8 replies to this topic

[egonwie79]

I recently received a minor observation under clause 7.4.5 of our BRC Issue 9 for using blue nitrile gloves as protection against water on sensors, knobs, and electrical plugs. These gloves have been the best tools we have ever used to protect equipment from damage, and I am unsure how to address this minor observation. Can I use an alternative glove color instead?

[kconf]

I don't see anything wrong with using blue gloves. 

Does your auditor want blue for food only and different color for non-food? 

[egonwie79]

I don't see anything wrong with using blue gloves. 

Does your auditor want blue for food only and different color for non-food? 

He said gloves are not meant for that purpose though I try to convince him that it is food grade and it is working so well for the purpose described and  we don't have any other alternative. 

[AltonBrownFanClub]

Would these gloves pose a foreign material risk if they somehow fell off the knobs or sensors?

[egonwie79]

Would these gloves pose a foreign material risk if they somehow fell off the knobs or sensors?

No, it will not, and I have conducted a risk assessment in places where I think there is a risk of contamination.

[G M]

Not sure how BRC words it, but this sounds like it falls under temporary repairs.  The gloves are working, but they're not "meant for" that purpose. 

 

The electronics or whatever need a durable permanent protective cover.

[Tony-C]

Not sure how BRC words it, but this sounds like it falls under temporary repairs.  The gloves are working, but they're not "meant for" that purpose. 

 

The electronics or whatever need a durable permanent protective cover.

 

Hi G M & egonwie79

 

The clause quoted is for control of gloves so I don't believe it was viewed as a temporary repair. I understand the view that based on risk assessment that the potential for contamination may be minimal, but, it is an inappropriate alternate use of a glove. 

 

I do agree though a that an appropriate protective cover should be used, if they are covering sensors etc. then I assume they are for protection during cleaning and removed afterwards prior to start up.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

[Dorothy87]

hi :) 

 

a few things : 

 

- foreign body risk - risk assessment won`t help in this matter, gloves are not design to cover machinery parts. 

- you should source special covers for machines or eliminate water splash / usage. 

- if not possible use screens like this one SegriScreens: Everything You Need to Know About Cleaning and Maintenance - Klipspringer

 

 

[Mulan1010]

  I understand the use of gloves as covers to protect sensitive equipment that you are describing.  It may not be the intention of the glove but it works great.  Permanent covers would be something else to maintain and clean and depending on what the covers are made of, might have to be added to the Glass and Brittle Plastic list. Plus, finding special covers that work as well as the gloves is much easier said than done. 

  Right or wrong, we do the same thing.  I do not see the risk of doing so as long as the gloves are controlled and used in areas where don't pose a risk if fall off.  We do date them so we know they are changed out daily and should someone (slim chance but possible) try to pull one off and use it we can identify it.   I think using a different color could work too, but it is something else to have to order and keep in stock when it may not be necessary.

  Maybe you can redo the risk assessment to add in the benefits to using them such that water does not get into the areas and prevents down time and people having to work on the equipment during production and does not add to the glass or brittle plastic risk.

  Don't know if auditor would accept it but could try.  Just suggest you work on a back-up plan in case not accepted as some of the replies indicate it should not be accepted.