4.9 b2 I'm looking for ideas for complying with the requirement for a CONTINGENCY PLAN. I have never seen one or have any idea what should be included.

4.9 g1 I'm not sure how to apply this requirement for packaging and preservation of equiment, tools and gages. It is nested within the requirement for Preventative Maintenance.

If there is anyone with knowledge of these areas please post a response. There are very few web pages that address any 3rd QS edition questions or explain the changes. I'd appreciate any leads.

Thanks Kelly

At the risk of appearing stupid, which to some degree is the case, I'll put my 2 cents worth in on this.

Key to 4.9.b.2:
"Shall prepare contingency plans..."
Now - does this mean (prepare???) DOCUMENTED plans? Hmmmm????

I have never seen such documented plans but I know manu companies have them. Almost always for Key Equipment failure. I mean - Key equipment failure is a given...

And often for utility interruption. In fact, I have had clients with backup generators because interruption would be that dramatic. From this I would say that the plan would have to be tailored with consideraqtion to the business as a whole. If you run a metal stamping shop your plan might not be as complex and dramatic as if you run a computer chip (yes - admittedly - extremely day-night) manufacturer.

Labour shortages? Ummm - well, that's a bit of a streach for some companies. I would see this as a function of the HR. I would expect an HR person to have at least a background enough top realize s/he should have plans for labour fluctuations. The company should have data for turn-over and you'd consider extremes (like in todays market).

What you are looking at here is having some common sense approach - which you probably have - and we'll have to watch as a new round of interpretations surfaces.

As far as 4.9.g.1 - I guess an example might be dies. I did some work for one company which didn't give a damn - they stored customer dies on outside, unprotected racks. The QS folks as placing more responsibility on you to protect the investment. Another example might be a check fixture. But again, we're looking at common sense.

I haven't yet seen an acceptable procedure to address this. Maybe someone will post an example. I'd be happy to talk with you about some specifics if you want to give me a call.

As a QS auditor I would expect to see some kind of documentation concerning a contingency plan. The purpose of the contingency plan is to ensure you can get product to your customers if "something" happens -- barring and act of God.

For example in my company (I do QS audits on a per diem basis) we have a union and although my company does not have a history of work stoppages, we keep an contingency inventory around the time uniion talks are about to begin. As Marc said, I have also seen a lot of companies have emergency generators in the case of power failures.

As far as equipment is concerned, your procedure for use and storage of the equipment should already be described in your procedures for how to use it. Company calibration standards are of particular interest. If storage requirements are already described in your procedures a simple statement to this fact in your Quality Manual should be sufficient

As I suspected, the contigency plan can be anything my client would like it to be and can include an array of ways to address stoppages of all kinds. I do appreciate the leads: utility, labor, and material shortages/stoppages. The way to tackle them could be so diverse an auditor should be able to accept most solutions?

I plan to tuck the requirement for a procedure for gage and tool packaging and preservation into the procedures written for 4.15. I can appreciate the reason for the requirement since I too have seen tools and gages stored sloppily. That didn't stop a QS auditor from siting minor noncompliances during a 2nd edition audit. Did they REALLy need to add it to 3rd? Oh well.

THANKS!
Kelly Speiser

I'm trying to brainstorm possible occurences other than the three examples (utility interruptions, labor shortages, key equipment failures)given in 4.9.b.2 that might require some sort of reaction plan. If you have any real examples of emergency events that would require a contingency plan I would appreciate the input.

As I go through the differnt scenarios we have addressed in our contingency plan, I really can't come up with anything outside of the categories listed. We have plans for downed networks (key equipment), loss of key personnel (labor shortages) and lightening strikes (utility interruptions). The only other things that we cover that may not fall under these categories include chemical spills (we build semiconductors) that cause evacuations (prolonged or otherwise - although evacuations could be considered labor shortages I guess) and fires (normally a result of faulty equipment). Hope this helps.

Can anyone tell me what exactly needs to be stated for contingency plans?
Thanks ahead of time.

Content of your contingency plans is related to the risks of your business and may include weather related stuff, failure of 'critical' manufacturing equipment and such. In addition, you will probably have a number of contingency plans. Maintenance must plan for catistrophic (spelling) equipment failure. Quality or metrology may have a plan for certain inspection and test equipment (say you have an x-ray inspection and only 1 x-ray machine). Etc. Etc. Some will be documented and some will not be (probably).

Hope this helps as a starter.

The intent of the contingency plans is that the customer's production does not get affected inspite of problems at the supplier's site. So, all the possible production distruptions that might hamper the supplier's production may have to be listed and the supplier's action plan to ensure supplies to the customer as per the customer schedules should be planned. These are the contingency plans required by QS9000. QS 9000 does not require supplier to consider unforeseen conditions like weather extremities ("Acts of God").

Ganesh

Marc I agree with what you said but i don't fully understand the meaning of Manpower shortage under what circumstances does this cover? We have a Union does this sttement cover every reason for manpower shortage including if the union strikes?

------------------

O.K. Dawn, here it is. What would you like to talk about?

We are having some difficulty, but we got as far as:
A letter from where we buy presses stating how quickly they can get us parts;
A letter from where we buy furnaces stating how quickly we can get parts and repair service;
A list from each facility of replacement parts;
A competitor who has agreed upon a written letter stating they will process any parts we need to our customer and we will do the same for them.
That's it. Does it work for you?

Just received a major NCR during our pre-assessment (TE) for not addressing "Contingency". When questioned, managers of various departments had no clear plan of what to do if a machine went down, one of our suppliers had trouble, the power went out, etc. It took the building maintenance manager 15 minutes to find his "handwritten" list of phone numbers to call in an emergency-and half of them were of folks who did not work for us anymore!

What we are doing is generate "Work Instruction" type of controlled documents for the systems that affect our companies ability to ship product. We went on the assumption that normal production emergencies do not apply here. So we picked things like a failure of 1 side of our closed loop water supply to our molding machines or our computerized shipping/inventory system.

When we looked at the problem from this point of view it was fairly simple.

Our next audit is in a couple of weeks , we'll find out then if we were right

------------------

Dawn,

Works for me. Some questions come to mind though regarding how you may have addressed labor issues (Are you a union shop?) or utility interruptions. How about when you ship to a Customer (What would happen if UPS went on strike again? For instance, would you have an alternate carrier?). Keep in mind the word "reasonably" when preparing contingency plans (you may have several alternate carriers at your disposal so a specific plan would probably not be necessary). Like auditing, actions or plans need to be comensurate with risk involved. Elaborate plans tend to have extreme overkill and create a burden on the system and just aren't necessary. You had mentioned presses and furnaces in your posting. How frequently do they break-down? A specific plan for something like a press (where many may exist) may be unnecessary. I would find the unique equipment and machinery that, in the event they were unavailable, to create plans for these items.

Consider these while Contingency Planning:

1) Identify critical processes (these may already be defined in your PFMEAs by large RPN values, manufacturing processes, shipping & delivery processes, etc.). Consider all areas in the organization.

2) Identify critical equipment and machinery (these may already be defined in Control Plans, PFMEAs, one-of-a-kind machine, etc.). Again, consider all areas (4.15.6.4 mentions the backup method for ASNs, a form of contingency planning).

3) Use the Experts (you determine and define an expert) in your organization to determine severity of impact of the process/item and create plans for those identified to have "reasonable" significance. Remember, you define "reasonable" so be prepared to defend your position.

Bill's interpretation on typical production emergencies is in my opinion correct. Not making a mountain out of a mole hill. Also the computerized inventory system is probably a good example for contingency planning (could you find the right thing and ship it ontime if the computer failed or if the power were out?) Well, these are just a few of my thoughts. Back to the group for more input...

I'm going mad here writing contingency plans. The more you think about it, the more things can go wrong. Marc- Point taken on test machines, until now I was only focusing on production equipment....Thanks a lot!
But seriously, when do you stop?
I've identified 3 scenario's to plan for so far:
1) Specific equipment repair/damage; Specific Machinery goes down due to unforeseen failure or damage (ie smashed by a careening forklift)
2) Building unusable; Assuming the equipment can be salvaged, I have to plan to move heavy machinery to another facility....
3) Building destroyed; Earthquake,Floods, F-15 plows into it, etc... I have to have a plan to manufacture my product by hand? We are a stamping/assembly facility. Sure, we can assemble by hand, but what if my dies are damaged?
Add to each scenario the labour factor, and then do it again for utilities (for both short term and long term outages for water and electricity...phones!...and god forbid...SEWAGE!
My contingency plan is beginning to look like a tome.
Can anybody post and example somewhere?, or know of a location of one that is already out there? I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate that.

Max,

I believe that you may be planning too fine. You need to plan reasonably to protect for issues identified as needing it. Earthquakes and floods are acts of God and do not need a contingency plan (as well as an F15 falling out of the sky). There is another thread (I didn't know this one existed when I started it) where more information exists.

Marc I agree with what you said but i don't fully understand the meaning of Manpower shortage under what circumstances does this cover? We have a Union does this sttement cover every reason for manpower shortage including if the union strikes?Kevin has the gist of what's happening here. To use an example of 4.20 Statistical Techniques. I go into a company and the question is where to start and how far to go. What they are asking is what have you considered? Did you make a big list and whittle it down to the 'significant few'? With statistical techniques as with contingency plans, you start out making a list. What can go wrong. Big and little. With statistics you have to show you considered (well, explain if not show) a variety of things and designated a significant few for monitoring. With contingency plans you do the same. If you're union, I would expect some sort of plan to address a strike.

As is with QS, there are no concretes here. Look at all the examples folks have given in this thread. Ask your selfwhich ones might apply to you. If you mix chemicals and have 20 mixers, I doubt you would have a contigency plan for one or two going down (unless your production is ramped up to max and every mixer then *may* become critical. BUT - if you only have 1 mixer you sure want a spare motor, etc (you will have a contingency plan which is to keep an extra motor on hand).

Don't so much ask "what is QS requiring" here but rather ask "what major 'likely' things will occur" (Murphy's law(s)). Start with your 'long list', whittle it down to the significant few based on reason, knowledge, *cost*, reality, etc. The have those plans.

Contingency Plans 4.9.b.2 -- The supplier shall prepare contingency plans (e.g. utility interruprionts, labour shortages, key equipment failure) to reasonably protect the cuswtomer's supply of product in the event of emergency, excluding natural disaster and acts of GodNote: I do know many contingency plans are not documented. Maintenance, from maintenance records and such, may keep extra motors on hand without writing something saying so. They have undocumented contingency planning - they know what's going on from maintenance records review. And this goes to issues like calibration. There are many things a cal lab manager sees in calibration records that charting will not help - many decisions are based upon their professional experience and knowledge.

Another example of a contingency plan which is seldom documented is planning for workers being absent (John and Mary didn't show up today). Managers and supervisors have 'plans' but they are typically not written.

One last one - it says "..utility interruptions..." How do we deal with that? Let's face it - most companies are not going to have a back-up generator system which will support all production and support functions. It doesn't make sense in *most* cases. I admit some of my clients have had that capability but they are few and far between. When does the electricy go out? Ice storms? Is an ice storm an act of god? Will anyone get to work any way? And, since it says "...utility interruptions..." Does this mean you have to have a plan for the possibility of a local water main break? Or natural gas - what if a main pipe breaks? You gonna bring in propane tankers which will involve orifrice changes everywhere gas is used?

REALITY, Folks! You can't plan for everything. Plan for what makes sense and is realistic. Your're already doing that to a large degree any way (see above where workers don't show up).

So - remember - there are a number of aspects to contigency plans...

Have I confused the issue?

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 02-01-99).]

I didn't know this one existed when I started it

Kevin, check your preference settings. You may not be displaying the threads from more than 25 days or so. Just a thought.

To use an example of 4.20 Statistical Techniques.

Good suggestion, Marc. Vital few, trivial many. I might be able to offer another.

In situations where it appears that the task at hand becomes burdensome, an affinity diagram of the key inputs and potential consequences may be valuable. I have a similar technique (believe it or not) for characterizing design inputs.

This particular area is not my strong suit (if I have a strong suit), so if I am completely off base, please let me know.

Regards,
Don

Diagram would do nicely. You could use that as 'proof' that you looked at all reasonable possibilities and chose certain things to address. Yes - an affinity diagram would do nicely.

You could use that as 'proof' that you looked at all reasonable possibilities and chose certain things to address.

It does make for good objective evidence. When I first suggested it as a method for analyzing design inputs, it was treated with all the enthuasism as Oliver Twist asking for more soup. But it did catch on.

On this subject, the so-called TQM tools (or whatever they are being called these days) are presented as mainly to address problem solving or potential solutions. They are much much more than that.

Regards,
Don

Marc and Don,

Good explanations and suggestions. By the way Don, you're right on the setting. I will dig deeper before posting my next topic. I have to admit that if I go any deeper into the archives, I believe my system may die trying to retrieve all the info. Marc, the abiity to only retrieve the latest postings was a great idea and better for this tiring computer. Back to the group...

Well, we have survived the latest visit from our registrar and our attempt to address the contingency plans seems to have been successfull. The auditor reviewed our methodology and said that if it was documented and met our needs the it met the intent of the standard, he did hitn at the possibility of needing to show "trial Runs" in the future.

Hope this helps.



------------------

SO FAR I HAVE ONLY BEEN ABLE TO FIND EXAMPLES OF Y2K CONTINGENCY PLANS, CAN SOMEONE HELP ME OUT WITH ONE THAT MEETS THE QS REQUIREMENT.

I think that the " Trial run " issue is a Ford Specific requirement in the MS9000 manual.
As far as I can tell the QS 9000 requirements manual does not mention it, but I think there might be an argument to be made concerning effectiveness if you never tested the contingency plans.


Bill

Hi.

In our upgrade audit to 3rd Edition, auditor ha an issue with my Contigency Plans. I had to make some adjustments to our level II, but they accepted my revision. It is odd that you mention "trial runs". I was told by our registrar, that we would not have to worry about that, but I guess it does make sense to see if it works. The probelm may come in, where it incurs lots of costs to "test run" the plan...where is the value-added?

Again, the plot thickens.

Bryon

To bring some realism to this thread:

How many folks here think Ford had a contingency plan (documented or otherwise) for the recent Rouge powerplant explosion. Note that QS9000 4.9.b.2 requires a plan for utility interruptions! Everyone that thinks Ford did raise your hand!

Very Good. Very Good, Indeed.

Regards,
Don

I will admit that I do really believe (no, I am not kidding) that there actually was some sort of plan for it. I cannot believe someone at Ford did not think of it as a (very) remote possibility at some time within the last 10 years.

More importantly is to note that a contingency plan does not mean that a shipment (or more) will not be missed in some scenarios. This is why I say consider realism in your plans.

To me, much of the compliance issue it to show (be able and ready to discuss the issue) you fully understand the concept (just like in MSA). You can plan for a tornado (Florida folks, think hurricane), but can you plan for the entire plant being leveled? If you have 50 acres of buildings and land and the utilities are blown away but you plant is untouched, have you a 'deposit' on one helluva lot of generators (Hell no! Remember Risk & Probability and such), or, on the other hand, what if the place that has the generators is blown away in the storm (even if you DID pay a deposit)?

As always, my sage http://www.qs9000.com/ubb/wink.gif advice:

Keep it realistic and keep it simple. You really DO know what is appropriate for your plant/facility.

Live by the river in flood prone land? Insurance may pay to rebuild but it may take a while!

Phew! Next?

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 02-05-99).]

From: Suzi Maresh
Subject: RE: QS-9000 Contingency Plans (r2089) /Maresh

In response to Sheila's questions regarding how one might address the new QS-9000 requirement for contingency plans ...

During our last QS-9000 surveillance visit (audit) we asked the assessor to do something like a pre-assessment for the new 3rd edition. Our management came up with a long list of plans which aim to protect the customer's supply of product, such as,
inventory management
capacity at other sites
equipment backup systems
Y2K planning
MIS Backup systems

While one might not immediately recognize some of the above as contingency plans, my point is, you will probably be surprised at what systems you already have in place to protect your customer's supply of product in the event something out of the ordinary happens.

The assessor was pleased with our efforts here, but suggested we formalize some of our more nuts&bolts-y activities in a QSP. For example, if the boiler goes down for whatever reason, WHO is responsible for doing WHAT to ensure that the plant is still able to run?

I think if you simply ask yourself the last question, who is responsible for doing what to ensure that the plant can still run, and document the activities that take place, then you are there.

"How far" you need to go in the event of something happening can only be answered by your management, certainly not your assessor.

S. Maresh /ENTEK International LLC

Marc,

Good post. Often folks don't look at what they have and document it. Instead, they feel pressed to create many new plans when few or none are needed. It is good advice to step back, look at the system and determine if your program is documented. A lot less work documenting something in existence than creating from scratch.

I am trying to write a contingency plan but do not know what to include, or what a the auditor will require in it. Can anyone help?

I need to write a contingency plan, can somebody help me with information in how can I prepare this plan.

Largely correct. What was the end result (since the original posting is from a couple of years ago...)?

I wonder what ever happened to Scott...

Originally posted by Bill Smith:

.... he did hint at the possibility of needing to show "trial Runs" in the future....Has anyone been asked to do trial runs? I've seen trial runs as pertain to containment, but so far no requests for same with respect to contingency planning.

Thanks Marc,

I think i was heading down the wrong road, now i realise i should be looking at key equipment and utilities etc, not what to do in the event of flooding, fire etc.

Having just passed a QS9000 Certification Audit, the following is our "Contingency Plans" and each of the following processes fits on two typed pages. It covers:

Key Equipment Failures.

What to do if the Phone System goes down.

What to do if the Computer Network goes down.

What to do in the event of a Power Failure.

That's it. That was fine for the auditor... this time (LOL).

As for manpower shortages, our auditors were only concerned if we were UNIONIZED. We are not, but if we were, part of the Contingency Plans would deal with what to do in the event of a STRIKE.

As for "Acts of God" or "Catastrophic Weather" - guess what? The customer's supply chain will be interrupted. Tough dung. Some auditors may bust hump on it. I would write a contingency plan for the customer to go elsewhere for the business. The bottom line is, to have Contingency Plans for Hurricanes or Tornadic activity, or floods is simply ludicrous for MOST businesses. If our building blows down or burns to the ground - the customer isn't getting their stuff... and short of building another facility somewhere stocked with all of the same equipment, there is NOTHING that we are going to do in said situations.

Hope I've helped, if even a little bit.

ALM

[This message has been edited by ALM (edited 19 April 2000).]

4.9.b.1 specifically excludes the need to cover "natural disaster and acts of God" in your contingency plan. I would point the auditor to that element if he questioned why they were not covered.
We have a one page work instruction which outlines what actions we will take, and our auditor was satisfied with it.

I wondered if anyone has a list of possible Contingency Plans, because that would spair me a lot of time.

I hope someone can help me!

Thanks anyway,

Martin

What to do for:

1) Key Equipment Failure

2) Power Failure

3) Phone System Failure

4) Computer System Failure

5) Labor Interruptions (typically if union facility)

These are what we used to get started.

What type of situations have you covered in the contingency plan prepared by you? We have covered the following situations
a) power interruptions
b) compressed air failure
c) subcontractor failure
d) labour shortages
e) key equipment failure.
What action will you take if we are not able to follow the plan in some cases.
For e.g if we had planned in our contingency plan to divert the part to an already identified subcontractor , who has spare capacity, but unable to do so when a contingency sitauation arises because he has filled up the capacity with parts from a new customer.

Andrews - looks like you are certainly on the right track with this.

Although you don't need to address the "Acts of God" stuff, you should address the smaller interuptions to business like fire (large enough to cause an interuption but not a catastrophy), flood (not the river overflowing - maybe pipes bursting or storm damage). Another you may wish to address is interuption of material flow from your suppliers.

I have seen plans with specific items addressed in great detail. I don't think you need to go past the basics but if the detail works for your company, then that is what you should use.

As for the failure in the plan, the plan has to be both robust and dynamic. Periodic review should be made to ensure your contingencies are still valid. When you find they are not, you are obligated to come up with an alternative. If the plan doesn't list the subcontractor's name, you won't have to change it every time you have to use someone else.

Dave

I agree with Dave. The only thing I would add is to make sure everyone involved knows their responsibility when a situation arises.

We had a coolant pipe burst in our plant last week. Shouldn't have been that big of a deal, but the wrong valve was closed and it created a 1000 gallon + lake of coolant before someone realized the mistake. Costly lesson to learn.

Also see:

http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6196