscovering ingredients of antiquity. October 2010. Pszczola, Donald. Food Technology.

from the test kitchen
By Darren Scott
FAPC Sensory Specialist
darren.scott@okstate.edu
Spring/Summer 2010 | 19

P
ast articles have discussed some
steps to introduce a new food
product to market. So far, the
articles have covered the importance
of having a product, a plan, a customer,
a niche, a recipe, and having a good
understanding of cost.
The subject of making the product
has not been covered. Manufacturing a
product is only one part of the picture
and does not add value by itself.
20 | fapc.biz
The total picture (more than just
product) must be considered in bringing
a product to market. Therefore,
processing will be kept on the back
burner, for now, and this article will
focus on “why marketing?”
Marketing may be at the top of the
list for successful companies but at the
bottom of the list for entrepreneur clients
who come to the FAPC with product
concepts they “wish to market.”
Initial discussions are more about
products they “wish to make” with
little thought given to marketing the
product once it is made. Redirecting
focus from “make” to “market” is a
challenge when the world is waiting
for their products.
Making a product from “scratch”
is easier than entering a market from
“scratch.” These are tough words to
hear, particularly when they hear it
from a processing specialist.
Words such as commodity, mature
markets, overcapacity, production
driven are bounced around, and
then shift to words like target market,
branding, the customer, value, awareness,
relationships, and imagine a shift
has evolved in marketing during the
last fifty years.
When I first started working in the
meat industry, many products were
considered commodities and business
was typically production driven. There
was little, if any, difference between
competing products from various processing
companies.
As a result, margins were thin,
missing or minus. Marketing consisted
of “we make lots of product, now sell
it before it goes out of date and has
to be discounted.” Production also
has followed the path of “let’s cut our
losses by increasing volume.”
For example, if 5,000 units were
processed daily at a loss of one dollar
per unit, maybe 10,000 units can be

processed at a loss of only fifty cents
per unit. If the loss per unit is cut in
half, and the savings are passed on to
the customer, even more units can be
sold.
The result was increased production,
but margins continued to be thin,
missing, or minus. By today’s standards,
this is not a sustainable marketing
strategy.
According to the American Marketing
Association, “Marketing is the
activity, set of institutions, and processes
for creating, communicating,
delivering, and exchanging offerings
valuable to customers, clients, partners,
and society at large.”
Thus, it is a system to add value
by increasing customer awareness and
delivering differentiated products and
services. Having a marketing plan can
lead to increased margins for small
and large producers and can be a winwin
for processors and end users.
It is not unusual that about 80
percent of the margins result from sale
of about 20 percent of the products.
Remember the “80/20 rule?”
In the example above, volume and
low price did not result in significant
margins. Therefore, the business-marketing
strategy shifted toward reducing
the commodity side (80 percent) of the
business and increasing the processed
side (20 percent), or to shift product
mix from commodities to consumer
branded products. To shift away from
commodity products, marketing gurus
were hired and given the assignment
to “work their magic.”
The marketing gurus began by
hosting a series of endless meetings to
plan, develop, and sell the new strategy.
The result was a plan to expand
existing brands with new products,
create new brands, and phase out commodity
products, where possible.
My role was to keep a steady
stream of new or redesigned products
in the pipeline to meet marketing objectives
and help keep the gurus employed.
The marketing gurus expected
new products to fit a customer need
(perceived or real) and meet specific
financial targets.
In most cases, actual product development
did not take place until a
financial analysis was conducted. Market
research became
part of the package
and was used to
determine what consumers
would like
and if specific features
were of interest.
Focus groups
were conducted to
test proposed concepts,
product acceptance,
and interest in purchasing.
Information learned through market
research was used to support new
product development and presentations
to buyers. It provided reasons
why buyers should stock the new and/
or revised products.
During time, a paradigm shift took
place within the sales force as marketing
plans expanded beyond volume
and price.
The customer now became part of
the equation. Sales personnel relied on
features and benefits including “price”
as a factor, but not the only factor to
consider when selling product.
On time delivery, accurate invoicing,
credits, product support, and marketing
allowance were non-product
features used to differentiate products
from the competition and support
buyer satisfaction.
Operating according to Dilbert, “If
you lower the price, you can sell more
food processing
By David Moe
FAPC Pilot Plant Manager
david.moe@okstate.edu
units, or if you increase the price, you
will sell fewer units” slowly became
a concept of the past. The new strategy
of adding value to products and
services continued after the marketing
gurus moved on.
Marketing is a way of offering
“something,” a competitive product
not offered in another market. This
brings to mind the story of a new store
opening next door to compete with an
existing store.
The new store put up a sign saying,
“best deals.” When another new
store opened on the other side of the
original store, they put up a sign saying,
“lowest prices.” When sales at the
original store dropped, they put a sign
over its door saying, “main entrance.”
Of course, this is not a true story,
but shows how a “marketing plan” can
deliver the customer to your product,
at least short range.
When customers expect only low
price, they move on if price does not
meet their target. However, if price,
quality, and service all exceed their
expectations, they will soon learn the
“best price” is not always the lowest.
Having a well thought out brand
and marketing strategy, is part of a
system to identify, keep, and satisfy
the customer. Another part of the system
is to provide consistent products
and services.
In a nutshell, “why marketing?”
Spring/Summer 2010 | 21

Providing quality training
T
raditional food safety and sanitation
programs have greatly
progressed the last several
years. Ten years ago, the criteria for
food safety and sanitation was based
on the simple principles of personnel
practices, maintenance for food safety,
cleaning practices, integrated pest
management, and adequacy of food
safety programs.
In 2001, an audit scheme emerged
with the claim to replace all other
audits, National Food Processors Associations
Supplier Audits for Food
Excellence (NFPA-SAFE Program).
“This comprehensive audit will
help standardize food safety requirements
and provide benefits to both you
and General Mills,” according to General
Mills in a letter to their suppliers
in September 2001. “The benefits to
you include a reduced number of redundant
inspections by General Mills
and many other food processors.”
22 | fapc.biz
This SAFE audit has criteria
for manufacturing quality systems,
and the criterion was one of the first
food safety systems addressing quality
systems, a term commonly used
with ISO 9000 and other international
quality programs. The SAFE audit
became just an additional audit, few
audits were eliminated, and other audit
schemes evolved to better address
quality in the criteria.
There have been several customer
driven programs, such as YUM!
brands, Quality System Audit, a separate
audit from Food Safety Audits.
This audit was supplier focused and
not driven to all food processing establishments.
Global Food Safety Initiative
(GFSI) released a guidance document
recently to which GFSI Standards are
to comply. The GFSI was formed by
the International Committee of Food
Retail Chains Organization for “continuous
improvement in food safety
management systems to ensure confidence
in the delivery of safe food to
consumers,” according to the GFSI
mission statement.
The GFSI audit schemes incorporate
food safety and sanitation into a
quality management system. The GFSI
audit schemes are globally recognized,
directly or indirectly impact the implementation
of food safety and sanitation
programs in every food processing
facility.
Because of the evolution to quality
management systems, Tim Bowser,
FAPC food process engineer, and Jason
Young, FAPC quality management
specialist, ASQ certified Six Sigma
black belt, and certified quality manager,
are teaching quality principles
and tools to the Oklahoma food processors
through workshops, assistance,
and interactive roundtables.

FAPC Quality Training
Quality Management System
training is not part of the traditional
HACCP workshop. The FAPC recognize
enhanced audit schemes use
quality management systems to incorporate
the food safety and sanitation
programs. In order for food processing
establishments to fully use a quality
management system, there needs to be
further training to understand quality
as it relates to the processes, internal
and external customers, and systems
designed for continuous improvement.
Dr. Bowser and I have designed
these workshops to give Oklahoma
food companies the opportunity to
better understand the fundamentals
involved in a quality management
system.
The Quality 101 Workshop, Continuous
Improvement Tools for Beginners
Workshop, and Quality Management
Roundtable are held quarterly.
Upcoming workshops can be found
online at www.fapc.biz.
Quality 101 Workshop
Quality 101 is a highly interactive
workshop used to train management,
supervisors, or quality assurance professionals
for your facility.
Customers are looking for their
suppliers to provide an ongoing and
improving quality system enhancing
food safety and sanitation programs.
This workshop presents quality principles
that food processing establishments
need for their next level of
meeting customer requirements.
Identifying various ways of recognizing
quality, seeing the costs of
quality, finding your internal customer,
and learning new tools used in process
improvement teams are just a few of
the basic principles highlighted at the
Quality 101 Workshop.
“This is causing us to think even
deeper about our internal customers,”
said one Quality 101 participant.
Quality in food processing plants
should be systematic. Quality should
be a way of managing an operation to
continuously improve the quality of
processes that provide a product meets
specifications and add value to your
company and your customers.
Bringing a new level of quality
to your organization can change the
way employees think about their jobs.
quality management
By Jason Young
FAPC Quality Management Specialist
jason.young@okstate.edu
“The workshop provided several aspects for creating, controlling,
and nurturing quality as well as key supervision development.”
Quality 101 Workshop Participant
Quality is the tool, which allows for
the implementation of improvements
or changes the way a company operates
by focusing on the needs and expectation
of the customer.
This program will give new insight
to quality and prepare your personnel
for improvement initiatives at
your facility.
Continuous Improvement Tools for
Beginners (C-IT-Begin) Workshop
Continuous improvement tools
are used to maximize a company’s
competitive advantage by helping individuals
and teams work to identify
the root cause of problems and solve
them.
The C-IT-Begin Workshop is designed
to teach participants process
variation and different statistical process
control tools used to see variation,
determine the root cause of variation,
and implement control mechanisms.
The workshop is interactive with professionals
from other establishments
with practical training.
“The workshop will help us focus
our efforts on quality improvements
and allow us to better understand
causes or effects,” said a C-IT-Begin
participant.
The topics covered include basic
quality; data classification; problem
solving with histograms, run charts,
and control charts; and case studies in
food processing.
Reducing product variation increases
customer satisfactions, reduces
waste, and increases profits.
Quality Management Roundtable
A quarterly interactive Quality
Management Roundtable has been created
for the discussion, sharing, and
dissemination of information on current
quality management, best practices,
and customer-driven issues to the
food processing industry in Oklahoma.
The roundtable will integrate industry
representatives; OSU personnel; state
and federal official food safety professionals;
and industry vendors, such as
3rd party quality and food safety auditors.
Specialists from university, industry,
consulting, in-state and/or out-ofstate,
will be invited to give presentations
on topics related, but not limited,
to new and emerging technologies,
quality practices, sanitation, crisis
management, statistical process control,
validation and verification procedures,
and current federal regulations
pertaining to the food industry.
After each forum, notes and materials
related to the forum will be available
on the Web.
Spring/Summer 2010 | 23

Oklahoma State University
Robert M. Kerr Food & Agricultural Products Center
148 FAPC
Stillwater, OK 74078-6055
24 | fapc.biz
Robert M. Kerr
148 FAPC, Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, OK 74078-6055
405-744-6071 • www.fapc.biz
Nonprofit Organization
U.S. POSTAGE PAID
Stillwater, OK
Permit No. 191
Food & Agricultural
Products Center
f a p c
Adding Value to Oklahoma
Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources • Oklahoma State University