Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Tolerance on Mass Balance for Recall/withdrawal for BRC

Tolerance Recall withdrawal grain

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

#1 Dawny P

Dawny P

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 17 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female

Posted 03 August 2016 - 08:03 AM

Dear all,

could anyone offer up suggestions/experiences regarding a tolerance level when conducting a Mass Balance for a BRC Food Safety Recall/withdrawal.

When dealing with 100's of tonnes of wheat with stocks visually estimated by experienced operatives it still leaves an element of 'guess work' and it's difficult to trace the full 100% of the grain.

Is there an accepted industry standard for a tolerance level?

If not......is there an accepted 'formula' we can follow to calculate what is an acceptable % that cannot be traced?

 

Thank you

 



#2 Jean Blaise

Jean Blaise

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ireland
    Ireland

Posted 03 August 2016 - 09:59 AM

Dear 
it is very unlikely that the mass balance check  will be 100% accurate however the fundamental part is to able to demonstrate that the mass Balance is achievable.
I recently conducted a mass balance exercise and there was a large amount of loss that could not be reconciled. to improve the process. production records had to be redesigned to included waste.
it also  depending on all records available.I  might attached  a template that we use during our production records with end waste if that will help.

Regards



#3 redfox

redfox

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 465 posts
  • 137 thanks
18
Good

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 04 August 2016 - 01:38 PM

Dear Dawny,

 

BRC has no guidelines or some quantified given standard. This attachment was the used during our BRC7 audit.

 

Recovery is 99.5 to 105%.

 

Page 10/clasue 3.3b

 

Attached File  NSF_supplier_assurance_processor_manual.pdf   502.7KB   166 downloads

 

 

regards,

redfox



Thanked by 2 Members:

#4 * Steve

* Steve

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 17 November 2016 - 04:42 PM

Hi,

 

A mass balance is really trying to assess is if there are any discrepancies in your traceability systems, and is a very good way of showing this.

 

For example, if you have used 100 Kg of raw materials and 1000 donut cartons, you should through your traceability system (paper based or not) show that all of these have been accounted for, and none have gone 'missing' (i.e. not been recorded correctly).

 

The mass balance should also show waste (both measurable, and also the usual 'spillages' based on historical data).

 

Mass balances should really show at least a 95% accountability.



#5 McForman

McForman

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 9 posts
  • 4 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 16 January 2018 - 06:16 PM

Hi,

 

A mass balance is really trying to assess is if there are any discrepancies in your traceability systems, and is a very good way of showing this.

 

For example, if you have used 100 Kg of raw materials and 1000 donut cartons, you should through your traceability system (paper based or not) show that all of these have been accounted for, and none have gone 'missing' (i.e. not been recorded correctly).

 

The mass balance should also show waste (both measurable, and also the usual 'spillages' based on historical data).

 

Mass balances should really show at least a 95% accountability.

I just got a NC for 97% and 104% in BRC for  Dry Bean Silos



#6 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 13,975 posts
  • 3853 thanks
458
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 16 January 2018 - 08:41 PM

From BRC6 audit guide -

 

It is unlikely that the mass balance check will account for all materials with 100% accuracy. However, packed final
product should never exceed the quantities of the raw material batches. The company shall justify any discrepancies
and understand the nature of the variance. This may be inherent in the product characteristics, for example, the
dehydration of fresh ingredients or portion variances.

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 redfox

redfox

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 465 posts
  • 137 thanks
18
Good

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 17 January 2018 - 03:07 AM

Hello,

 

When we were audited in 2016, we just showed the article attached on my previous post. The quantification is 99.5 to 105% recovery on mass balance. The auditor okayed when she read the article.

 

 

regards,

redfox



Thanked by 1 Member:

#8 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 13,975 posts
  • 3853 thanks
458
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 18 January 2018 - 01:30 PM

Hello,

 

When we were audited in 2016, we just showed the article attached on my previous post. The quantification is 99.5 to 105% recovery on mass balance. The auditor okayed when she read the article.

 

 

regards,

redfox

 

Hi redfox,

 

Fortunate that yr auditor is apparently blissfully unaware of BRC's opinions ! :smile:


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#9 redfox

redfox

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 465 posts
  • 137 thanks
18
Good

  • Philippines
    Philippines

Posted 19 January 2018 - 02:42 AM

Hello Charles,

 

Since  BRC has no detailed guidelines for quantification from minimum to maximum limit for % recovery, we used that article. Our auditor is also from NSF and the article is also published by NSF. It could be a factor that it was okay for her.

 

regards,

redfox



#10 nomio1972

nomio1972

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 6 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 19 January 2018 - 01:17 PM

We had a similar issue when I worked with dried rice because we could have huge discrepancies between what we purchased and what we packed depending on where it was stored and for how long. I pulled together a brief overview of how we purchased, shipped, transported and stored the product which showed the complexity involved in measuring exacts and then did the mass balance from Intake to our mill to packed product making it clear it used an average milling yield therefore wouldn't be 100% accurate.

 

The key is to not get too caught up with the numbers, they are seeing if you have control of your processes and where things go not if you can round up every grain of a particular lot number.



Thanked by 2 Members:

#11 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 13,975 posts
  • 3853 thanks
458
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 20 January 2018 - 11:58 PM

Hello Charles,

 

Since  BRC has no detailed guidelines for quantification from minimum to maximum limit for % recovery, we used that article. Our auditor is also from NSF and the article is also published by NSF. It could be a factor that it was okay for her.

 

regards,

redfox

 

Hi redfox,

 

Please note that, as stated, my quote was ex-BRC.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate