Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 109 views

    API AARs

    Uploaded by

    Dhaval Chitre
    This document summarizes 14 non-conformances across various API AAR departments: 1) The facility has not planned for implementation of requirements in API Q1 Addendum 2 for their QMS. 2) The quality system manual does not identify processes requiring validation. 3) The facility lacks a procedure for defining personnel competency and identifying training requirements within the quality management system scope. 4) Control of an external document defining pressure testing requirements is not evident. 5) The facility did not plan or conduct internal audits for outsourced calibration activities performed onsite.

    Copyright:

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

    API AARs

    Uploaded by

    Dhaval Chitre
    109 views2 pages
    This document summarizes 14 non-conformances across various API AAR departments: 1) The facility has not planned for implementation of requirements in API Q1 Addendum 2 for their QMS. 2) The quality system manual does not identify processes requiring validation. 3) The facility lacks a procedure for defining personnel competency and identifying training requirements within the quality management system scope. 4) Control of an external document defining pressure testing requirements is not evident. 5) The facility did not plan or conduct internal audits for outsourced calibration activities performed onsite.

    Original Title

    API AARs.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes 14 non-conformances across various API AAR departments: 1) The facility has not planned for implementation of requirements in API Q1 Addendum 2 for their QMS. 2) The quality system manual does not identify processes requiring validation. 3) The facility lacks a procedure for defining personnel competency and identifying training requirements within the quality management system scope. 4) Control of an external document defining pressure testing requirements is not evident. 5) The facility did not plan or conduct internal audits for outsourced calibration activities performed onsite.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    109 views2 pages

    API AARs

    Uploaded by

    Dhaval Chitre
    This document summarizes 14 non-conformances across various API AAR departments: 1) The facility has not planned for implementation of requirements in API Q1 Addendum 2 for their QMS. 2) The quality system manual does not identify processes requiring validation. 3) The facility lacks a procedure for defining personnel competency and identifying training requirements within the quality management system scope. 4) Control of an external document defining pressure testing requirements is not evident. 5) The facility did not plan or conduct internal audits for outsourced calibration activities performed onsite.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    API AARs

    AAR Department Non-conformance description


    No.
    1 QA The facility has not planned QMS for implementation of
    requirements of Addendum 2
    of API Q1.
    2 QA Quality System Manual does not identify the processes
    requiring validation.
    3 HR The organization shall maintain a documented procedure for
    defining personnel competency and identifying training
    requirements or other actions to achieve the necessary
    competency of personnel whose responsibilities fall within the
    scope of the quality management system.
    4 Engineering Control of External Document ASME B 16.34 (which the facility
    refers for deciding the pressure test requirements for the
    products where the pressure class is defined in terms of
    Pressure Classes like #600, #900, #1500 etc. ) , is not evident.
    5 QA It is not evident that the facility had planned and conducted
    internal audit for the outsourced activities of Calibration of
    Testing, Monitoring and Measuring equipment" which are
    performed at the facility site.
    6 Inside sales There was no Contract Review CUM Work Order Records
    evidenced for the Customer PO Number 4209140696, Rev 0
    dated 06 Mar 2019 from M/s. Emerson Process Management
    for Retrofitting of chokes parts for lower size trim assembly.
    Para (b) of documented procedure JFC-P-IS-01, Rev 1 dated 01
    Jun 2018 requires
    "Review shall be done for quote and customer purchase order".
    7 QA Contingency Planning for the risk related to “delivery of non-
    conforming products to customers’ is not evidenced.
    8 Engineering Evidenced records of Pressure Time Graphs for PR2 Validation
    testing of API 6A GLOBE VALVE (Model VGB-40) 4-1/16”, 10000
    psi, PSL3G, PR-2,FF-0.5, K+X, API 6FA, with Gear Box, BX-155, do
    not demonstrate that the product was held at Maximum
    Temperature of 180 degrees C for a period of 01 hour. Also,
    validation records for required Fire Safe Testing could not be
    evidenced by the facility.
    9 Purchase It is not evident that the facility has defined controls on the
    outsourced processes of
    1. Fugitive Emission Testing 2. Third Party Inspections
    10 Production Documented system does not address the requirements for
    qualification of equipment used for Post Weld Heat Treatment
    of welded parts.
    11 QC Evidence of conformity to requirements of Parallelism,
    Perpendicularity, Concentricity of various surfaces (as required
    in facility's drawing number 30A19CE1FA9CA9CFG-X, Rev 0) is
    not available
    12 Purchase Supplier Evaluation Records/Vendor Audit Report dated 15 Sep
    2017 do not evidence that the capability of the supplier was
    established to perform calibrations of Automatic Welding
    Machine, Ovens, Steel Scale, Digital Clamp meter etc.
    13 QC Verification records of purchased Nuts do not evidence
    conformity to the requirements defined by the facility.
    14 QC In one of the sampled cases, records of product release do not
    enable identification of the individual releasing the product.

    You might also like