Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Will SQF auditors give a non-conformity when a clear plan is evident?


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

#1 nitchicsqf

nitchicsqf

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 24 posts
  • 8 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female

Posted 27 October 2014 - 10:15 PM

Good Evening guys,
 
I have a question in regards to our upcoming SQF audit and would appreciate any insight you may have into this matter.
 
Hypothetically, during our facility audit we receive a particular major or minor non-conformity. However, we have blueprints and provisions in place to have the non-conformity corrected within a specified time frame (outside of the 30-day minor and 14-day major) requirements. Would we still be penalized for not having met the SQF code? Or would it show as us as meeting this requirement? For example, if we are in the process of installing a hands-free wash sink at one of our plant entrances, however, we know it will not be installed at the time of the facility audit, but we have contracts in place to have it completed by a specified time frame, but outside of the 30-day minor or 14-day major specifications, will we be written up as non-conforming?
 
I hope I articulated this clearly.
 
Thank you,


#2 RG3

RG3

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 501 posts
  • 164 thanks
74
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them" Albert Einstein

Posted 27 October 2014 - 11:27 PM

Yes, it's a non-conformity.

 

Being outside the timeframe 30-day minor or 14-day major you'll be ok. As long as you have proof that you are in process of having it complete by showing a copy of the contract and some sort of date. Under your CAR you will put under contract to have this completed by such and such date. The fact of the matter is, you do not have it in place at the time of the audit.

 

11.3.2.2
iii. Paper towels in a hands free cleanable dispenser;

 

11.3.2.3 The following additional facilities shall be provided in high risk areas:
i. Hands free operated taps

 

These are considered minors.



#3 EmpireFoodSci

EmpireFoodSci

    Grade - Active

  • Newbie
  • 9 posts
  • 2 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 31 October 2014 - 02:47 AM

It should still be a non-conformity. If at the time of the audit something does not meet the SQF code it should be written as a non-conformity. That said, if you are able to put in place a temporary procedure that adequately controls the hazard until the project is complete.

 

For example, standing water in production areas should be avoided and SQF requires floors be sloped to the floor drains. Let's say a facility does not have the best floors and they are not pitched to the floor drains and standing water builds up through out the day. They have a plan in place to correct this, but it won't be done until after the audit. In the mean time, a temporary program is put in place where an employee squeegees water to the floor drain every half hour. This temporary program may avoid a non-conformity.

 

For you particular situation, have you looked a hands free sink adapter? These are quick and easy short term solutions and if they are compatible with your sink will help you avoid a non-conformity. 

 

--Greg


Empire Food Science

www.empirefoodscience.com


Thanked by 1 Member:



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate