Final Product Audit (QS-9000 Paragraph 4.10.4.2)

C

Carl Scaringelli

#1
#1
I have received a finding on this element.
The standard requires all specified requirements to be verified.

My interpretation is that it was what we specified on the control plan. My registrar insisted that it was all requirements including functional and all dimensions.

Obviously, I will comply with what my registrar requires. I just wondered if anyone else has had experience with this requirement.
 
GAGEpack - Gage & Calibration Management
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
Marc

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
Admin
#2
#2
I'd fight your registrar. They're asking for a full dimensional? Hot Damn!

So far as I have seen. I understand the requirement to be packaging, labeling and general condition of the product. I do not understand the requirement to be for a full layout.

Anyone face this yet with success? What was the formula?

Barb? R U there?
 
C

Carl Scaringelli

#4
#4
I will take your advice and and go to the IASG. The registrar is DNV. I spoke to the technical manager in Houston to try to convince him that his interpetation was overzealous, after all we no longer have to do annual layouts like we used to.

Thanks for you guidance!

Carl
 
Marc

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
Admin
#6
#6
Well, I hate to do this, but - what the hell. Entela sent out a news letter and they said:


4.10.4.2 Do "Final Produt Audits" (or "dock audits") have to be included on all control plans?

Interpretation: No. They may be included depending on the particular process for final audits that has been defined by the supplier. A dynamic dock audit program that constantly changes and evolves (sic) based upon PPM's and other company performance measures could not logically be defined on a control plan. Reference may be made to the applicable procedure on the control plan.

4.10.4.2 Can Dock Audits be conducted on the mnufacturing / assembly floow prior to actually closing and sealing the containers? Can the same inspector conduct the final inspection as well as the Dock Audit?

Interpretation: Not typically. The intent of the Dock Audit is to inspect the overall inspection and packaging / labeling process. Therefore, product which has been completed (sealed, labeled and moved) and ready for shipment would enable one to inspect the adequacy of packaging and labeling as well as overall product quality. Since the intent is to inspect the overall process, the same inspector being used for both inspections and final dock audit makes the intent negligable (they would be inspecting their own inspection capabilities). Unique situations may warrant different methods and may be acceptable if deemed effective by the auditor.

**NOTE: I disagree that one person could not do both. I don't buy this 'inspecting their own...' logic. As long as requirements are defined, the same person can check their own work - MY opinion.

OK - the last one (damn - I hate retyping stuff like this...

4.10.4.2 Does every single product characteristic appearing on the control plan have to be inspected accordingly (sic) during a Dock Audit? (i.e., flammability, receiving inspection characteristics of material / components, etc.)?

Interpretation: No. Final inspection instructions and packaging / labeling instructions should (at a minimum) be used for the final audit verification.

OK - Dat's All, Folks! From Entela!

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 02-27-99).]
 
M

Mike525

#8
#8
DNV is our registrar also, and I'm curious to know if that is an independent (personal) interpretation by the auditor (I've known auditors to do that - and have come close to wringing a few necks because of it), or if that is DNV's "official" interpretation (lord help us if it is). We are up for our 1st surveillance audit in July. Our stance is what makes sense for us to do cost-wise, what is reasonable, and what adds value to the process. So, when DO the NEW sanctioned interpretations come out? I'm so glad the 3rd edition is clear as mud.
 
Marc

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
Admin
#9
#9
I don't know what DNV considers a dock auit at their organizational level. I suggest you call your account manager (or equivalent functionary) and ask.
 
J

Jada

#10
#10
Interesting finding by DNV.

"The standard requires all specified
requirements to be verified. "

If this is truly the intent of 4.10.4.2. Then what is the purpose of 4.10.4.1 - Layout inspection and Functional Testing? Isn't this sub-element stating that all dimensional aspects (layout) and functional (matl. etc) be verified?

While I can appreciate that 4.10.4.1 is as per customer requirements and 4.10.4.2 is supplier defined, why wouldn't your frequency as a minimum be based on customer requirements (4.10.4.1)

Just my thoughts..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Final Product Audit Specification - Assembly Operation example or form Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
M Problem creating a specification for "Final product audit" Customer and Company Specific Requirements 4
S QS-9000 Clause 4.10.4.2 - Final Product Audit vs. Dock Audit QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 6
M Dock Audits - 4.10.4.2 Final Product Audit QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 4
W Final Report re: Market withdrawal of radiation-emitting product Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
M CE / FCC Compliance for components + final product CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
M Movement of Final Product from One Warehouse to Another Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
D Diagnostic Reagent Stability Studies - Final Product Packaging EU Medical Device Regulations 8
S Outsourcing manufacturing of final product ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
B Stands and rack for final product is corroded Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 3
T Final inspection and testing of product from validated processes Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 1
K Final Inspection for Software Product - Functional Test? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
M Product Release - Final acceptance activities and acceptance records ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
R Final Product Prints - Are Final Product Prints required by ISO 9001? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
M The Impact of Appraisal Costs in the Final Product Cost Software Quality Assurance 1
S First Article Inspection in an AS9100 service industry (Final product non tangable) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
S NonConforming product NCR during Manufacturing vs. NCR only at final inspection AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 21
A Biocompatibiltiy testing of materials (ISO 10993-1) vs. Testing of final product? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
E Clause 7.3 - Verification and validation of the sub assemblies and the final product? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
N Final Product Audits - What happened to QS-9000 Clause 4.10.4.2? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
D Final Release Responsibilities - Separate responsibility for the release of a product ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
R Transport of components off site for final assembly. Medical Device Related Regulations 2
Watchcat DE NOVO FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
A Final quality control corrective actions ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
Watchcat De novo Final Rule Pending - Inspections 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 0
mustomutlu Process Validation Final Report Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 2
I Mother bobbin final inspection criteria Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
D Using non-conforming components even though the final assembly is conforming? Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
M Informational EU – MDCG 2019-12 Designating authority’s final assessment form: Key Information Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Coronary, Peripheral, and Neurovascular Guidewires – Performance Tests and Recommended Labeling Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Intravascular Catheters, Wires, and Delivery Systems with Lubricious Coatings – Labeling Considerations Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final and update guidances – Software Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
M Informational USFDA final guidance – Safety and Performance Based Pathway Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Special Premarket Notification [510(k)] Pathway Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational Final guidance – GUIDELINES on the benefit-risk assessment of the presence of phthalates in certain medical devices covering phthalates which are carc Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Acceptance Review for De Novo Classification Requests Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE) Program Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Consideration of Uncertainty in Making Benefit-Risk Determinations in Medical Device Premarket Approvals, De Novo Classificati Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
V Removing final inspector for medical device manufacturing Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 4
M Informational US FDA Final guidance – Postmarketing Safety Reporting for Combination Products Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA Final guidance – Metal Expandable Biliary Stents – Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA – Requests for Supervisory Review of Certain Decisions Made by the Center for Devices and Radiological Health – Final Rule Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA final guidance – Marketing Clearance of Diagnostic Ultrasound Systems and Transducers Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA final guidance – Utilizing Animal Studies to Evaluate Organ Preservation Devices Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational US FDA final guidance Characterization of Ultrahigh Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) Used in Orthopedic Devices Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational USFDA final guidance – Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational USFDA final guidance – Recommended Content and Format of Non-Clinical Bench Performance Testing Information in Premarket Submissions Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
T Final process capability results - What I am supposed to present? Cp and CpK? APQP and PPAP 11
M Informational IMDRF final document – Assembly and Technical Guide for IMDRF Table of Contents Submissions Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 4
M Informational USFDA Final Guidance – Medical Devices Containing Materials Derived from Animal Sources (Except for In Vitro Diagnostic Devices) Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0

Similar threads

Top Bottom