Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Recall of Product Containing Rework


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Buddy

Buddy

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 16 posts
  • 1 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 03 August 2010 - 07:08 PM

We are in the process of improving our recall procedures. During these discussions, it became apparent that our recall program is a little weak pertaining to recall of products containing rework. In our facility non-conforming, edible product is ground, sent to a bulk silo and reintroduced to the process later. A portion of this product containing rework will inevitably become non-conforming, sent to rework, ground, sent back to the silo and again reintroduced to the process. As you can see this could potentially be a never ending cycle.
Does anyone have any advise in dealing with this phenomonon?


  • 0

#2 SaRaRa

SaRaRa

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 186 posts
  • 12 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 August 2010 - 09:25 AM

Dear buddy,

What is your product ? Maybe you could use some sort of ingredients-markers and some sort of spectrophotometric identification of the reworked product? Maybe you could use a second identical processing line where the end product would get a different code and stored in a different silo. Or if you could get just a new silo but then you would have to know which portion of the product that enters the processing line is going to be reworked, and then this "reworked" new end product could get a different code and then stored in the new silo.
With the use of a database program recalls would be much easier to manage. Ofcourse all those ideas I just mentioned will probably rise the cost but so far its the only ones I can think of. I hope they can be of practical use.





Best regards,
Philip


  • 0

#3 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,010 posts
  • 806 thanks
169
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 05 August 2010 - 03:13 AM

We are in the process of improving our recall procedures. During these discussions, it became apparent that our recall program is a little weak pertaining to recall of products containing rework. In our facility non-conforming, edible product is ground, sent to a bulk silo and reintroduced to the process later. A portion of this product containing rework will inevitably become non-conforming, sent to rework, ground, sent back to the silo and again reintroduced to the process. As you can see this could potentially be a never ending cycle.
Does anyone have any advise in dealing with this phenomonon?



I would also like to know what product you are talking about?

When I have had systems like this previously we regularly cleared the rework and started the process fresh with at least one day without rework. If you do this you break any chain and at least have a defined batch period and a small semblance of traceability.

Regards,

Tony
  • 0

#4 Buddy

Buddy

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 16 posts
  • 1 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 06 August 2010 - 05:14 PM

The product is a cookie.


  • 0

#5 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,239 posts
  • 483 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 August 2010 - 03:00 PM

Sorry I can't help but there is a similar situation in most confectionery companies I believe. Unfortunately I left a confectioner before the issue was resolved but all the suggestions I was hearing were excuses to maintain the status quo IMO. Just look at the Cadbury Salmonella issue to see why clearly defined batches might be a good plan...


  • 0

#6 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,010 posts
  • 806 thanks
169
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 08 August 2010 - 03:07 AM

Ultimately Senior Management within the organisation need to understand that without batches all of the product in the market place would need to be withdrawn in the event of a problem. I guess some will believe this will never happen and as such play Russian Roulette with the business. Posted Image


  • 0

#7 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,239 posts
  • 483 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 08 August 2010 - 05:47 AM

Ultimately Senior Management within the organisation need to understand that without batches all of the product in the market place would need to be withdrawn in the event of a problem. I guess some will believe this will never happen and as such play Russian Roulette with the business. Posted Image




Absolutely. If you do need ammunition, I do suggest you look at the Cadbury Salmonella recall and associated fines and also consider that from what I heard they were IMO completely unethical and only recalled products where the final product was shown to have Salmonella in it NOT all product containing the contaminated crumb and rework from that batch!
  • 0

#8 Charles Chew

Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 48 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 08 August 2010 - 10:22 AM

When I have had systems like this previously we regularly cleared the rework and started the process fresh with at least one day without rework. If you do this you break any chain and at least have a defined batch period and a small semblance of traceability.

without batches all of the product in the market place would need to be withdrawn in the event of a problem


Agree! Classic case of damage control using separation planning through dedicated physical storage or time barrier for dedicated process, etc otherwise be prepared for a full scale recall that could financially cripple the company as a viable ongoing concern.
  • 0
Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com

#9 Cathy

Cathy

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 253 posts
  • 36 thanks
7
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 11 August 2010 - 09:20 PM

The use of rework has been the source of many headaches but it is sometimes an economic necessity to use and not waste food. The answer is to decide as a company how big of a recall you can afford should one occur. Once you decide this - you establish a clean break - a specific time when you eliminate all rework and throw it out even if it has not been used. Some companies do this per batch, some per day or some may elect to take greater risks and continue that rework use cycle for a week or a month. It's up to you and how much risk you are willing to accept. Every recall conducted is because product 'may' contain X pathogen or Y allergen...the size of the recall is always a matter of how the company chooses to control certain risks.


  • 0
Cathy Crawford, HACCP Consulting Group
http://haccpcg.com/

#10 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,239 posts
  • 483 thanks
55
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 12 August 2010 - 07:02 AM

I worked for a company which never had a break; that's right, NEVER! People even joked that the product didn't taste right without rework. They had a 0% rework recipe but never used it.

At another factory in the same company I was asked to try and improve efficiency. I tried their process without rework andfound ironically that using the rework in their process created more rework and worse machine performance than not using rework. Sometimes rework is a false economy and the cause for the rework should be explored more thoroughly.


  • 0

#11 Abdul Qudoos

Abdul Qudoos

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 308 posts
  • 36 thanks
3
Neutral

  • United Arab Emirates
    United Arab Emirates
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sharjah

Posted 02 September 2010 - 08:33 AM

Recalling and reworking cookies, how is it possible,


Once the product is dispatched there is no rework , can anyone share me the process flow/diagrams of cookie making to understand the process. and what packing material used and storage and transportation conditions?


how we assure the quality after exiting the product from the premises - how it is transported and stored in shelves and how long (humidity and temperature effect )


  • 0
Join me on
Abdul Qudoos on LinkedIn
Follow me on twitter Healthy_Food_
Visit my website Healthy Food Management



#12 Charles Chew

Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 48 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 02 September 2010 - 12:09 PM

A portion of this product containing rework will inevitably become non-conforming, sent to rework, ground, sent back to the silo and again reintroduced to the process. As you can see this could potentially be a never ending cycle.
Does anyone have any advise in dealing with this phenomonon?


Hi Buddy,
Looks like you need to work on your rework material risk assessment programme i.e. quality or food safety non-conformity. With regards to traceability of reworked products, its not a problem even if you have to deal with multi-pack biscuits but it appears that you have an urgent need to resolve your rework risk assessment criteria first i.e. what should be / not be further re-worked. The co-mingling of materials will certainly be a potential risk to the company.

Regards
Charles Chew
  • 0
Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users