Any suggestion for a Dry Sanitation program and Food Contact Cleaner?

I'm working in a low risk Food Manufacturing Company mixing powdered ingredients in Ribbon Blender and packing it as a Lattes. 

We don't have any Allergens and we only use dry cleaning in our ribbon blender. Right now after each production our dry cleaning process are:

1. we are using a compressed air to removed all the powders left in the Ribbon Blender

2. Vacuum the debris.

3. spray with 70% Alcohol

4. Air Dry

For years we are using that dry cleaning process and we don't have any problem in products. We are testing it monthly for TPC, Yeast/Mold and all the results passed. But recently in our BRC Audit the auditor suggested that we should have ATP Test. We bought an ATP Test the Hygiena EnSure Monitoring System and I've tested our Ribbon blender for an ATP test using the UltraSnap. But I keep on getting higher than 200 RLU, I even got a result of 1500 RLU last time. 

We once tried using the Alpet D2 Surface Sanitizer instead of the Alcohol 70% and got < 100 RLU. But now that we are going to implement it, I discovered that the sanitizer is not allowed in the Southern California because of its high VOC (Volatile Organic Compounds).

If you can give me suggestions of how we can improved our dry cleaning and any suggestion of food contact cleaner that we can use in our stainless steel Ribbon Blender.

Also if you guys know what is the realistic Pass/Fail limit for the Ultrasnap Hygiena for the ATP Test of Stainless Steel.

I still don't have much experience in this field of work (Quality Control and Food Safety) so if you can help me because I can't find the answers in the internet.  :helpplease:

Thank you, 

Sencha,

You need to analyze the compressed air for suitability.

The results will tell you whether to install a microbial filter or not.

 

 

 BRC Audit the auditor suggested that we should have ATP Test

If you have no allergen concerns and your viable cell counts have been low, then your sanitation process has been fine and the ATP test is likely picking up on residual product.

I personally choose not to use ATP because of the variation in results that don't correlate to microbial safety, and it doesn't make sense in your process given that you can reasonably expect the surface to have some residues with a dry clean process. And again, if your micro data has been coming out fine, why would the auditor require ATP? Sounds like an auditor bias towards equipment they personally prefer, rather than a risk assessment of the process in place.

If you really wanted to keep using ATP, I would recommend finding a detergent that works well with dry cleaning. A detergent step to lift and remove soils with rags instead of just your alcohol spray will reduce the number of residues that will set off the ATP. There are some quat-alcohol detergents out there that I've seen advertised as combined detergent/sanitizer for dry clean environments.

Trying to get this product for converting and slitting equipment.  ECOLAB DRYSAN DUO.  Product information looks very encouraging.

Trying to get this product for converting and slitting equipment.  ECOLAB DRYSAN DUO.  Product information looks very encouraging.

_{I agree with "FurFarmandFork"...we are a dry food manufacturer and we have to use a food grade detergent prior to sanitizing our blenders in order for our ATP swabs to register low RLU values and, therefore, declare the equipment "clean".}

_{I agree with "FurFarmandFork"...we are a dry food manufacturer and we have to use a food grade detergent prior to sanitizing our blenders in order for our ATP swabs to register low RLU values and, therefore, declare the equipment "clean".}

May I know the food grade detergent that you are using? 

Agree with others on the ATP.  It really is pointless since you do micro and results are passing.  However, I would think if you do anything you increase the micro sampling and testing of the equipment versus ATP.

You can validate your cleaning with before and after micro testing and routinely verify (once per week) with the micro testing after cleaning/sanitation.  If you have multiple persons who clean the equipment you can validate each persons cleaning with micro.

Leave ATP out of it...correlation is sketchy at best and you can end up chasing your tail for not much added benefit.

As for a detergent/cleaner to use I second the DrySanDUO recommendation.  We use it here for various applications and it works well as both a mild cleaner and a sanitizer.

May I know the food grade detergent that you are using? 

Sure...the food-grade detergent we use is supplied to us by Cintas. Their item number is SK1 and the brand name is Signet.

You mention no allergens......is there dry milk powder in your finished goods? If so, is it in ALL your finished goods? And if not milk powder.....soy? Both are on the top 10 list of allergens.....

You can ask your ATP Hygiena EnSure Monitoring System supplier to give you recommended baseline limits for pass, conditional and fail based on the surface type you are testing. I'm sure they can give you this after sales service. Once you have enough data on hand, you can improve or update your limits which is more realistic to your processing environment.

Well since you already purchased the equipment, you have to make use of it already.

Hello - is anyone using Alpet D2 on machine rubber belts?  I was wondering if the alcohol would have a drying affect on the belts.

Thanks.

Hello - is anyone using Alpet D2 on machine rubber belts?  I was wondering if the alcohol would have a drying affect on the belts.

Thanks.

I use Alpet D2 with similar processing and it is safe. Consider performing your ATP prior to sanitizing. This provides you with a rue reading. Some auditors may call it out. 

ATP should always be done prior to sanitizing step

Sanitizer will "read" and give you an inaccurate number of the actual cleanliness post clean/but before sanitizer