8.3 Control of NC Product - Who is the Relevant Authority for Concession?

[morteza]

Hi all
My company is a producer of different kinds of gearboxes with design responsibility for some of them.
Our customer defined its functional and performance requirements, and we designed the components of gearbox to meet those requirements.
During PPAP, we sent all components drawings and CPs to the customer and it approved the product/processes as well as documents.
However, sometimes our engineering dept. gives some concessions to QC or production depts for some dimensional or chemical composition nonconformities identified in components during incoming stage or in-process stages.
The question is that:
Is our engineering dept the relevant authority for issuing the concession?
Overview:
Some of our internal auditors believe that in this case the relevant authority for concession should be the customer, because we deviate from the specifications which approved by customer through PPAP.
Our customer PPAP requires us to notify the customer when changes in components affect on its requirements.

 

[steve hussain]

clause 7.2.2 (b) was breached. it is your company responsibility to inform the customer of any deviations encountered.

 

[Mikishots]

clause 7.2.2 (b) was breached. it is your company responsibility to inform the customer of any deviations encountered.

Hold the phone here; 7.2.2 deals with reviews before the company commits to providing the product. The statement in (b) deals with situations when the requirements change from what was previously discussed or agreed on. This clause has nothing to with any requirement of letting the customer know about a nonconformance or concession (where applicable).

As long as the product reaching the customer satisfies each and every requirement they stipulated, and the product fulfills the intended use, there is no issue. Concessions regarding chemical or dimensional nonconformities typically go through a material review board, who have the authority to decide on use-as-is, rework, repair or reject dispositions.

 

[insect warfare]

clause 7.2.2 (b) was breached. it is your company responsibility to inform the customer of any deviations encountered.

More like 8.3.4.

Brian

 

[Big Jim]

Hi all
My company is a producer of different kinds of gearboxes with design responsibility for some of them.
Our customer defined its functional and performance requirements, and we designed the components of gearbox to meet those requirements.
During PPAP, we sent all components drawings and CPs to the customer and it approved the product/processes as well as documents.
However, sometimes our engineering dept. gives some concessions to QC or production depts for some dimensional or chemical composition nonconformities identified in components during incoming stage or in-process stages.
The question is that:
Is our engineering dept the relevant authority for issuing the concession?
Overview:
Some of our internal auditors believe that in this case the relevant authority for concession should be the customer, because we deviate from the specifications which approved by customer through PPAP.
Our customer PPAP requires us to notify the customer when changes in components affect on its requirements.

In my mind for the scenario you presented, the relevant authority would be both the design authority (your engineering group) and the customer collectively.

 

[ssz102]

i agree with the idea from Big jim, the customer is the true authorized person

 

[rickmcq]

Hi all
My company is a producer of different kinds of gearboxes with design responsibility for some of them.
Our customer defined its functional and performance requirements, and we designed the components of gearbox to meet those requirements.
During PPAP, we sent all components drawings and CPs to the customer and it approved the product/processes as well as documents.
However, sometimes our engineering dept. gives some concessions to QC or production depts for some dimensional or chemical composition nonconformities identified in components during incoming stage or in-process stages.
The question is that:
Is our engineering dept the relevant authority for issuing the concession?
Overview:
Some of our internal auditors believe that in this case the relevant authority for concession should be the customer, because we deviate from the specifications which approved by customer through PPAP.
Our customer PPAP requires us to notify the customer when changes in components affect on its requirements.

You said your customer approved the product and manufacturing processes. The customer now controls.

Concession: The customer allows you to temporarily ship nonconforming product.

Deviation: The customer allows you to manufacture product different than what was approved (until something is settled).

Rick

 

[Big Jim]

You said your customer approved the product and manufacturing processes. The customer now controls.

Concession: The customer allows you to temporarily ship nonconforming product.

Deviation: The customer allows you to manufacture product different than what was approved (until something is settled).

Rick

Keep in mind on this scenario that the customer may not have design expertise, and thus the need for this to be a joint resolution.

 

[Jim Wynne]

You said your customer approved the product and manufacturing processes. The customer now controls.

Concession: The customer allows you to temporarily ship nonconforming product.

Deviation: The customer allows you to manufacture product different than what was approved (until something is settled).

Rick

Here we get into the terminology of what the standard refers to as a "concession." A concession is not necessarily different from a deviation; a deviation is a type of concession.

Local definitions will vary, of course, but in general parlance a deviation is a nonconforming condition discovered after manufacturing or processing, or comes as a result of some known inability to meet a requirement on a temporary basis.

A waiver, on the other hand, is generally a permanent dispensation from the customer to permanently change the specifications without changing the drawing or other design record elements.

Sometimes these deviations are flipped, so it's important that everyone understands what's being asked for. REgardless of what they're called locally, both are concessions.

 

[rickmcq]

Here we get into the terminology of what the standard refers to as a "concession." A concession is not necessarily different from a deviation; a deviation is a type of concession.

Local definitions will vary, of course, but in general parlance a deviation is a nonconforming condition discovered after manufacturing or processing, or comes as a result of some known inability to meet a requirement on a temporary basis.

A waiver, on the other hand, is generally a permanent dispensation from the customer to permanently change the specifications without changing the drawing or other design record elements.

Sometimes these deviations are flipped, so it's important that everyone understands what's being asked for. REgardless of what they're called locally, both are concessions.

I agree with you 100%. Our customers include very large well known names. The word "concession" isn't even in the book. In the rare instances where we may have to ask for, and get, a deviation it's because we found something that both we and our customer have agreed that it doesn't affect the function of the part. The deviation paperwork allows the product to get through the customers receiving inspection. Virtually all of the time it results in an engineering change.

Morteza was saying that his production department was producing some out of spec product and the engineering department, knowing the product through some sort of design input, was saying "Don't worry about it, ship it" without involving the customer. His auditors are wanting to get the customer involved and are trying to use the book as the authority.

I've run into Morteza's situation many times in the past. The engineers would say "ship it" but when you ask them to sign off on their decision the conversation starts to heat up.

Rick