Lesson Learned from Aerospace Transition Audits

Presenter: Roger Ritterbeck, Aerospace Product Manager, Bureau Veritas, Cuyahoga Falls, OH, USA

Keywords: Aerospace, Aviation, Space, Defense

Industry: Aviation/Space, Defense/Military, Manufacturing

Level: Intermediate


During this presentation, you will learn from an industry leading Certification Body the challenges presented by the transition to the AS91XX:2016 series of standards. The information for this presentation was derived from real life audit results, including major and minor nonconformities, opportunities for improvement and what organizations did well.

In section 4, organizations struggled with understanding the concepts of internal & external issues, context of the organization and how it relates to the management system. This presentation will provide examples of how organizations succeeded and where they failed.

The Leadership section now requires full engagement by top management. In some cases organizations have struggled with new concept. Top management must now be accountable for the effectiveness of management system and be able to explain the context and strategic direction of the organization.

While section 6 is shorter than other sections, organizations have struggled here as well. Many of the issues result from lack of good outputs from Leadership into Planning to address Risk and Opportunities.

Organizations have been fairly successful with the Support requirements as defined in section 7 as these processes were typically in place. They are now bundled into one section for ease of use. This section does introduce some new concepts where organizations may have not fully met the intent of the standard.

The Operation section presents some new concepts and in many cases enhanced requirements to address industry concerns. In many cases, organizations have had the impression that if they were compliant to the previous version, if they just address the new requirements they would be “OK”. This is a common pitfall that has resulted in consistent and common nonconformities. Performance Evaluation and Improvement are previous requirements rolled into a logical sequence for the management system. This routinely results in nonconformity due to assumed compliance.