posted 01 February 1999 05:48 PM               

quote:

---

Marc I agree with what you said but i don't fully understand the meaning of Manpower shortage under what circumstances does this cover? We have a Union does this sttement cover every reason for manpower shortage including if the union strikes?

---

As is with QS, there are no concretes here. Look at all the examples folks have given in this thread. Ask your selfwhich ones might apply to you. If you mix chemicals and have 20 mixers, I doubt you would have a contigency plan for one or two going down (unless your production is ramped up to max and every mixer then *may* become critical. BUT - if you only have 1 mixer you sure want a spare motor, etc (you will have a contingency plan which is to keep an extra motor on hand).

Don't so much ask "what is QS requiring" here but rather ask "what major 'likely' things will occur" (Murphy's law(s)). Start with your 'long list', whittle it down to the significant few based on reason, knowledge, *cost*, reality, etc. The have those plans.

quote:

---

Contingency Plans 4.9.b.2 -- The supplier shall prepare contingency plans (e.g. utility interruprionts, labour shortages, key equipment failure) to reasonably protect the cuswtomer's supply of product in the event of emergency, excluding natural disaster and acts of God

---

Another example of a contingency plan which is seldom documented is planning for workers being absent (John and Mary didn't show up today). Managers and supervisors have 'plans' but they are typically not written.

One last one - it says "..utility interruptions..." How do we deal with that? Let's face it - most companies are not going to have a back-up generator system which will support all production and support functions. It doesn't make sense in *most* cases. I admit some of my clients have had that capability but they are few and far between. When does the electricy go out? Ice storms? Is an ice storm an act of god? Will anyone get to work any way? And, since it says "...utility interruptions..." Does this mean you have to have a plan for the possibility of a local water main break? Or natural gas - what if a main pipe breaks? You gonna bring in propane tankers which will involve orifrice changes everywhere gas is used?

REALITY, Folks! You can't plan for everything. Plan for what makes sense and is realistic. Your're already doing that to a large degree any way (see above where workers don't show up).

So - remember - there are a number of aspects to contigency plans...

Have I confused the issue?

posted 01 February 1999 06:08 PM               

quote:

---

I didn't know this one existed when I started it

---

Kevin, check your preference settings. You may not be displaying the threads from more than 25 days or so. Just a thought.

quote:

---

To use an example of 4.20 Statistical Techniques.

---

Good suggestion, Marc. Vital few, trivial many. I might be able to offer another.

In situations where it appears that the task at hand becomes burdensome, an affinity diagram of the key inputs and potential consequences may be valuable. I have a similar technique (believe it or not) for characterizing design inputs.

This particular area is not my strong suit (if I have a strong suit), so if I am completely off base, please let me know.

posted 02 February 1999 04:17 PM               

quote:

---

You could use that as 'proof' that you looked at all reasonable possibilities and chose certain things to address.

---

It does make for good objective evidence. When I first suggested it as a method for analyzing design inputs, it was treated with all the enthuasism as Oliver Twist asking for more soup. But it did catch on.

On this subject, the so-called TQM tools (or whatever they are being called these days) are presented as mainly to address problem solving or potential solutions. They are much much more than that.

posted 03 February 1999 10:25 AM               

Hope this helps.

posted 03 February 1999 12:01 PM               

In our upgrade audit to 3rd Edition, auditor ha an issue with my Contigency Plans. I had to make some adjustments to our level II, but they accepted my revision. It is odd that you mention "trial runs". I was told by our registrar, that we would not have to worry about that, but I guess it does make sense to see if it works. The probelm may come in, where it incurs lots of costs to "test run" the plan...where is the value-added?

Again, the plot thickens.

posted 05 February 1999 10:48 PM               

More importantly is to note that a contingency plan does not mean that a shipment (or more) will not be missed in some scenarios. This is why I say consider realism in your plans.

To me, much of the compliance issue it to show (be able and ready to discuss the issue) you fully understand the concept (just like in MSA). You can plan for a tornado (Florida folks, think hurricane), but can you plan for the entire plant being leveled? If you have 50 acres of buildings and land and the utilities are blown away but you plant is untouched, have you a 'deposit' on one helluva lot of generators (Hell no! Remember Risk & Probability and such), or, on the other hand, what if the place that has the generators is blown away in the storm (even if you DID pay a deposit)?

As always, my sage advice:

Keep it realistic and keep it simple. You really DO know what is appropriate for your plant/facility.

Live by the river in flood prone land? Insurance may pay to rebuild but it may take a while!

Phew! Next?

posted 01 March 1999 12:46 AM               

In response to Sheila's questions regarding how one might address the new QS-9000 requirement for contingency plans ...

During our last QS-9000 surveillance visit (audit) we asked the assessor to do something like a pre-assessment for the new 3rd edition. Our management came up with a long list of plans which aim to protect the customer's supply of product, such as,
inventory management
capacity at other sites
equipment backup systems
Y2K planning
MIS Backup systems

While one might not immediately recognize some of the above as contingency plans, my point is, you will probably be surprised at what systems you already have in place to protect your customer's supply of product in the event something out of the ordinary happens.

The assessor was pleased with our efforts here, but suggested we formalize some of our more nuts&bolts-y activities in a QSP. For example, if the boiler goes down for whatever reason, WHO is responsible for doing WHAT to ensure that the plant is still able to run?

I think if you simply ask yourself the last question, who is responsible for doing what to ensure that the plant can still run, and document the activities that take place, then you are there.

"How far" you need to go in the event of something happening can only be answered by your management, certainly not your assessor.

posted 23 March 2000 12:43 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bill Smith:

.... he did hint at the possibility of needing to show "trial Runs" in the future....

---

posted 19 April 2000 02:54 PM               

Key Equipment Failures.

What to do if the Phone System goes down.

What to do if the Computer Network goes down.

What to do in the event of a Power Failure.

That's it. That was fine for the auditor... this time (LOL).

As for manpower shortages, our auditors were only concerned if we were UNIONIZED. We are not, but if we were, part of the Contingency Plans would deal with what to do in the event of a STRIKE.

As for "Acts of God" or "Catastrophic Weather" - guess what? The customer's supply chain will be interrupted. Tough dung. Some auditors may bust hump on it. I would write a contingency plan for the customer to go elsewhere for the business. The bottom line is, to have Contingency Plans for Hurricanes or Tornadic activity, or floods is simply ludicrous for MOST businesses. If our building blows down or burns to the ground - the customer isn't getting their stuff... and short of building another facility somewhere stocked with all of the same equipment, there is NOTHING that we are going to do in said situations.

Hope I've helped, if even a little bit.

ALM