Many thanks yr comments/attachments. No offence intended but I struggled to understand yr RA as detailed below. Not too sure as to the "simple". Maybe it's just me.
The relevant BRC text appears to be -
Washing of protective clothing by the employee is exceptional but shall be acceptable where the protective clothing is to protect the employee from the products handled and the clothing is worn in enclosed product or low-risk areas only.
I note that the BRC use of "low risk area" does not, afaik, involve any allergen-related risk assessment.
The exact/intended BRC meaning of the first quoted "red" text is unclear to me and I do not know of the clarification in BRC guidelines (if any).
Notwithstanding the above BRC areal risk comment, I deduce from yr RA that you have utilised potential allergenic hazards to fulfil the (first) red text requirement. Is this (IMO) conceptually ingenious logic acceptable to the BRC auditor ?
Assuming Yes so that allergen-related hazards are relevant, I am confused by yr RA eg (a) severity due to an actual allergen incident is surely not LOW?, (b) i agree that there could be a clothing-vectored, allergen, cross-contamination hazard between allergenically dissimilar products but yr RA seems to conclude the risk is non-significant, ie no requirement for specialised clothing, or are you proposing the use of clothing be a PRP hence justifying a low risk ? If so, I guess you are envisaging some kind of clothing change between products in addition to the usual Sanitation procedures ?.
Whether an (allergen) option relates to Mary's process is unknown ??.
JFI , some related BRC discussion for a Low Risk situation is in this thread (ignore the IFS location disparity) -