AS9100D Clause 10.2.1g Supplier Corrective Action for each and every nonconformity?

[tpartlow]

I recently underwent my recertification audit. I was issued an NCR because my current process does not issue corrective actions to suppliers for every occurrence of a non-conformance that is dispositioned as "Supplier Responsibility". We do do trend analysis of NC's by supplier and issue CAR's depending on the severity or a trends that have been identified, but not for every NC. Is this the intent of the clause? I only ask because I have not done this in the past with other suppliers and it has never been an issue.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

We do do trend analysis of NC's by supplier and issue CAR's depending on the severity or a trends that have been identified, but not for every NC. Is this the intent of the clause?

The CB auditor is misguided. Digesting the requirements of the standard:

When a nonconformity occurs, the organization shall evaluate the need for action to eliminate the cause(s) of the nonconformity, in order that it does not recur or occur elsewhere...

So, as established numerous times, not every nonconformity will justify a corrective action. As per your own process, criticality and frequency of the nonconformity must be taken into account. I would dispute/appeal the validity of the NC, because you do NOT want to have an automatic corrective action request issued to a supplier for a minor, trivial issue. Obviously, the same line of thought applies to internal sourced nonconformities.

 

[Mike S.]

I agree with Sidney.

IAQG puts out a neat little graphic showing if there is low frequency and low impact, RCCA is "not required", it goes up to optional, recommended, and mandatory as the frequency and/or severity rises.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

IAQG puts out a neat little graphic showing if there is low frequency and low impact, RCCA is "not required", it goes up to optional, recommended, and mandatory as the frequency and/or severity rises.

​