4 replies to this topic

[PQAManager]

Recently we had our SQF audit and got a minor for 11.1.7.2 Equipment an utensils shall be designed, constructed, installed, operated, and maintained to meet any applicable regulatory requirements and to not pose a contamination threat to products.  Minor: A "Egg Crate" was being used in production to sit on.  The crate is not designed for this purpose nor was it maintained as it was broken in several places.  The broken piece on the crate could create possible foreign contamination. 

 

My question is: What do I put as a root cause? I can't say it's an oversight on our part, even though it was...  I tried that response last year.  We are not deliberately doing things we are not supposed to, usually one of the production guys was sitting on it when I did my rounds and I never thought about it.  We've only been SQF certified for 3 years so we are still learning.  Any body feel like "Where's Waldo?" doing food safety inspections?

[AJL]

That is SO picky! This claus should be used to focus on equipment used for processing of food -  and mostly food contact materials. So I think it's a really picky!

RCA:

Why: Milk crate was used as a seat and was not broken 

Why: Overlooked by both maintenance and QA

Why: There was often someone seated there during the rounds so the object could not be inspected

You actually don't need to do all 5 whys

Corrective action: Remove crate and provide an alternative seating solution 

Preventative action : Training for maintenance, QA does the rounds at different time periods in order to catch more things, when doing the risk assessment for frequency of internal audits, assess that site standard needs to be audited more frequently. 

Hope that helps you out. 

Honestly, drives me mad as I can't see a serious issue. I would have named it to you but NO non conformity ..

Edited by AJL, 28 July 2023 - 10:07 PM.

[SQFconsultant]

A milk crate wasimproperly placed in production.

The crate has been removed and the area has been inspected for any fragments.

All employees in production were trained on the importance of taking breaks in the canteen, lunch room etc.

Document it, do a training record and that's it.

[Charles.C]

Recently we had our SQF audit and got a minor for 11.1.7.2 Equipment an utensils shall be designed, constructed, installed, operated, and maintained to meet any applicable regulatory requirements and to not pose a contamination threat to products.  Minor: A "Egg Crate" was being used in production to sit on.  The crate is not designed for this purpose nor was it maintained as it was broken in several places.  The broken piece on the crate could create possible foreign contamination. 

 

My question is: What do I put as a root cause? I can't say it's an oversight on our part, even though it was...  I tried that response last year.  We are not deliberately doing things we are not supposed to, usually one of the production guys was sitting on it when I did my rounds and I never thought about it.  We've only been SQF certified for 3 years so we are still learning.  Any body feel like "Where's Waldo?" doing food safety inspections?

The specific safety-related criticism was "possible foreign contamination" so IMO that is the one which needs a "training" response.

And possibly covered by Pre-Op documentation if currently not included?

[Scotty_SQF]

Agree with Charles, I think the main concern of the auditor was that the crate was broken and pieces could be sources of foreign material contamination.  That is where you should focus on the root cause, corrective and, don't forget, they require a preventative action as well.