5 replies to this topic

[ads78]

Is it me or does the draught version of BRC v6 make it almost compulsory to have metal detection or some other form of foreign body detection? Lets hope that doesnt make it into the final draught. Sounds expensive.

4.10.3.1

Metal detection equipment shall be in place unless on the basis of risk it can be shown that this does not improve the safety of the products. Where metal detectors are not used justification shall be documented. Justification would normally be expected to be based on the use of an alternative more effective method of protection e.g. use of X-ray or fine sieves or filtration of products.

[GMO]

I think if you read that statement it's not much different to the version 5. I can't remember the exact words but there's something about unless risk assessment proves it's unnecessary.

I would argue that if metal detection or other foreign body detection system (sieving, x-ray) would improve the safety of your products, you should have one of them. Wouldn't that be the conclusion of your HACCP team anyway?

[ads78]

I think you could argue that by definition, metal detection will improve product safety for all products, as it protects against obscure or rare machinery failure, in addition to inherent metal contamination and malicious activity. I work in produce, the likelihood of any machinery contaminating the product to such a degree that it could be eaten is negligible, but the use of metal detection would improve the safety of the product. The wording could lend itself to different interoperation....

[ads78]

Interpretation!

[aps]

Interpretation!

I am working currently in produce, (spuds)

Currently we do not use any mretal detection in which i can not still get my head round as at the end of the day people including me just throw the spud in the oven etc where there can still be a risk. The nature of the product is what I get told is the reason for this in which i disagree with.

Version 6 does this section state we have to have metal detection?

Thanks

[wijit]

As I understand it, v6 doesn't actually stipulate that you HAVE to have metal detection in place, but you need to justify why you don't.
So I suppose if you have a product which comes into no, or very little contact with any metal which either has moving parts or has a physical impact at any stage of the process then you could justify not having detection in place because the risk is minimal.

One thing I would say though, as we all know is that anything concerning FB/metal is quite subjective and so what one auditor says is minimal risk, another may suggest otherwise.