14 replies to this topic

[D-D]

Well January is done already. Anyone been audited (or carried out an audit) against V6 yet? Findings and comments...?

Edited by D-D, 02 February 2012 - 11:39 AM.

[GMO]

Nope but I will watch this thread with interest because after reading this document today, I think my interpretation was a bit off in places:

http://www.brcglobal...2 11 1 12.docx

The attachment is on this page if the above link doesn't work.

http://www.brcglobal...s/Food/FAQ.aspx

[Kamwenji Njuma]

Hi not yet but am sure am in the first group.Mine is at the end of this month.

Regards,
Kamwenji

[Marco Stefano]

Yes. Twice already, 2 more in June / July.

5 minors for the first site, 3 minors for the second, so hopefully 2 A grades.
Much emphasis on GMP & plant / amenities on the first day. Second day (systems audit) was intense, little time to fit it all in.
Very keen on seeing investigations into root cause on any systems dealing with non-corforming products, calibrations, analyses, etc., and also seeing corrective & preventative actions defined in all of these systems.

Having been heavily involved in the transition to the new version, I attended both audits and was very busy retrieving system documents & information while the auditor carried on with more clauses. These audits would have been very difficult, if not impossible to complete in 2 days without at least 2 people full-time with the auditor and more people drafted in as we went into different areas.

I got the feeling that the auditors were told not to give an inch, so not much leeway for systems being in transition and having an action plan. Fair enough - we have had 6 months to comply!

Good luck to all with their audits, Mark.

[scuba1]

I have seen 2 issue 6 audits and would say there has been a clear change in emphasis from mostly a paperwork/systems review to GMP. Half the audit time must now be spent on the plant.
In order to get around the time issue for small / basic plants the traceability test for example was shown to the auditor in the site lab for instance rather than being taken up to a meeting room or looking at engineering procedures in the enginerring workshop etc.
Line start-ups (eg after a cleadown) and shift switchovers also need to be seen. This can mean either a very early or late start/finish to fit in with the plant. Of the NC's that are being raised there seems to be a move to GMP also. I would guess between 50-90% of the NC's are GMP related.
Regarding the various new clauses, proactive sites either already had most of the items in place or fairly small tweeks have been made to cover them off.
There is a lot of emphasis on root cause and risk analysis. For root cause, sites are typically using the 5 Why's or fishbone approaches as it easily demonstrates the process taken to get to the RC.

[maurocon]

YES.

Grade A confirmed for the main unit (pig slaughterhouse and cutting plant, 11.000 pigs/week, more or less) and extension to a small unit (cutting plant).

Auditor gave much emphasis on:

• Food contact materials, certificates of conformity of packaging
• Water distribution system and water treatment
• Factory layout and definition of the production risk zones (and related site plans)
• Knife control policy and, in general, foreign body detection procedure

Not easy, but not impossible!

Good luck

[GMO]

Yep, 4 minors which if confirmed will mean a grade A.

My experience is it wasn't possible to spend 50% of the time in the factory (small site) and my auditor laughed when I told him about doing the traceability in the QA office and called that "cheating"! Several of the aspects which are meant to be audited in the shop floor can't be. How can you prove your pest contractor is trained in the factory? Hmm.

All that said, from our experience and from that of Campden, they're finding basic GMP 'sillies' to be one of the biggest sections of non conformances; more time in the factory = more time to see the silly stuff. We had no non conformances on paperwork and systems.

I found all of the non conformances raised though to be really minor, even Campden and BRC themselves agreed they were picky. I don't know whether that reflects our auditor or how the standard generally is being audited. Certainly if the non conformances we had were typical, I see a lot of factories getting grade 'B'.

[birmingham2000]

I have seen 2 issue 6 audits and would say there has been a clear change in emphasis from mostly a paperwork/systems review to GMP. Half the audit time must now be spent on the plant. In order to get around the time issue for small / basic plants the traceability test for example was shown to the auditor in the site lab for instance rather than being taken up to a meeting room or looking at engineering procedures in the enginerring workshop etc. Line start-ups (eg after a cleadown) and shift switchovers also need to be seen. This can mean either a very early or late start/finish to fit in with the plant. Of the NC's that are being raised there seems to be a move to GMP also. I would guess between 50-90% of the NC's are GMP related. Regarding the various new clauses, proactive sites either already had most of the items in place or fairly small tweeks have been made to cover them off. There is a lot of emphasis on root cause and risk analysis. For root cause, sites are typically using the 5 Why's or fishbone approaches as it easily demonstrates the process taken to get to the RC.

What is the 5 why's and fishbone approach?

Edited by birmingham2000, 01 April 2012 - 07:24 PM.

[hr49]

Audited in January by a very hawk eyed auditor. Concentrated mainly on GMP and watching operators working against procedures. Only a small site, but the auditor was clearly at home in a factory environment spending about 7 hours on plant. I'm sure there were still aspects of the standard we did not get through within the 2 day audit, but maintained grade A for another year.

Agree with GMO about 'picky' auditing and can definitely see some sites slipping a grade, probably unjustifiably!

Good luck to all those still to be audited, not sure why anyone would choose an unannounced audit, having months to prepare was stressful enough

[Charles.C]

What is the 5 why's and fishbone approach?

Dear Birmingham,

QC Tools for Blowing Yr Mind.

Can try these links (100s of others in Google) -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Whys

http://www.bulsuk.co...y-articles.html

Rgds / Charles.C

[Mendeljev]

We had our BRC 6 /IFS 6 audit last week and have had 13 minors, mainly GMP-related

For BRC we obtained a B-Level
For IFS we stayed at A level

It was the 2nd year with the same auditor and I have to say that it was a lot more in detail. Last year we had about 2 hours in the factory, We now spent each day 2 hours in the factory.

As we had only 4 months to prepare and this is my first audit as a QM, I 'm really pleased with this result.

The auditor also stressed that they are put under pressure to become more severe and therefor have to limit the A-Levels. He told me that most of the plants he visited got a c-level for the BRC6

Can anyone tell me if there is a big difference (for customers) in perception for having a B-grade instead of an A-Grade ?

[Dalways]

Yes two audits in one week with 3 minor for one site and 4 for other . Two grade A .

[Wine Gum]

had an audit in June - 4 minor non-conformaties, therefore still A-grade. Was very intense, especially to make sure ALL the requirements as per each clause are covered in documentation. Non-conformaties were for some of the requirements that were not fully implemented. Also much emphasis on root cause analysis corrective actions raised since January 2012. So, make sure you cover all aspects of the standard.

Makayla

[Arturo]

Hello,

Yes, we hadours in April, has it is mentioned a lot o focus on GMP and for us also ontraining with a lot of questions to the operators (HACCP, BRC, Quality Alerts,etc) we got a minor, and we did do a lot of training to the workers.

This is ourfirst BRC, so I do not have the means to compare to the V5. (Hope it helps)

Regards,Arturo.

[Pava]

Hello,



May i know if it is necessry to have a 5 why APPROCH or Fish bone diagram analysis for root cause, Here we have created a global action plan and we have bben using it since years. Do you think that a Global action plan is sufficient for the root cause analysis.

This Global action plan contains the description of the Non conformities, the actions taken and the people responsible for the actions to be taken and the Closing date of the Non conformity .... We do not have any kind of further verification of the non conformity once it is closed or the cause for the non conformity has been addressed.


I think it is highly impossible for us to do the root cause analysis for all the non conformities identified using the Fish bone or 5 whys method.



Any suggestions please.



Thank you



Regards

Pavan

Edited by Pava, 13 August 2012 - 11:20 AM.