FEATURE


not only hydrophobic, but also become ‘sticky’ when wet. The solutions to counteract this ‘stickiness’ create their own set of issues in the food environment which require particular cleaning aids.


CLEANING AND TESTING Minute amounts of allergens can cause an allergic reaction in a person. In a trial in 2009 for example, peanut traces were transferred after being held in the hand for around ten seconds. Therefore stringent tests are performed in order to minimise risks of transfer across the food manufacturing process.


Such levels of sensitivity have led to tough cleaning measures. Cleaning to a visual standard was overtaken by microbiological sanitising to ensure a deeper clean. Now, it’s recognised that microbiologically clean might not also be ‘allergen-clean’.


Aqueous Ozone cleaning is making its presence felt in food manufacturing, though its efficacy is still being checked across the huge range of allergens in their various formats on different surfaces. In short, aqueous ozone is oxygen (O2


) with a third


oxygen molecule added, which creates an unstable compound. In an attempt to achieve a stable condition, the molecules break down and try to grab the nearest particle – such as bacteria – which effectively cleans and sanitises a surface. The end result is also effectively chemical free as the aqueous ozone breaks down into clean water. However, an aqueous solution isn’t suited to all food environments – such as dry goods manufacturing.


The manner in which effective allergen reduction is achieved is where expertise, knowledge and understanding of the sector are applied most efficiently.


PROCESSES AND


PROCEDURES In an ideal world, food manufacturers would have separate production lines, with allergen-bearing foods manufactured in separate or self- contained areas. In the real world, however, dedicated production lines are not always feasible. Food producers will often clean down a line


www.tomorrowscleaning.com


to eliminate allergens and then run the next product. Minimum down-time plus maximum cleaning efficacy are both needed to adhere to the required food standards. Equally, the operations part of the business must work closely with the cleaning function to instil the correct processes and procedures.


Top down cleaning, for example, is standard for dry goods to reduce potential contamination.


Also, machine run-time can be improved by staging the order in which goods are processed and therefore the order in which machinery is cleaned. Running products containing a lower allergen count and then moving the line to process goods containing higher allergens will improve the run time by reducing the cleaning load.


Cleaning-In-Place (CIP) whereby a production line is cleaned through with a prescribed series of cleaning solutions – rather than dismantling and cleaning the machinery – relies on the correct products being used in the correct manner. Temperature, concentration and volume of the cleaning agents are all vital factors.


THE HUMAN TOUCH The vital element in cleaning is people’s expertise – the human touch. An experienced cleaning operative, well-trained in cleaning in the food manufacturing environment, will know how and why certain procedures must be followed.


Well-trained cleaners know how to use, clean and properly dispose of cleaning materials. In a domestic home environment, for example, if there’s a food spillage in the kitchen, many people will normally mop up the debris with some kitchen roll and drop the soiled kitchen towel into the nearest bin. In food manufacturing, specialists cleaners are trained to raise an alert, check nearby team members for splashes and store and label the spill wipes.


Using the correct cleaning solutions is another difference between domestic and industrial cleaning personnel. The tendency of normal domestic cleaning is to make a cleaning solution stronger, because of course, this will mean that it works better.


Unfortunately however, a stronger solution could cause corrosion and create further hygiene hazards in a manufacturing environment


In addition to knowing what to do in the production area, expert cleaners will ensure that they change, don and dispose of protective clothing in strict order and adhere to the cleaning and health and safety requirements of their plant.


EFFECTIVE ALLERGEN


REMOVAL A simple yet complex series of factors will support effective allergen removal in food production environments. The simple part is that if an organisation can get the cleaning right, a large proportion of the allergen battle can be won. The complex part is getting all the necessary elements to work in harmony – process, products and people; production, engineering and hygiene, overseen by technical and quality stakeholders.


Paul Keogh, Business Development Director, ISS Food Manufacturing cleaning commented: “Knowing the challenges our customers face, speaking their language and having the necessary technical capability to drive improvements for them is critical when outsourcing some or all of the cleaning requirements in food manufacturing.


“Given the public risk through the severity of some allergic reactions, the complexity of the subject and the detailed technical knowledge required to implement solutions, a specialist team dealing solely in the Food Manufacturing arena is a growing necessity.”


www.uk.issworld.com


*The 14 allergens which must be listed: Cereals containing gluten, crustaceans, eggs, fish, peanuts, soybeans, mil (including lactose), nuts, celery, mustard, sesame seeds, sulphur dioxide and sulphites, lupin seeds and molluscs.


Many food manufacturers work to list and exclude other allergens in addition to the 14 in the main list. These additional products include kiwi fruit, bananas, various pulses and mushrooms.


Tomorrow’s Cleaning April 2016 | 67


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98