1. Vince May Atlanta, Georgia July 20 - 23, 2010
IAQG OPMT - FMEA
Vince May
Atlanta, Georgia
July , 2010

2. IAQG OPMT - FMEA OPMT Meeting Berlin, Germany – Feb 18 and 19, 2008
Attendees:
APAQG – Tamaki Nishio and Masahiro Kawamoto
EAQG – Hans Luijt, Herbert Mairose, Gerard Pleigneur, Jean-Louis Bounie
AAQG – Susie Neal, Mike Gallagher, Vince May, Rick Downs
Purpose of the meeting was to develop response to the SWG’s request to identify current failure modes of ICOP process and identify corrective actions.

3. FMEA Results
Inputs
Oversight data from each sectors oversight activities
ANAB oversight input
Boeings supplemental oversight report to the AAQG.
Using this data we identified eleven specific failure modes.
Using the FMEA process a rating of risk was assigned for each failure mode.
Using the identified risk level the failure modes were prioritized and the top 65% of failure modes were selected for corrective action.

4. Action Plans
Audit Duration – Commercial Issues drive CBs to minimum audit time
Develop mandatory audit day table that establishes minimum audit days
Update OASIS to include input of audit days to check if correct days were assigned
Audit Execution and Results – Soft Grading
Input complete Audit Reports and Corrective Actions in OASIS
Provide access to private data in OASIS to Oversight Assessment Teams

5. Action Plans
Audit Execution and Results – CB Certification Board influencing Audit Findings
Eliminate Major/Minor Finding categorization by providing one definition for nonconformity.
Establish Corrective action requirements (e.g., Clear 21 day response, includes containment action. Define rules for long term implementation items.)
When it is determine that findings are not written when evidence identifies a finding (Soft Grading) add a rule to 9104 for automatic suspension of CB (based on input from IAQG Members, SMS oversight activity, and AB oversight activity.)

6. Action Plans
Audit Execution and Results – Accuracy/completeness of data in audit report
Request IDR and SDRs lead effort to strengthen auditor training and evaluation
Audit Execution and Results – No description of non-conformances
Update 9101 Corrective Action Form
Audit Execution and Results – OASIS not updated within 30 days of certificate issuance
Consider adding it to criteria for CB suspension

7. Action Plans
Audit Execution and Results – Auditor weaknesses result in in effective audits
Strengthen auditor training and evaluation
Audit Execution and Results – Accuracy/completeness of data in audit report
Audit Execution and Results – Audit planning is not complete
Audit Execution and Results – Customer Satisfaction - effectiveness of audit approach
Strengthen requirements in 9100 and 9101

8. Action Plans
Audit Execution and Results – Thorough review of specific customer requirements (i.e., POs, quality flowdowns, contracts)
Provide specific training in 2008 SMS workshops
Encourage use of feedback process to alert CBs and auditors to issues for auditing
Defined auditor days will also help support this by ensuring adequate on-site audit time
Develop 9104 requirements for CBs and Certified Organizations to ensure it is clear that CBs review customer satisfaction data and that certified organizations must provide this data to CBs.

9. Action Plans
Audit Corrective Action – Corrective action implementation/effectiveness not fully evaluated
Strengthen auditor training and evaluation
Audit Corrective Action – Process does not ensure that all auditors are part of oversight activity
team and oversight leaders develop proposal to ensure all auditors are part of oversight process
Certificate Issue – Certificate is issued prior to closing non-conformances
Consider adding it to rules for CB suspension

10. Action Plans
Auditor Approvals – Auditor competency and effectiveness not evaluated
Strengthen auditor training and evaluation

11. Questions?
As Of November 14, 2009