I'm looking for some guidance on a practical approach to applying 10.2, particularly in design and development. We recently completed an internal audit on this process and one of the auditors raised this as a finding because each item on their project issues list did not have all/most of the typical fields found in a formal CAR. One hypothetical example might be when bringing up a new product design and it fails to achieve a desired output. The engineer, when evaluating the first sample built on his/her bench, determines that a resistor value needs to be 10K ohms vs. 1k ohms. (This is where everyone typically wants to wade off into change control, but that is not my question. It is strictly about the requirement to document the issue per 10.2.) It seems to me that it is impractical to ask engineers that are in the process of designing a product to go through a whole 10.2 documentation process for all of the issues they encounter. Thoughts?