Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

How to document 'on the spot' maintenance fixes?


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

#1 Irishlass105

Irishlass105

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 46 posts
  • 7 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 September 2016 - 01:06 PM

Hi guys,

 

The site I work for have a PMS system in place which is basically a tick box exercise. Although I am working towards making this more robust I also have the issue that any on the spot repairs or temporary repairs are not documented or recorded anywhere. 

 

This has been picked up in an audit before my time and I am trying to fill the gaps on previous issues.

 

What makes it slightly harder is that we do not have a maintenance team. We have 50 employees tops which include office workers so the repairs are completed by the business manager and factory manager who have worked with the machines for over 20 years meaning that if something is broke it gets fixed ASAP without any paper work to get the product out the door which I am fine with but it makes it difficult to create paperwork or documents which will actually be completed correctly.

 

I suggested walking the areas as we are a small factory once a week to pick up silly fabrication issues which you never seem to notice until its preaudit season and all of a sudden there is a million things to do but its getting the others to find time to do this along with me, I suggested that I would take notes, long them on a database with a time scale and closed out once completed but I am also aware that I cant do it all myself as I am the only member of the QA team and already up to my eyes in paperwork.

 

Does anybody have a suggestion ,template or ideas on how to document or control on the spot repairs(including temporary)?

 

All ideas welcome and thanks in advance.

 

IrishLass


  • 0

#2 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,581 posts
  • 3275 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 07 September 2016 - 02:00 PM

Hi Irishlass,

 

i assume PMS = preventive maintenance system.

 

I assume this is a very low risk product and a 2nd tier FS Standard ?


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#3 Irishlass105

Irishlass105

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 46 posts
  • 7 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 September 2016 - 02:15 PM

Hi Charles,

 

We comply with BRC V7 and are both low risk with a small high care pasteurizing plant on site. With that being said, the maintenance breakdowns all seem to be in relation to the low risk area. Your correct about my abbreviation for PMS. As said previously, as we have some sort of PMS in place I am focusing on creating documents and back ups showing the other issues we fix which aren't on the PMS schedule. For example, door frame loose, shadow board missing screws, machine handle broken etc.

 

IrishLass


  • 0

#4 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,581 posts
  • 3275 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 07 September 2016 - 02:41 PM

Hi IrishLass - not sure i have ever encountered a High Care operation described as Low Risk.

 

Details presumably need to match BRC7 text which i didn't check. IMEX all factorties vary from a layout/risk items/inspection POV.

 

Generic type template attached but, from a BRC POV, will require a xreference to a  Corrective Action form unless added at end.

 

Attached File  Record - Preventive Maintenance Form.doc   63.5KB   113 downloads


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,581 posts
  • 3275 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 07 September 2016 - 02:51 PM

addendum - here's a Procedure also -

 

Attached File  Preventive Maintenance Procedure.doc   51.5KB   98 downloads


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#6 Irishlass105

Irishlass105

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 46 posts
  • 7 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 September 2016 - 03:11 PM

Just to clarify - we are a low risk egg packing site but we also have a high care pasteurizing process on site. 


  • 0

#7 FurFarmandFork

FurFarmandFork

    QA Manager/FS Blogger

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 488 posts
  • 234 thanks
35
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

Posted 07 September 2016 - 08:15 PM

I absolutely would never consider working with liquid egg low risk, egg is basically microbial media.

 

In my plant I have temporary and breakdown repairs recorded directly on primary production paperwork when they do not pose a food safety risk, it's just a notes section which includes equipment issues. A breakdown that results in foreign material etc. gets an incident report, which has additional documentation requirements. They way I see it, if a machine adjustment or repair occurs during a production day, the scope of affected material is that date, and thus the documentation of the repair will appear to me if I ever need to reference an issue associated with that production lot.

 

The fault in this method of course is that you don't have a log or register of these repairs available to search or trend, but they at least have a record tied to the material it might affect from a food safety standpoint, and it won't be missed if you're investigating that production date.


  • 0

For discussions related to food safety, production, and agriculture. Check out my blog at http://furfarmandfork.com/.

 


#8 chichai

chichai

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 24 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 08 September 2016 - 12:42 AM

Thanks Charles! Great help! 

I'm the QA Supervisor but i do maintenance policies and procedures (funny, right   :silly: )


  • 0

#9 MCIAN

MCIAN

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 100 posts
  • 36 thanks
9
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Law of attraction & Meditation

Posted 08 September 2016 - 04:56 AM

Hi Guys!

It's good to be back after a long hiatus.

 

We have currently around 100 machines in our site. What we have, to document repairs, big or small, is the Machine History of Repairs template which are deployed in every machine and serves as a log.

 

 

Regards to all!

 


  • 0

#10 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,581 posts
  • 3275 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 08 September 2016 - 04:57 AM

Hi IrishLass,

 

I just had a look at the BRC7  "maintenance"  requirements.

 

It would seem that you particularly need a variety of responses to clause 4.7. I would have thought BRC would be distinctly unhappy if no documentation for 4.7, especially if this potentially overlapped aspects like pasteurization equipment, Storage areas. But perhaps i am over-dramatising yr setup.

 

Perhaps you could create a (two-person !) Maintenance Section ? Or designate a meaningful person / sub-section within Engineering (if no Engg. Dept, some more creativity required).

 

On the other hand, routine "superficial" infrastructure patrols (eg yr Post 3) are IMEX allocatable to QA "hygiene" inspections, albeit possibly requiring (CA form) follow-up from a "maintenance" section. The form I attached is really more formally oriented to a standardised maintenance intervention than the hybrid routine you suggested in yr OP. Perhaps you could pass it on to the (multi-Headable) Factory Manager for filling in ? :smile:


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#11 MCIAN

MCIAN

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 100 posts
  • 36 thanks
9
Neutral

  • Philippines
    Philippines
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Law of attraction & Meditation

Posted 08 September 2016 - 05:00 AM

Here is the template.

Attached Files


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#12 Irishlass105

Irishlass105

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 46 posts
  • 7 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 08 September 2016 - 06:57 AM

I think I have caused some confusion. I am not saying our pasteurising site is low risk. Our main business area is packing eggs into cartoon which is low risk, that is 90% of our factory and business. However, we have a very small simple pasteurising plant which we obviously class as a high care area.

 

As this area is rather new and the equipment is less than 3 years old the PMS seems to stop any breakdowns, it works very well and we rarely have an breakdowns during production.

 

However, our egg packing station which is mainly machines with a few operatives is older and more problems occur. Just to confirm, we have a preventative maintenance system in place which states the machine, areas needing looked at, work done, hygiene needed after and closing out of issue for production to begin again.

 

My issue isnt the PMS at the moment. Its that if for example tomorrow morning we arrive on site and our automatic crack detector machine is broken and stopped production for 3 hours, we have no records of this, no records if the work caused FB issues and hygiene was completed before the machines ran again etc. With our large machines in the egg packing station, we have contractors who would come in and fix the machines who are from the company who supplied them and they would complete paperwork and leave it with us which is good but that isnt always the case as in they are not always called as our business manager and production manager know the machines inside and out and mostly are able to fix themselves.

 

Is this an issue? 


  • 0

#13 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,581 posts
  • 3275 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 08 September 2016 - 07:57 AM

Hi IrishLass,

 

I assume the egg low risk unit is covered by BRC7

 

Regarding last para of previous post, might refer to the "breakdown" portions of procedure/record i posted.

 

Presumably BRC clause 4 again relates as far as documentation is involved, eg 4.7.2.

 

The point is that repair work is supposed to not generate any incidental FS issues, eg cross-contamination. The verification is having documentation.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#14 sez_1982

sez_1982

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 3 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 09 September 2016 - 07:01 AM

Hi IrishLass,

 

I would have a general log book for each area (depending on the size of your operation) to record events such as unplanned maintenance activities, machine downtime etc. This would provide your documentary evidence that the relevant GMP precautions were taken if any repair work was carried out on machinery.  


  • 0

#15 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,581 posts
  • 3275 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 09 September 2016 - 06:10 PM

Hi sez,

Thks for the useful suggestion.

It's true IMEX that auditors are not unsympathetic to smaller scale operations and aging equipment but they still need "something" to be able to tick their box.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users