Metal Detector Limit, can we skip as CCP? for Dairy Industry?

Metal Detector Limit and Can we skip as CCP?? for a Dairy Industry????

hi Junaid

you cant just skip because you want to.

risk =impact x probability

1. Probability – A risk is an event that "may" occur. The probability of it occurring can range anywhere from just above 1 percent to just below 99.99999 %
2. Impact – A risk, by its very nature, always has a negative impact. However, the size of the impact varies in terms of cost and impact on health, human life, or some other adverse effect

unless you can justify it within these means then maybe you cant/ can..

 when you say metal detector limit= do you mean you will check metal detector with  diiferent sample size pieces depending on ..? Please explaim what you mean by limit

I am working in a dairy industry, owner of our company says, what is the reference of metal detector to purchase a metal detector. Limit(size) of detection. 

I'm assuming you're asking what are the detectable limits you should be using for the dairy industry?  You would need to contact a manufacturer directly in your area who can educate you.....one would assume reputable companies will want to come and speak to you directly in place to get the right machine for the job. The parameters are what YOU set, there will not be any prescribed levels anywhere as it would be process specific to each facility 

Hi Junaid

We can help in determining the size of contaminates that the metal detector will see if we know what product is running through the detector..  For example is the dairy product in a liquid form running through a 100 mm piping?  If you can share this information we can better answer your question. 

To determine if CCP or not you have to conduct a risk assessment.  We are a fluid dairy and non-dairy operation and do not have a metal detector which is typical for this type of operation.

Attached is our risk assessment.  I actually pulled this from one of the IFSQN webinars which was a great help.

00 - Metal Detection Risk Assessment.xlsx   36.22KB   78 downloads

Hi Ryan,

Thks for the RA. A couple of comments.

(1) Somewhat dubious regarding the use of the RA’s  “graded” severities (health impacts) in this case.  I can go with “contrived” but the text as presented also looks implausible. :smile:  Regardless, I’m sure a BRC auditor will be delighted.

I guess this hazard factor and other foreign bodies are one reason for the long-lasting popularity of the Codex Tree.

(2) Semantically  there seems to be a need for a  “not” “somewhere” within the suggested response to “Medium” Risk, ie –

“End of line metal detection advised unless specifically required by the customer.”