Which statement best defines a Reasonably Likely To Occur (RLTO) Hazard?

• A. A hazard for which a prudent establishment would establish controls because it historically has occurred or because there is a reasonable possibility that it will occur in the particular type of product being processed, in the absence of these controls.
• B. A hazard that occurs only rarely and is unlikely in most products.
• C. A hazard that can be completely eliminated by cleaning.
• D. A hazard that is illegal to occur under any circumstances.

Answer: (A)

Think about a hazard in terms of what could reasonably happen in the product and process you’re dealing with, not what has happened everywhere or never happens. A Reasonably Likely To Occur (RLTO) hazard is one that could be expected to occur in a given product type or process, based on history or the inherent characteristics of that product, and for which a prudent establishment would put controls in place to prevent or limit it.

That is exactly what the option conveys: a hazard for which a prudent establishment would establish controls because it has historically occurred or there is a reasonable possibility it could occur in that particular type of product, in the absence of these controls. It captures both past experience and the plausible risk tied to the specific product/process, and it justifies implementing preventive measures.

Why the others don’t fit: a hazard that occurs only rarely and is unlikely in most products doesn’t match the idea of a reasonable likelihood in the specific context. A hazard that can be completely eliminated by cleaning oversimplifies the concept—RLTO is about preventing or controlling a plausible hazard, not guaranteeing complete elimination via sanitation alone. And a hazard that is illegal to occur under any circumstances isn’t the focus of RLTO; RLTO is about what could reasonably occur and thus needs controls, regardless of legality.