What is the real purpose of a Certificate of Conformance "C of C"?

[Jim Wynne]

Hello,I agree with Al40. When my company I work for was audited, that was something they looked for. And it does give you something to go by if they product is defective, to show they said it was in compliance, but it really wasnt

If you're dealing with a situation where a CofC is required, you don't have any choice. On the other hand, as has been pointed out in this thread, what you have to go by if the product is defective is the purchase order (which includes specifications or reference to them). Having a supplier create a document that attests to the conformity of the product doesn't mean anything, and won't help anything. The product either meets the specifications or it doesn't.

 

[bobdoering]

If you're dealing with a situation where a CofC is required, you don't have any choice. On the other hand, as has been pointed out in this thread, what you have to go by if the product is defective is the purchase order (which includes specifications or reference to them). Having a supplier create a document that attests to the conformity of the product doesn't mean anything, and won't help anything. The product either meets the specifications or it doesn't.

Save paper - have them certify conformance on the packing list - and stuff it into a drawer. Two birds...one stone.

 

[John Broomfield]

Covers,

What is the real definition and usage of a certificate of conformance?

I have always thought that is was kinda the birth certificate of a product you bought and the supplier stating that it was built by their processes, etc.. is my thinking flawed?

Thanks,
qm

qm,

If you require a CofC from your supplier then your supplier selection criteria should enable evaluation of the potential supplier's ability to verify conformity.

Most supplier selection criteria (and supplier evaluation records) I see make no mention of this even when the organization has delegated verification authority to the supplier.

This may explain why some correspondents see little or no value in the CoC.

John

 

[Jim Wynne]

qm,

If you require a CofC from your supplier then your supplier selection criteria should enable evaluation of the potential supplier's ability to verify conformity.

Most supplier selection criteria (and supplier evaluation records) I see make no mention of this even when the organization has delegated verification authority to the supplier.

This may explain why some correspondents see little or no value in the CoC.

John

What value do you see in it, assuming that it's not a customer requirement?

 

[John Broomfield]

What value do you see in it, assuming that it's not a customer requirement?

Jim,

None, the value is in evaluating your suppliers' ability to reliably verify conformity of their products.

I have never seen a supplier prosecuted for committing fraud with their CoC but I guess that is what some customers/regulators would like to threaten.

That may be why they specify Certificates of Conformity (CoC).

John

 

[QATN11]

I am currently working with a client that purchases most all of its raw materials from distributors as apposed to the manufacturer of those items.

The items are stipulated to meet a MIL spec on the purchasing contract. Documentation received varies by product and source. The documents range from full testing reports with data, simple letters indicating the materials comply to requirements, similar statements printed on pick slips to statements indicating their catalog lists specification compliance. Some do not supply anything at all. This last gap is being addressed. Other than the full testing, does anyone have comments on the other CoC documents as reqistration to ISO 9001 moves forward. Obviously, I am trying to obtain a full CoA, but since resellers seldom test or request CoA from manufacturers, this may not happen. In this particular industry, 2-tier or 3-tier certification has not been practiced.

 

[Jim Wynne]

I am currently working with a client that purchases most all of its raw materials from distributors as apposed to the manufacturer of those items.

The items are stipulated to meet a MIL spec on the purchasing contract. Documentation received varies by product and source. The documents range from full testing reports with data, simple letters indicating the materials comply to requirements, similar statements printed on pick slips to statements indicating their catalog lists specification compliance. Some do not supply anything at all. This last gap is being addressed. Other than the full testing, does anyone have comments on the other CoC documents as reqistration to ISO 9001 moves forward. Obviously, I am trying to obtain a full CoA, but since resellers seldom test or request CoA from manufacturers, this may not happen. In this particular industry, 2-tier or 3-tier certification has not been practiced.

7.4.1 of ISO 9001:2008 says (in part): "The organization shall ensure that purchased product conforms to specified purchase requirements," while also saying that the "type and extent of control" is up to you, but "shall" be dependent on the risks involved (paraphrasing). 7.4.3 says that you "shall" do "inspection or other activities" needed to verify that purchased product meets requirements.

What you're describing is a significantly (imo) inconsistent method of verifying that what you're buying meets the requirements. If your suppliers are saying that their products meet the specified standards but have no evidence to support the contentions, it means that you also have no evidence except for the suppliers' unsubstantiated claims. This is not good.

Of course, a lot of this depends on the risks involved, but if a CB auditor (or one of your customers) asks you how you know that what you're buying meets the requirements, answering "The supplier said so" won't have the effect you'd be hoping for. What you need is objective evidence. Perhaps you need to get your suppliers to get the necessary information from their sources, or you need to get some independent testing done, or both. If you can tell us more about the types of material in question, and how it's used, we can probably be more helpful.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Other than the full testing, does anyone have comments on the other CoC documents as reqistration to ISO 9001 moves forward.

You could adopt in your QMS a requirement that exists in the AS9100B standard*, which would make you periodically validate (by testing) the veracity of the CoC's and product conformity to specifications. You can also assess your suppliers as to their process robustness of verifying incoming product against specifications and maintaining traceability. Depending on how good each supplier is and the risks involved, you could then target the higher risk supplier/products for incoming verification testing, and the low risk ones accepted with the evidence, e.g., CoC's (or equivalent) from suppliers.

*requirement deleted in AS9100C.

 

[Cam-mando]

What you're describing is a significantly (imo) inconsistent method of verifying that what you're buying meets the requirements. If your suppliers are saying that their products meet the specified standards but have no evidence to support the contentions, it means that you also have no evidence except for the suppliers' unsubstantiated claims. This is not good.

Exactly... I just had this discussion here.

We purchase MIL Spec fasteners many of which are difficult to source. Often no one has produced them in the last 5 years so we are dealing with distributors who sell to one another.

If they do not have at least a C of C from the ORIGINAL manufacturer, they have no basis to claim the product is in compliance with the specifications.

An example I just ran into is a hard to find piece of hardware was purchased from an outfit we had not dealt with in the past. They are ISO certified and have a large online presence. Since they were the only source we moved ahead with a preliminary supplier approval on the basis of their ISO certification.

The c of c we received stated the items were "visually inspected to the required standards / specifications" and "Properly handled and packaged".

When I requested additional evidence that the items were as represented they finally provided a C of C from another distributor that provided the items to them which stated the items were "New Surplus" condition and that 10 pieces were from manufacturer X and 30 pieces from manufacturer Y. But THAT supplier had no certifications from the original manufacturers of the items.

Most likely they purchased surplus material possibly at government auction and who knows how they determined exactly what the items were. These pieces of hardware do have manufacturer codes stamped on them in the form of a single alpha character so it is possible to determine who the manufacturer was assuming they were not "knock offs" which has been a problem in the MIL spec hardware market in the past.

Even though these suppliers were willing to pass along hardware that "most likely was legit" they could not guarantee that the items were produced by the approved manufacturers and met all specifications.

The issue currently stands that we cannot use this hardware for our customer's requirements and the supplier is refusing to take the items back.

Our new policy is that we have added a statement on hardware POs that "An original manufacturers certificate of compliance is required".

 

[Baggie]

So you ask for a COC, one arrives with the goods - Now you find some (or all) of the goods are incorrect.
Can you use the COC in your subsequent claim for damages.
Not a chance !

Use a contract or P.O. by all means.

The only COC worth anything is one where you tell the supplier what they are to certify and agree the wording to be used.(presumably by a clause in contract / p.o.)

ie
We anycompany certify we have inspected the following feature and all goods supplied conform to the specification X (+/- y ) as per results herein.
Serialisation of product and results would also help.

But then there's GRR / who is authorised to sign / training records, and on, and on to consider.........

Conclusion,
Don't bother with COC's they are a complete and utter waste of time. (unless as stated above you have ignorant customers)
This opinion is based upon 30 years in Automotive / electronics and aerospace industries.