Whether First Article Inspection Report- FAI is mandatory for regular

[umesh prabhu]

Whether First Article Inspection Report- FAI is mandatory for regular, continuous and repeat order in order to meet AS9100 Rev D standard requirements



We are regularly producing precision component for an aerospace industry since 2016. Our customer provides raw materials, drawing, control plan for production of components. During 2016 we didn’t have AS 9100 certification and we unaware of the FAIR. So our customer himself performed the FAIR and we are regularly producing the same component with any change in drawing, specification, PLC software and persons also. Now we have decided to go for AS9100 Rev D certification. We had our AS9100 D stage – 2 audit on 08.07.2018 and auditor raised NC as follow by a certification body.
NC under AS9100 D - 8.5.1.3 Production Process Verification- stating that
1. There is no evidence of production process verification of part no XXXXXX-0 Rev 2 with respect to all characteristics as per ballooned part drawing , other requirements/notes as specified in customer part drg.

2. Pre-contract review of customer requirements dated 08-07-2017 for part No XXXXXX -0 requires PPV (FAI ) to be performed and submitted.
Can anyone tell us when there no change in any parameter since 2016, how we can have the First Article Inspection in which stage. Please note that the drawing No. / Part no XXXXXX -0 Rev 2 remains same since 2016. Also tell us if it a Non Conformance(NC).


So there is no chance of occurrence of doing the First Article Inspection Report

 

[UncleFester]

There is a N/C as during your pre-contract review you understood the customer requirement for a FAI but you didn't submit one.

If you can provide evidence that your customer then presented an order confirming that they would produce the FAI themselves then this would be the only mitigation.

You have stated that at the time that you were unaware of the FAIR, yet you conducted a pre-contract review where the customer required a FAI.

The NC is justified.

 

[umesh prabhu]

There is a N/C as during your pre-contract review you understood the customer requirement for a FAI but you didn't submit one.

If you can provide evidence that your customer then presented an order confirming that they would produce the FAI themselves then this would be the only mitigation.

You have stated that at the time that you were unaware of the FAIR, yet you conducted a pre-contract review where the customer required a FAI.

The NC is justified.

Thanks for your reply.
1. Very Initially we did not have the contract review form but we are doing the aerospace part order since 2016
2. The contract review form is created on 20.01.2018 where we have addressed as” if there is any FAI requirement by the customer” as one column specifying YES or NO
3. This is usually NO, because our customer either or customer doesn’t specify the requirement of FAI report, because it is a continuous and repeated order for us sine 2016 ( No change in dimension, specification, drawing or raw material, no change in the CNC program also no change in the operator since 2016)
4. We have internal system of First setting approval inspection report for every part
5. Our customer doesn’t ask us to comply with AS9102
6. We don’t get any chance of making any first part to perform FAI
Only the certification body auditors during stage II audit have raised NC and asking us to perform FAI. They are not understanding that the parts are regular and continuous production since 2016 without change in any of the parameter. So in which stage now we have to do the FAI. Is it NC or not. Therefore, we have come to the forum for having clarity.

 

[UncleFester]

The NC has been raised. If you have already accepted the findings of the auditors report then you need to address the NC.

If there was a dispute at the time that the NC was raised then there was opportunity to challenge the auditor and reduce or remove the NC.

From the other evidence you have provided, at the time of taking the first customer order you were required to perform an FAI as you stated:

"2. Pre-contract review of customer requirements dated 08-07-2017 for part No XXXXXX -0 requires PPV (FAI ) to be performed and submitted."

You didn't perform or submit the FAI. So the auditor is correct.

You should look at this as an opportunity to determine what, if anything, has changed since you first started manufacturing this part - the FAI process will help you to determine this.

Please bear in mind that the NC not only requires corrective action to addressing for this particular part (by doing a FAI), but you also need to demonstrate that there are preventive actions in place. You have introduced a new form with a column to indicate the customer requirement for a FAI but you need to demonstrate that your process ensures that this customer requirement is met.

 

[Gwhittaker22]

Whether First Article Inspection Report- FAI is mandatory for regular, continuous and repeat order in order to meet AS9100 Rev D standard requirements



We are regularly producing precision component for an aerospace industry since 2016. Our customer provides raw materials, drawing, control plan for production of components. During 2016 we didn’t have AS 9100 certification and we unaware of the FAIR. So our customer himself performed the FAIR and we are regularly producing the same component with any change in drawing, specification, PLC software and persons also. Now we have decided to go for AS9100 Rev D certification. We had our AS9100 D stage – 2 audit on 08.07.2018 and auditor raised NC as follow by a certification body.
NC under AS9100 D - 8.5.1.3 Production Process Verification- stating that
1. There is no evidence of production process verification of part no XXXXXX-0 Rev 2 with respect to all characteristics as per ballooned part drawing , other requirements/notes as specified in customer part drg.

2. Pre-contract review of customer requirements dated 08-07-2017 for part No XXXXXX -0 requires PPV (FAI ) to be performed and submitted.
Can anyone tell us when there no change in any parameter since 2016, how we can have the First Article Inspection in which stage. Please note that the drawing No. / Part no XXXXXX -0 Rev 2 remains same since 2016. Also tell us if it a Non Conformance(NC).


So there is no chance of occurrence of doing the First Article Inspection Report

Hello UnMesh..

Did you consider that the customer purchase contract provisions are the rules for your company to meet your obligations for performance of the contract? I am not a member of the local "Bar", but I did not sleep in a Holiday Inn either.....

The highest customer requirement is defined in the purchase order contract.
If the customer contract includes text that states that the FAI shall be completed by the customer resources,then it is logical to consider that the quality records for the same shall reside with the customer.
Is your organization ITAR compliant?
How about a clause that states something to the effect "Available upon appropriate request for review on site", or the customer may consider the balloon drawing "Proprietary"?

Perhaps you might consider configuring your records management protocol to require written notice for customer controlled property, e.g. the balloon drawing(s)

George