Control Plan & Corrective Action pertaining to TS16949:2009 Annex A, A.2(e)

[Mortalis]

I have searched for information pertaining to TS16949:2009 Annex A, A.2(e) that refers to, from what I have been told, a new addition to the standard. That addition refers to
A.2 Elements of the control plan
e) Reaction plan and corrective actions
- reaction plan (include or reference)
- corrective action

I have been advised (by someone more well versed in TS than I) that the newest iteration of a control plan must include a reference (advised to add column specific) to corrective actions.

I see the statement in the TS16949 Annex as I have detailed above yet when I reference the APQP/Control Plan, second edition, chapter 6, supplements, (examples of control plan formats) I do not see this reference in any of the examples.

Can anyone elaborate on this?

 

[Stijloor]

Re: Control Plan & Corrective Action

Your reaction plan could include references to the corrective action process that your organization already has in place. There is no requirement that states that you must add a specific column to the Control Plan. If you want to, that is your choice.

Keep in mind that ISO/TS 16949:2009 ANNEX A is normative; these are requirements for the Control Plan and that Section 6 in the AIAG APQP Manual provides you with guidelines.

 

[Mortalis]

Re: Control Plan & Corrective Action

Thank you Stiljoor.
One would think that if it was important enough to state in the Technical Standard that the examples in the supplemental guide would have some reference to said requirement.

By the way, my wife (the one to whom I was referring) is a Global TS Technical Director for LLoyds Register of Quality Assurance and has sat on the AITF oversight commitee so I know her view is slightly biased.
I know from past experience that LLoyds tends to interject their interpretation of the Standard as the Golden Rule. That is why I wanted to get another opinion of the ruling, so to speak, as I did not see it in the requirements the way it was explained to me.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Control Plan & Corrective Action

Thank you Stiljoor.
One would think that if it was important enough to state in the Technical Standard that the examples in the supplemental guide would have some reference to said requirement.

By the way, my wife (the one to whom I was referring) is a Global TS Technical Director for LLoyds Register of Quality Assurance and has sat on the AITF oversight commitee so I know her view is slightly biased.
I know from past experience that LLoyds tends to interject their interpretation of the Standard as the Golden Rule. That is why I wanted to get another opinion of the ruling, so to speak, as I did not see it in the requirements the way it was explained to me.

I agree with Stijloor, fwiw. Sometimes the CBs like for us to do more work to make things easier for them. If you have a reference to your CA procedure in the "Reaction Plan" field, you've done what the standard requires.

BTW, the AIAG PPAP manual and ISO/TS16949 are published and controlled by different entities, hence the "guidelines" nature of the former.

 

[Stijloor]

Re: Control Plan & Corrective Action

Thank you Stiljoor.
One would think that if it was important enough to state in the Technical Standard that the examples in the supplemental guide would have some reference to said requirement.

By the way, my wife (the one to whom I was referring) is a Global TS Technical Director for Lloyds Register of Quality Assurance and has sat on the IATF oversight committee so I know her view is slightly biased.
I know from past experience that Lloyds tends to interject their interpretation of the Standard as the Golden Rule. That is why I wanted to get another opinion of the ruling, so to speak, as I did not see it in the requirements the way it was explained to me.

I hope that I did not contribute to a marital disagreement.

Your wife is more than welcome to attend my training sessions on ISO/TS 16949:2009 and associated AIAG Core Tools.

 

[Mortalis]

Heh!
Not a problem Stiljoor.
She knows I am a letter of the law, so to speak, kinda guy when it comes to the requirements and I know she is all about their interpretations of how the standard should be implemented.