Using Certificate setup on 08 inspection lot for UB STO

[Former Member]

hi All.

We are trying to get certificates working between two different plants that are on same company code. The parts are setup with QM Proc Active, Have cert configured control key and certificate type configured. If i receive using NB inter company the 01 type inspection lot gets CTCM status and cert receipt changes status to CROK.

However for part with same setup but configured for 08 inspection type (usage 9) received on UB stock transfer order the inspection lot gets created but it does not pick up the certificate status of CTCM or CROK when cert receipt is done.

Anybody out there doing this already? Through configuration or enhancement....

Any ideas or more questions on this?

[former_member42743]

The COA functionality is designed by SAP to work via purchase orders and not stock transport orders.  You can talk to your procurement people as I believe there is a way to have a stock transport order done in such a way that it looks like a PO upon receipt and an 01 inspection lot gets created instead of an 08.

The more basic issue I have to ask is why, why, why are they even doing this?????

You are basically sending test results from one plant in SAP to another plant in SAP.  Yet all the test resutls and everything that is on the COA should be viewable in SAP for review by both plants. Why generate wasted paper?

SAP only envisioned that you'd get COA's from external vendors.  Why would you require a cert from an internal plant to an internal plant?  It seems a total waste of time and a very inefficient process.

I have had this discussion on several projects, including global projects, and it was usually a case where plants had this process in place becasue they were not all on the same systems.  Once they got on the same system, they realized there really was no need to continue this process anymore. It was a matter of them getting comfortable with the idea and understanding that there is no real value added by sending internal COA's.  There were a few countries world-wide when there was an exception to this, but it was rare and was due to paperwork required for shipping/importing, not a quality control issue.

Craig

[Former Member]

Hi Craig

Thanks for responding and i will some more context which will answer the why. And yes the plants are in different countries/continents.

The paper certificate (although not checked) was being sent with the physical inventory and not routed through QM. The notified body had a finding around this on inspection and said that even though we are one company we are the equivalent of a vendor for parts like this and said we have to inspect or at basic level do a certificate check. The amount of receipts we are doing is very large and the cost of inspection/cert check would very large also.
To answer your second question on paper, for the envisaged system the cert is being created in QM and sent on outbound idoc and internal idoc does a cert receipt against the vendor batch so there is no paper here. We will validate the process and justify the certification happens on sending site, system validates this and product is routed through QM for inventory.

This works for NB flow with the 01 as you mentioned.

Do you know if it is possible to have UB create a 01 on receipt? i did not think that was possible. 

We are doing it today and is creating the 08 on receipt and for all purposes it acts like a 01 but does not read the certification statuses.

[former_member42743]

An option you might consider is the copying of results.  There have been a few threads on this as of late.

Maybe you can have the 08 lot copy the results from the previous lots in the other plant.  The results will be checked against the specs set up in the incoming plant.  The UD could be made automatically when the results are in-spec and force a manual UD if anything has any out-of-spec result.  You may also be able to set it up to read the incoming data from the IDOC and populate the 08 inspection lot.  This would be way more rigorous then checking the COA manually as you are actually testing each and every result against an independent spec set up in the receiving plant.  It makes it way more efficient as your people only need to deal with anomalies and not manually review every result. 

The process for creating the 01 on GR is how they create the order.  My understanding is that it is still a UB but the system thinks of it as coming from an external vendor.  I believe this is done by creating a vendor number for the sending plant.  The req is created using the vendor number and not by source plant.  A procurement specialist should be able to help out with that.  you will need to activate the 01inspection type in the receiving plant of course which you are already doing.

Craig.

[former_member42743]

BTW:  a lot of people interpret findings as a hard and fast requirement.  Just becasue a particular solution was put in place at one time to resolve a finding, doesn't mean a new process can't be used or that the finding becomes obsolete because of new technology or processes.

I get so many people tell me (not necessarily you), that they HAVE to do it this way because of a finding.  Or even worse becasue an auditor said so.  Many auditors have no clue of computer systems, and many just do whatever they are use to.  Unfortunately, technology changes so fast many auditors are woefully behind unless they really make a point to keep up. Not unlike most of us IT people!

For instance, in pharma, most COA check's can be done away with if you have a vendor agreement, audits and a mointoring system in place like using DMR's to fully inspect a few times a year.  It's done at numerous pharma's and defense and military industries and is fully acceptable by the regulatory agencies.  Yet I have people still insisting on a hand signed COA cause 30 years ago they had a finding.

But some countries and companies are different and we have to deal with it anyway. 

Craig

[Former Member]

the process for creating the 01 on GR is how they create the order.  My understanding is that it is still a UB but the system thinks of it as coming from an external vendor.  I believe this is done by creating a vendor number for the sending plant.  The req is created using the vendor number and not by source plant.  A procurement specialist should be able to help out with that.  you will need to activate the 01inspection type in the receiving plant of course which you are already doing.

The part we would like to do doesnt have any requirement to send down test results, the data sent down in the EDI is the fact it was QC released in the sending plant and the association of the cert with the receiving inspection lot will allow our process to work. The finding from the auditors for us told us we cant just accept lots without proof, the design we are working towards is a IT flow to counter paper, resources and  burden on sites in large enterprises with multiple sites. We are happy that our position is one we can happily stand over when it does land on the next auditors desk.

I am interested in the above quoted part and would like to find out more about this if possible if you or anyone has any ideas on what is possible here.

[former_member42743]

Yes, as I understand it is possible, but it might be only across different company codes.  I spoke with a mutual firend of ours and went over as much as I could.  I think a procurement specialist should be able to answer that.  I'm interested in hearing how it gets resolved.  I hope you can keep us updated.