HACCP Plan with Metal Detector

Hi everyone, We are a sugar company and we are finalizing our HACCP Plan. There are issues we have discussed on the following process steps: screening (ROTEX screens), metal separation (magnets) and metal detection. Can any one make some comments on the attached file with regards to the process steps mentioned? especially the numbers mentioned. Hope to hear from everyone soon. Thank you for the help.

Hi everyone, We are a sugar company and we are finalizing our HACCP Plan. There are issues we have discussed on the following process steps: screening (ROTEX screens), metal separation (magnets) and metal detection. Can any one make some comments on the attached file with regards to the process steps mentioned? especially the numbers mentioned. Hope to hear from everyone soon. Thank you for the help.

 

Dear chebar,

 

attached file is missing ?

 

Rgds / Charles.C

Hi Guys, sorry that the file attached was missing....resending the file.

 

Hope everyone can have their comments.

 

Thanks.HACCP with Metal Detector.pdf   104.07KB   283 downloads

Hi Chebar

 

I'm not au fait with the Rotex Screening.

 

Can you explain what it does, I don't want to assume it does one thing when in fact it does something entirely different!

 

Caz x

Hi everyone, We are a sugar company and we are finalizing our HACCP Plan. There are issues we have discussed on the following process steps: screening (ROTEX screens), metal separation (magnets) and metal detection. Can any one make some comments on the attached file with regards to the process steps mentioned? especially the numbers mentioned. Hope to hear from everyone soon. Thank you for the help.

 

Hi Chebar,

 

What about foreign bodies other than metal?

 

Regards,

 

Tony

Hi Chebar

 

I'm not au fait with the Rotex Screening.

 

Can you explain what it does, I don't want to assume it does one thing when in fact it does something entirely different!

 

Caz x

 

Rotex Screening - http://www.rotexscre...o.uk/rotex.html

 

Regards,

 

Tony

Hi everyone,

 

Thanks for your initial replies.

 

As for the ROTEX screens, we used a 14-mesh market grade screen that will remove foreign bodeis (metals, sugar crystals etc..) that are bigger than 2mm.

 

Just a follow up question on metal detection(process step), is it safe to say less than 1.5 mm or larger than 1.5 mm. Our MD unit can detect the test pieces of 1.5mm Fe and nFe and 2.2 mm SS.

 

Thanks in reply.

Cheers Tony

 

I think i'd want the magnets as a CCP too. They are still removing metal, maybe less than 2mm?

 

Caz

Hi Caz,

 

Is it safer to say less than 1.5mm or larger than 1.5 mm? What is the implications is it a food safety or quality issue?

 

Thanks for your ideas.

Ok, how about you explain the logic of having the Rotex as a CCP, then after the there are 6 magnets  which are a QCP, then metal detection which is a CCP?

 

Caz

IMO magnets and screens are Control Points, and the metal detector at the fonal step of packeging is the Critical Control Point.

Magnets and screens are CCP's and the metal detector is monitoring for a CCP.  A CCP is a step in which control must be applied and is essential to prevent or eliminate a food safety hazard or reduce it to an acceptable level. Metal detection can't prevent, eliminate, or reduce the hazard. It can only monitor the product and alarm if the product exceeds critical limits. The metal detectors must be validated to show that they will detect accurately at the critical limit. They must also be verified to be functioning properly on a regular basis.  

 

At the point of metal detection, it sounds like the hazards that are left would be non-magnetic particles less than 2mm.

I disagree with bwilson and agree with esquef...we are a sugar refinery and our only CCP is metal detection...magnets and screens/sifters are control points, but not CCPs.

Hi Sugar Mama,

 

I would be glad also if you can comment on our HACCP Plan wherein we placed less than 1.5mm Fe and nFe while 2.2 mm SS. Our customer requires us that FB should not be greater than 2mm. Anything lesser than 2mm is a food safety or quality issue.

 

Your comments, please

 

Thanks

 

Chebar

Dear chebar,

 

Our customer requires us that FB should not be greater than 2mm. Anything lesser than 2mm is a food safety or quality issue.

 

 

As far as safety is concerned, some countries would agree with above (with caveats), some not.

 

I suggest you ask yr customer the reason for this debatable (safety) opinion. Or perhaps you are encountering a similar problem as another recent poster here concerning yr local regulatory requirements.

 

As far as quality is concerned, assuming that the product is for retail, it is not unusual IMEX to see a zero tolerance for foreign materials in typical product specifications, regardless of size.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

I disagree with bwilson and agree with esquef...we are a sugar refinery and our only CCP is metal detection...magnets and screens/sifters are control points, but not CCPs.

I agree, I think the CCP is metal detection.

I just wondered why sieving would be a CCP & magnets not?

Cazx

Hi Charles,

 

Thank you for your quickly reply. Our customer uses our sugar product in their coffee mixes (dry mixing) and if our sugar is more than the 2mm requirement then our sugar would affect their quality. Our sugar must be homogenous in the mix product and will not tear the foil of the packed product.

 

I was wrong to say "if less than 2mm would be food safety or quality issue" but rather greater than 2mm would be a food safety and smaller than that is a quality issue.

Guys,

 

I would like everyone to look on our process step on metal detection on the second column and to quote "Metals lesser than 1.5 mm ferrous, lesser than 1.5 mm non-ferrous, lesser than 2.2 mm stainless steel 316"

 

Question: Is it a correct argument? what are the implications?

 

Thanks everyone for your patience.

 

Chebar

We use 1.5 mm Fe, 1.8 mm non-Fe, and 2.0 mm SS for our critical limits, and we haven't had problems with any customers so far.

Guys,

 

I would like everyone to look on our process step on metal detection on the second column and to quote "Metals lesser than 1.5 mm ferrous, lesser than 1.5 mm non-ferrous, lesser than 2.2 mm stainless steel 316"

 

Question: Is it a correct argument? what are the implications?

 

Thanks everyone for your patience.

 

Chebar

 

Dear Chebar,

 

Do you mean "greater, greater, greater" ? (ie similar to post 17)

 

Irrespective of above, any meaningful answer to yr query may depend on yr local legislatory requirements.

what are they ?

(from another thread ex same location, i got the impression that yr local rules are based on USFDA in which case yr opinion should be compared accordingly). This result would presumably take priority over any personal opinions.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

Hi Sugar Mama,

You mentioned that you use 1.5 Fe, 1.5 nFe and 2.0 SS in your metal detector around this forum.

Our customer requires that we will deliver sugar that passed thru the 14-mesh screen(<2 mm).

Here's my question, is it correct to place on our HACCP plan that the hazard introduced, controlled or enhanced in the metal detection is less than 1.5 mm Fe, less than 1.5 nFe and 2.0 mm SS? This step comes after the screening step.

What's the implication if we placed greater than 2mm?

Thank you for patience.

Chebar

We use 1.5 mm Fe, 1.8 mm non-Fe, and 2.0 mm SS for our critical limits, and we haven't had problems with any customers so far.

Hello Chebar,

From your question, you cannot guarantee that your MD can detect metals less than size of your test pieces. Therefore, CL should be "more than and equal to" the size of your test pieces.

For the CCP or QCP, it is depended on your decision tree answer. Rotex can be CCP for non-metal foreign materials (e.g. glass, plastic, etc.). Magnet can be CCP if its efficiency can remove metal foreign materials (mainly Ferrour) smaller than your test pieces (1.5 mm) that used for MD. However, if you can prove that magnet can remove smaller size...it seems your MD is installed for Non-Fe only. I mentioned this due to your rotex can remove all foreign materials size > 2 mm, but your SUS test piece for MD is 2.2 mm....which is weird and questionable.

For your buyer point to increase the size of test pieces to be bigger than 2 mm....well, it means your company don't need MD then since rotex screen should be able to remove all foreign materials bigger than your buyer's expectation anyway.

I just answer this to let you think. Each facility need to determine the hazard control independently due to different situation and environment can result different control need.

Good luck,

Dear chebar,

 

I presume you agree with the first part of post 20 ?

 

Do you understand the meaning of "metal detector sensitivity" ?

 

Do you have a comment regarding the second part of post 20 ?

 

What's the implication if we placed greater than 2mm?

 

 

 

Implication with respect to what ? Legally, it may well relate to the previous line of this post.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

always worth remembering that screens like any piece of equipment can suffer failures. This is where I see the value in having a metal detector post screening regarding of mesh size.

 

If you are using metal mesh screens understand how much of the mesh would be needed to result in a detection.

Agree with QLD's comment above. If using metal mesh screens, it is worth to have MD post screening. I think the test pieces should be as close as possible to diameter and metal type of screens.