Nonconformity help

andrei iuganu

Involved In Discussions
Hello group.
I am begginer in IATF filed audit and i want to learn so...I would like to clarify two situations related to a non-compliance report (ipotetical)

Situation A:
A Company xxxx is involved in the manufacture of automotive hinges is being audited in the manufacturing process area. (Auditor) asked the operators to show work instruction for welding and heat treatment processes which are being carried out for a long time. The auditor is impressed by the manner in which the work instructions are documented.
It was found that there are some changes in process conditions which have taken place recently and when auditor asked whether these changed processes have been validated, the concerned shop supervisor told that since these processes are established for a long time, there is no need for revalidation.

for situation A what is the nc statement? clause requirement ? and the NC major or minor?

Situation B:

During the third party audit in an organization certified to IATF 16949:2016, the auditor while reviewing internal audit reports found that the audits are being carried out as per the audit plan. While talking to the concerned internal auditors who have carried out manufacturing process and product audits, the auditor enquired about the knowledge of the auditors regarding IATF 16949: 2016.The internal auditors indicated while they have not undergone any specific training on IATF 16949:2016 in this organization, but they follow strictly the checklist given by management representative and verify compliance during manufacturing process and product audits.

for situation B what is the nc statement? clause requirement ? and the NC major or minor?
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
Here are my thoughts:

Situation A - 8.5.6.1d, the organization shall retain records of verification and validation. This seems pretty straight forward. You have to validate the change you made worked. If its a mature process, the validation process may not be as intense, but still must happen and be recorded. If not, how do you know your making product as good or better than before? Inspection records. Maybe after implementing the change, the process can be monitored and say 1 months inspection records are reviewed by the supervisor, manager, QA, Whoever, and retained as evidence of effectiveness. If its an internal audit, not sure of the value of assigning it as major or minor. So think this way, there is an NC, but what's the impact. Customers impacted? Product quality or delivery impacted? If those are a no, its a minor thing. Easily remedied in my opinion.

Situation B - 7.2.3, the organization shall have a documented process to verify internal auditors are competent. There are different levels of competency requirements, depending on the type of audit.

Management system auditors must understand the process approach, any applicable CSR's, the applicable standard requirements within the audit scope, etc.

The standard doesn't require formal IATF 16949 training. Just that auditors are competent. The question would be, are they? What and where is the evidence?
 
Back
Top Bottom