AS9100 - Verification of Raw Material Supplier Test Reports

We're in the middle of an AS9100 surveillance audit, and received a nonconformance for not always checking chemistry on material certs against specification. When we receive mill certs, we always check them against specification and PO to assure that we have the right material, and that it meets any special processing requirements (heat treat, spheroidizing, etc.). However, we do not always compare the lchemistry on the cert to specifications. AS9100 states that test reports must be acceptable per applicable specifications, and that the organization shall periodically validate test reports. We do periodic evaluation through independent labs. However, our auditor is telling us that in addition to that, to assure accuracey, every mill cert received must have chemical composition compared to the applicable specification for accuracy. In my opinion, this is his interpretation, not a black and white requirement. Just wondering if anyone out there has an opinion. Thanks.

Re: AS9100 - verification of test reports

I'm a bit confused by your question. It seems to state that you always check against spec and PO, yet you do not always check against spec? Am I missing something here?

We're in the middle of an AS9100 surveillance audit, and received a nonconformance for not always checking chemistry on material certs against specification. When we receive mill certs, we always check them against specification and PO to assure that we have the right material, and that it meets any special processing requirements (heat treat, spheroidizing, etc.).

Click to expand...

Re: AS9100 - verification of test reports

I'm inclined to agree with your auditor. The sentence directly preceding the requirement you referred to states:

AS9100 Rev B said:

Purchased product shall not be used or processed until it has been verified as conforming to specified requirements...

Click to expand...

So if your method of verification is to use the supplier cert, then before you use the material the data in the reports needs to be verified as conforming.

Re: AS9100 - verification of test reports

AS9100 states that test reports must be acceptable per applicable specifications, and that the organization shall periodically validate test reports.

Click to expand...

It says that "the data in those reports shall be acceptable per the applicable specifications".

Your auditor may be correct......I am interested to hear everyone's opinions.

Re: AS9100 - verification of test reports

howste said:

So if your method of verification is to use the supplier cert, then before you use the material the data in the reports needs to be verified as conforming.

Click to expand...

If a supplier provides a Certificate of Conformity stating that the product is in conformance with a specification (which would typically include verification of chemical, metallurgical, physical, etc. requirements), then you are doing redundant verification.

As we all know, redundant verification work tends to add costs without adding value. Such as a customer doing thorough receiving inspection after the product had been thoroughly inspected and approved by the supplier. Since one of the goals in this whole process is to reduce costs by avoiding redundant work, one could make a case that an organization does not need to double check a supplier's CoC if that document clearly state the product to be in conformity with material specs.

If you have a supplier that would issue a CoC when the product is not in conformance with the spec, you have a major concern in your hands.

Note 2 under AS9100 7.4.3 lists the typical activities which can be used for verification of incoming product; obtaining objective evidence of product conformity, such as a CoC, is one of them.

Re: AS9100 - verification of test reports

Let me rephrase and see if it helps. We check certs we receive against the material callout on the drawing and also against the Purchase order to confirm that we ordered and received the correct material. We also do the periodic validation, as required by AS9100. However, we do not verify chemistry on every receipt of material. According to our auditor, making sure the material meets our specification, and periodic validation, is not sufficient. He's telling us for every cert received, we need to confirm the chemistry of the material (as reported on the cert) by comparing to the applicable ASTM/AISI/SAE spec.

Re: AS9100 - verification of test reports

Sidney Vianna said:

If a supplier provides a Certificate of Conformity stating that the product is in conformance with a specification (which would typically include verification of chemical, metallurgical, physical, etc. requirements), then you are doing redundant verification.

As we all know, redundant verification work tends to add costs without adding value. Such as a customer doing thorough receiving inspection after the product had been thoroughly inspected and approved by the supplier. Since one of the goals in this whole process is to reduce costs by avoiding redundant work, one could make a case that an organization does not need to double check a supplier's CoC if that document clearly state the product to be in conformity with material specs.

If you have a supplier that would issue a CoC when the product is not in conformance with the spec, you have a major concern in your hands.

Note 2 under AS9100 7.4.3 lists the typical activities which can be used for verification of incoming product; obtaining objective evidence of product conformity, such as a CoC, is one of them.

Click to expand...

Thanks. This makes perfect sense to me. What the auditor is requiring would be like saying we have to remeasure every part a supplier sends us a C of C and data on to make sure their measurements were correct. In certain circumstances, that may be necessary, but not 100% of the time. I don't see why this would be any different with material certs.

I agree with Sydney on this issue that AS9100 does not require line-byline chemical and physical confirmation of each material certification.

However, with that said, some customers (most notably GE) have historically required this level of detail for verification of all received raw material on aero engine components.

Good Luck

alspread said:

However, with that said, some customers (most notably GE) have historically required this level of detail for verification of all received raw material on aero engine components.

Click to expand...

So, the organization would have to do this line by line verification, due to a CUSTOMER REQUIREMENT.

Similarly to the issue of AS9100C no longer having a requirement for periodic validation of CoC's and test reports. Many organizations would still be required to do them, due to:

1. customer requirements
2. risk management and risk mitigation

If you have a supplier that would issue a CoC when the product is not in conformance with the spec, you have a major concern in your hands.

Click to expand...

Everything that is shipped in this industry is shipped with a C of C.

If you accept product based on the "receipt" of a certification only, aren't you really delegating inspection authority to your supplier?

In my mind, acceptance of product based upon the receipt of a certification (C of C or a detailed material cert) is no different than a dock to stock type of scenario bypassing any physical incoming inspection........which is fine if it is planned for and justified. Inspection is wasteful and should be eliminated when possible. That said, inspection levels should be based on performance history and perceived risk.