What this is
What counts as a chemical and compositional result, as opposed to a microbiological one?
What counts as a chemical and compositional result, as opposed to a microbiological one?
Chemical and compositional results cover composition (protein, fat, moisture, salt, ash), additive levels, chemical contaminants such as heavy metals and pesticide residues, and authenticity or nutritional claims. Microbiological results — total viable count, pathogens, indicator organisms — are a different discipline with different limits and investigation paths, and belong on their own record.
What does 'within uncertainty of the limit' mean for a borderline result?
Every analytical result carries a measurement uncertainty, typically plus or minus a value at a stated confidence level. If a result sits closer to the specification limit than that uncertainty allows for, the true value could plausibly sit on either side of the limit, so calling it a pass on the number alone overstates what the method can tell you.
What's the difference between a specification limit and a legal limit?
A specification limit is a value the business or customer has agreed a product should meet; missing it is a quality non-conformance handled internally. A legal limit is set by food law — a maximum residue level, an additive ceiling, a labelling accuracy threshold — and exceeding it is a regulatory matter independent of the specification.
Scope
When is a chemical and compositional result record required?
This record covers the result that comes back from the laboratory, not the sample sent or the method that produced it. Using it for either of those jobs produces a register that can't answer the question it was built for.
Use this template when
- A chemical or compositional result — nutritional, additive, contaminant, allergen, authenticity or residue — has come back and needs recording against a specification
- A result needs checking for whether it supports a label claim already printed or about to be printed
- A result is borderline, out of specification, or exceeds a legal limit and needs a documented response
- You are running the Laboratory and Testing programme and a chemical result is one of its steps
- A linked record needs this one to exist, such as a specification review or a labelling change
Do not use it for
- Laboratory Sample Log, which logs the sample taken, what it is and where it went, before any result exists.
- Microbiological Result Record, which records a micro result against its own specification, with its own investigation path.
- Laboratory Method Verification, which confirms a test method performs as expected before any result from it is relied on.
- Out of Specification Investigation, which is raised once this record has already flagged a result as out.
- Anything outside KnowQuality, which belongs in the workspace that owns that process
Compliance mapping
Which BRCGS cl.5.6 requirements does this satisfy?
BRCGS ties chemical testing to the specification the product is meant to meet; food law ties the same result to whatever the label already promises. The record has to answer both, which is why some rows below sit outside BRCGS entirely.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| BRCGS cl.5.6 | The laboratory, method and analysis type used are appropriate to the parameter tested and recorded against the result | Header |
| BRCGS cl.5.6 | Products are analysed against a documented specification, with units and range recorded so the result can be judged against the limit | Results |
| BRCGS cl.5.6 | Measurement uncertainty is available and applied before a result close to the limit is treated as a clean pass | Results |
| Food Safety Act 1990, s.15 | A label or presentation of food that falsely describes its composition is a criminal offence, independent of any BRCGS finding | Interpretation |
| Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, Art.7 | Food information must not be misleading as to the food's characteristics, including nutrient content and quantity | Interpretation |
| BRCGS cl.5.6 | An out-of-specification result triggers a documented investigation, escalated further where a legal rather than internal limit is exceeded | Response |
What it does not cover
- Within Specification recorded as Yes with Measurement Uncertainty Stated left at No, which turns a borderline pass into an unqualified one nobody can defend on request.
- Label Claim Supported marked Yes while Legal Limit Exceeded is also marked No with no supporting result entered above, which lets a nutritional panel stand on a claim the analysis never actually ran.
- Contaminant Detected marked Above Action Level with no OOS Investigation ID entered, which breaks the link between the finding and the investigation it should trigger.
- Trend Versus Recent Results marked Worsening with Specification Review Triggered left at Not Needed, which lets a drifting parameter run on before anyone questions the limit itself.
- Action Required marked Yes with no CAPA ID entered, which leaves a promised correction with nothing behind it to check later.
Global
Chemical and Compositional Result Record requirements by country
A chemical result rarely stays inside a single certification scheme — it also has to survive whichever food law governs the label behind it, and that law differs in every market the product ships to.
Food Safety Act 1990, s.15
Falsely describing or presenting food is a standalone criminal offence, prosecuted independently of any BRCGS audit outcome.
A label claim this record cannot evidence is a legal exposure in its own right, whatever the certification finding says.
Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011
Food information must not mislead the consumer as to composition, and any voluntary nutrition claim made must be capable of being substantiated.
A compositional result that falls short of a marketed claim is a labelling non-conformance under EU law, not just an internal specification miss.
21 CFR 101.9
Nutrition labeling declarations must fall within FDA-defined compliance ranges of the value actually found on analysis.
A result outside the regulatory tolerance for the declared value is a labeling violation regardless of the internal specification range.
How to complete it
How to complete a chemical and compositional result record, step by step
Filling in the fields is mechanical. Deciding what a borderline number is actually telling you is the part that determines whether the record holds up later.
Stating that measurement uncertainty exists is not the same as using it. The call is whether the reviewer actually compared the result plus or minus its uncertainty against the limit, or simply noted uncertainty was available and moved on. Only the first defends a borderline pass.
A result can sit outside the internal specification while no label claim depends on it, or inside it while the label claim demands a tighter tolerance than the specification provides. Deciding which is true for this parameter is a judgement the form prompts but doesn't make for you.
OOS Investigation ID is optional because not every flagged result needs a full investigation — some have a known, already-documented cause. The call is whether this result meets the threshold for a new investigation, an existing one, or genuinely none, applied consistently.
Trend Versus Recent Results is a judgement across records, not just this one. A run of individually in-spec results can still be moving toward a limit, and calling that Stable because nothing has failed yet is a different call from Worsening because the direction is clear.
What auditors find
Most common chemical and compositional result record findings
The failures that show up in audit are rarely a missing field — they're a field completed in a way that quietly contradicts another field on the same record.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| A borderline result recorded with no measurement uncertainty stated, so the pass can't be defended against the limit it sits closest to. | BRCGS cl.5.6 | Require Measurement Uncertainty Stated before Within Specification can be closed as Yes inside a defined tolerance band of the limit. |
| Label Claim Supported marked Yes for a claim where the underlying result was never entered against that specific claim. | Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, Art.7 | Cross-check the parameter tested against the specific label claim it is meant to evidence before the field can be answered. |
| Contaminant Detected marked Above Action Level with no OOS Investigation ID entered and no explanation for the gap. | BRCGS cl.5.6 | Make OOS Investigation ID conditionally required whenever Contaminant Above Action Level is Yes, mirroring the logic on CAPA ID. |
| Legal Limit Exceeded marked Yes with the same downstream response as a routine internal specification miss. | Food Safety Act 1990, s.15 | Route a Legal Limit Exceeded result to a technical manager and, where relevant, a legal contact, separate from the standard OOS path. |
| Trend Versus Recent Results marked Worsening across several consecutive records with Specification Review Triggered left at Not Needed each time. | BRCGS cl.5.6 | Flag a specification review after a defined number of consecutive Worsening results, rather than leaving the call to each record. |
| Analysis Type recorded as Nutritional for a parameter that is actually a chemical contaminant, misfiling the result against the wrong scrutiny. | BRCGS cl.5.6 | Tighten the pairing between Analysis Type and Parameter so a contaminant parameter can't be filed under Nutritional. |
Case in point
Case in point: a protein claim that outran its own evidence
A product carried a protein declaration on pack. The quarterly result came back a fraction under the label value — inside the internal specification, but only just, and well within the laboratory's stated uncertainty. Within Specification was marked Yes, and Label Claim Supported followed on the strength of that same tick, without comparing the result against the tighter tolerance nutrition labelling law actually allows around a declared value.
The gap surfaced months later through a customer's own independent test, which came back further under the declared value again. Three more results had been filed the same way, each defensible alone, none checked against the regulatory tolerance rather than the internal one. The fix wasn't a new field — it was a rule that Label Claim Supported had to reference the specific regulatory tolerance for that claim, not the internal specification standing in for it.
The template
The template, field by field
The form exactly as it installs. Every field, option, score and conditional rule is editable, and the links to other templates come with it.
4 sections
- Reference
- QUA-083
- Archetype
- Record
- Record ID
- CHM-2026-000
- Scoring
- Out of spec rate
- Direction
- Low is good
- Singleton
- Yes
- Basis
- BRCGS cl.5.6
- Links
- Links Specifications, Labelling
- Tags
- Laboratory, Chemistry
- Sections
- 4
- Fields
- 38
- Follow up fields
- 3
- Repeating sections
- 1
- Links out
- 5
Header
10 fieldsResult ID*
Auto sequence. Format CHM-2026-0000.
The record's own ID. Other templates point at this value.
Status*
Drives who this goes to next.
- Planned2 pts
- In progress2 pts
- Complete3 pts
- Deferred0 pts
- Open0 pts
- Closed3 pts
- Overdue0 pts
Date and Time*
Completed By*
Site*
Site ID*
Format SITE-000.
Links to FDN-001 Site ID
Sample ID*
Links to QUA-081 Sample ID
Analysis Type*
Laboratory*
A Claim You Cannot Evidence Is A Legal Exposure
Nutritional panels, protein content and additive levels on a label are declarations. If analysis does not support them, that is a labelling offence as well as a quality problem.
Results
Repeats8 fieldsParameter*
Result Value*
Units
Specification Minimum
Specification Maximum
Within Specification*
- Yes3 pts
- Borderline1 pt
- No0 pts
Measurement Uncertainty Stated*
A result sitting on the limit is meaningless without the uncertainty around it.
- Yes3 pts
- No0 pts
Result Within Uncertainty Of Limit
- No, clearly in spec3 pts
- Yes, borderline1 pt
- No, clearly out0 pts
Interpretation
6 fieldsAll Parameters In Specification*
- Yes3 pts
- Some borderline1 pt
- No0 pts
Label Claim Supported*
- Yes3 pts
- Marginal1 pt
- No0 pts
Legal Limit Exceeded*
- No3 pts
- Yes0 pts
Contaminant Detected*
- None3 pts
- Below action level2 pts
- Above action level0 pts
Contaminant Above Action Level
- No3 pts
- Yes0 pts
Trend Versus Recent Results*
- Improving3 pts
- Stable2 pts
- Worsening0 pts
Response
14 fieldsSpecification Review Triggered*
- Not needed3 pts
- Yes1 pt
Supplier Notified
- Yes3 pts
- Not applicable3 pts
- No0 pts
Investigation Opened*
- Yes3 pts
- Not required3 pts
- No0 pts
OOS Investigation ID
Links to QUA-088 Investigation ID
Label Or Specification Change Needed*
- No3 pts
- Yes1 pt
Change Control ID
Links to QUA-069 Request ID
Action Required*
Raise the action record, then enter its reference here.
- No2 pts
- Yes0 pts
Priority
- High0 pts
- Medium1 pt
- Low3 pts
CAPA ID
Format CAPA-2026-00000.
Links to FDN-014 CAPA ID
Action Owner
Quality*
Signature*
Technical Manager*
Second Signature*
QUA-083 · record IDs look like CHM-2026-000 · Links Specifications, Labelling
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
The form is the easy part. Keeping every result routed to the right reviewer, and holding the line between a specification miss and a label miss, is the work that actually slips.
Holds the chemical result register against every open specification, flags a result sitting inside its uncertainty band of a limit, and keeps the evidence trail linking a result to the claim it supports.
Tracks which label claims each result is meant to evidence across jurisdictions, and surfaces the gap when a result meets an internal specification but misses a tighter regulatory tolerance.
Watches contaminant and residue results against action levels and legal limits, escalating a legal-limit exceedance down a different path from a routine specification miss.
Coordinates the crew across laboratory, technical and label review, rolls open results and exceptions into one view, and holds every write for your approval before it touches a record.
This template lives in KnowQuality — quality and food safety. HACCP, nonconformance, traceability, laboratory and customer complaints.
Meet KnowQuality→Glossary
Chemical and Compositional Result Record definitions and key terms
- Measurement uncertainty
- The range around a reported result, usually plus or minus a value at a stated confidence level, within which the true value is expected to fall. A result within that range of a limit can't be called a clean pass on the number alone.
- Action level
- A contaminant concentration below the legal limit at which a business chooses to act — investigate, adjust sourcing, tighten controls — before the legal limit is ever approached.
- Label claim
- Any statement of composition, content or nutritional value on packaging or marketing material, which food law treats as a representation that must be evidenced by analysis on request.
- Specification limit
- The minimum and maximum value a business or customer has agreed a parameter should fall within, set independently of whatever the legal limit for that parameter is.
- Out of specification (OOS)
- A result falling outside the agreed specification range, requiring a documented investigation into cause before the result and any related product is dispositioned.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about chemical and compositional result record
Does every chemical result need its own record?+
Yes. This is not a singleton — a new record is raised each time a result comes back, whichever parameter it covers, and the Results section repeats to hold multiple parameters from one sample.
What's the difference between Contaminant Detected and Contaminant Above Action Level?+
Contaminant Detected records whether anything was found at all — none, below action level, or above it. Contaminant Above Action Level is a narrower yes-or-no on the same result, used to drive the response fields.
Why does the record ask about legal limits separately from the specification?+
Because they carry different consequences. Missing an internal specification is a quality event handled inside the business. Exceeding a legal limit is a regulatory matter that can involve authorities or prosecution regardless of the specification.
Who reviews a chemical and compositional result once it's entered?+
Technical review on receipt, with a second signature from the technical manager before closure. A label or specification change goes through its own change control reference rather than being decided inside this record.
What happens if the laboratory doesn't state measurement uncertainty?+
The record still requires an answer, and a No there is a finding in its own right — any borderline result on that report can't be properly judged against its limit, a gap to raise with the laboratory rather than work around.
Does this record apply to allergen results?+
Allergen is one of the Analysis Type options, so an allergen quantification belongs here, but a qualitative presence check tied to cleaning verification is usually a different record with its own pass or fail logic.
Keep going
Related templates and programmes
Industries this is written for
Programmes this belongs to
Used together in Laboratory and Testing
Maintenance Calibration Record
Records calibration of maintenance instruments such as torque wrenches, pressure gauges and multimeters
Calibration Record
Records the calibration of a piece of test equipment, including standard used, result and next due date
Laboratory Sample Log
Logs every sample taken for testing, with what it is, why it was taken and where it went
Microbiological Result Record
Records a micro result against its specification, with the action taken where it is out
Laboratory Method Verification
Verifies that a test method performs as expected in your hands, on your matrix, before results are relied on
Proficiency Testing Record
Records participation in a ring trial or proficiency scheme and how the result compared with the consensus
More in Laboratory
Laboratory Sample Log
Logs every sample taken for testing, with what it is, why it was taken and where it went
Microbiological Result Record
Records a micro result against its specification, with the action taken where it is out
Laboratory Method Verification
Verifies that a test method performs as expected in your hands, on your matrix, before results are relied on
Proficiency Testing Record
Records participation in a ring trial or proficiency scheme and how the result compared with the consensus
Laboratory Environmental Check
Checks laboratory conditions that affect results, covering temperature, humidity, cleanliness, segregation and media storage
External Laboratory Approval
Assesses a contract laboratory for accreditation scope, turnaround, reporting and how it handles out of specification results
Written and reviewed by
Siddarth Singh
Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Knowella
Certified Safety Professional and industrial and systems engineer with more than a decade inside food supply chain, freight and manufacturing operations. This page was written against the current text of the standards it cites, not against secondary summaries of them.
- Certified Safety Professional (CSP), Board of Certified Safety Professionals
- MBA, University of Chicago Booth School of Business
- MS and BS, The Ohio State University, Industrial and Systems Engineering
- Six Sigma Black Belt
Sources and last review. Reviewed 16 August 2026 against:
- BRCGS cl.5.6 — Chemical and physical product testing
- Food Safety Act 1990, s.15 — Falsely describing or presenting food
- Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, Art.7 — Fair information practices
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.