API Q1 9th Edition - My Experiences (A Diary)

L

lawKK

hi, Nick

FYI, i just joined this forum today after my client told me about it.
I am a consultant for assisting companies opt for API Spec Q1 and API Monogram SPec 6A and 6D.
My objective is to develop and implement the API Q1 and seek compliance to API Monogram without official certification to API Q1. But the client is interested in ISO 9001 standard certification.
You are right after the differences between ISO 9001;2008 and Q1, there are 27 SOP documents to prepare and a Quality Manual.

I saw in this forum people seeking templates or quick fix to conformance to API Q1, however, I recommend my client to take time to customize their Quality Manual and integrate their other OHSAS 18001 system into the Manual.
In fact, the API Q1 9th ed. had addressed most of the new ISO 9001:2015 std. especially on risk assessment and management,plus contingency planning.

Therefore, if a company complied to Q1 , it is much easier to comply with API Monogram Licensee and new ISO 9001:2015.

This was personal view about Q1 and new ISO 9001:2015 version.
Most of the templates for ISO 9001, API Q1 and OHSAS 18001 are all generic in nature and pretty useless for a company to use them UNLESS they have to re-write the system based on their actual business process flow.
Not many consultants really know how to write a Good and excellent Quality Manual to reflect the company business flow and policy, thereafter those processes can be cross reference to their respective clauses in the standard.

That is why many companies certified to ISO or Q1 have problems of maintaining the system because they copy and paste all the content of the templates into their Q Manual and SOP, Work instructions.
regard, Lawrence
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
lawKK - People know canned procedures are for reference. This has been discussed in lots of threads here over the years. People who copy and paste all the content of the templates into their Quality Manual, SOPs, Work Instructions (etc.) without tailoring them to their specific company are going to have problems.

Canned procedures are not inherently bad. Not every company can afford a consultant, nor is it easy to write a procedure from scratch if they have never seen what one looks like to begin with. I'm not a fan of canned procedures, but I know many companies that have used them to good effect by tailoring them to their company.
 
R

Rheckler

If my company does not service parts are we required to have a procedure for it. According to the API manual it says you must have a documented procedure. We dont do it so this makes it hard to develop one.
 
P

pjgary

We do not perform "servicing" in the classical sense. API defines servicing so that any time a newly manufactured part leaves your facility, if it comes back within 5 minutes from failing a receiving inspection and needs to be reworked to resolve an NCR, those dickheads at API call that servicing.

I say bull. So in my procedure, I basically say "we do not perform any field servicing (as in going out to where the product is and actually servicing the part)" and all orders/product we manufacture is new product/parts (we aren't re-working API threaded connections that have been used). The only activity we perform which is considered by API (and only API) as servicing is the rework of a new product that is returned to us due to a non-conformance.

So I state in my procedure that our "servicing" is 100% governed and controlled by our "control of non-conforming product" procedure, being that anything that comes back to us is returned to us with an external NCR. At which point the WO is re-opened, and the original procedures and controls which govern production are applicable (i.e. - traceability, receiving inspection, production provision, inspections, control or records, control of documents, ect).

Long story short, my servicing procedure basically says we don't perform most aspects of servicing, and the servicing we do perform is controlled by our "control of non-conforming product" procedure.

API auditor was very impressed with our QMS. He didn't like the servicing procedure, but he wrote it up as a concern and not a finding. He agrees with me on what servicing is and is not, but he has to audit it as API has worded the spec, whether or not he and I disagree with API and Ed Durant's definition of servicing.
 
R

Rheckler

pjgary,

thank you very much for the response, that is exactly what I will do, we are the same as you. We dont service just fixed if its jacked up. Thank you very much for the help.


Robert
 
I

INTERACTION38

Hello,
According to API 6D and API 600 standard products to sell to comply with the requirements sufficient spec.q1 API or API Spec. Q1 certificate should there be?
 

roneljdsilva

Involved In Discussions
Hey guys,

If any of you have sample templates or your present records for risk assessments related to product delivery/quality.. basically the requirements of API Q1 (including availability of competent personnel), that would be great.

I am currently trying to figure out how to do my risk assessment cos to be honest, I'm the only one in QA in this small machine shop/start-up and I need to figure this out. I will attach a sample document I made doing a risk assessment on the availability of the Quality Manager. If I could get any feedback on it or if this is good to go? It's my first time and I expect it not to be a lot harder than I think it is cos my form looks pretty direct and simple. I just can't think of anything else at the moment! Need help!

Thank you Covers!
 

Attachments

  • 001-DP Master.pdf
    24.9 KB · Views: 530
  • 002-Quality Manager.pdf
    23.9 KB · Views: 865
D

DP561

We do not perform "servicing" in the classical sense. API defines servicing so that any time a newly manufactured part leaves your facility, if it comes back within 5 minutes from failing a receiving inspection and needs to be reworked to resolve an NCR, those dickheads at API call that servicing.

I say bull. So in my procedure, I basically say "we do not perform any field servicing (as in going out to where the product is and actually servicing the part)" and all orders/product we manufacture is new product/parts (we aren't re-working API threaded connections that have been used). The only activity we perform which is considered by API (and only API) as servicing is the rework of a new product that is returned to us due to a non-conformance.

So I state in my procedure that our "servicing" is 100% governed and controlled by our "control of non-conforming product" procedure, being that anything that comes back to us is returned to us with an external NCR. At which point the WO is re-opened, and the original procedures and controls which govern production are applicable (i.e. - traceability, receiving inspection, production provision, inspections, control or records, control of documents, ect).

Long story short, my servicing procedure basically says we don't perform most aspects of servicing, and the servicing we do perform is controlled by our "control of non-conforming product" procedure.

API auditor was very impressed with our QMS. He didn't like the servicing procedure, but he wrote it up as a concern and not a finding. He agrees with me on what servicing is and is not, but he has to audit it as API has worded the spec, whether or not he and I disagree with API and Ed Durant's definition of servicing.
Hi pjgary and all other forum users. I have recently joined the forum and have been reading all the posts with avid interest. I am new to the world of Quality and have been tasked with implementing API Q1 9th Edition into our company who provide pipeline components and drilling manifold systems. Some we have started to produce ourselves and some we outsource, most of them to API specifications. Our company paid a consultant to implement a quality manual early last year, without labouring the point, it wasn't too good, hence my new job here.
Any help I can get will be greatly appreciated and so far this forum is far better than anything else I have come across.
Pjgary, would you mind sending me a copy of your current manual. I need a base to start from and am struggling a bit now. My company seems to be doing everything correctly but nothing much is documented.

Thanks in advance.
 
P

pjgary

Hi pjgary and all other forum users. I have recently joined the forum and have been reading all the posts with avid interest. I am new to the world of Quality and have been tasked with implementing API Q1 9th Edition into our company who provide pipeline components and drilling manifold systems. Some we have started to produce ourselves and some we outsource, most of them to API specifications. Our company paid a consultant to implement a quality manual early last year, without labouring the point, it wasn't too good, hence my new job here.
Any help I can get will be greatly appreciated and so far this forum is far better than anything else I have come across.
Pjgary, would you mind sending me a copy of your current manual. I need a base to start from and am struggling a bit now. My company seems to be doing everything correctly but nothing much is documented.

Thanks in advance.
pm me your email
 
Top Bottom