Whether First Article Inspection Report- FAI is mandatory for regular

U

umesh prabhu

Registered
#1
#1
Whether First Article Inspection Report- FAI is mandatory for regular, continuous and repeat order in order to meet AS9100 Rev D standard requirements



We are regularly producing precision component for an aerospace industry since 2016. Our customer provides raw materials, drawing, control plan for production of components. During 2016 we didn’t have AS 9100 certification and we unaware of the FAIR. So our customer himself performed the FAIR and we are regularly producing the same component with any change in drawing, specification, PLC software and persons also. Now we have decided to go for AS9100 Rev D certification. We had our AS9100 D stage – 2 audit on 08.07.2018 and auditor raised NC as follow by a certification body.
NC under AS9100 D - 8.5.1.3 Production Process Verification- stating that
1. There is no evidence of production process verification of part no XXXXXX-0 Rev 2 with respect to all characteristics as per ballooned part drawing , other requirements/notes as specified in customer part drg.

2. Pre-contract review of customer requirements dated 08-07-2017 for part No XXXXXX -0 requires PPV (FAI ) to be performed and submitted.
Can anyone tell us when there no change in any parameter since 2016, how we can have the First Article Inspection in which stage. Please note that the drawing No. / Part no XXXXXX -0 Rev 2 remains same since 2016. Also tell us if it a Non Conformance(NC).


So there is no chance of occurrence of doing the First Article Inspection Report
 
GAGEpack - Gage & Calibration Management
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
U

UncleFester

Involved In Discussions
#2
#2
There is a N/C as during your pre-contract review you understood the customer requirement for a FAI but you didn't submit one.

If you can provide evidence that your customer then presented an order confirming that they would produce the FAI themselves then this would be the only mitigation.

You have stated that at the time that you were unaware of the FAIR, yet you conducted a pre-contract review where the customer required a FAI.

The NC is justified.
 
U

umesh prabhu

Registered
#3
#3
UncleFester said:
There is a N/C as during your pre-contract review you understood the customer requirement for a FAI but you didn't submit one.

If you can provide evidence that your customer then presented an order confirming that they would produce the FAI themselves then this would be the only mitigation.

You have stated that at the time that you were unaware of the FAIR, yet you conducted a pre-contract review where the customer required a FAI.

The NC is justified.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply.
1. Very Initially we did not have the contract review form but we are doing the aerospace part order since 2016
2. The contract review form is created on 20.01.2018 where we have addressed as” if there is any FAI requirement by the customer” as one column specifying YES or NO
3. This is usually NO, because our customer either or customer doesn’t specify the requirement of FAI report, because it is a continuous and repeated order for us sine 2016 ( No change in dimension, specification, drawing or raw material, no change in the CNC program also no change in the operator since 2016)
4. We have internal system of First setting approval inspection report for every part
5. Our customer doesn’t ask us to comply with AS9102
6. We don’t get any chance of making any first part to perform FAI
Only the certification body auditors during stage II audit have raised NC and asking us to perform FAI. They are not understanding that the parts are regular and continuous production since 2016 without change in any of the parameter. So in which stage now we have to do the FAI. Is it NC or not. Therefore, we have come to the forum for having clarity.
 
U

UncleFester

Involved In Discussions
#4
#4
The NC has been raised. If you have already accepted the findings of the auditors report then you need to address the NC.

If there was a dispute at the time that the NC was raised then there was opportunity to challenge the auditor and reduce or remove the NC.

From the other evidence you have provided, at the time of taking the first customer order you were required to perform an FAI as you stated:

"2. Pre-contract review of customer requirements dated 08-07-2017 for part No XXXXXX -0 requires PPV (FAI ) to be performed and submitted."

You didn't perform or submit the FAI. So the auditor is correct.

You should look at this as an opportunity to determine what, if anything, has changed since you first started manufacturing this part - the FAI process will help you to determine this.

Please bear in mind that the NC not only requires corrective action to addressing for this particular part (by doing a FAI), but you also need to demonstrate that there are preventive actions in place. You have introduced a new form with a column to indicate the customer requirement for a FAI but you need to demonstrate that your process ensures that this customer requirement is met.
 
G

Gwhittaker22

Registered
#5
#5
umesh prabhu said:
Whether First Article Inspection Report- FAI is mandatory for regular, continuous and repeat order in order to meet AS9100 Rev D standard requirements



We are regularly producing precision component for an aerospace industry since 2016. Our customer provides raw materials, drawing, control plan for production of components. During 2016 we didn’t have AS 9100 certification and we unaware of the FAIR. So our customer himself performed the FAIR and we are regularly producing the same component with any change in drawing, specification, PLC software and persons also. Now we have decided to go for AS9100 Rev D certification. We had our AS9100 D stage – 2 audit on 08.07.2018 and auditor raised NC as follow by a certification body.
NC under AS9100 D - 8.5.1.3 Production Process Verification- stating that
1. There is no evidence of production process verification of part no XXXXXX-0 Rev 2 with respect to all characteristics as per ballooned part drawing , other requirements/notes as specified in customer part drg.

2. Pre-contract review of customer requirements dated 08-07-2017 for part No XXXXXX -0 requires PPV (FAI ) to be performed and submitted.
Can anyone tell us when there no change in any parameter since 2016, how we can have the First Article Inspection in which stage. Please note that the drawing No. / Part no XXXXXX -0 Rev 2 remains same since 2016. Also tell us if it a Non Conformance(NC).


So there is no chance of occurrence of doing the First Article Inspection Report
Click to expand...
Hello UnMesh..

Did you consider that the customer purchase contract provisions are the rules for your company to meet your obligations for performance of the contract? I am not a member of the local "Bar", but I did not sleep in a Holiday Inn either.....

The highest customer requirement is defined in the purchase order contract.
If the customer contract includes text that states that the FAI shall be completed by the customer resources,then it is logical to consider that the quality records for the same shall reside with the customer.
Is your organization ITAR compliant?
How about a clause that states something to the effect "Available upon appropriate request for review on site", or the customer may consider the balloon drawing "Proprietary"?

Perhaps you might consider configuring your records management protocol to require written notice for customer controlled property, e.g. the balloon drawing(s)

George
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
K Whether the product is an accessory according to the MDR definition EU Medical Device Regulations 3
E Whether Egypt allows the appointment of multiple AR? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
A " I, as a 3rd party auditor, retain the obligation to determine whether or not the process is "effective"... Discuss. Registrars and Notified Bodies 5
D Deciding whether or not pre-market clinical investigation is required for low risk device EU Medical Device Regulations 5
A How to make sure whether the predicated device is marked with EC certificate? EU Medical Device Regulations 8
N Whether your NB is pushing you for MDR? Registrars and Notified Bodies 0
K Question on whether IEC 60601-2-62 standard is applied IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
V Regrinding Material - Verify whether a product contains any regrinding material Manufacturing and Related Processes 13
S Contract Manufacturer Question - Whether or not the reference to the ex-CMO ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
P Deciding whether or not a new 510k is needed Other US Medical Device Regulations 2
F ISO 22000 Clause 7.4.4 to determine whether a control is a CCP or and OPRP Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 2
A Cnpk (Non-Parametric Capability Analysis) to assess whether the Process is Stable Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 7
J Trying to determine whether a steel plate is bowed with a Faro Arm Calibration and Metrology Software and Hardware 8
B How do you measure whether a QMS is good or bad? Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 9
S Whether some paths exist for leakage to get outside the LCD? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
D ISMS Asset Register - How to rate whether the asset is critical? IEC 27001 - Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) 3
1 How I can tell whether or not my QMS is MDD compliant EU Medical Device Regulations 4
O Seasonality - How can I be sure whether the seasonality is available or not Using Minitab Software 2
P Whether the medicine spoon, medicine dropper and NASAL ASPIRATOR are medical devices EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A Root Cause Analysis - Whether one can do RCA for Positive Findings Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 19
I The Status of EN 550 and Whether it will be Replaced Soon by ISO 11135 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
R Whether or not this Purchasing Process get NC during Audit?? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
B How to identify whether my data is non-normal? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 26
Manix WEEE and the confusion surrounding whether we fall into the scope of the directive! Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 9
S I want to know whether Development is a part of Design or not. Design and Development of Products and Processes 5
S Whether the word BETA means prototype samples or the Production samples IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
N Determining whether a process yeild is normal or non-normal distribution? Six Sigma 10
C Distributors Agreement Article 14 EU Medical Device Regulations 4
M KSA CAA acceptance of article AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
J Bioburden requirements for Procedure Packs under Article 22? EU Medical Device Regulations 3
Jim Wynne Article: Whatever Happened to Six Sigma? Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 32
C MDR 2017/744 Article 22 EU Medical Device Regulations 3
D Does the MDR article 10 (14) needs to be documented word for word in a Procedure? EU Medical Device Regulations 1
N Definition of article, complex object, substance REACH and RoHS Conversations 1
O Article 120 - significant change interpretation EU Medical Device Regulations 7
R EU MDR Article 22 applicability of medical device with components. EU Medical Device Regulations 4
V MDR – Article 65 – Clinical investigations on minors EU Medical Device Regulations 6
P MDR Article 27 - UDI - Keeping records of UDIs EU Medical Device Regulations 1
K 2021/2226 on Electronic Instructions for Use (IFU) for medical devices Article 22 Packs EU Medical Device Regulations 1
A MDR article 54(2) "modifying" EU Medical Device Regulations 1
B 2017/745 Article 22 EU Medical Device Regulations 6
D AS9100D 8.5.1.3 First Article AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 9
F The meaning of MDR Article 61 6(b) EU Medical Device Regulations 1
S Meaning of Article 61 (10) of the MDR 2017/745 EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A Article 54, Article 61(4) the meaning of marketed device EU Medical Device Regulations 8
L Article 87 Field Safety Corrective Actions in a third country EU Medical Device Regulations 2
D DOD First Article Test Plan & Report Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
A MDR Article 16 Certification of Distributors by a Notified Body? EU Medical Device Regulations 8
C Discus Software for First Article Inspection Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
A Declaring Conformity with MDR Article 120(3) for an MDD Legacy Device EU Medical Device Regulations 1

Similar threads

Top Bottom