Acceptance Criteria - ISO 9001:2008 Clause 8.2.4 - Questionable Audit Finding?

A

AshleyE

#1
Good Morning Cove,

We are an ISO 9001:2008 registered contract manufacturer that primarily serves the commercial sector. At our last surveillance audit our CB auditor raised a minor nonconformity in 8.2.4, Monitoring and Measuring of Product; however we're not sure this is an appropriate nonconformity for a 9001 audit. This is exactly what we were given:

Requirement: ISO 9001:2008, 8.2.4 required evidence of conformity with acceptance criteria.
Nonconformity: 1st pc inspection not showing evidence of inspection with inspection criteria.
Evidence: All 1st pc inspection is evident only by initials and date on the traveler and does not show what characteristics and tolerances dimensions were actually inspected.

The 1st pc inspection being referred to verifying the 1st pc of the manufacturing operation (not first article, which is very different). The first pc of every manufacturing operation is signed off by an authorized employee to indicate the part conforms to customer specifications (blue prints). If the customer requires a higher level of inspection, this will be done by Quality Control. If the customer requires us to document the results, QC will do an inspection report.
Our procedures show we plan to check the 1st pc of every manufacturing operation and sign/date to show the part conforms to the customer blue prints.

The standard states

8.2.4 Monitoring and measurement of product
The organization shall monitor and measure the characteristics of the product to verify that product
requirements have been met. This shall be carried out at appropriate stages of the product realization process in accordance with the planned arrangements (see 7.1). Evidence of conformity with the acceptance criteria shall be maintained.

To me, it seems he is applying AS9100 requirements to our 9001 system. Several times in audit he starts digging for AS9100 and gives us a hard time when we can't show evidence we're meeting an aerospace requirement.

We are considering upgrading our process to AS9100 and the auditor is aware of it, but again, this is an ISO 9001 audit.

We have no problem improving our process if there is a deficiency to the standard we are registered to but it really seems we've been written up to aerospace requirements.

Am I looking at this the wrong way? Any insight would be appreciated.


 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#2
Re: Questionable audit finding?

First of all, thank you for providing details.

I think the finding is probably misguided, although not necessarily wrong. Are the acceptance criteria specified for each product? Is actual measurement done?
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#3
Re: Questionable audit finding?

Looks kinda weak to me. You guys or you customer state how and what you are to inspect and how it's to be recorded. If you state that inspection is to be against blue print specs and the inspector verifys it being done, and it's acceptable to all concerned then the auditor may have erred, if the requirement is that all the data must be documented and you didn't do it you erred.

Now with the question of Standard...If your auditor references something no applicable to you and trys to inject it into your audit ask him to stop or just stop the audit if he refuses and kick his a&& out and make a call to his company.
 
B

Bonhomme

#4
Re: Questionable audit finding?

I'm no expert but I'd tend to agree with you.

That's how I understood the standards too :
- 9001 requires verification(s) of products as appropriate, and to record who made such verifications (what you already do with initials)
- 9100 specifies that details (criteria, ...) about said verification must be documented too

I'll happily wait for additions/corrections from the experts though
 

qusys

Trusted Information Resource
#5
Re: Questionable audit finding?

Good Morning Cove,

We are an ISO 9001:2008 registered contract manufacturer that primarily serves the commercial sector. At our last surveillance audit our CB auditor raised a minor nonconformity in 8.2.4, Monitoring and Measuring of Product; however we're not sure this is an appropriate nonconformity for a 9001 audit. This is exactly what we were given:

Requirement: ISO 9001:2008, 8.2.4 required evidence of conformity with acceptance criteria.
Nonconformity: 1st pc inspection not showing evidence of inspection with inspection criteria.
Evidence: All 1st pc inspection is evident only by initials and date on the traveler and does not show what characteristics and tolerances dimensions were actually inspected.

The 1st pc inspection being referred to verifying the 1st pc of the manufacturing operation (not first article, which is very different). The first pc of every manufacturing operation is signed off by an authorized employee to indicate the part conforms to customer specifications (blue prints). If the customer requires a higher level of inspection, this will be done by Quality Control. If the customer requires us to document the results, QC will do an inspection report.
Our procedures show we plan to check the 1st pc of every manufacturing operation and sign/date to show the part conforms to the customer blue prints.

The standard states

8.2.4 Monitoring and measurement of product
The organization shall monitor and measure the characteristics of the product to verify that product
requirements have been met. This shall be carried out at appropriate stages of the product realization process in accordance with the planned arrangements (see 7.1). Evidence of conformity with the acceptance criteria shall be maintained.

To me, it seems he is applying AS9100 requirements to our 9001 system. Several times in audit he starts digging for AS9100 and gives us a hard time when we can't show evidence we're meeting an aerospace requirement.
We are considering upgrading our process to AS9100 and the auditor is aware of it, but again, this is an ISO 9001 audit.

We have no problem improving our process if there is a deficiency to the standard we are registered to but it really seems we've been written up to aerospace requirements.

Am I looking at this the wrong way? Any insight would be appreciated.


If the acceptance criteria that you have agreed with the customer are for attributes ( pass/ no pass), you should be ok if you showed the record and so I do not think the nc could have been raised up. In the case the request is to record data of the first pc inspection ( with measurement check and related values) and you did not do it, the nc is valid.
It depends . :bigwave:
 
Last edited:

Mikishots

Trusted Information Resource
#6
Re: ISO 9001:2008, 8.2.4 - Acceptance Criteria - Questionable Audit Finding?

Good Morning Cove,

We are an ISO 9001:2008 registered contract manufacturer that primarily serves the commercial sector. At our last surveillance audit our CB auditor raised a minor nonconformity in 8.2.4, Monitoring and Measuring of Product; however we're not sure this is an appropriate nonconformity for a 9001 audit. This is exactly what we were given:

Requirement: ISO 9001:2008, 8.2.4 required evidence of conformity with acceptance criteria.
Nonconformity: 1st pc inspection not showing evidence of inspection with inspection criteria.
Evidence: All 1st pc inspection is evident only by initials and date on the traveler and does not show what characteristics and tolerances dimensions were actually inspected.

The 1st pc inspection being referred to verifying the 1st pc of the manufacturing operation (not first article, which is very different). The first pc of every manufacturing operation is signed off by an authorized employee to indicate the part conforms to customer specifications (blue prints). If the customer requires a higher level of inspection, this will be done by Quality Control. If the customer requires us to document the results, QC will do an inspection report. Our procedures show we plan to check the 1st pc of every manufacturing operation and sign/date to show the part conforms to the customer blue prints.

The standard states

8.2.4 Monitoring and measurement of product
The organization shall monitor and measure the characteristics of the product to verify that product
requirements have been met. This shall be carried out at appropriate stages of the product realization process in accordance with the planned arrangements (see 7.1). Evidence of conformity with the acceptance criteria shall be maintained.

To me, it seems he is applying AS9100 requirements to our 9001 system. Several times in audit he starts digging for AS9100 and gives us a hard time when we can't show evidence we're meeting an aerospace requirement.

We are considering upgrading our process to AS9100 and the auditor is aware of it, but again, this is an ISO 9001 audit.

We have no problem improving our process if there is a deficiency to the standard we are registered to but it really seems we've been written up to aerospace requirements.

Am I looking at this the wrong way? Any insight would be appreciated.

My take on this is that the finding is valid if you haven't been able to show evidence of conformity. You've shown records that have the release authorization on them, but it seems that the auditor did not see any acceptance criteria.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#7
Re: ISO 9001:2008, 8.2.4 - Acceptance Criteria - Questionable Audit Finding?

My take on this is that the finding is valid if you haven't been able to show evidence of conformity. You've shown records that have the release authorization on them, but it seems that the auditor did not see any acceptance criteria.
The criteria was in the blueprints and instruction used by the inspector
 
#8
What's missing here is that if an inspection is performed and, if there's variables data obtained, that should be recorded! Just a set of initials to say a feature is inspected is (relatively) meaningless! DATA is necessary to give evidence that the result meets the blueprint. A signature doesn't show anything meets the blueprint.

Practically, if a feature is measured and the result is not recorded, but in fact is right at the limit, what if the customer's measurement shows it's out of tolerance - how is anyone going to have a meaningful discussion about what result was achieved and how? Showing them a set of initials doesn't show conformity!
 
A

AshleyE

#9
Thank you all for your take on this.

The majority of our customers only care about getting their parts on time, and the parts match the customer specifications. Very few of our customers require we keep results of inspection on file. The first time we make a part for any customer, it gets a full inspection report that spells out each dimension from the print, the acceptance critera and the actual measurement. Anytime a customer requires inspection reports for a job, that becomes a requirement on the job traveler and it goes through full inspection with reports.

We keep evidence of conformity based on what our customer requires. If the customer does not require evidence of conformity, we use our standard sign/date procedure.

I guess it all boils down to how does one define "evidence of conformity" and what "evidence" acceptable.
 
A

AshleyE

#10
What's missing here is that if an inspection is performed and, if there's variables data obtained, that should be recorded! Just a set of initials to say a feature is inspected is (relatively) meaningless! DATA is necessary to give evidence that the result meets the blueprint. A signature doesn't show anything meets the blueprint.

Practically, if a feature is measured and the result is not recorded, but in fact is right at the limit, what if the customer's measurement shows it's out of tolerance - how is anyone going to have a meaningful discussion about what result was achieved and how? Showing them a set of initials doesn't show conformity!
Andy, I just missed your post when I put up my reply. I do see your point.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
A Risk Acceptance Criteria in ISO 14971 ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 19
Q How to meet Clause 7.1.2 Acceptance Criteria in ISO TS 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
Q Sampling Plan Acceptance Criteria - ISO TS 16949 Clause 7.1.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 8
I ISO/TS-16949 Technical specification - What is the International Acceptance Criteria IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M ISO 9001:2000 quality objective vs acceptance criteria ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
H Medical Device Label Acceptance Criteria Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
D What are the acceptance criteria/requirements for Stability Study? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 7
L Gage R&R TMV Acceptance Criteria Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
M V&V phase: Justification of acceptance criteria (statistical method ) - (Medical Device) Design and Development of Products and Processes 2
O GR&R Acceptance Criteria Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
S Shore A hardness Tester Acceptance Criteria Standard Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 2
lanley liao Purchase Acceptance Criteria - Tensile testing Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
R Procedure, Frequency and Acceptance Criteria for Replicate, Recalibration, Before-After and Intermediate Checks ISO 17025 related Discussions 8
S Acceptance criteria for gauges General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 8
M Characterization Testing - NO acceptance criteria, no minimum performance requirement Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
J AIAG PPAP: 2.2.11.3 Acceptance Criteria for Initial Study (page 9, 4th edition) APQP and PPAP 1
C FDA on changing acceptance criteria re: analytical method validation US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
B IATF 16949 Cl. 8.6.6 - Acceptance Criteria - Zero Defects Attribute Data Sampling IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
P Medical Device Validation Protocols and Reports - Acceptance Criteria Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 3
C Software Unit Acceptance Criteria (5.5.4) IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 3
J Acceptance Criteria in 8.1.1 e) of IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
O Acceptance criteria bacterial endotoxins immunosera for human use Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
I As a part of validation, should i include the acceptance criteria of CPk index >1.33? Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 4
V Acceptance Criteria Gage R&R - Simple vs Complex Techniques Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 8
A 5.5.3 - Software Unit Acceptance Criteria (Risk Control Measures) IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 3
M Establishment of Acceptance Criteria for a Weigh Balance General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
X How to define Calibration Acceptance Criteria General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
P Gage R (no reproducibility) - Acceptance Criteria Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
V Validation Test and Acceptance Criteria for Compressed Air Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 3
I Dual Acceptance Criteria: Cpk and Individual Values Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
L Acceptance Criteria for External Calibrated Standards IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
G Acceptance Criteria when Verifying a Gauge General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
D Renault Painting Defect Acceptance Criteria Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
B Surface Roughness Tester Acceptance Criteria Calibration Frequency (Interval) 4
H Package Integrity Testing Acceptance Criteria ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D 21 CFR 820.80 In-Process Acceptance Criteria requirements for IVDs 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
S Acceptance Criteria for Scratches on Medical Devices ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
JoCam Nadcap AC7120 (Audit Criteria for Circuit Card Assemblies) - Acceptance Criteria AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
J IPC-A-610 E Thermal Plane Acceptance Criteria for D-Pak Component Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 2
S Acceptance Criteria at Design Verification Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
P Labels - ASTM D3330/D3330M Acceptance Criteria for Adhesion 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
optomist1 Tensile Test Crimped Electrical Terminal Acceptance Criteria Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
V The approach/criteria of setting Acceptance Limits Method Validation Parameters Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 1
6 Acceptance Criteria For pH Meters and other Laboratory Equipment Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 16
V How to define Risk Acceptance Criteria? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
Rameshwar25 Acceptance Criteria for Attribute MSA Study Effectiveness Summary Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
D What are API Equipment Cleaning Requirements and Acceptance Criteria? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
V How are the Acceptance Criteria for Content Uniformity & Dissolution Superior? Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 2
1 Acceptance criteria and related standard for 1 micron Lever Type dial Indicator General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
M Acceptance Criteria for Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5

Similar threads

Top Bottom