Dock Audits - 4.10.4.2 Final Product Audit

[Mike525]

4.10.4.2 Final Product Audit states "The supplier shall conduct audits of packaged final product to verify conformance to all specified requirements (e.g. product.....)

Originally my understanding of this requirment was no physical measurments (testing) had to be done to the product as long as all manufacturing (and/or assembly) records show all feature and/or all performance characteristics are within specification. Now that the 3rd ed. has been out for awhile, is my understanding still valid, or am I falling short somewhere in meeting the QSR?

 

[Howard Atkins]

IMHO you are correct.
The dock audit is a check on the packaging ,labelling etc.
The language is" e.g. product.....) e.g.are suggestions and not mandatory see page 1 of qs9000 at bottom.

 

[Laura M]

Howard,
I was under the impression you actually inspected product. Maybe not to the extent of in-process inspection, but more of a "containment" type inspection. We looked for: are all inspection identifications in place, product ID (on the part), visual appearance - anything unusual, correct components (we did assembly of various combinations of similar components), and if necessary, a small sample for physical test. Of course at the time, several products were on Level 1 containment, so it probably may sense. I suppose limiting it to labeling and packaging would be OK if product quality data supported it. By the way, we did prevent some problems (one big one) getting to the customer. I had a field day with that one because the department fought implementing the process every step of the way!

 

[Marc]

Check out these threads. Dock Audit discussions:
Final Dock Audit
and
QS9000's New Dock Audit Requirement
and
Final Product Audit (4.10.4.2)

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 04 February 2000).]

 

[Mike525]

As with just about everything else of late dealing with QS and registrars, I have a serious problem with dock audits. From reading the suggested threads (thanks, Marc), I got the impression the interpretations are many and varied. When I read my post from thread #000100 in response to another's question regarding the same subject, I should've known better - we both have the same registrar, and needless to say I'm less than estatic with them. Fortunately, my role here is one of internal consultant, and no one listens to me anyway. I should've listened to my mother and become a doctor! Thanks for all the help, everyone.