ISRO-PAS-100

Issue 3, November 2012

Non-conformance
Control Requirements
for ISRO Projects

ISRO Reliability Standards

Directorate of Systems Reliability and Quality, ISRO Headquarters, Bangalore

 ¦ÉÉ®úiÉÒªÉ +xiÉÊ®úIÉ +xÉÖºÉÆvÉÉxÉ ºÉÆMÉ`öxÉ
+xiÉÊ®úIÉ Ê´É¦ÉÉMÉ
¦ÉÉ®úiÉ ºÉ®EòÉ®
+xiÉÊ®úIÉ ¦É´ÉxÉ
xªÉÚ ¤ÉÒ.<Ç.B±É. ®úÉäb÷, ¤ÉåMɱÉÚ®ú-560 231, ¦ÉÉ®úiÉ
nÚ®¦ÉɹÉ: +91-80-2341 5241/2217 2333
¡èòCºÉ: +91-80-23415328
Indian Space Research Organisation
Department of Space
Government of India
Antariksh Bhavan
New BEL Road, Bangalore - 560 231, India
Telephone : +91-80-2341 5241/2217 2333
Fax : +91-80-23415328
e-mail : chairman@isro.gov.in

Dr. K. Radhakrishnan
Chairman

MESSAGE

ISRO Reliability Standards, addressing the various disciplines of Engineering, have been
in vogue for almost three decades now. These standards are followed across ISRO
centres as well as external work centers for design, fabrication, testing, analysis and other
processes involved in the realization of Launch Vehicles, Spacecraft, Space Applications,
Ground support systems and other launch infrastructure.The need for standardization
of processes towards achieving high reliability systems can never be over emphasized,
and ISRO Reliability Standards are just an attempt towards explicitly stating this.

With the advent of newer techniques and with the evolution of technology itself, over
the last 30 years, it has become essential to revisit the existing ISRO Reliability Standards and revise and
update the standards wherever essential. Towards this, the Directorate of Systems Reliability and Quality
(DSRQ) at ISRO Headquarters has taken an initiative to re-invigorate the reach and visibility of ISRO
Reliability standards across all the Centres of ISRO. Specific Inter-centre teams were formed to revise each
of these documents and I would like to place on record their commendable efforts in bringing out these
documents.

There is a pressing need for ensuring uniformity of practices, across various functions of design, fabrication,
testing, review mechanisms etc., across the centres and units of ISRO. Towards this goal, the mandatory
adoption of ISRO Reliability Standards will ensure standardization in quality processes and products. I am
certain that this will go a long way towards ensuring overall system level Quality and Reliability and in
achieving the goal of zero defects in the delivery of space systems of ISRO.

K Radhakrishnan
Chairman, ISRO
 Directorate of Systems Reliability & Quality
ISRO Headquarters
Antariksh Bhavan
New BEL Road, Bangalore -560231
Ph :080 - 2341 5414
Fax :080 – 2341 2826
S Selvaraju Cell:09448397704
Senior Advisor, Systems Reliability and Quality Email: sselvaraju@isro.gov.in

PREFACE

ISRO Reliability standards are a result of the need for standardization of processes towards achieving high
reliability systems. The transfer of knowledge and techniques from the seniors to their successors is best
done with proper documentation and checklists translating the entire know-how into black and white.

This particular document, ‘Non-conformance Control Requirements for ISRO Projects’ deals
with the review mechanisms for the different types of deviations/defects that occur during the course
of realization of various systems. The classification of non-conformances, their reporting, disposition, and
archival are addressed at length in this document.The mechanism for follow-up of corrective and preventive
actions is also elaborated. The composition of various boards like Local Salvage Committee (LSC) and
Non-conformance Review Board (NCRB) involving various experts and quality professionals has been
detailed. Special thrust is laid on the development of a lessons learnt database and its dissemination across
ISRO centers.

It is deemed essential that these standards be strictly adhered to, in order to ensure uniformity of practices
across ISRO centers and achieve zero defects in the delivery of space systems.

I am grateful to Chairman ISRO, for being the source of inspiration in the release of these documents.
Thanks are also due to the centre Directors for their encouragement. I am also thankful to the Heads of
SR Entities/Groups of various ISRO centres for their relentless support and guidance. I am also indebted
to the members of the Integrated Product Assurance Board (IPAB) for the meticulous review of these
documents. I also owe gratitude to the task team members and other experts for putting efforts in the
realization of these documents. I am glad to carry forward this rich lineage of ISRO reliability standards,
championed by Shri R Aravamudan, a revered pioneer in the area of Quality & Reliability in ISRO.

S Selvaraju
Sr. Advisor (SRQ)
 CONTENTS

1. SCOPE 9

2. DEFINITION 9

3. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS 9

4. NON-CONFORMANCE CONTROL SYSTEM 9

4.1 Application of Non-conformance criteria 10
4.2 Classification 10
4.2.1 Minor Non-conformances 10
4.2.2 Major non-conformances 10
4.2.3 Critical Non-conformances 11

5. NON-CONFORMANCE REPORTING 11
5.1 Local Records 12

6. NON-CONFORMANCE REVIEW AND DISPOSITION 12

6.1 Non Conformance Review Board (NCRB) 12
6.1.1 Membership 12
6.2 Local Salvage Committee or NCRB Sub-Committee 12
6.3 Initial disposition 13
6.3.1 Documentation of Non-Conformances and their notification 13
6.4 Review 13
6.5 Non Conformance Dispositions 14
6.5.1 Disposition of Minor Non-Conformances 14
6.5.2 Disposition of Major Non-Conformances 14
6.5.3 Disposition of Critical Non-Conformances 15
6.6 Close-out 15
6.7 Final disposition of Non-conformances 15

7. PARTS/MATERIALS 15

8. EXTERNAL PRODUCTION 15

9. EXECUTIVE CLEARANCE 16

10. NON-CONFORMANCE RECORDS 16

10.1 Trend Analysis and Summary 16
10.2 Lessons learnt 16

ANNEXURE-1 Typical check list 17

1. SCOPE
This document brings out the requirements for the review and control of non-conformances (NC) occurring
during the course of realization of systems and sub-systems for all ISRO projects. The management of these
non-conformances during the course of a project is a major function involving trade-offs in performance, reliability,
cost and schedule.This will generally entail identification and classification of non-conformances, their documentation,
review and disposition.

2. DEFINITION
An item, be it raw material or finished product, will be identified as having non-conformance when it does not
conform to the applicable specifications during the course of procurement, fabrication, assembly and tests.
Non conformances are attributable basically to any one or a combination of the following factors
• Non availability of parts/ materials meeting to the total space qualified specifications
• Deficiency/marginality in design, process or workmanship
• Over specification of design tolerances
• Incompatibility with respect to interfaces
• Susceptibility to variations in electrical and environmental parameters etc.

Non-conformance control involves satisfactory closure of the observations by implementing the required
modifications, associated re-work/ re-test / re-qualifications as deemed necessary. Through an effective
non-conformance control mechanism, their overall occurrence can be minimized.

Non conformances are to be eliminated to the extent possible. A waiver for non conformance is not to be made a
regular practice.

3. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
The current versions of following documents shall be applicable:
• ISRO – PAS – 200 Design Review Requirements for ISRO projects
• ISRO – PAS – 201 Failure Analysis and Corrective Action System
• ISRO-PAX-300 Workmanship Standards for fabrication of electronics packages
• ISRO-PAX-305 Workmanship Standards for fabrication of Microwave Integrated circuits
• ISRO & MIL standards for workmanship
• Design Specifications of the System
• Mission requirements of the Project

4. NON-CONFORMANCE CONTROL SYSTEM

A system shall be implemented such that it provides a disciplined approach for identification, segregation, reporting,
review, disposition, analysis, corrective action and prevention of recurrence of non-conformances; both confirmed
and suspected.

9
The Non-conformance control system shall address all the disciplines involved in a Project viz. Mechanical, Chemical,
Electrical/ Electronics and Software.

A recommended flow diagram of the non-conformance control activities is shown in figure-1. All non-conformances
shall be classified and disposed off by the respective Non-Conformance Review Board (NCRB) of the system
involved. In the case of large volume of products being manufactured, sub-committees may be constituted by NCRB
for the day to day review and clearance of the subsystems/components. All non- conformance cases cleared by sub-
committees are to be ratified by the respective NCRB at the earliest, before any critical operation .

4.1. APPLICATION OF NON CONFORMANCE CRITERIA

The non-conformance control / review system is applicable to any raw material, part, component, subsystem or
system which forms either an input or output of a process and used for flight applications.
This may be further categorised as:
• All flight hardware
• All flight standby hardware
• Qualification hardware
• Components
• Raw Materials
• Checkout equipments for testing of subsystems/system
• Ground equipment used for integrating/handling/charging flight systems
• Test procedures
• Software and related interfaces

4.2. CLASSIFICATION
The following are essential to identify the non-conformances in any system:
a) Generation of accurate and realistic specification for all parameters
b) Identification of proper parameters and testing methods at subsystem and system level.

All non-conformances may be classified as minor or major depending upon their severity. The level at which they
are closed-out depends on this classification.

4.2.1. Minor Non-conformances are those which do not significantly affect the performance of a sub-system
and have no impact on interface characteristics. Generally, while deviation may exist with respect to the
optimum specifications, it does not essentially require any change/rework.

4.2.2. Major Non-conformances are those which reflect on the performance of the sub-system/ system and its
interface characteristics. Decision to proceed or not to proceed with the existing deviation, is to be
discussed and arrived at a consensus by all the agencies concerned.

10
4.2.3. Critical Non-conformance: Cases having an adverse impact on overall system level functioning / operation
are classified under this category. Also those having severe impact on cost and/or schedule may be
classified as critical, requiring the special attention of the management.

Critical non-conformances should never be allowed in the system. These call for correction to ensure satisfactory
performance.

Any deviations in Functionally Critical Dimensions (FCD), Functionally Critical parameters (FCP) and specifications
should be classified as Major / Critical non conformances and necessitate special attention.

Depending on the requirements of a particular project, the classification definition may vary, but it is necessary to
distinctly define the classification during the initial stages of the project.

Figure-1: Flow diagram of Non-Conformance Control System

5. NON-CONFORMANCE REPORTING
The non-conformance control system shall include written procedures for reporting and for complete documentation
of all non-conformance activities of a project. Provision should be made for the timely dissemination of

11
non-conformance reports to the appropriate groups of the project organisation. Sufficient data should be included
to provide a basis for decisions. The system shall also ensure that all non-conformances observed and reviewed
during the course of a project are fully documented and a rapid retrieval of information on the close-out status on
each reported case is available.

All non-conformances shall be referred to Non-Conformance Review Board (NCRB) and closed at the earliest,
before the commencement of any further major operation on the subsystem/ stage. The testing/inspection agency
is responsible for referring the cases of non-conformance to NCRB. The non-conformances which may arise during
production / designer level tests shall also be referred to NCRB by the appropriate agencies. It is desirable that a
prescribed format be made available for Non-Conformance (NC) reporting as it will enable standardisation and
ensure adequate information for analysis and disposition. A typical list of attributes to be recorded is enclosed in
Annexure.

In case any sub-committee or specialist committees review and dispose off a non-conformance, the reports should
be provided to the NCRB for formal discussion / disposition.

All executive clearances shall be compiled by NCRB for records.

5.1 Local Records

All non-conformances shall be recorded initially in local records applicable to the area of operation such as,
– Discrepancy notes
– Test reports
– Inspection records
– Log books/sheets

Subsequently, a formal non-conformance report shall be raised with sufficient data to enable initial disposition.

6. NON-CONFORMANCE REVIEW AND DISPOSITION

6.1 Non Conformance Review Board (NCRB)
The NCRB is a formal authority to be established by the Center Director for the purpose of reviewing, advising the
corrective action and disposing-off of all major/critical non-conformances. The committee shall also formally ratify
all minor non-conformances.

6.1.1 Membership
The NCRB shall be constituted by the Centre Director as a standing review board for all projects or a
separate board for each project. Separate boards are necessary for disciplines such as mechanical, electrical,
chemical, etc. The NCRB shall have a chairman / co-chairman, who is preferably not a member of the team
responsible for the delivery of the system. The other members shall be from the System Reliability (SR) ,
project core-team, the designer and other specialists The NCRB shall have Convener / Co-convenor
preferably from the project.

6.2 Local Salvage Committee or NCRB Sub-Committee

In order to cater to the large quantity of items being produced, at different work centers, a Local Salvage Committee

12
(LSC) or Sub Committee of NCRB (NCRB-SC) may be constituted at each work center for the respective area
of work by the Chairman NCRB, to review the minor NCs and take appropriate decisions. This LSC/ NCRB-SC
shall have representation from fabrication agency, on-line Quality control, Systems Reliability and Project, together
with relevant design experts. It is preferred that the Chairman of LSC shall be a senior engineer from Systems
Reliability.

6.3 Initial assessment

The initial assessment shall be performed by the concerned sub-system/ Test engineer/ Project Engineer/ Manager
/ QC representative in consultation with the Quality Assurance representative to determine whether the
non-conformance submitted should be classified as minor, major or critical. In case of doubt, classify as
major/critical.

There has to be an identified criterion for categorizing the deviations as minor, major or critical depending on
its impact on the system. Major and critical deviations are to be referred to the NCRB. Minor deviations may be
disposed off by the local salvage committee. The decision of these committees shall also be ratified by NCRB.

6.3.1 Documentation of Non-conformances and their Notification

All non-conformances shall be reported after initial disposition. The following minimum information shall be
included in such notifications:
• Project name and model category (QM, FM etc).
• Name, part number, serial number, raw material code, of the system, subsystem, equipment, component or
item, having non-conformance.
• Initial disposition.
• Date, time, location, facility, test equipment and environment at incidence of non-conformance; and persons
observing the non conformance.
• First symptom or indication of non-conformance, phase of test (if applicable), test procedure, inspection
procedure, suspected cause of NC and its effects on the unit as well as other connected hardware/
assembly.
• Preliminary or proposed corrective action taken to prevent recurrence of the non-conformance.
• Associated documents and references.
• Re-Test/Re-qualification as applicable
• Impact on the configuration from the programmatic point of view

6.4 Review
In determining disposition for the non-conformance, the board/ sub-committee shall:
• Evaluate the non-conformance and investigate the root cause;
• Determine and record the effect of the non-conformance on the intended use of the item and associated
impact on the specification requirements ;
• Review records of earlier review actions affecting similar or identical cases;
• Determine the corrective and preventive actions to prevent recurrence of the non-conformance.

13
6.5 Non-Conformance Disposition
6.5.1 Disposition of Minor Non-conformances
Non-conformances classified as minor shall be subjected to one of the following dispositions:
Use-as-is: If the item is found to be completely usable without further action it may be accepted as ‘Use-as-is’.

Return for rework /completion of operation: If the deviation can be corrected and unit can match the required
specifications, after only additional “normal” operations, then it shall be identified as requiring rework and returned
for additional/ completion of operations. After such rework, items shall be resubmitted for normal inspection and
test operations.

Return to manufacturer/supplier: Non-conformances in bought-out/ sub-contracted items shall be communicated

to the manufacturer/supplier. Based on their feedback, it may be returned to the suppliers for necessary analysis
disposal and corrective action for repeating it in future.

All the above dispositions shall be ratified in NCRB. If LSC or NCRB-SC is not sufficiently equipped to take a
decision on the matter, it shall be referred to NCRB at the earliest and appropriate decision taken.

6.5.2 Disposition of Major Non-conformances

Major non conformances shall be disposed off, in one of the following manners by the board:

Use-as-is: If the item is usable without corrective action; or it is evident that any further action would not yield any
improvement, it shall be accepted for "use-as-is". Any deviation/waiver action to be initiated as a result, has to be
stated clearly.

Repair: When, in the opinion of the board, an acceptable repair is possible to alleviate the NC, repair action
may be authorised. Repairs must be performed in accordance with procedures approved by the board. The repair
procedures shall include appropriate inspection and tests to verify the acceptability of the items after repairs. Any
deviation/wavier action to be initiated as a result shall be stated clearly.

Return to manufacturer/supplier: When a bought-out/ sub-contracted item is found to have non-conformance on

receipt, it should be returned to the manufacturer/ supplier with non-conformance information. The manufacturer
shall devise a rework & retest plan and the same shall be implemented only after approval of the concerned NCRB.
The NCRB may provide the necessary guidance for corrective action. The delivered item after repair shall be
accompanied with all relevant details of re-work and testing carried out.

Scrap: If the item is unfit for rework and use or it is evident that any further action would not yield improvement,
it shall be disposed off in accordance with established procedures for identifying, controlling and disposing of scrap,
or it shall be marked as “NOT FOR USE” and quarantined.

Others: If the above dispositions are not appropriate, the Board may make other recommendations such as retest/
re-inspection, extended tests, failure analysis etc. Results of such tests & analysis shall be documented in reports and
submitted to the Board for final disposition. Use of such hardware for any ground tests may also be considered.

14
6.5.3: Disposition of Critical Non-Conformances
Flight items with critical non-conformances should never be used in "as-is" condition.Such cases should be referred
to appropriate Design Review Team / Failure Analysis Board for final disposition.

The NCRB shall propose preventive measures required to ensure that such deviations do not recur in future.
The board may take views of a larger group of SR and other domain experts of the Centre during analysis of the
NC and defining corrective/preventive actions.

NCRB may seek additional studies/analysis/tests for closure of NC. The board may also refer the NC if critical, to
an expert team for their opinion on the impact on the mission, other sub-systems etc. NCRB shall review the case
after receipt of such inputs and dispose the case appropriately.

Non-conformance dispositions require unanimous agreement of all board members. If the decision is not unanimous,
the specific case shall be referred to the Design review team and other related experts for further disposition.
Such references shall be accompanied by the analysis of the Board with regard to the impact of the deviation on
the system performance, and also the suggested corrective measures. In complex cases, having impact on overall
system delivery/ performance, this may be referred to an expert committee and the final recommendations of such
committee shall be cleared/ approved by higher level review fora.

6.6 Close-out
The SR agency in the Centre should confirm that all the non-conformances are closed out satisfactorily and sufficiently
early, before any major actions are taken on the system. As a minimum, the close out shall require that:
• The root cause of the deviations and respective corrective actions are identified.
• Corrective actions have been implemented successfully and verified;
• Effectiveness of preventive actions has been satisfactorily demonstrated.
• The necessary design and/or software changes have been implemented and verified by test;
• The Quality agency, to confirm the completion of all close-out actions and the close-out document signed
by appropriate authority.

6.7 Final disposition of Non-conformances

The final disposition of all non-conformances encountered during the course of project realisation shall be compiled
by the Quality agency and presented to the relevant review board.

7. PARTS / MATERIALS
For the review of all the non-conformances in the area of parts/ materials etc., NCRB shall also consult expert bodies
Quality Management Board (QMB), Parts Review Board (PRB), Material Review Board (MRB) etc for appropriate
analysis/ closure.

8. EXTERNAL PRODUCTION
All non-conformances occurring at external work centres during fabrication or testing shall be communicated to

15
the identified QA agency and focal point for external production in the centre, for necessary analysis and close out
as detailed in sections 5 and 6.

9. EXECUTIVE CLEARANCE
Project Director may overrule the recommendations of NCRB and issue other decisions based on exigencies of
time schedule or cost of implementation. Such an executive decision taken shall be issued in writing, along with
technical assessment. The decision should be sent to Chairman, NCRB, Quality agencies and other concerned
development groups.

10. NON-CONFORMANCE RECORDS

The NCRB as well as SR agency shall maintain records of all non-conformances and their dispositions in a standard
database. In addition, minutes of all NCRB meetings shall be maintained to provide a continuous record of actions
and attendance.

Such records shall be in a form showing the complete history of each non-conformance as indicated in the
annexure.

All non conformance records/minutes should be widely circulated to all agencies concerned, including fabrication,
QA, QC, test teams, integration and project. It is preferable that the records are archived in electronic form in a
common domain for easy access and quick retrieval.

10.1 Trend Analysis and Summary

The centre System Reliability team shall implement a system of non-conformance trend analysis to review and
analyse non-conformance data and their corrective actions over a project, as well as across all projects. The records
shall be reviewed to identify trends and repetitive occurrence, evaluating the progress made in corrective actions
and to determine the overall effectiveness of the non-conformance system. Periodic status summaries shall be
prepared and updated for:
• Non-conformances with their dispositions and corrective action status;
• All NCRs and their respective close-out status;
• Identify process/ procedure improvements to avoid recurrence of non-conformances

These records shall also form a part of the input data package for project reviews. The trend analysis shall also be
presented in project reviews in order to determine the effectiveness of the corrective actions implemented.

10.2 Lessons Learnt

The centre System Reliability team shall compile a set of lessons learnt during the realisation of the systems of
each project. These shall be generic in nature and shall highlight common errors and corrective actions that were
successfully implemented. These lessons shall be widely circulated across projects, design, fabrication and test teams,
thereby enabling implementation of good fabrication/ test and integration practices, and in the long run, shall result
in a systematic elimination of common non-conformances. These lessons learnt shall also be circulated across ISRO
centres for the common cause.

16
 Annexure-1
Typical check list for recording Non-Conformances

Sr. No Details
1) Project
2) Model
3) System / Sub system/ Identification number
4) Inspection / Test reference
5) Location / Test Conditions
6) Date of deviation observed
7) Members present
8) Category of deviation
9) Detail of deviation
10) Initial Classification & Disposition

Disposition of Non-Conformances

Sr. No Details
1) Initial Assessment on deviation
2) Root Cause for the deviation
3) Final Decision
4) Justification for acceptance/rejection
5) Corrective & Preventive actions
6) Specific Actions identified
7) Impact analysis
8) Parameter / Drawing affected
9) Re-test/ re-inspection plan

17