Micro Specs for Aseptic Purees and Juices: What Buyers Should Ask

What “aseptic” means (and what it does not)

Aseptic is a system: the product is processed to reduce microbial load, and it is filled into a sterilized package in a controlled environment. When executed correctly, it can deliver a product that is shelf stable until opened (depending on product type and spec). But aseptic does not mean: “no need to test,” “no risk from upstream raw materials,” or “no risk after opening.” Aseptic reduces risk; it does not remove the buyer’s responsibility to define acceptance criteria and verify performance. The more sensitive your application (baby food, medical nutrition, ready-to-drink beverages), the more disciplined your micro program should be.

Start with risk: your application determines your micro program

Micro requirements are not one-size-fits-all. A puree used as an ingredient in a further heat-treated product may tolerate different limits than a puree used in a ready-to-eat, no-kill-step product. Consider:
Is there a downstream kill step? (HTST, hot-fill, retort, baking)
Is the product high-acid or low-acid? (pH influences pathogen growth potential)
Is the finished product refrigerated or ambient?
Who is the consumer? (infants, immunocompromised populations raise standards)
How long is the expected shelf life?
Use these answers to decide which tests are essential and what limits are appropriate for your risk profile.

For baby food documentation expectations, see Topic 067. For aseptic vs frozen in baby food risk/logistics, see Topic 063.

Core microbiology tests buyers commonly request

While exact requirements vary, many buyer specs include a core set of tests that help detect spoilage risk and indicator organisms:

Total Plate Count (TPC/APC): general indicator of microbial load and process hygiene.
Yeast & Mold (Y&M): critical for fruit ingredients because yeast/mold drives spoilage, gas formation, and off-flavors.
Coliforms / Enterobacteriaceae: indicator organisms that can suggest sanitation issues or post-process contamination.
E. coli: indicator of fecal contamination risk; often required as a “must be absent” or very low limit.
For aseptic products, you will often see “less than” reporting formats (e.g., <10 CFU/g) because results can be below detection limits.

Pathogen testing: when it should be required

Pathogen testing requirements depend on risk and category, but many buyers request:

Salmonella: typically “Not Detected” in a defined sample size (common for ready-to-eat applications).
Listeria monocytogenes: often required for RTE or sensitive categories, especially refrigerated systems.
Some programs also include: Staphylococcus aureus or other organisms depending on the product and regulatory environment. The key is to be explicit about the test method and sample size so “Not Detected” has meaning. “ND” without context is not enough for many QA teams.

Spoilage-specific organisms: Alicyclobacillus and heat-resistant issues

In certain high-acid juice systems (especially some fruit juices), buyers may care about spoilage organisms that survive pasteurization and produce off-odors (classically described as medicinal/phenolic notes). If your finished product is a shelf-stable beverage where spoilage is a high commercial risk, ask whether spoilage organism screening (and which one) is appropriate for your category. Not every product needs this, but the cost of a spoilage event in a high-volume beverage program can be severe.

Understanding COA reporting: “<10 CFU/g” and other formats

Micro data is often reported as: CFU/g or CFU/mL counts, “less than” results (below detection limit), or “Not Detected” statements. The buyer’s job is to confirm: the unit of measure, the detection limit, the sample size for ND claims, and the method reference. If your spec says “Y&M < 10 CFU/g,” but the COA reports “<100,” that is not equivalent. Misalignment between detection limit and acceptance criteria is a common reason lots get held at receiving. Align your spec to what suppliers can realistically test and report, or require improved testing where the risk justifies it.

Sampling plans: one test result is not a sampling plan

A COA result is only meaningful if the sampling method is credible. For bulk ingredients, consider:
Where was the sample taken? (tank, fill line, finished package)
How many sub-samples were composited?
What is the retention sample policy?
Many buyer programs also include inbound verification testing at defined frequency, especially for new suppliers or high-risk applications. Sampling plans should be part of supplier approval documentation—not improvised after a problem occurs.

Hold-and-release: the workflow that prevents expensive surprises

A robust program defines when lots can be released for use. Some companies release on COA alone for low-risk applications and approved suppliers. Others require internal micro verification, at least periodically, or for every lot in sensitive categories. Define: release criteria (what must be present on the COA), hold triggers (missing data, out-of-range results, mismatched lot codes), and escalation steps (retest, third-party lab confirmation, supplier CAPA request). This makes receiving predictable and reduces “debates at the dock.”

After opening: micro risk is now your operational problem

Even if an aseptic ingredient has strong micro posture at receipt, once opened it behaves like any other food ingredient. Foodservice environments are especially vulnerable to post-opening contamination. If you sell to foodservice operators, provide clear handling instructions: storage temperature after opening, maximum open-life, and sanitation expectations for dispensing systems. If you use aseptic ingredients internally, treat post-opening handling as a HACCP-managed step.

For foodservice handling and consistency systems, see Topic 091.

Document set: what buyers typically request beyond the COA

Many QA approvals require more than a COA. Common companion documents include:
Micro specification sheet (explicit limits and methods)
Allergen statement / cross-contact statement
Country of origin statement
Certifications (organic, kosher, etc., if applicable)
Process description (aseptic process overview, when needed for regulated categories)
If your category is regulated or sensitive, your document set should be complete before the first shipment arrives.

Related procurement guides: Topic 098 • Topic 099 • Topic 075

Writing micro specs into purchase documents (practical approach)

The simplest effective approach is: define a micro spec table (organism, limit, unit, method, sample size), reference it in your purchase spec, and require it on every COA. Then align your internal receiving checklist to that table. If the supplier can’t meet the reporting style you need, decide whether to: accept a different detection limit, require third-party testing, or source from a supplier with stronger QA infrastructure. The best micro programs are designed for repeatability, not for “heroic” problem-solving after the fact.

For a spec sheet template that can include micro limits, see Topic 100.

Next steps

If you tell us your application category, whether there is a downstream kill step, target shelf life, and any customer/regulatory constraints, PFVN can recommend a practical micro spec set and documentation package that matches your risk profile and procurement workflow. Use Request a Quote or visit Contact. You can also browse Products and Bulk Juice Concentrates.

Continue reading: Topic 095 — °Brix, Acid & pH Specs • Back to Academy index

Previous article: Topic 093 — How to Read a COA
Academy index: All 100 industrial application guides
Next article: Topic 095 — °Brix, Acid & pH Specs