Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

11.7.6.3 Detection of Foreign Objects

metal detector rejected product records

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

#1 sqflady

sqflady

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 4 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 12 October 2017 - 04:56 PM

Hello fellow SQFers,

 

Looking for some advice on 11.7.6.3 which states "Records shall be maintained of the inspection of foreign object detection devices and of any products rejected or removed by them.  Records shall include any corrective actions resulting from the inspections."

 

We use in-line metal detectors in the manufacture of cheese sauce.  We use our metal detector reject to run product out of the line until the proper temperature is reached for packaging and also to clear out the lines during product changeovers.  All of this goes into waste barrels.  Of course any rejected product also ends up in the waste.  

 

What would be the best way to record rejected product?  Any rejected product is automatically diverted to waste along with our waste for other reasons.  We do have a log where we record tests and alarms.

 

Is it sufficient to record the amount of waste from each line for the production day?  Would a risk assessment explaining this be adequate instead?  We have an 800 micron nylon filter right before the metal detector as well.


  • 0

#2 honeybunny

honeybunny

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia

Posted 13 October 2017 - 05:33 AM

Hi, 

 

IMO:

 

Is it sufficient to record the amount of waste from each line for the production day? - No, besides recording the amount of waste, there should be some form of screenings on rejected waste to see what are the foreign object present. This can serve as an indication if there is any metallic foreign body generation along the upstream processes and assist in food safety incident investigation. Besides, this exercise can also confirm if the metal detector is functioning properly, i.e. whether it is a true or false rejection. It is also important to compute and monitor false rejection rate, neither 0 nor too high rate is a good sign. 

 

We have an 800 micron nylon filter right before the metal detector as well - This is insufficient to rule out the need to inspect rejection from metal detector since there is the possibility of hard and sharp foreign body generated from upstream processes which may puncture the filter and successfully escape through. 

 

Hope my opinion helps. 


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Gerard H.

Gerard H.

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 126 posts
  • 43 thanks
4
Neutral

  • France
    France
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 October 2017 - 08:43 AM

Dear SQF lady,

 

In your situation, being responsible for the food safety, I would like to have a different diversion channel for the startup waste. Or reduce the startup waste to zero.

 

You need to analyse what is rejected by the metal detector (and the filter). Furthermore, the rejected parts need to arrive in a closed bin with limited access only.  

 

Kind regards,

 

Gerard Heerkens


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 sqflady

sqflady

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 36 posts
  • 4 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 13 October 2017 - 11:59 AM

Thank you both for your feedback.  I do think it is possible for us to have rejected product run into a separate bin so it is not combined with other waste.  


  • 0

#5 Gerard H.

Gerard H.

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 126 posts
  • 43 thanks
4
Neutral

  • France
    France
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 October 2017 - 12:14 PM

Hi SQF Lady,

 

You're welcome. That will be a nice step to study with your Food Safety team.

 

I hope this case will give you inspiration for a lot of continuous improvement steps!

 

For now, I wish you a nice weekend.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gerard H.


  • 0





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users