We are in the SQF scheme but as both SQF and BRC are bench-marked to the GFSI there should be more similarities than differences. The relevant SQF section says:
22.214.171.124 The methods and responsibility for scheduling and conducting internal audits to verify the effectiveness of the SQF System including facility and equipment inspections, pre-requisite programs, food safety plans, food quality plans and legislative controls shall be documented and implemented. The methods applied shall ensure:
i. An internal audit schedule is prepared detailing the scope and frequency of internal audits;
ii. Correction and corrective action of deficiencies identified during the internal audits is undertaken;
iii. Audit results are communicated to relevant management personnel and staff responsible for implementing and verifying corrective actions; and
iv. Records of internal audits and any corrections and corrective action taken as a result of internal audits shall be maintained.
So corrections and corrective actions need to be documented. The SQF guidance document defines the difference between corrections and corrective actions this way:
Corrections are considered a short term fix, i.e. a quick action taken to remediate a specific problem and make adjustments to regain immediate control. A corrective action is a long term fix designed to identify the root cause of the problem and to take actions that will prevent recurrence. This process is designed to minimize the risk that the situation will occur again.
It is likely that the vast majority of issues you find require corrections and should be handled in that way. Logged into your monthly audit with a simple one sentence description of the issue, the correction, the date the correction was completed and by whom. Trend analysis of issues or serious non-conformances can lead to corrective actions which require an in-depth investigation. Simple GMP corrections should only require simple, concise documentation.