Containment Actions for NCRs (AS9100 C) that are not Product related

[dsanabria]

In Reply to Parent Post by bobbelden

Hi, We recenty went though are AS9100 rev C transistion audit and we have several NCRs that are not product related. I am struggling for containment action. Some of the non-conformances deal with not having our CMM manufacturer on our registrar of suppliers. Not logging and tracking Corrective actions. No action plan inplace to improve customer satisfaction. If product were involved I'd be checking shipment records, work inprocess, stock. I need some food for thought to get me out of my box. Thanks Bob

You should ask the registrar to help you with the write ups. It looks like the auditor took some liberties and the registrar should be aware of it. Who knows, the auditor is incorporating the same thinking on other auditee.

Remember: AS9101 D

4.2.2.5 - NOTE 3: If there is no evidence of non-fulfillment of a requirement, the auditor cannot issue a nonconformity.

[Chris_Anderson]

In Reply to Parent Post by bobbelden

Hi, We recenty went though are AS9100 rev C transistion audit and we have several NCRs that are not product related. I am struggling for containment action. Some of the non-conformances deal with not having our CMM manufacturer on our registrar of suppliers. Not logging and tracking Corrective actions. No action plan inplace to improve customer satisfaction. If product were involved I'd be checking shipment records, work inprocess, stock. I need some food for thought to get me out of my box. Thanks Bob

It's ok to compare this to product to understand what to do. A CMM manufacturer not on the registrar of suppliers is like a measuring device that is not on the calibration list. What would you do? You would have to contain or analyze the impact of using an uncalibrated device. Similarly, you need to evaluate the supplier for approval and then analyze your purchases from this vender to understand the impact of those purchases. You should consider red tagging or not using CMM equipment until this evaluation is complete.

The scope requirement is something that is not required for ISO 9001:2008. What I have done is use the scope from either the suppliers registration or the customers approved supplier list (i.e. what Boeing has approve them for). If these don't exist then you would list the scope from the evaluation/audit you used to approve an unregistered supplier.

Not logging and tracking Corrective actions is related to No action plan inplace to improve customer satisfaction. These sound like a broken system or major nonconformance. Should you contain the whole system? Is it really working? If customer satisfaction is low and there are no actions being taken then this is serious, right? It is like not recording manufacturing defects that have occurred. What would you do? Because you are required to record nonconforming product and in this case you are required by the customer to take corrective action. It was a little unclear but the finding sounded like no corrective action has been taken/started.

[Big Jim]

In Reply to Parent Post by Chris TBD

The scope requirement is something that is not required for ISO 9001:2008.

This is about AS9100C where the scope of the things you can buy from a supplier IS a requirement.

[Stijloor]

In Reply to Parent Post by dsanabria

Actually "exceeding" requirements are easily done - and I tell customer / suppliers that it is measurable. For example - if the requirements are written on the Purchase Order or Print - they could easily exceed them. Perfect example - they want their product tomorrow but you given the product today - BINGO - you have exceeded the requirements of the Purchase order or.. They want a surface finish of 64 but you give them a 32 surface finish - BINGO - you have exceeded the requirements.

NOW...what I take issue is when they write down that they meet and EXCEED the customer EXPECTATION.

Very subjective and not able to verify what are the customers expectations are.

In fact, I tell them that the customer expectation is to receive the product yesterday, free of charge and with a US 20.00 bill with each part - then you have begun the process of exceeding expectation ... but wait - the customer will once again change their mind about expectations because it is not written down on the Purchase Order.

Thus - you could exceed requirement if they are written down but you could never exceed expectations.

Let me help you.

From ISO 9000:2005:

3.1.2
requirement

need or expectation that is stated, generally implied or obligatory

Emphasis mine.

Stijloor.

[AndyN]

In Reply to Parent Post by dsanabria

Actually "exceeding" requirements are easily done - and I tell customer / suppliers that it is measurable. For example - if the requirements are written on the Purchase Order or Print - they could easily exceed them. Perfect example - they want their product tomorrow but you given the product today - BINGO - you have exceeded the requirements of the Purchase order or.. They want a surface finish of 64 but you give them a 32 surface finish - BINGO - you have exceeded the requirements.

NOW...what I take issue is when they write down that they meet and EXCEED the customer EXPECTATION.

Very subjective and not able to verify what are the customers expectations are.

In fact, I tell them that the customer expectation is to receive the product yesterday, free of charge and with a US 20.00 bill with each part - then you have begun the process of exceeding expectation ... but wait - the customer will once again change their mind about expectations because it is not written down on the Purchase Order.

Thus - you could exceed requirement if they are written down but you could never exceed expectations.

Be very careful with such examples! Delivering before time is often as bad as late delivery! Giving the surface finish as you stated, is out of spec - I had the exact issue! Both are not meeting customer needs, not exceeding! I can't agree about exceeding expectations, either! I've experienced just that very thing...

The point about quality policies regarding exceeding customer expectations is very valid.

[dsanabria]

In Reply to Parent Post by Stijloor

Let me help you.

From ISO 9000:2005:



Emphasis mine.

Stijloor.

This is the latest definition that I was making reference to:
Taken from:
http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/liveli...nterpretations

EXPECTATION

NOT USED IN 9001:2008

ISO 9004:2009 (Clauses 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and A.2) noun
- belief about (or mental picture of) the future
- wishing with confidence of fulfilment

[dsanabria]

In Reply to Parent Post by AndyN

Be very careful with such examples! Delivering before time is often as bad as late delivery! Giving the surface finish as you stated, is out of spec - I had the exact issue! Both are not meeting customer needs, not exceeding! I can't agree about exceeding expectations, either! I've experienced just that very thing...

The point about quality policies regarding exceeding customer expectations is very valid.

Agree!

Bad examples - this one could go either way...

[Cari Spears]

In Reply to Parent Post by bobbelden

Section 7.4.1 of As9100C states “The organization shall a) maintain a register of its suppliers that includes approval status (e.g., approved, conditional, disapproved) and the scope of the approval (e.g., product type, process family)”. 1)The following Calibration Houses were used without being on the ASL: FARO, Starrett and PIC. 2)The Current ASL QPF7.44 does not include the scope of approvals for many of the suppliers listed. Example; A&A Aerospace, Bodycote, C&H Hydraulics, B/E Aerospace.

Here's my take on this: containment is the immediate correction - whether it's containing and reworking or scrapping product, or correcting a document error, etc. The permananent corrective action is how to prevent the same thing from happening again.

In the above example, I would have given "evaluated and added all calibration houses to the ASL" as the containment action. For corrective action, I would have described what our plan was to keep us from using suppliers that aren't on the ASL from now on.

Here's an example of one of our nonconformances not related to product that we gave containment for: