Howard Atkins
1st December 1999, 01:20 AM
For your information
"General Motors ISO TS/16949 Customer-Specific Requirements "
......Certification to ISO/TS 16949, including the requirements in this document, by a GM-recognized certification body using an automotive registration scheme recognized by General Motors may satisfy General Motors' requirement for QS-9000 third party registration.
for the full document go to ****DEAD LINK REMOVED ***
There are also most of the GM procedures here.
[This message has been edited by Howard Atkins (edited 01 December 1999).]
Roger Eastin
1st December 1999, 10:06 AM
Howard - from what document are you quoting? Is this a memo from GM that you received? By the way, one of the big holes in the TS16949 standard has been an audit registration scheme. I take GM's stance to mean that a company can use the QS9K registration scheme? Also, do the GM procedures contain GM-specific requirements? (I'll check out the website that you posted - but if you have a quick synopsis of this, I would appreciate it.)
Howard Atkins
2nd December 1999, 01:06 AM
This is an offical GM paper on their website.
Check it out
Sam
2nd December 1999, 09:26 AM
Also check out 'www.gmsupplier.com'
Roger Eastin
2nd December 1999, 09:49 AM
Thanks, guys! I checked out this site and it was very interesting. There is a lot said here and some that is hinted at, but not clear. For instance, it speaks of a GM-approved certification scheme for ISO16949, but I don't know what that means. Is there another GM document that speaks to that need? I am not a direct supplier to GM, so I am not familiar with all of their documents!
Marc
17th December 1999, 10:11 AM
GM sends suppliers notice: http://Elsmar.com/pdf_files/GMTS16949-9912.jpg
Roger Eastin
17th December 1999, 10:39 AM
Although GM (per this letter) does not require you to change from QS9K to ISO16949, they "strongly recommend" that you upgrade to it during your next surveillance. I think this is GM's way of saying, "DO IT!!"
Christian Lupo
27th December 1999, 10:32 AM
Yeah Roger I agree it's a do it rather than a recommendation. however I don't think the urgency is that great yet. They did not give a "drop dead" date like thay did with QS. I think they will be tolerant of QS for a while, QS is the standard of the B3 and they do not want it to die for political reasons (to save face!). I also think they are a little worried about the strong German influence in TS.
