The new wording in AS9100 Rev D clause 10.2.1.b.2 states:
We have a customer representative that is of the opinion that with this AS9100 Rev D requirement we are required to determine causes for EVERY nonconformity we encounter, no matter how insignificant.
AS9100 Rev C has some "weasel words" that allow us to decide when we will determine causes. Realistically I don't believe that any organization has the resources to determine causes for every nonconformity. With this customer representative's interpretation, if we have a slight scratch in paint requiring touch-up we would have to determine the cause. If we have a 5 cent washer that is bent we would have to determine the cause.
I don't believe that the intent of the requirement was supposed to change with the new standard, or someone would have highlighted this as a significant change in the standard. Is anyone aware of any sanctioned interpretations about this requirement? Since this text is in ISO 9001, anything from TC 176, IAQG, AAQG, etc. would be acceptable to show as evidence one way or the other. Any ideas?
When a nonconformity occurs, including any arising from complaints, the organization shall... b. evaluate the need for action to eliminate the cause(s) of the nonconformity, in order that it does not recur or occur elsewhere, by... 2. determining the causes of the nonconformity...
We have a customer representative that is of the opinion that with this AS9100 Rev D requirement we are required to determine causes for EVERY nonconformity we encounter, no matter how insignificant.
AS9100 Rev C has some "weasel words" that allow us to decide when we will determine causes. Realistically I don't believe that any organization has the resources to determine causes for every nonconformity. With this customer representative's interpretation, if we have a slight scratch in paint requiring touch-up we would have to determine the cause. If we have a 5 cent washer that is bent we would have to determine the cause.
I don't believe that the intent of the requirement was supposed to change with the new standard, or someone would have highlighted this as a significant change in the standard. Is anyone aware of any sanctioned interpretations about this requirement? Since this text is in ISO 9001, anything from TC 176, IAQG, AAQG, etc. would be acceptable to show as evidence one way or the other. Any ideas?