It's a problem from the standpoint of paperwork being in order, but if the specified materials were used the impact on the product is probably nil. Also, I think that in all of the PPAPs I've personally reviewed (thousands) the material test report was done according to the specified requirements in maybe 1% of the cases.
The IMDS number reported on the warrant generally does not include the rev. The IMDS system would be the final source for the most recent rev. So, whether there was a change or not is irrelevant - it will simply up rev the same IMDS number.
In fact, just today from Chrysler:
Community: Chrysler
Message priority: Normal
Subject: IMDS confirmation numbers on PSWs
Message: As a reminder to Suppliers, all Part Submission Warrants (PSWs) submitted to Chrysler must include a completed IMDS confirmation number in the “Materials Reporting” section of the document. Failure to do so will result in your PSW being rejected.
Attachments:
Targeted audience: Chrysler Production Suppliers
Effective dates: 06/12/2009 to 07/13/2009
Contact name: Contact your SQE
Contact phone: Contact your SQE
Seems clear to me what the requirement is - whether or not it is followed (as I mentioned) has a lot to do with the diligence of the approver.
The material test report itself is really a whole different issue than IMDS reporting. But, yes, the IMDS reporting is a pitiful mess. But, it is
still required....