Glossary

Disposition record

A disposition record documents the decision and required actions for material, product, or work found to be nonconforming.

Nonconformance, MRB and CAPA (NCR)MRB, Deviations and Concessions

A disposition record is a quality record that documents the decision made for material, product, or work that does not meet a specified requirement. It records how the item will be handled, such as rework, repair, use-as-is, scrap, return to supplier, or further evaluation.

In manufacturing systems, a disposition record is commonly linked to a nonconformance report, inspection result, deviation, or hold event. It typically identifies the affected part, lot, serial number, operation, requirement, observed condition, disposition decision, required actions, responsible approvers, dates, and closure evidence.

A disposition record should not be confused with corrective action. Disposition addresses what happens to the specific affected item or batch. Corrective action addresses the cause of the issue and actions intended to reduce recurrence. In regulated or quality-sensitive environments, disposition records support traceability and decision history, but they do not by themselves imply approval, certification, or compliance outcome.

Related FAQ

What is an example of a non-conformity?

A non-conformity is any product, process, or record that does not meet a defined requirement. Example: a machined part measures outside drawing tolerance, even if it still appears usable. In practice, whether it becomes scrap, rework, or a formal NCR depends on specification limits, disposition authority, traceability, and the site’s quality process.

When should a nonconformance trigger a formal containment action?

A nonconformance should trigger formal containment when there is a credible risk that suspect product, material, data, or process conditions could continue to flow, escape, or be reused before the cause is understood. The threshold depends on severity, detectability, recurrence, traceability, inventory exposure, and whether the issue may affect shipped product, in-process work, suppliers, or released records.

What is the difference between corrective and preventive action in practice?

In practice, corrective action addresses a real, detected nonconformance or failure and aims to prevent recurrence. Preventive action addresses a plausible risk before a failure occurs and aims to prevent occurrence. The distinction depends on evidence, root cause quality, process maturity, and how well actions are traced, approved, implemented, and verified across existing QMS, MES, ERP, and related systems.

How can LPA findings be linked to CAPA in digital systems?

Yes, but the link should be controlled, not automatic. In digital systems, LPA findings can feed CAPA through defined severity rules, traceable workflows, evidence attachments, and status synchronization. Whether this works well depends on process design, data quality, ownership, and integration between audit, QMS, MES, and ERP systems in a brownfield environment.

Related Glossary