Food production premises have never been under closer scrutiny. Not only are the legislators keen to ensure the safety of consumers, but the power of the major retailers to dictate how manufacturers run their operations is greater than ever.
With the arrival last year of its fourth edition, the British Retail Consortium's (BRC's) Global Standard is its most stringent test for suppliers yet. Auditors inspect around 6,000 plants in 23 countries for BRC compliance every year. From a plant design viewpoint, it is changes to the section of the standard covering layout, product flow and segregation, that food manufacturers need to be especially aware of if they're aiming to comply with the new version.
For the first time, compliance with all the clauses in this section is one of the fundamental requirements of the standard. While some sections of the standard effectively give companies an opportunity to deal with problems through corrective actions, fundamental requirements offer no such opportunity.
"The new standard is more onerous if companies are not well prepared for their evaluation," says Jacqui Slatter, client inspection services manager for BRC-certified auditor EFSIS. The certification and inspection business was acquired last December by SAI Global Group in a £5.6m deal.
"Making more requirements fundamental now means that companies will not gain certification or could be suspended from the scheme. They then have to complete the whole evaluation process again," adds Slatter.
The consequences of failure can be catastrophic. "If a plant fails an inspection it's up to the retailer to decide what to do," says Kevin Swoffer, head of technical services for BRC. "But I know of a case where a large supplier failed on a fundamental clause and from that day its major supermarket customer didn't take anything from that manufacturer because they felt it compromised their due diligence," he adds.
"The trouble is that achieving compliance with many of the fundamental clauses is going to take time because many of them are primarily systems issues," adds Swoffer. So if a supplier hasn't been carrying out a programme of internal audits, for example, simply writing up a plan to do so wouldn't be enough to satisfy the auditors. The company would have to demonstrate that it had a genuine working programme in place and that could take months.
For the first six months of 2005, the old and new versions of the BRC standard operated in parallel, with manufacturers able to choose which version they wished to be certified to. But from July, the fourth edition took over entirely.
High and low risk areas
"Segregation between high and low risk areas has been going on for years, but the demands are becoming more stringent," says consulting engineer Geoff Willett. A high risk area is one that handles material that is vulnerable to contamination by pathogens, such as food that won't be cooked any further by the manufacturer. "The attitude used to be that if people are going to be cooking products at home it'll be OK. Now they have to be able to eat them safely at the factory gate because people can't be trusted to cook them properly," says Willett.
But segregation is not just about having walls in the right places, it's also about the management of air, people, ingredients and products as they move around the site.
For example, a plant processing organic and non-organic vegetables wouldn't need to separate areas of the factory, as long as it had the correct procedures in place. If it processed the organic food at the start of each shift and the non-organic food later that would be fine, provided the plant was cleaned thoroughly between shifts.
According to Willett, it's the small and medium sized operations that are finding it the most difficult to sort out segregation. "I recently carried out a consultation for a small ready meals company and their segregation between high and low risk areas had to be totally reviewed. They just didn't know where to start," he says. "My job is to look at the process flow and say how best to change the configuration with minimum cost."
Cooking areas are obviously critical, especially for smaller, batch operations that are more likely to use open pans, rather than the entirely closed processes more typical of larger-scale, continuous production processes. "The pan would be on the low risk side and you'd need a pipe feeding the cooked product through a wall into the cooked area. Or if you're cooking pasta or veg you might have a long tunnel cooker that passes through the wall," explains Willett.
Sunderland-based chicked processor Challenger Foods, which also has EFSIS higher level accreditation, has recently refurbished its factory to increase capacity. It redesigned the layout and adopted new procedures to improve hygiene levels throughout the plant.
But the design of less obvious, peripheral areas is also coming under increasing scrutiny. Another of Willett's recent clients produces cooked meats for a major supermarket's premium own-label range. "They want to look at everything," he says. "I've even had to map out the roof space to make sure the auditors can access absolutely everywhere."
Staff changing facilities are another example. Many companies will need one changing area for people entering low risk areas and another for high risk personnel. "There are even some factories where they want high and low risk personnel to have separate eating areas," says Willett.
Air flow failings
Air flow around a plant is another common stumbling block. Bill Treddenick, a director of project management firm Lorien Engineering Solutions, says: "Air conditioning and ventilation is very important and it's easy to score an own goal by having excellent segregation but not taking proper account of air flows."
As in pharmaceuticals, high risk areas generally operate at a slightly elevated pressure to prevent pathogens from entering. This can be a major expense, according to Willett: "You want your high risk area to be as small as possible, with as few holes as possible to minimise air costs. It's like blowing up a balloon. The more holes there are, the faster you lose the pressure."
Another tip to save money in the longer term is to make spaces as flexible as possible, so that they can be changed from low risk to high risk areas more easily if their function changes. For example, fitting the bottom of all partitions with crevice-free waterproof coving, instead of traditional curbs, will make them easier to clean. They will also be more likely to meet the necessary hygiene standards if a change in production flow alters the area's risk status.
The cost of BRC compliance can be substantial and auditors warned last year that the latest version of the Global Standard would increase costs by 15% (Food Manufacture, p10 March, 2005). But the changes are part of a continuing process, with even more guidance already in the pipeline for some sectors.
For manufacturers of chilled foods, for example, the standards situation was set to change again at the end of last month, with the publication of extensive revisions to the Chilled Food Association (CFA) Best Practice Guidelines. Billed as the biggest overhaul in the design of chilled food manufacturing operations for a decade, the guidance focuses on implementing hazard analysis critical control points correctly.
"It's really about making sure everyone is making these systems work. They're things they should have been doing anyway," says CFA secretary general Kaarin Goodburn. "We're not going to say everything has to be stored at 3°C or anything daft like that - we're not into increasing costs for the sake of it." FM
Marmite factory gets euo 10m facelift
Lorien Engineering Solutions is carrying out a euro 10m project to gut and refurbish Unilever’s Marmite factory in Burton-upon-Trent. The refurbishment of the Marmite line is part of an even wider, three-year, euro 23m redevelopment of the site.
Marmite has been produced in Burton for over 100 years and at the present site since the 1960s, with some of the equipment more than 45 years old. As well as new stainless steel plant and automation systems to bring the process up to date, Lorien is co-ordinating the replacement of drains, floors and internal wall finishes. A new air handling system is also included in the project.
“Unilever was operating to an acceptable hygienic standard before, but this will bring it up to an even higher standard,” says Lorien project manager Antony Carter. “One of the most challenging aspects of the project is the logistics of ensuring that production continues uninterrupted while new equipment is brought on stream. The big thing is careful planning and co-ordination and making sure we communicate with the client.”
As Lorien tackles each section of the plant, it isolates the area using temporary walling to contain any dust and noise.
Key ContactsBritish Retail Consortium 020 7854 8900Chilled Food Association 01536 514365Efsis 01908 844156Lorien Engineering Solutions 01543 444244Willett Food Projects 08450 569399