Hello All! I am brand new to this engineering/QA/Document Control world (did it extensively for the healthcare field). I am a process focused type of person and I "feel" that we currently have an issue with the way non-conforming product is handled here... but being a newbie... here goes:

Just becuase something is scratched/not plated correctly/not cleaned during the zinc process, etc... does that DEFINITIVELY need to go through an MRB process?

The root question is this I guess... An end cap that is zinc plated comes back to us green, this isn't going to cause a communication breakdown between plane and human, it isn't going to bring down a helicopter, and it isn't going to wreak havoc on any piece of equipment... it just looks horrible. Is there a way to NOT have this type of stuff go through the MRB process with a lengthy paper trail...

Clear as mud? Sorry for the length, and thanks for any insight!
Danie

Depends on the company's vision of quality. We have items that are plated and if they come back looking horrible, we reject them and deal with the supplier. Even though the part will still work, we take pride in our product visibility and only want the best being put on display. It's considered non-conforming product and we handle it as per our non-conforming product procedure. It depends on what your company has written into their procedure.

Just my $0.02

Does it meet customer requirements/specs?
Does it meet internal requirements/specs?

If the answers to either are no, you probably need to review. But, does your MRB need revamping? Paper trails (or electronic records, or whatever format you record these items in) are not necessarily bad. But, if the system is unweildy (sp?) and paralyzes the process you may need to revamp it.

So, looks like non-conforming, even minor occurances such as paint chipping, incorrect plating, etc should go through MRB (which, actually runs smoothly).

I was thinking MRB should be used solely for the purpose of grotesquely non-conforming product and not just batch rejects to our vendors.

Thanks so much for the quick replies! I greatly appreciate it and will probably, well... definately have more questions for this knowledgeable group!

Just remember that the action taken should be in proportion to the problems encountered. No need to shut down the plant for something that is acceptable, nor should we minimize problems that could cause injury. Welcome aboard!:bigwave:

On possibility that you might consider is the "standard repair". This is an MRB approved standard method of dealing with a minor (appearance) non-conformance, that is either impossible or uneconomic to eliminate. The MRB and the customer's rep approve a standard repair, which is a standing disposition of some minor nonconformance, including a description of when it applies and who can apply it. We used SRs fairly extensively back in the dark ages when I was in avionics quality.

Geoff Withnell

I agree with Mr. W., however the standard repair should be clearly defined in you work instructions.

A Quality system must be efficient. You must develop an efficient method of dealing with "lower level" or "common" nonconformances so your MRB doesn't turn into Massively Reluctant and Bored.

So, looks like non-conforming, even minor occurances such as paint chipping, incorrect plating, etc should go through MRB (which, actually runs smoothly).That is not correct. Any non-conforming product must be dispositioned (i.e., scrap, repair, re-work, use-as-is, RTV, etc...) But there is no requirement for a multi-functional MRB process, which could be left for "special occasions". You could empower (after making them competent) operators, inspectors to disposition non-conforming products on the spot, for minor (or major) discrepancies. Records would still be required, though.