CAPA bulk import fails with field mapping validation errors

We’re migrating 850+ CAPA records from our legacy system to ETQ Reliance 2021 and hitting consistent validation errors during bulk import. The CSV file passes initial format checks but fails during field mapping validation.

Key issues we’re encountering:

  • Date fields rejecting formats that look correct to us
  • Dropdown enumeration values not matching despite using exported templates
  • Text fields truncating unexpectedly even when under visible character limits
  • Validation error messages are cryptic (“Field validation failed for row 47”)

Sample error from import log:


Error: Field validation failed - CAPA_InitiatedDate
Row 47: Value '03/15/2024' does not match required format
Expected format: YYYY-MM-DD

We tested with a 50-record subset and got 23 validation failures. This is blocking our compliance audit preparation. Has anyone successfully navigated ETQ’s field mapping validation rules for bulk CAPA imports?

I’ve dealt with this exact scenario. ETQ’s validation engine is strict about format compliance. Your date format error is the smoking gun - ETQ requires ISO 8601 format (YYYY-MM-DD) regardless of your regional settings or what the UI displays.

For the dropdown enumerations, exported templates can be misleading. The CSV needs internal enum IDs, not display labels. Check your enumeration configuration in Admin > Lists and verify you’re using the actual stored values.

Also verify your CSV encoding. ETQ 2021 expects UTF-8 without BOM. Excel sometimes adds BOM markers that cause silent validation failures. Save your CSV as “UTF-8 (without BOM)” in Notepad++ or similar editor before importing.

The enumeration issue is tricky. ETQ stores enum values with internal IDs that aren’t visible in exports. You need to map display labels to internal values. Go to Configuration > Data Dictionary > CAPA object > Source field. Look at the enumeration definition - you’ll see entries like “CC|Customer Complaint” where CC is the internal code.

Your CSV must use “CC” not “Customer Complaint”. This inconsistency between export templates and import requirements is a known pain point.