--- name: supplier-scar description: >- Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR) — escalate a supplier non-conformance to a formal corrective action request, define response requirements, evaluate the supplier's 8D response, and verify effectiveness. Use when an NCR escalates to a SCAR, when a supplier delivers repeated non-conformances, or when a field failure is traced to a supplier. Covers ISO 9001 §8.4 and IATF 16949 §8.4.1. license: MIT metadata: author: RBraga01 version: "1.1" iso-9001: "8.4, 10.2" iatf-16949: "8.4.1, 10.2.3" domain: quality-engineering subdomain: supplier-quality industries: automotive,electronics,aerospace,medical,general status: approved created: "2026-06-06" last_updated: "2026-06-06" updated_by: migmcc reviewed_by: RBraga01 standard_edition: "ISO 9001:2015 §8.4 / IATF 16949:2016 §8.4.1" --- # Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR) ## When to use Use this skill when: - A supplier NCR requires a formal corrective action (beyond simple return/replacement) - A supplier has delivered the same non-conformance twice or more - A non-conformance has caused a production line stoppage, customer complaint, or field failure - A supplier's quality performance score falls below the defined threshold - An OEM customer issues a concern that is traced to a sub-supplier - Preparing a SCAR, evaluating a supplier's 8D response, or conducting an effectiveness review ## Prerequisites - Non-conformance documented (NCR or equivalent) with: part number, description, quantity, measured evidence - Supplier code, contact name, and corrective action coordinator identified - SCAR response timeline agreed (typically 24h for D3, 30 days for full 8D) - Historical data: previous SCARs, PPM trend, quality score for this supplier ## Workflow ### Step 1 — Escalation criteria: when does an NCR become a SCAR? Issue a SCAR when any of the following conditions are met: | Trigger | Description | |---------|-------------| | Severity — Critical | Non-conformance affects safety, regulatory compliance, or field function | | Severity — Customer impact | Non-conformance reached the end customer or caused a production line stop | | Recurrence | Same defect or same part rejected for the second time within 12 months | | Volume | Rejection of an entire lot or >5% of a delivery | | Systemic risk | Evidence that the supplier's process or system is inadequate (missing controls, no inspection, operator error on SC characteristic) | | Customer escalation | An OEM customer has issued a concern traceable to this supplier | Do NOT issue a SCAR for every NCR — use NCR + return for minor first-occurrence issues and reserve SCAR for systemic or high-risk situations. --- ### Step 2 — Write the SCAR The SCAR document must contain: **Header:** - SCAR number (unique, traceable) - Date issued - Supplier name, supplier code, contact person - Issued by (supplier quality engineer name) **Non-conformance description:** - Part number and revision - Delivery reference (PO number, lot number, delivery note) - Quantity delivered / quantity non-conforming / % affected - Defect description in objective-evidence language (measured values vs. specification — not opinions) - Customer impact (if applicable): production stop, customer complaint, field return - Reference to the NCR (attach or link) **Response requirements:** Specify exactly what the supplier must provide and by when: | Deliverable | Typical deadline | |-------------|-----------------| | D3 Immediate Containment Action (ICA) | 24–48 hours | | D4 Root Cause (occurrence AND escape) | 7–14 days | | D5–D6 Permanent Corrective Actions with evidence | 30 days | | D7 Systemic prevention (PFMEA, CP, WI updates) | 30 days | | Full 8D report | 30 days | Always require TWO root causes: why the defect was produced (occurrence) AND why it was not detected (escape). **Containment verification:** State that the supplier must confirm: - All suspect stock at their facility has been identified and quarantined - All stock in transit has been recalled or placed on hold - All stock at your facility has been segregated (include quantity) - A containment verification plan is in place before any further shipments are accepted --- ### Step 3 — Evaluate the supplier's 8D response Use the 8D Evaluator methodology (skill: `8d-problem-solving`) to review the supplier's response. Focus on the most common SCAR-specific failures: **D3 — Containment:** - Is the containment in PAST TENSE? (If it says "we will inspect going forward" — reject) - Does it cover all locations (supplier, transit, your facility, customer)? - Is there a verification result (quantity sorted, quantity rejected, quantity cleared)? **D4 — Root cause:** - Are BOTH causes identified: occurrence (why produced) AND escape (why not caught)? - Is the root cause supported by evidence, or is it opinion? - Reject: "human error", "operator oversight", "customer changed specs" — always ask why it was possible - Verify: if the supplier claims "operator error", ask why the error was not detected by the control plan **D5 — Permanent corrective action:** - Does the PCA directly address the confirmed root cause? - Is "retrain the operator" the only action? If so, reject — training is not a systemic fix - Is there a poka-yoke or process change that makes the defect impossible or immediately detectable? **D7 — Systemic prevention:** - Has the PFMEA been updated to reflect the failure mode and new controls? - Has the Action Priority (AP) been revised in the PFMEA after verified corrective action? The revised AP must be lower than the original or documented with justification — AP revision is only valid after D6 effectiveness is confirmed, not at planning stage. - Has the Control Plan been updated? - Have Work Instructions been updated? - Has horizontal deployment been considered (same process at other lines/plants)? **D6 — Verification:** - Is there production data showing the PCA is effective? - What quantity was run? Over what period? - What is the measured improvement (before/after comparison)? --- ### Step 4 — Issue a SCAR response rejection If the supplier's 8D response does not meet the gate criteria, reject it formally: **Rejection notice must specify:** - Which discipline(s) failed and why (specific, not generic) - What is required in the revised response - Revised deadline for resubmission Do not accept a response that: - Has no evidence of D3 completion (only a plan) - States "human error" as the final root cause without systemic analysis - Lists only training as the PCA - Has no PFMEA or CP update in D7 - Shows no production data in D6 --- ### Step 5 — Effectiveness verification 30–90 days after PCA implementation, verify that the corrective action is effective: **Methods:** - Monitor incoming quality data: zero recurrence of the same defect in the next X deliveries - Review updated PFMEA and Control Plan (request current revision, verify D4 failure mode is addressed) - On-site verification: audit the specific process step where the defect occurred (use VDA 6.3 P6 questions for that step) - Request production data showing Cpk improvement on the relevant characteristic **Close the SCAR when:** - Zero recurrence of the same non-conformance for the agreed monitoring period (typically 3–6 months) - Updated PFMEA, CP, and WI documents received and verified - Effectiveness data reviewed and accepted **If recurrence occurs during monitoring:** - Escalate to supplier management (not just quality coordinator) - Consider: production stop, new supplier qualification, customer notification - Issue a new SCAR referencing the previous one as evidence of systemic failure --- ### Step 6 — Supplier performance tracking Link every SCAR to the supplier's quality performance record: - PPM trend (Parts Per Million non-conforming) - SCAR open count and average response time - Closure rate (closed on time vs. overdue) - Recurrence rate (same defect within 12 months of a previous SCAR) Suppliers with repeated SCARs or recurrences should be placed on: - **Controlled shipping** — every delivery inspected before acceptance (in automotive: CS1 = supplier-managed 100% sort; CS2 = customer-managed sort at supplier's cost) - **Supplier improvement plan** — formal APQP-style corrective programme - **Qualification review** — potential re-qualification or replacement **Warranty cost recovery / debit note risk:** In automotive OEM supply chains, SCARs that result in field failures or warranty claims can trigger financial recovery. The OEM issues a warranty debit note to the Tier 1, who cascades it to the responsible sub-supplier via SCAR. Each SCAR must therefore document whether the non-conformance caused any field or warranty cost — this determines whether cost recovery applies. A SCAR without this assessment is incomplete for OEM reporting purposes. If warranty cost recovery is raised, escalate immediately to commercial and legal before responding to the OEM. --- ## Validation criteria A SCAR is closed when: - Full 8D submitted with both root causes confirmed (occurrence AND escape) - Permanent corrective action verified with production data (D6) - PFMEA, Control Plan, and Work Instructions updated and received (D7) - No recurrence of the same non-conformance during the agreed monitoring period - Closure signed off by Supplier Quality Engineer and documented in the supplier record ## Common mistakes - Issuing a SCAR for every NCR — dilutes the severity signal; suppliers stop taking SCARs seriously - Accepting a D3 response that is a plan ("we will inspect") rather than a completed action - Closing the SCAR when the 8D is submitted rather than when effectiveness is verified - Accepting "human error" or "operator training" without requiring a systemic root cause - Not updating the supplier performance record — next engineer doesn't know the history - Allowing the SCAR to stay open indefinitely with no escalation — sets the precedent that deadlines are negotiable ## Output Format At the start of each use, ask the user: > "How would you like to receive the output? > **A** — Structured Markdown (formatted tables and sections, ready to copy) > **B** — Plain tables (simplified structure for Excel or Word) > **C** — Narrative report (flowing text for a formal document or email) > > Default: A." Adapt all output sections to the chosen format. If the platform or session context already defines a format preference, skip this question. ## Changelog | Version | Date | Author | Change | |---------|------|--------|--------| | 1.0 | 2026-06-06 | @RBraga01 | Initial release | | 1.1 | 2026-06-06 | @migmcc | Added AP revision check in D7 evaluation; added warranty cost recovery / debit note risk in Step 6; added CS1/CS2 controlled shipping reference |