A Shared Understanding of Standard-Defined Terms is Crucial for Compliance
Published .
Applicable Standards
AS9102Related
- AS9100
- ISO 9001
Topics
- fai
- as9102
- interpretation
- definitions
- compliance
- training
- documentation
A supplier submitted a First Article Inspection (FAI) package based on their team's general interpretation of quality terminology. Believing certain fields marked 'Conditionally Required' were optional in their context, they were left blank. The provided evidence for materials and processes was based on internal conventions rather than the specific requirements of the standard.
The prime customer rejected the FAI package, citing non-compliance rooted in misinterpretations of standard-defined terms. The rejections stemmed from a misunderstanding of what constitutes 'objective evidence' and the precise criteria for completing 'Conditionally Required' fields as defined in the standard's appendices.
Key Takeaways
- The rejected FAI led to production delays and required the supplier to expend significant resources reworking the entire documentation package.
- This corrective action necessitated retraining personnel on the specific definitions and appendices within the governing aerospace quality standard.
- The prime customer rejected the FAI package, citing non-compliance rooted in misinterpretations of standard-defined terms.
Best Practice
Organizations must ensure quality personnel have a thorough, uniform understanding of the specific definitions provided within applicable standards like AS9102. Relying on general industry knowledge or internal conventions can lead to non-compliant documentation, costly rework, and schedule impacts.
Reflects the recommended position based on community discussion and expert review.
Continue the conversation
Have a different interpretation or recent experience that adds nuance? The community keeps lessons sharp.
Ask LINK
Get an instant AS9102-grounded answer from our FAI assistant. The fastest path to a working answer for your own situation.