NADCAP AC 7004 Rev. D, Effective 9/11/2006 - Checklist has been revised

[Bobh@pte]

lgibson,
True story. We have ISO Certification, but this is not acceptable to PRI.
The real meat of NADCAP is the special process specifications. Lets face it,
ISO 9001
AS 9001
AC 7004
Not a heck of alot of difference. I agree with you, it's about $.
They are however, much more white glove type of auditors, with regard to what happens at the workstations. They charge you thousands to beat you up pretty good the first couple of times. But once you get this down pat, they will extend your audit frequency to 18 months, up 2 years, (Merit).
All in all a pretty decent organization.

Bob

 

[Bobh@pte]

True. AC7004 is way cheaper. If you have ISO, you already have 95% of what you need to be successful with AC7004 D.

Bob

 

[Sidney Vianna]

What I don't understand is the seemingly contradiction in PRI NADCAP's requirements available at https://www.pri.sae.org/Nadcap/FAQs.id.42.htm

What are the quality system requirements for a Nadcap audit?
Suppliers who have an AS9100 registration / certification from an IAQG approved Registration / Certification body, as listed on the IAQG Oasis website, do not require an additional quality systems audit through Nadcap. When a supplier does not hold a current AS9100 registration / certification from an IAQG approved Registration / Certification body, an assessment to the Nadcap AC7004 is required. To access the IAQG website, please click here

How does AC7004 compare to AS9100 and AS9003?
AC7004 is designed to assure that suppliers maintain an effective quality system that has been derived from SAE AS9100 and ensures product and process integrity. The intent of the AC7004 audits is to validate that the audited quality system assures compliant inspection, product and process conformity, and that the airworthiness of products is maintained.
The requirements of AC7004 are a word-for-word equivalent of SAE AS9003. SAE AS9003 is a document of the American Aerospace Quality Group (AAQG) intended specifically as the minimum quality system for inspection and test quality systems. This "less-than" AS9100 is based on the 1994 version of AS9100.
AS9100 includes ISO 9001:2000 quality management system requirements and specifies additional requirements for a quality management system for the aerospace industry.
Please contact your customer is you are not sure what quality system audit you should schedule.

They state that if the supplier is not AS9100 certified, they would require an assessment against AC7004. But AC 7004, according to them is word-for-word equivalent to AS9003. AS9003 is a "less than ISO 9001" document. So, and apparently, they do not recognize AS9003 certificates, ISO 9001 certificates, but are happy with AC7004 which is less than ISO 9001.

 

[Quality-Misfit - 2008]

What I don't understand is the seemingly contradiction in PRI NADCAP's requirements available at https://www.pri.sae.org/Nadcap/FAQs.id.42.htm

They state that if the supplier is not AS9100 certified, they would require an assessment against AC7004. But AC 7004, according to them is word-for-word equivalent to AS9003. AS9003 is a "less than ISO 9001" document. So, and apparently, they do not recognize AS9003 certificates, ISO 9001 certificates, but are happy with AC7004 which is less than ISO 9001.

Isn't this a prime example of how the whole ISO, AS, and TS systems are out of control?

In my experience the whole Nadcap process is a questionable their specifications are no better than ISO as they are vauge and that leaves room for their auditors like all the other auditors you run across in other certifications they make up their own interpertations as they go.

I think the whole system needs a total overhaul.

 

[andygr]

The AC7004 and specific Nacap special process are linked together in the PRI audit process. Both have to pass to get the accredation in each.
Some deals out in the industry between primes and their supply chain do not have all suppliers required to get the AS9100 or do not require it to be obtained from the RAB. This requirement is driven by an attempt to set some basic minimumm level of verification.

Some aerospace primes are very lax's in their supplier approval process driven by various reasons I will not go into. As we know cost is king.

As for the PRI checklists being open to interpertation I agree to some extent but that is where the handbooks and the apeal process comes in ( curage of ones convictions after all). Most of those that fail after years of "customer approvels" are those that have been able to go thru the buyers and program folks of their customer to get lame C/A responses accepted or findings overridden.At least with PRI and the task group composing all the industry the review is by those that do not have a vested intrest.

Not that those of us in QA have aver seen "encuragement" provided by the company that gives us our paycheck to see things in a differant light.

 

[Bobh@pte]

Good catch Sidney! You are right. We noticed this three years ago.
I decided not to lose any sleep of a tightly woven web that I have no control over. The Boss says do it, I study the rules, execute and maintain. Pretty easy, and they pay me for it.
I save my digging skills for more important stuff, like hooking up a dvd recorder, vcr and surround sound receiver to a 50" plasma tv, and, trying to get everything to work with one controller. Harder than NADCAP!

Bob

 

[Quality-Misfit - 2008]

The AC7004 and specific Nacap special process are linked together in the PRI audit process. Both have to pass to get the accredation in each.
Some deals out in the industry between primes and their supply chain do not have all suppliers required to get the AS9100 or do not require it to be obtained from the RAB. This requirement is driven by an attempt to set some basic minimumm level of verification.

Some aerospace primes are very lax's in their supplier approval process driven by various reasons I will not go into. As we know cost is king.

As for the PRI checklists being open to interpertation I agree to some extent but that is where the handbooks and the apeal process comes in ( curage of ones convictions after all). Most of those that fail after years of "customer approvels" are those that have been able to go thru the buyers and program folks of their customer to get lame C/A responses accepted or findings overridden.At least with PRI and the task group composing all the industry the review is by those that do not have a vested intrest.

Not that those of us in QA have aver seen "encuragement" provided by the company that gives us our paycheck to see things in a differant light.

Paychecks are important.....

 

[ccostello4]

Well all these responses to my question has really enlightened me. But as you say Bob, I get a directive from my boss and I execute it.
I'll try the AC7004 compliance with our Nadcap audit first then move forward to AS9100 cert. We have a big contract potential if we get Nadcap so initial cost is critical but once we get the contract cost for AS will be easier to come by.
Again thanks to all.
P.S. I am working on Purchasing process now to be compliant with AS9100 anyone have a work instruction on 7.4 they would like to share. I need some guidance on how to structure the process..
Thanks

 

[andygr]

Allways keep it simple. To get thru the PRI audits just list each item required from the check list ( and any in the guidance) and make sure that your procedure clearly covers each one. The second half is to then verify that those useing the procedure actualy follow it.
You get quite a bit of latitude on you initial audit though the C/A process it painfull at times.

Make sure that you cover the following items typicaly found durring Nadcap audits
Supplier cert referances spec revision differant from that on PO
Your po to suppler does not call out rev level of print or spec
Supplier is not on your ASL listing
You do not have the current Standards on file

 

[benkmer]

How can I obtain a copy of AC7004?
I went to the PRI/Nadcap site and SAE and cannot find where I can get a copy.
Can anyone help????