:thanx:Background information:

We are semiconductor subcontractor, and providing both assembly and testing service to customers.

During recent certificate renew audit, auditor told us that test can not be included into TS certificate scope due to it is not value added process.

Does anybody know this req. ? Personally I think "test" is also a value added process as we need burn in certain programs for some ICs and did not see any IATF guideline saying non- value added process can not be included?

Appreciate someone give the idea

My guess is that they meant to tell you that test alone cannot be the scope. I would think that test can be one of the activities listed in the scope for the organization. It may not be acceptable to have a TS scope that includes ONLY test.

There are other threads on this very topic.

Regards,

Dirk

The auditor is correct test cannot be included in the scope. There are a few other threads, but to summarize: the IATF defined "value added" as manufacturing processes. Only value added processes can be included in the scope.

The only non manufactirng process you should see in the scope is design.

Hello Josey Wales:

Are you sure that the word "test" cannot be in a TS scope?

What if an organization's scope was "Design, assemble, test, package and shipping?" What you are saying is that no TS certificate is allowed to have the word "test" in the scope?

I really think what the IATF is trying to enforce is a TS scope with only "test" is not allowed.

If test is not important, or "value add", or simply is not allowed in the scope of a TS certificate, then the 23 references to "test" in TS maybe should be removed? For example, 8.2.4.1, 8.5.2.4 have the word "test" in the title of the clause.

If this is true, what is the inclusive list of "value added manufacturing processes" that can be included? What is the list of things that cannot be included in the scope?

Is packaging or shipping "value added manufacturing process?"

Thank you,

Dirk

100% positive that test cannot be included in the scope, and neither can shipping, packaging, sequencing, kitting, sales, distribution, warehousing.

Only Value Added as defined by the IATF, or to summarize manufacturing procesesses.

The complete list is on page 3 of TS:02 section 3.1.6.

The only exception is design.

The IATF wanted to make it crystal clear that the focus is on manufacturing processes.

The rules say
5. ISO/TS 16949:2002 Certificate content requirements
b.
"Scope statement(s) including only all manufacturing activities for related products and services meeting the applicability of ISO/TS 16949:2002"

I think that this is clear that you cannot put it on the certificate

Actually IC test is also a value added process -- To burn in program so that the device can be used.

In remote site explaination, it did mentioned the "Test", whcih means TS itself definiton not tally. Pls refer to item7 in "Rules for Achieving IATF Recogniztion 2nd Edition FAQs"

As I see it the test referred to in the FAQ is whether the site is subcontractor or supporting function.
Not to testing as a function

Could it be that the scope statement on a certificate and the scope of the manangement systrem are not the same thing?

The scope statement on the certificate identifies the core manufacturing capabilities where as the scope of the system contains many other things including non-value added activities like inprocess or final testing?

I think the scope statement and the system scope are different things.

Thank you,

Dirk

Could it be that the scope statement on a certificate and the scope of the manangement systrem are not the same thing?

I think the scope statement and the system scope are different things. Scope of ISO 9001:2000, Scope of Quality Management System and Defining Scope of Certification (http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/3553988/APG-Scope.doc?func=doc.Fetch&nodeid=3553988)

Does the content of the Audit Practices Group document on Scopes apply to the TS world?

If the word "test" cannot be part of the scope statement on a TS certificate, then I would question the applicability of the APG document to the TS world.

From the APG document:

"Consequently, the scope of registration/certification encompasses the scope of the QMS, as well as describing any excluded ISO 9001 requirements.

In order to dissipate such confusion and to enable identification of what has been registered/certified, the scope of registration/certification should clearly define:

- the scope of the QMS (including details of the product lines and related sites, departments, divisions etc. that are covered by it), "


Thank you again Sidney for shaing all of your knowledge.

Regards,

Dirk

This has not been published but in an exchange between myself and one of the oversight bodies
I asked the following:
Howard Atkins: "Do the interpretations of ISO/TC 176 as published here http://www.tc176.org/Interpre.asp apply to audits according to ISO/TS 16949:2002 ?"
Oversight body:"The answer regarding ISO/TC 176 is No"

The reason for me asking was the interpretation referring to the Management Representative.

By inference the APG is in the same position.

This is somewhat related. A company takes chips and programs them, then sends them to their customer. These chips are used in vehicles, and without the programming, they would be useless. Their customer states they must be registered to TS. They initially were, but their registrar pulled the registration, stating that the IAOB has ruled that semiconductors are not applicable for TS. The customer says no TS, no new work.

I cannot find any rule that clearly covers the programming of chips.

I cannot find any rule that clearly covers the programming of chips.You won't. Basically, you would have to find a TS qualified CB that is willing to accept that IC programming is a value added manufacturing process. That would be the "sine qua non" condition for this organization to be eligible to TS 16949 certification.

You won't. Basically, you would have to find a TS qualified CB that is willing to accept that IC programming is a value added manufacturing process. That would be the "sine qua non" condition for this organization to be eligible to TS 16949 certification.

That's kinda what I thought, however, their registrar is quoting the IAOB, and I just want to know where the quote came from.