Eliminating Paperwork using Inspection Stamps

[wayne.wilson7]

Ok one I am thinking of introducing which may eradicate paperwork!!

We have a software system that our engineers have to clock on and off the operations they are working on, when the first off is completed they sign, stamp and date the reverse of the card, then continue with the balance of the batch and inspect as they go along etc then sign, stamp and date when completed.

Due to the electronic traceability of the engineer clocking on and off along with quantities etc I believe this is more substantial than an engineer initialling and stamping as long as they have a security pin against their clocking in number so no one else can clock them on a job.

Does anyone else already do this? if so have auditors commented on this?

Thanks

Wils

 

[ScottK]

I'm not in aerospace, I'm in medical device, but we need to sign in addition to scanning in and out of the job. This is because the scanning in and out is only tracking time - and is not included in the quality record after the job is done.
The quality record is the work order traveler with the signatures.
Using the time reporting would mean extra work for someone to print these out at then end of a job and collate them with the quality record.
It more efficient to simply sign.

Plus in the med device world electronic signatures require double password and validation of the system.

 

[PaulJSmith]

I never worked there until after it was bought by one company, then sold to another, but I was told by older employees that McDonnell-Douglas used to use such a system. Those who used it said it was much more efficient than paper WOs/Travelers, and it was never illegible or had lost pages. You could not skip a process and proceed if the next process would obscure the previous. I never heard anything bad about it.

 

[Eredhel]

We are moving to more digital as well. While trying to figure out just how far we can go with it our internal auditor suggested that as long as there was a unique login started by the employee that was enough. I think that's on the right track, but I'm not sure if it is enough to show we could check logins and timestamps later if needed or if some might say it needs to be obvious before digging.

As we dig deeper into our software I'm hoping that login is there anyway so it becomes a moot point for us. So basically I'm aiming for using unique logins that are visible at the point of occurrence.

 

[Golfman25]

Whenever you do something "out of the norm" you need to be ready for the questions "why don't you do it like everyone else." That is what these standards have become these days.

It will be easier to answer that question if somewhere in your software there is a box to be checked or a space to be "initialed." We had it come up on our inspection records and the easiest thing was to create a space for the inspector to put their name/initials. Good luck.

 

[AEOS_QA]

It is certainly possible to sign steps digitally in the Aviation maintenance and I assume manufacturing field as well.
There are quite specific rules and guidance by the regulatory bodies such as FAA, EASA and in our case CASA.
Have a look at AC 11-3(1) ELECTRONICALLY FORMATTED CERTIFICATIONS, RECORDS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (Skip to page 8 12) Electronic Signatures )
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/011/011c03.pdf

The link to provides some idea on what issues you need to consider and made me decide to stick with paper for the time being .

Good luck

 

[Vthouta]

Ok one I am thinking of introducing which may eradicate paperwork!!

We have a software system that our engineers have to clock on and off the operations they are working on, when the first off is completed they sign, stamp and date the reverse of the card, then continue with the balance of the batch and inspect as they go along etc then sign, stamp and date when completed.

Due to the electronic traceability of the engineer clocking on and off along with quantities etc I believe this is more substantial than an engineer initialling and stamping as long as they have a security pin against their clocking in number so no one else can clock them on a job.

Does anyone else already do this? if so have auditors commented on this?

Thanks

Wils

This is really hard to achieve without the electronic signatures like clocking in and off the job, making sure the operations have been completed, process steps have not been skipped,etc. Right now, our firm is in transition phase and in the process of implementation, verification and validation.

We were using stamps to authorize a batch on any specified process documented on router. The stamps part really works out well for job orders less than 200. Once they increase in size, its really tough to trace out who authorized the move and makes it further complicated as the paper router is filled with initials and move stamps.