Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 48 views

    Heat Treating Task Group Staff Engineer/Audit Reviewer Handbook 01-Nov-2018 Criteria For Major/Minor Ncrs

    Uploaded by

    Vijay Yadav
    The document provides criteria for classifying nonconformance reports (NCRs) as major or minor during heat treating audits. Major NCRs involve violations of customer specifications or testing tolerances, while minor NCRs involve issues like inadequate procedures when the process is still compliant. It also outlines requirements for objective evidence, notifying customers of major issues, round robin testing, verification audits, and the supplier appeal process.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Heat Treating Task Group Staff Engineer/Audit Reviewer Handbook 01-Nov-2018 Criteria For Major/Minor Ncrs

    Uploaded by

    Vijay Yadav
    48 views3 pages
    The document provides criteria for classifying nonconformance reports (NCRs) as major or minor during heat treating audits. Major NCRs involve violations of customer specifications or testing tolerances, while minor NCRs involve issues like inadequate procedures when the process is still compliant. It also outlines requirements for objective evidence, notifying customers of major issues, round robin testing, verification audits, and the supplier appeal process.

    Original Description:

    SE Handbook 01-Nov-2018

    Original Title

    SE Handbook 01-Nov-2018

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document provides criteria for classifying nonconformance reports (NCRs) as major or minor during heat treating audits. Major NCRs involve violations of customer specifications or testing tolerances, while minor NCRs involve issues like inadequate procedures when the process is still compliant. It also outlines requirements for objective evidence, notifying customers of major issues, round robin testing, verification audits, and the supplier appeal process.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    48 views3 pages

    Heat Treating Task Group Staff Engineer/Audit Reviewer Handbook 01-Nov-2018 Criteria For Major/Minor Ncrs

    Uploaded by

    Vijay Yadav
    The document provides criteria for classifying nonconformance reports (NCRs) as major or minor during heat treating audits. Major NCRs involve violations of customer specifications or testing tolerances, while minor NCRs involve issues like inadequate procedures when the process is still compliant. It also outlines requirements for objective evidence, notifying customers of major issues, round robin testing, verification audits, and the supplier appeal process.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    HEAT TREATING TASK GROUP

    STAFF ENGINEER/AUDIT REVIEWER HANDBOOK


    01-Nov-2018

    Criteria for Major/Minor NCRs:

    Major:
    1. Any violation of engineering processing parameters required by customer-invoked
    specifications, or a lack of documentation demonstrating compliance to same.
    Parameters include, but are not limited to:
    • Temperatures and temperature tolerances
    • Times and time tolerances
    • Atmosphere/vacuum levels
    • Quenchant media, temperature, or quench delay time
    • Any parameters fixed/frozen per customer
    2. Any failure to address the potential product impact associated with the above.
    3. Any violation of the testing tolerances or methods of Pyrometry.
    4. Any repeated non-compliance of periodic testing intervals.
    5. Any incorrect application of correction factors that results in an out-of-tolerance
    condition.
    6. Any non-sustaining corrective actions from the previous heat treating audit.

    Minor:

    1. Inadequate or non-existent procedures when supported by evidence that the


    processing or testing is performed correctly per requirement.
    2. Isolated non-compliance of periodic testing intervals.
    3. Any incorrect application of correction factors that does not result in an out-of-
    tolerance condition.

    Findings shall be reviewed using these criteria and upgraded or downgraded accordingly
    and documented in eAuditNet in accordance with a-frm-49. If an additional finding is
    identified during the review process which is related to a different checklist question than
    the original finding, an additional finding will be written against that checklist question.

    Findings which are written against “best practices” and not associated with a checklist
    requirement will be voided.

    Findings which are designated “Supplier to Evaluate Impact to Product” will not be
    downgraded to minor findings even if the supplier is able to demonstrate that there has not
    been any impact to product.
    Objective Evidence Requirements:

    1. All findings for both Initial and Reaccreditation audits require objective evidence.
    2. Any major finding which is a violation of a customer required specification
    requirement requires notification to that customer. Evidence of acknowledgment
    from the customer of the notification is required to close the finding.
    3. If the supplier has not been performing a SAT or a TUS in accordance with the
    governing Pyrometry specification, a new test to the spec is required to close the
    NCR.

    Requirements for all Round Robin Testing:

    1. Accept any statistical method which compares the data with 95% confidence.
    2. Require the raw data, statistical calculations, pass/fail criteria, and signature of
    whether the study passes or fails.
    3. Require the procedure to outline how the test is being performed, the statistical
    method which is being used to compare the data, and the pass/fail criteria.
    4. Require a submitted round robin test and procedure for suppliers who cannot
    demonstrate that they are performing round robin to close the finding.

    Verification of Corrective Action (VCA) Audits:

    1. Recommend a VCA audit when there are significant findings for flow down or
    Pyrometry.
    2. Recommend failure in lieu of a VCA audit for reaccreditation audits who have a
    history of VCA audits and/or failures in Heat Treating.
    3. Duration of a VCA audit will be 2 days for audits which had more than 9 findings. All
    audits which have 9 findings or less will only require a one day VCA audit.

    Task Group Review:

    1. Recommend the two assigned reviewers to review and comment in Task Group
    discussion prior to the point when the audit has been submitted for Task Group
    Review and Ballot. This will minimize the audit report review time.

    2. Do not include findings, which are reopened for prime specific requirements identified
    by a prime during review, when the SE does not have the applicable prime
    specification in the delegation percentage numbers.

    Audit Ballot Closure:

    When all NCRs are closed and the audit is ready to go for Task Group Review, the Reviewer
    shall send an e-mail to all Subscribers that signed-up to review that audit informing them that
    the audit is in their queue.

    When closing a ballot, all comments in the ballot that are contrary to final decision or
    Reviewer recommendations are to be acknowledged in the audit forum for evidence of
    complete consideration.

    Supplier Failure Appeals Process

    1. Audit Reviewer liaises with the Supplier to obtain from the Supplier the technical reasons
    to support the appeal.
    2. Audit Reviewer liaises with the Task Group Chair to set up an Ad Hoc meeting to review
    the appeal. Supplier can request that he can attend meeting.

    3. Audit Reviewer forwards Supplier information to the Task Group before the meeting for
    review.

    4. Supplier presents their case. Decision made on the appeal by the simple majority of the
    Task Group Quorum.

    5. Audit Reviewer informs the Supplier of the Task Group decision.

    You might also like