TS 16949 Clause 7.5.1.1 - Audit Finding - Control Plan Requirements

[TJM42853]

we had a finding which the auditor would not change. 7.5.1.1. "The organization does not always ensure evidence of all control plan requirements"
Evidence: at time of audit revisions to control plan for P/N was not evident to reflect customer approved deviation"
There was a permanent Deviation issued by our customer that had 8 deviations granted, 5 of the deviations were not on the control plan, because they are not inspected during production, our production monitoring log has all the dimensions from the control plan listed, including 3 of deviated specs and the deviation number.
Question: Do all approved deviations have to be listed on the control plan, even if it would conflict with the production monitoring control log. We thought that the control plan and the production monitoring log should mirror each other. The part has an annual layout which initially uncovered the deviated state.

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

we had a finding which the auditor would not change. 7.5.1.1. "The organization does not always ensure evidence of all control plan requirements"
Evidence: at time of audit revisions to control plan for P/N was not evident to reflect customer approved deviation"
There was a permanent Deviation issued by our customer that had 8 deviations granted, 5 of the deviations were not on the control plan, because they are not inspected during production, our production monitoring log has all the dimensions from the control plan listed, including 3 of deviated specs and the deviation number.
Question: Do all approved deviations have to be listed on the control plan, even if it would conflict with the production monitoring control log. We thought that the control plan and the production monitoring log should mirror each other. The part has an annual layout which initially uncovered the deviated state.

Well, I am not an expert in TS, but as I read the requirement as listed (7.5.1.1) as referenced and the objective evidence identified, common sense tells me that the Auditor is correct. Each deviation needs to be identified on the control plan.

But, just my opinion and common sense is how I have interpreted the requirement.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

we had a finding which the auditor would not change. 7.5.1.1. "The organization does not always ensure evidence of all control plan requirements"
Evidence: at time of audit revisions to control plan for P/N was not evident to reflect customer approved deviation"
There was a permanent Deviation issued by our customer that had 8 deviations granted, 5 of the deviations were not on the control plan, because they are not inspected during production, our production monitoring log has all the dimensions from the control plan listed, including 3 of deviated specs and the deviation number.
Question: Do all approved deviations have to be listed on the control plan, even if it would conflict with the production monitoring control log. We thought that the control plan and the production monitoring log should mirror each other. The part has an annual layout which initially uncovered the deviated state.

There is nothing in 7.5.1.1 that specifically addresses customer-approved deviations. Nonetheless, if all of the specifications affected by the deviations weren't changed on the control plan(s), the auditor is probably right. On the other hand, if there are deviated specifications that weren't on the control plan to begin with, and didn't need to be on the control plan, there's no reason to add them now and the auditor might be wrong.

 

[TJM42853]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

There is nothing in 7.5.1.1 that specifically addresses customer-approved deviations. Nonetheless, if all of the specifications affected by the deviations weren't changed on the control plan(s), the auditor is probably right. On the other hand, if there are deviated specifications that weren't on the control plan to begin with, and didn't need to be on the control plan, there's no reason to add them now and the auditor might be wrong.

The deviated dimensions that were not listed on the approved control plan, were never on it. The 3 deviated dimensions that are on it have always been on the Control Plan

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

The deviated dimensions that were not listed on the approved control plan, were never on it. The 3 deviated dimensions that are on it have always been on the Control Plan

As to the three deviated dimensions, were they changed to reflect the new requirements?

 

[TJM42853]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

The 3 dimensions that are on the control plan were changed to the new requirements and the deviation number was referenced also.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

The 3 dimensions that are on the control plan were changed to the new requirements and the deviation number was referenced also.

Then I don't know what the auditor was expecting, or what part of 7.5.1.1 he was basing his nonconformity finding on. There's this bit in the clause:

​

​

"The control plan shall... include the customer-required information, if any..."​

But if your customer doesn't require all of those details on the control plan, they don't have to be there. I would ask the auditor for clarification at this point. What part of 7.5.1.1 was violated?

 

[howste]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

Maybe they had this requirement in mind?

8.2.4.1 Layout inspection and functional testing

A layout inspection and a functional verification to applicable customer engineering material and performance standards shall be performed for each product as specified in the control plans. Results shall be available for customer review.

NOTE Layout inspection is the complete measurement of all product dimensions shown on the design records.

 

[AndyN]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

Maybe they had this requirement in mind?

Then, shouldn't the nc state that?

 

[ChrissieO]

Re: TS 16949 -Audit finding 7.5.1.1

Then I don't know what the auditor was expecting, or what part of 7.5.1.1 he was basing his nonconformity finding on. There's this bit in the clause:

​

​

"The control plan shall... include the customer-required information, if any..."​

But if your customer doesn't require all of those details on the control plan, they don't have to be there. I would ask the auditor for clarification at this point. What part of 7.5.1.1 was violated?

Totally agree Jim, As I understand 7.5.1.1 and unless the custmer required this informtion and as long as they were not on the original control plan, I would question the auditors finding.

Chrissie