| name | ncr-writing |
| description | Write a non-conformance report, NCR, reject a supplier, or document a defect with objective-evidence language and correct severity grading (Critical/Major/Minor). Covers disposition recommendations and segregation requirements for incoming inspection failures, in-process defects, customer returns, and audit findings. |
| license | MIT |
| metadata | {"author":"RBraga01","version":"1.1","iso-9001":"8.7","iatf-16949":"8.7.1","domain":"quality-engineering","subdomain":"documentation","industries":"automotive,electronics,aerospace,medical,general","status":"approved","created":"2026-06-01","last_updated":"2026-06-03","updated_by":"migmcc","reviewed_by":"RBraga01","standard_edition":"ISO 9001:2015"} |
Non-Conformance Report (NCR) Writing
When to use
Write an NCR whenever a product, material, or service does not conform to a specified requirement:
- Incoming inspection failure
- In-process defect found at any production step
- Final inspection rejection
- Customer return or field complaint
- Audit finding on a product characteristic
The non-negotiable rule
An NCR describes WHAT is wrong, not WHY.
Root cause belongs in the CAPA / 8D. The NCR is the factual record of the non-conformance itself. Mixing root cause speculation into the NCR contaminates the record.
An NCR is a controlled quality record and may be used in audits, customer reviews, and legal contexts. All content must be objective and defensible.
Required NCR Checklist
☐ Requirement clearly referenced (drawing/specification number and revision)
☐ Actual value or observed defect recorded with quantified measurement
☐ Gap between required and actual explicitly defined
☐ Evidence attached or referenced and traceable to this NCR
☐ Severity correctly classified — grade higher when in doubt
☐ Affected quantity and population at risk identified
☐ Material physically segregated and identified before NCR is closed
☐ Detection point reflects where the defect was found, not where it originated
☐ Disposition defined and approved by authorised personnel
☐ Containment actions documented with timestamps (if applicable)
☐ Language is objective — no subjective terms, no root cause, no opinion
☐ NCR traceable to production records, batch records, and inspection logs
NCR structure
1. Header
| Field | Content |
|---|
| NCR number | Sequential, traceable |
| Date | Date of detection |
| Part number | Exact part number + revision |
| Part description | Name |
| Supplier / source | Supplier name + supplier code (for incoming) or line/station (for in-process) |
| Batch / lot | Traceability reference |
| Quantity affected | Non-conforming qty / total inspected |
| Detected by | Name + function |
| Detection point | Incoming / in-process station / outgoing / customer |
2. Non-conformance description
Write like a measurement report, not a complaint.
Required elements:
- What is the specified requirement? (drawing dimension, specification, standard)
- What was actually observed or measured? (actual value, description)
- What is the gap? (difference between required and actual)
Every NCR description must be independently understandable without additional explanation. Do not rely on attachments to complete the description.
Good NCR description:
"Connector housing flange thickness measured at 1.8 mm ± 0.05 mm on 3 of 5 sampled units. Drawing specification: 2.2 mm ± 0.1 mm (ref. DWG-12345 rev B, detail B-3). Non-conformance: measured values 0.35–0.42 mm below lower specification limit."
Bad NCR description (do not write):
"Parts are out of spec. The housing looks too thin and won't fit properly."
Rules for the description:
- Use numbers: actual value, specification value, tolerance, quantity
- Reference the requirement: drawing number + revision, specification number, purchase order
- Describe the physical observation: measured value, visual characteristic (location, extent, appearance)
- Avoid subjective language ("poor quality", "bad parts", "looks wrong") — use measurable and observable facts only
- Do NOT include hypotheses ("probably because…"), root cause, or blame
3. Objective evidence
List what evidence exists:
- Measurement records (gauge reading, CMM report, test result) — all evidence must be traceable to this NCR by ID or reference
- Photos (reference photo numbers or attach)
- Sample availability (samples retained: Yes/No, location)
- Batch / lot traceability (delivery note, batch record)
4. Severity classification
| Grade | Definition | Examples |
|---|
| Critical | Affects safety, regulatory compliance, or potential field failure that cannot be contained internally | Safety-related dimension OOS, regulatory label missing, electrical isolation failure, risk of harm to end user |
| Major | Affects form, fit, or function — customer will likely detect | Dimension preventing assembly, performance parameter below specification, missing required feature |
| Minor | Does not affect form, fit, or function — cosmetic or documentation | Surface scratch within defined limits, label position deviation, minor visual blemish |
| OFI | Observation for improvement — technically conforming but below best practice | (Used in audit context only, not for product NCRs) |
When in doubt, grade higher. It is easier to downgrade after review than to explain why a major issue was graded minor.
5. Affected quantity and segregation status
- How many units are affected? (inspected quantity, non-conforming quantity, population at risk)
- Where is the suspect material now? (on-hold location: shelf, bin, quarantine area)
- Has it been segregated? (Yes / No / In progress)
- Has it been identified? (red tag, quarantine label, system flag)
Segregation must occur immediately upon detection, before NCR documentation is completed.
Any non-conforming material must be physically identified and segregated before the NCR is closed.
6. Disposition
| Disposition | When to use |
|---|
| Use As Is (UAI) | Non-conformance does not affect form, fit, function or safety — requires engineering approval with documented rationale |
| Rework | Non-conformance can be corrected to bring part into specification — specify rework method and re-inspection required |
| Repair | Non-conformance can be corrected, but result will not meet original specification — requires customer deviation approval if shipping to customer |
| Return to Supplier (RTS) | Incoming material non-conformance — returned with copy of NCR |
| Scrap | Cannot be reworked or repaired — irreversible disposal |
UAI requires documented approval with technical justification. Never approve UAI verbally.
Disposition must be approved by authorised personnel per the defined approval matrix.
7. Immediate containment (if applicable)
If suspect material may have already passed to a downstream process or customer:
- List containment actions taken (sort, inspection, ship-hold) — all actions must be time-stamped and traceable
- Reference the 8D / CAPA initiated (if applicable)
Output format — example NCR
NCR-2026-0047
Date: 2026-05-28 | Part: 12345-B | Lot: 2026-05-12-A | Qty: 47/200 = 23.5%
Detection: Incoming inspection | Supplier: ABC Electronics
NON-CONFORMANCE:
Connector pin insertion depth measured at 3.8–4.1 mm on 47 of 200 sampled units.
Specification: 5.0 ± 0.3 mm (DWG-12345 rev B, detail C-1).
Non-conformance: 0.6–1.5 mm below lower limit on 23.5% of sampled parts.
EVIDENCE:
Measurement records: Sheet INS-2026-0047 (caliper, calibration cert. 2026-03-01)
Photos: NCR-2026-0047-Photo-01 to 05
Samples retained: 5 units, quarantine bin QA-07
SEVERITY: Major — connector will not achieve full mating depth, risking intermittent
electrical contact failure at the assembly stage.
SEGREGATION: 200 sampled units on hold, quarantine bin QA-07.
Remaining units in delivery note 55512 (1,500 units) on ship-hold pending 100% sort.
DISPOSITION: Return to Supplier pending investigation.
Immediate containment: 100% incoming inspection of remaining 1,500 units.
Common mistakes
- "Parts are bad" — too vague; always give measured values vs. specification
- Root cause in the description — "caused by incorrect tooling setting" → remove from NCR, goes in 8D D4
- Missing traceability — no batch or lot number makes containment impossible
- Incorrect severity grade — failing to grade Critical when safety is at risk
- UAI without engineering approval — verbal approval is not acceptable
- Not segregating before writing the NCR — segregation must happen immediately, before the paperwork
- Subjective language — "poor quality", "bad supplier", "looks wrong" — use objective, measurable facts
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.
Reference files
Changelog
| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|
| 1.0 | 2026-06-01 | @RBraga01 | Initial release |
| 1.1 | 2026-06-03 | @migmcc | Expanded severity classification criteria and disposition guidance |
