18 replies to this topic

[fgjuadi]

Hi

 

So, I've spent the past couple hours dealing with a foreign object issue  -

We found a 6 inch long metal stamper (It was this exact item - Pin Punch, apparently)

 

Broken in half, lodged in one of our pumps.  This could have caused several thousand dollars worth of damage and destroyed the metal pump, let alone the food safety issue of a giant piece of metal. 

 

Our mechanic recognized the tool company right away and assures me that we do not have anything of the sort in our facility (part of his reasoning : "That's high quality tool.  Much too expensive for us.")   The metal itself still has identifying marks, right down to initials from the mechanic it belonged to still stamped on it.

 

I'm confident it came from our chocolate supplier, but here is the caveat : This metal piece could have entered the tank at any time, with any lot, and may have only discharged recently.  We use two different suppliers in that tank and have not completely emptied it in months.  Not only am I unable to trace it back to the specific lot, I'm unable to trace it back to  supplier A or supplier B.   Supplier A is more likely, as we purchase roughly 80% of the chocolate that goes into that tank from them and have been using only their chocolate for over a month.  On the other hand, supplier B does not have a metal detector.

 

Do I contact both suppliers?  What if both suppliers deny the metal originated with them?

Edited by magenta_majors, 02 October 2014 - 07:23 PM.

[Mike Green]

Wow-that's what I call a foreign object!

 

Guessing neither vendor has an operational/effective tool management system-otherwise they would  have been contacting you!

 

(They should at least have records of tool purchases/allocation?-whether they are prepared to share this info- i suppose depends on how important your business is to them?)

 

It sounds like you are not sure they would be forthcoming?

 

 

Personally I'd be 'shaking both trees' just to see what falls out!

 

or ...... apply the sneaky approach

 

If you have a good relationship with anyone at either vendor- call them up and ask if you can borrow a MAC Tool PP6 punch!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Mike

[Snookie]

If you have a good relationship with anyone at either vendor- call them up and ask if you can borrow a MAC Tool PP6 punch!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Mike

 

That's funny Mike.  

 

I would most like notify both vendors without really letting them know about the other.  I would treat it as we got this foreign object and unfortunately we are not able to give you the lot number involved, but need to advise that this was recently found. 

[fgjuadi]

Ah...

My purchasing department has assured me that "they are both very good vendors" and that since I can not pinpoint which one it is, he will not pursue it (even though it could have caused $$$$$ in damage to our equipment and one of them doesn't have a metal detector).

 

[Snookie]

Not sure what your process is but think the QA department needs to notify both companies and send them a Corrective Action with details of how they are going to fix it so this does not happen again.  Would also include the cost of the equipment it could have damaged.  Forget purchasing does Plant manager and/or owners know? 

 

 

 

[fgjuadi]

Not sure what your process is but think the QA department needs to notify both companies and send them a Corrective Action with details of how they are going to fix it so this does not happen again.  Would also include the cost of the equipment it could have damaged.  Forget purchasing does Plant manager and/or owners know? 

 

 

 

Ah, purchasing is the only department that has the contact / PO information.  They're giant companies, so it would be difficult to get a hold of the person I need without knowing anything like account details. 

 

Edit: Pressure from the top worked, we contacted the vendors.  Whew.

Edited by magenta_majors, 07 October 2014 - 12:06 PM.

[Snookie]

Sometimes you just have to keep working it.  Both companies should supply you with a corrective action of how they are going to fix it and prevent it. 

[AS NUR]

IMO.. you should cominucate both of them and inform about  possible risk on your business caused by PP6... And you ask them on they commitment to solve this problem. 

 

 

Rgds

 

AS Nur

[Antores]

Hello Magenta.  Here are my thoughts on this:

• You should contact both suppliers and let them know. No need for tricky approaches, just be honest. If they are good suppliers they would appreciate it.
• I see there is a disconnection between purchasing and Q.A.  Sometimes these departments have different goals and it is hard to work together. For them “good supplier” is something totally different that it is for QA..  For instance, they have goof payment terms, good prices and good deliveries..  (Heck, I even heard one time they were good supplier because “they were very religions and go to church”!!)..   Bottom line, if they (purchasing) don’t want to collaborate, you need to escalate this to MANAGEMENT and let them know the risk this represent if the worst happen, and how much money it could have cost, not only fixing the machine or in shut off time, but in a recall or customer injuries..
• If Purchasing says they are good suppliers, then use this to your favor, a GOOD SUPPLIER would like to know when there has been a problem or deviation so they can correct it an prevent it.. and this is a great opportunity for them to do so..  If you imagine the worst that could have happened, such as machine damage or even a product recall or injured consumer.. Then there would be formal investigations and complaints, money losses and probably would have regulatory entities investigating both suppliers. Believe me, they don't want that.
• Finally, you as a QA/FS manager must do the due diligence and follow the procedure to report and investigate the incident.  Leave it all documented, but you are not a police or regulatory entity, so if your supplier deny having anything to do, don’t get to stressed about it.. And rather focus on more internal control.. Such as metal detector at receiving?

Edited by Antores, 09 October 2014 - 12:41 PM.

[DonnaC]

This literally happened us today! One of the night shift workers found a metal detectable pen in our meat luckily it was noticed and that meat wasn't put in the slicer! 

 

I know I haven't much experience as of yet but I would contact both suppliers. I know in the company I work for we have a tool check list which is signed off very day and each tool is signed in and out maybe ask if they have a policy like that in place or ask for a copy of their tool check list, that punch thing maybe on there?

[john.kukoly]

MM, you are in the lucky position of identifying a risk without incurring the full impact. You already identified you can't pin it down to one supplier or lot; I would drop the "catch" position and move on to "prevent recurrence".

 

Write it up, all the details of what was found. Ask both suppliers to define what controls they have in place in order to prevent this (everything from metal detection or FB controls, to mechanic tool inventory programs, post maintenance checks, fm prevention training to food defense). Ask for a thorough system challenge. Any company serious about food safety, even the giants, would typically relish the chance to test their system based on a real risk. I wouldn't be surprised if both suppliers find some opportunities for improvement.

[teaks]

Contacting both suppliers is absolutely the way to go, but....

How do you know that this might not have come from someone in your plant - deliberately?

We have had incidents (years ago) when someone through a wrench into a tank.  And not just once.  

 

Do you have any way of knowing - like video surveillance - that someone didn't bring the tool from home and throw it in the tank?

We, too, use chocolate (receive in solid chip or block form and add to tanks).  We empty our tanks for changeovers alot and so my feeling is that this FM entered your system very recently -- it's very unlikely that it has been in the tank for months.

 

Good luck -- hope you get the answers you need!

[Snookie]

Am curious how this all turns out. 

[jcruzborreros]

Contacting both suppliers is absolutely the way to go, but....

How do you know that this might not have come from someone in your plant - deliberately?

We have had incidents (years ago) when someone through a wrench into a tank.  And not just once.  

 

Do you have any way of knowing - like video surveillance - that someone didn't bring the tool from home and throw it in the tank?

We, too, use chocolate (receive in solid chip or block form and add to tanks).  We empty our tanks for changeovers alot and so my feeling is that this FM entered your system very recently -- it's very unlikely that it has been in the tank for months.

 

Good luck -- hope you get the answers you need!

 

Agreed!You should also investigate/consider a self-check for possible acts of sabotage. Consider all possible reasons for contamination.

 

Joven

[fgjuadi]

Thanks everyone!  Update on the saga -

 

Hello Magenta.  Here are my thoughts on this:

 

• Finally, you as a QA/FS manager must do the due diligence and follow the procedure to report and investigate the incident.  Leave it all documented, but you are not a police or regulatory entity, so if your supplier deny having anything to do, don’t get to stressed about it.. And rather focus on more internal control.. Such as metal detector at receiving?

 

 

MM, you are in the lucky position of identifying a risk without incurring the full impact. You already identified you can't pin it down to one supplier or lot; I would drop the "catch" position and move on to "prevent recurrence".

 

 

Yes, now I'm onto corrective action and I've having a hard time ensuring it doesn't happen again.  Both suppliers responded to ask about all lot numbers in the tank, which I provided, but did not return an investigation yet (I'm forgiving on this one - I'll give um more time).  Assuming they provide satisfactory reports, I still don't have a lot going for me on the "prevent this from happening" front. 

 

I've had some ideas and made a list of preventative actions, one of which was metal detector or x-ray raw materials.  These are too large to fit through our current detector, so we would have to purchase an new one, which is out of the question.  We already have a screen post melting pre tempering, but it is post Melting tank.  We do inspect raw materials prior to using them, but because the block of chocolate is so large, there's no way to visually detect embedded FBs. I got frustrated so most of them are things like "Don't buy chocolate with metal in it"  or "Purchase back up Chocolate Tank / Pump  to use when metal destroys first one"  or "Melt chocolate prior to melting tank" or "use log splitter to chip chocolate into tiny pieces then run it through a metal detector"

 

Contacting both suppliers is absolutely the way to go, but....

How do you know that this might not have come from someone in your plant - deliberately?

We have had incidents (years ago) when someone through a wrench into a tank.  And not just once.  

 

Do you have any way of knowing - like video surveillance - that someone didn't bring the tool from home and throw it in the tank?

We, too, use chocolate (receive in solid chip or block form and add to tanks).  We empty our tanks for changeovers alot and so my feeling is that this FM entered your system very recently -- it's very unlikely that it has been in the tank for months.

 

Good luck -- hope you get the answers you need!

 

 

Agreed!You should also investigate/consider a self-check for possible acts of sabotage. Consider all possible reasons for contamination.

 

Joven

Now this is interesting -

Ah, we do have video surveillance.  Is it unfortunate in that we do not *record* this footage (they only have cameras to violate our privacy and make us feel watched).  Access to the top of the tank is already restricted to 2 floor employees, 1 of which is supervisor, and maintenance (plus inspections).  We do tool inventory, and don't have pin punches or MAC Tools; I'm confident it didn't come from our factory, but maybe an employee's home?  The initials on the Pin Punch don't match any of the employees with access to the tanks. I'm open to exploring this, but  I'm not sure how exactly would one go about investigating if they were convinced it was an act of sabotage ?  Employee interviews?  Home raids of their garages?   Compare names against list of suspected Communists? Fire them all and let God sort it out?

Threw a wrench in the works, eh?

To organize and teach, no doubt, Is very good — that's true, But still we can't succeed without The Good Old Wooden Shoe

[teaks]

I totally agree with you on raw material inspection -- it's completely unpractical, and besides, that's why we use approved suppliers!  Their HACCP/HARPC systems are supposed to prevent this kind of thing.  

 

As for the sabotage angle -- we only identified it after a pattern emerged (weird equipment problems, downtime, then the wrench(es)) around a particular employee.  You have good documentation of who works on the equipment and when the incident happened, so if something else weird happens, you can start looking for a pattern.  And if it is an employee, who thinks they got away with something, it's likely the employee will try something else.

 

You may never know what happened, but you are doing (more than) your due diligence!

[Snookie]

?  Employee interviews?  Home raids of their garages?   Compare names against list of suspected Communists? Fire them all and let God sort it out?

Threw a wrench in the works, eh?

To organize and teach, no doubt, Is very good — that's true, But still we can't succeed without The Good Old Wooden Shoe

 

Why pick on just the communists, when you have republicans, democrats, tea partyers, liberals, socialists, and the list goes on.  (Can you see Mr. I getting itchy over this conversation )  Fire them all and let God sort it out, makes so much more work. Somehow don't think the wooden shoe would taste good in chocolate but like the concept.  Can't wait to hear about the reports......

[freeromios]

One remark: Never fully emptying tanks is a really REALLY bad practice regarding the traceability of your products.

It could cause a lot of trouble in the future, much more significant than the one you mentioned here.

[fgjuadi]

One remark: Never fully emptying tanks is a really REALLY bad practice regarding the traceability of your products.

It could cause a lot of trouble in the future, much more significant than the one you mentioned here.

Word.  I agree.  We ended up emptying them and scraping them down one by one over the "break" time .  I'm still not confident just scraping is adequate (I want to hire tank cleaners to come out & clean), but I'm having a harder time with using water / chemicals, because introducing water is bad, and the drying time, enclosed space work, work from height, etc