Due diligence threat of glass contamination checks

The due diligence bar for checking glass-in-glass contamination could and should be lifted, say equipment suppliers, despite the potentially significant capital costs for filling operations.

When it comes to online contaminant checking, British Retail Consortium audits are likely to see online metal detection as being sufficient, says Niall McRory, European sales and marketing manager at Mettler-Toledo group company Safeline.

"Up to now, it has been enough for manufacturers to be able to say they are doing the best they can," he warns. "But we've always said, it only takes one big court case and that legal protection is no longer there."

Glass-in-glass detection poses particular challenges. But one company specialising in product safety recalls and recovery points out that the last two years have seen a dramatic increase in the ability of X-ray to cope with high line speeds and high sensitivity needs.

The problems of glass detection have been highlighted by Green & Black's (G&B's) recall of a batch of its Organic Hot Chocolate Drink in late March. The recall, which affected some 16,000 glass jars, was triggered when consumers reported finding glass inside the jar in two separate incidents.

Initially, G&B's website suggested that damage to one jar on the filling line could have resulted in fragments entering adjacent jars. If so, this is the kind of contamination that X-ray is capable of detecting post-fill.

But while a metal detector may cost around £25,000, a glass-sensitive side-beam X-ray can cost between £80,000 and £200,000, says Safeline. Ishida Europe has a range of 'top-down' x-ray systems that cost around £50,000.

Jim Bedford, Ishida product manager for X-ray said: "Due diligence is a phrase that is cropping up far more often." Having driven uptake of metal detection, retailers are now doing the same with X-ray, he suggested.