The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  QS-9000
  Contingency Plans

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Contingency Plans
Dawn
Forum Contributor

Posts: 245
From:St. Marys, PA
Registered: Sep 98

posted 11 November 1998 04:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dawn   Click Here to Email Dawn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Can anyone tell me what exactly needs to be stated for contingency plans?
Thanks ahead of time.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 25 November 1998 02:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Content of your contingency plans is related to the risks of your business and may include weather related stuff, failure of 'critical' manufacturing equipment and such. In addition, you will probably have a number of contingency plans. Maintenance must plan for catistrophic (spelling) equipment failure. Quality or metrology may have a plan for certain inspection and test equipment (say you have an x-ray inspection and only 1 x-ray machine). Etc. Etc. Some will be documented and some will not be (probably).

Hope this helps as a starter.

IP: Logged

Ganesh Chidambarakrishnan
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 4
From:Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Registered: Nov 98

posted 15 December 1998 12:50 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ganesh Chidambarakrishnan   Click Here to Email Ganesh Chidambarakrishnan     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The intent of the contingency plans is that the customer's production does not get affected inspite of problems at the supplier's site. So, all the possible production distruptions that might hamper the supplier's production may have to be listed and the supplier's action plan to ensure supplies to the customer as per the customer schedules should be planned. These are the contingency plans required by QS9000. QS 9000 does not require supplier to consider unforeseen conditions like weather extremities ("Acts of God").

Ganesh

IP: Logged

terryd
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 2
From:elizabethtown, ky
Registered: Dec 98

posted 16 December 1998 11:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for terryd   Click Here to Email terryd     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/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?

------------------

IP: Logged

Max Perez
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 4
From:Aurora, Ontario Canada
Registered:

posted 01 February 1999 08:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Max Perez   Click Here to Email Max Perez     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm going mad here writing contingency plans. The more you think about it, the more things can go wrong. Marc- Point taken on test machines, until now I was only focusing on production equipment....Thanks a lot!
But seriously, when do you stop?
I've identified 3 scenario's to plan for so far:
1) Specific equipment repair/damage; Specific Machinery goes down due to unforeseen failure or damage (ie smashed by a careening forklift)
2) Building unusable; Assuming the equipment can be salvaged, I have to plan to move heavy machinery to another facility....
3) Building destroyed; Earthquake,Floods, F-15 plows into it, etc... I have to have a plan to manufacture my product by hand? We are a stamping/assembly facility. Sure, we can assemble by hand, but what if my dies are damaged?
Add to each scenario the labour factor, and then do it again for utilities (for both short term and long term outages for water and electricity...phones!...and god forbid...SEWAGE!
My contingency plan is beginning to look like a tome.
Can anybody post and example somewhere?, or know of a location of one that is already out there? I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate that.

IP: Logged

Kevin Mader
Forum Wizard

Posts: 575
From:Seymour, CT USA
Registered: Nov 98

posted 01 February 1999 10:19 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kevin Mader   Click Here to Email Kevin Mader     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Max,

I believe that you may be planning too fine. You need to plan reasonably to protect for issues identified as needing it. Earthquakes and floods are acts of God and do not need a contingency plan (as well as an F15 falling out of the sky). There is another thread (I didn't know this one existed when I started it) where more information exists.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 01 February 1999 05:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
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?
Kevin has the gist of what's happening here. To use an example of 4.20 Statistical Techniques. I go into a company and the question is where to start and how far to go. What they are asking is what have you considered? Did you make a big list and whittle it down to the 'significant few'? With statistical techniques as with contingency plans, you start out making a list. What can go wrong. Big and little. With statistics you have to show you considered (well, explain if not show) a variety of things and designated a significant few for monitoring. With contingency plans you do the same. If you're union, I would expect some sort of plan to address a strike.

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
Note: I do know many contingency plans are not documented. Maintenance, from maintenance records and such, may keep extra motors on hand without writing something saying so. They have undocumented contingency planning - they know what's going on from maintenance records review. And this goes to issues like calibration. There are many things a cal lab manager sees in calibration records that charting will not help - many decisions are based upon their professional experience and knowledge.

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?

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 02-01-99).]

IP: Logged

Don Winton
Forum Contributor

Posts: 498
From:Tullahoma, TN
Registered:

posted 01 February 1999 06:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Don Winton   Click Here to Email Don Winton     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
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.

Regards,
Don

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 01 February 1999 06:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Diagram would do nicely. You could use that as 'proof' that you looked at all reasonable possibilities and chose certain things to address. Yes - an affinity diagram would do nicely.

IP: Logged

Kevin Mader
Forum Wizard

Posts: 575
From:Seymour, CT USA
Registered: Nov 98

posted 02 February 1999 12:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kevin Mader   Click Here to Email Kevin Mader     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc and Don,

Good explanations and suggestions. By the way Don, you're right on the setting. I will dig deeper before posting my next topic. I have to admit that if I go any deeper into the archives, I believe my system may die trying to retrieve all the info. Marc, the abiity to only retrieve the latest postings was a great idea and better for this tiring computer. Back to the group...

IP: Logged

Don Winton
Forum Contributor

Posts: 498
From:Tullahoma, TN
Registered:

posted 02 February 1999 04:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Don Winton   Click Here to Email Don Winton     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
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.

Regards,
Don

IP: Logged

Bill Smith
Forum Contributor

Posts: 20
From:El Paso, Texas
Registered:

posted 03 February 1999 10:25 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Bill Smith   Click Here to Email Bill Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, we have survived the latest visit from our registrar and our attempt to address the contingency plans seems to have been successfull. The auditor reviewed our methodology and said that if it was documented and met our needs the it met the intent of the standard, he did hitn at the possibility of needing to show "trial Runs" in the future.

Hope this helps.

------------------

IP: Logged

Bryon C Simmons
Forum Contributor

Posts: 65
From:Zeeland, MI USA
Registered: Dec 98

posted 03 February 1999 12:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Bryon C Simmons   Click Here to Email Bryon C Simmons     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi.

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.

Bryon

IP: Logged

Bill Smith
Forum Contributor

Posts: 20
From:El Paso, Texas
Registered:

posted 03 February 1999 07:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Bill Smith   Click Here to Email Bill Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think that the " Trial run " issue is a Ford Specific requirement in the MS9000 manual.
As far as I can tell the QS 9000 requirements manual does not mention it, but I think there might be an argument to be made concerning effectiveness if you never tested the contingency plans.


Bill

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 05 February 1999 09:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
To bring some realism to this thread:

How many folks here think Ford had a contingency plan (documented or otherwise) for the recent Rouge powerplant explosion. Note that QS9000 4.9.b.2 requires a plan for utility interruptions! Everyone that thinks Ford did raise your hand!

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 05 February 1999 09:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Don't forget Kevin Mader's Contingency Plans thread.

IP: Logged

Don Winton
Forum Contributor

Posts: 498
From:Tullahoma, TN
Registered:

posted 05 February 1999 10:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Don Winton   Click Here to Email Don Winton     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Very Good. Very Good, Indeed.

Regards,
Don

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 05 February 1999 10:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I will admit that I do really believe (no, I am not kidding) that there actually was some sort of plan for it. I cannot believe someone at Ford did not think of it as a (very) remote possibility at some time within the last 10 years.

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?

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 02-05-99).]

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 01 March 1999 12:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
From: Suzi Maresh
Subject: RE: QS-9000 Contingency Plans (r2089) /Maresh

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.

S. Maresh /ENTEK International LLC

IP: Logged

Kevin Mader
Forum Wizard

Posts: 575
From:Seymour, CT USA
Registered: Nov 98

posted 01 March 1999 08:20 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kevin Mader   Click Here to Email Kevin Mader     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc,

Good post. Often folks don't look at what they have and document it. Instead, they feel pressed to create many new plans when few or none are needed. It is good advice to step back, look at the system and determine if your program is documented. A lot less work documenting something in existence than creating from scratch.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 23 March 2000 12:43 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Smith:

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


Has anyone been asked to do trial runs? I've seen trial runs as pertain to containment, but so far no requests for same with respect to contingency planning.

BTW, I think the other 'major' contingency threads are:
https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000008.html
and https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000087.html
and https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000048.html

IP: Logged

ALM
Forum Contributor

Posts: 80
From:Philadelphia
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 19 April 2000 02:54 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ALM   Click Here to Email ALM     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Having just passed a QS9000 Certification Audit, the following is our "Contingency Plans" and each of the following processes fits on two typed pages. It covers:

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

[This message has been edited by ALM (edited 19 April 2000).]

IP: Logged

Tom Goetzinger
Forum Contributor

Posts: 123
From:Milwaukee, WI USA
Registered: Mar 99

posted 20 April 2000 10:03 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom Goetzinger   Click Here to Email Tom Goetzinger     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
4.9.b.1 specifically excludes the need to cover "natural disaster and acts of God" in your contingency plan. I would point the auditor to that element if he questioned why they were not covered.
We have a one page work instruction which outlines what actions we will take, and our auditor was satisfied with it.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!