Has anyone got a cross reference list of the final draft TS16949:2002 requirements to QS9000 requirements.

If so could I blag a copy please ?

I haven't seen one yet. I'd like to see one as well.

I'm just getting into all of this and my question is this...our company supplies to the Big 3. We currently have ISO9001:1994 with QS900:1998 certification. As a Tier 2 supplier we're being required to have TS16949.
My question is what cancels out what? Do I need TS16949, ISO14001, QS9000 and ISO9001:2000?
I don't want to create policies and procedures for all of these if I don't have to.

Thanks for any help you can give.:eek:

Gayle,

Who said you have to be TS????????

Al...

We're Tier II to Visteon and they require TS16949.:frust:

Gayle215

For automotive, going from QS to TS will not be a requirements issue. As far as I know, nothing 'cancels out' so to speak. Technically TS requires a bit less than QS. However, any requirements not stated in TS will be addressed by customer specific requirements. As I sit here looking at the 14 September 2001 Draft, it looks just like QS-9000 rearranged. Most of the requirements are the same but the bottom line is there really aren't any significant new requirements. There are 7.1.5.7 Feedback of Information from Service and 7.1.5.8 Servicing Agreement with Customer - but you should be doing these anyway if you're doing service.

Have you read through the 'latest' TS 16949?

Also see http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=2806

A big change from QS to TS is the lab requirements and the auditing requirements.
You have to upgrade your lab to ISO17025, which was the biggest change in our upgrade here from QS to TS.

Also, we needed to address the audit requirements to include the process audits, system audit and product audits. (we had alot in place already, just needed to "beef" it up). We actually had to create a new position of process auditor.

Now I'm going through my change from TS16949:1999 to TS16949:2002.....;)

I just received the IS0/TS 16949 2nd edition Technical Specification Requirements for the application of ISO9001:2000and the ANSI/ASQ Q9000-2000 standards. . My confusion is whether ISO/TS16949 is separate or the same as ISO9001:2000.

I'll be reading both manuals in the next days.

Originally posted by Sporty

You have to upgrade your lab to ISO17025, which was the biggest change in our upgrade here from QS to TS.Registration is not required per 7.6.3 of the 2001 version (see the Note), but I agree your lab has to be 'tight'.Also, we needed to address the audit requirements to include the process audits, system audit and product audits. (we had alot in place already, just needed to "beef" it up). We actually had to create a new position of process auditor.Wow! A new position! I haven't seen these as an issue in the past because dock audits (product audits) were required in the 1998 version of QS and clients I have had did a combination of compliance and process audits in their interanl audit rounds. I may be missing something here.

Originally posted by Gayle215

I just received the IS0/TS 16949 2nd edition Technical Specification Requirements for the application of ISO9001:2000 and the ANSI/ASQ Q9000-2000 standards.What is this and where did you get it? As far as I know the 2nd edition of TS 16949 has not been officially released yet.My confusion is whether ISO/TS16949 is separate or the same as ISO9001:2000.TS 16949 Second Edition Draft from 2001-09-14 is the same as ISO 9001:2000 with additional requirements.

My registrar gave me a copy of IS)/TS16949:2002(E) Second Edition 2002-03-01.
The Q9000-2000 is dated 12/13/2000

Hmmmm.. I hadn't heard of any official release. I know it was planned for this month but haven't seen anything recently.

Your right Marc, you don't have to register the Lab to 17025, but I am still required to audit our lab against the 17025 manual and our lab manual had to be rewritten to address the 17025 shalls.....maybe my registrar led me astray?

As for the audits, your right again, our dock audits covered the product audits, but we were weak with our process audits, and created someone "accountable" for the process audits.

For us, those two areas were the biggest changes from QS9000

Mark - do you have a hard date as to the release of the newer TS? I am currently working on a conversion from our QS system to TS, hopefully to get registered by the end of the year. I am using the 1999 version of TS. Am I wasting my time? Should I wait for the new revision?

I would suggest you wait for the release of TS 2002, it is due out anytime now, and you could start your gap analysis from QS using the draft of TS:2002.
TS16949:1999 is being replaced by 2002, so you will be required to upgrade anyway by December 2003, why do both?

Just my opinion.:)

The 1999 version of TS was changed in 2001. I have not seen an official release notice of the 2002 release version but i have just today seen a version marked:

ISO/TC 176 N660
ISO/TS 16949
Second Edition 2002-03-01

So - it's out there, even if unofficially.

> I am currently working on a conversion from our QS system
> to TS, hopefully to get registered by the end of the year.
> I am using the 1999 version of TS. Am I wasting my time?
> Should I wait for the new revision?

The content is about the same so from that standpoint I don't think it should be a problem as long as you're not linking the numbering scheme.

I am currently reading through the Second Edition 2002-03-01 version of TS. I am use to QS9000 structure based with ISO9001:1994 so I am getting my first look at ISO9001:2000 through TS 16949. It seems very mixed up because I am so use to the 1994 version.

I digress; we do not do 4.4 or 4.19 of the QS9000 standard. Does the entire section of 7.3 in TS not apply or do we have to go through and pick and choose. Specifically I am confused about the manufacturing process design. We are a heat treater, so we have no "product" design, but we "design" or create processes for different customer requirements.

For example, if we received a new part from a customer that is not in our system yet, we identify it as a new part process and the process is built around the requirements from the customer. The actual processes are standard, we only change time and temp. But we basically build our process sheet (step by step shop floor signoff sheet) by plugging in the different processes to be followed along the way. (e.g. receiving, loading, hardening, tempering, washing, inspection and shipping). these are all "standard processes that exsist, we just customize them to get the results that match the requirements from the customer. Our processes of actual heat treating are subjective with time and temp because we rely on the customer to identify the material type. Some customers like to buy cheap material and then ask us to deliver results for high priced material. This can be tricky, so we kind-of design a process for the specific material or part number, but we are using processes that are standard, just modified controls.

I hope I explained that well. Basically if we do not do 4.4 or 4.19 of QS now, what sections in the new TS would be the equivalent? I look at it and get confused.:bonk: :confused:

In clause 7 of the proposed TS16949 (based on ISO9001:2000) you would also have the following QS9000 (ISO9001:1994) requirements:-

4.3 Contract Review
4.6 Purchasing
4.7 Customer Supplied Product
4.8 Product Identification and Traceability
4.9 Process Control
4.11 Cintrol of Inspection, Measuring and Test Equipment
4.12 Inspection and Test Status
4.15 Handling Storage etc, etc

as well as 4.4 and 4.19 mentioned

There is also a splash of 4.10 in this clause, and in clause 8.

Thanks, I was specificaly addressing 7.3 and if that entire section is not applicable as in 4.4 of QS. I also came across a reference to servicing in 7.5.1.8. Is this also not applicable and waivable as in 4.19 of QS? :confused:

There is a note at the top of section 7.3 that states that the design requirment is also applicable to the design of manufacturing processes - so you cant opt out of that one.

If you have no specific servicing agreement with your customers then 7.5.1.8 would not apply.

It is my understanding that by not doing 4.4 or 4.19 in the old system because they truly didn't apply would technically still be acceptable under the new standard. Process design must be considered, but I think there is definately different implications that with product design. Product realization concerns processes and producing the product, not the design part of product realization. The exclusion statement was truly meant to make sure that companies that really designed product couldn't exclude design - like in the "old" days and register without involving the entire organization. If you covered processes in the old system (4.9?) then you may be all set.

Well in the last draft of TS16949-2002 it does categorically state that the design element (7.3) is applicable to the design of manufacturing processes.

You may argue that your manufacturing process is however an 'established design' and that in effect you are doing no new 'design' work and hence opt out of this requirement. In the case quoted of heat treatment this may be a valid argument, or it may be that you are performing your process to your customers requirements, i.e. the customers 'design' but this would necessitate your customer telling you exactly how to conduct your process, such as heating temps, times, quenches, etc as opposed to just quoting the desired outcome, such as a value for hardness to be achieved.

I can not address the new revision with any authority, however it would seem to me that regardless if we look at product or process design, the key indicator of design responsibility has to be approval authority.

We contribute to many designs, both product and process but have no design responsibility by definition unless we have the approval authority. Without the authority, we would not be allowed to register as 9001.

It would seem to follow that even if you contribute most of the process input, the actual design responsibility would rest with whoever had approval authority. Once a PSW has been approved, for example, we cannot change the process (parameters stated on the control plan) without resubmitting our PPAP. Customer approval is required before we can make a process change

I was under the impression that design (9001) was no longer being split out. If this is so, wouldn't it seem that 7.3 is intended to cover design responsibility in the same way as the old split off? The inclusion of "process" may be simply including the clarification that design is not limited to product but also extends to process. The same old design responsibility "rules" should still apply.

By the way, most 9001 folks probably include design in their APQP and look at it for all new processes/products just to determine if they are responsible. I am attaching a copy of the checklist we use in one of our departments which might be of intrest to anyone needing to address design.

Dave

I just saw a cross reference (TS vs QS) in this month's edition of Quality Digest magazine. You can view it on-line at www.qualitydigest.com. It looked pretty good, so I printed a copy for myself.

Thanks Roger - just what I was looking for !!

I suggest everyone download the matrix pdf file while it's still posted. It's copyright so I can't post it here. It's a nice matrix! Thanks for the link, Roger!

And Dave - Excellent form! Thanks!

here is a
The key differences between QS-9000 and ISO/TS 16949

http://www.bsiamericas.com/Automotive/ISOTS16949/keydiffs.xalter
at the bottom of the page is a link to QS-9000 3rd Edition vs draft TS 16949:2002.
This is only the draft but I assume that they will update this.
Keep looking.

As marc says

a search............

I was told that it will be released at the years end.

We are supposed to get the latest and greatest release at the rollout seminar this month.

Good Morning
I have seen the comparison posted in the Quality Digest and working on updating the comparison. My problem is that I do not have a copy of the draft version that the Quality Digest article was based upon. Now that the 2nd edition has been released, I assume that the draft version is no longer copyrighted. Could someone send me the draft version? My email address is: marjiejames@kemet.com
Richard, we are in the same city, Greenville, SC. I'm sure that I will be contacting you, and this list, with more questions when the "offcial" decision is made to convert or registration to ISO/TS 16949.
Marjie

I went to the ISO/TS 16949:2002 Rollout seminar yesterday. It sounds like after 12/15/03 ISO:9000 1994 will no longer be a certifiable standard and QS-9000 will be considered a Stand Alone Document.

QS-9000 will remain in effect until 12/14/06 however the recommendation is if your getting certified after 2003 you may want to strongly consider certifying to the new ISO/TS 16949 standard since you won't be getting your full 3 years out of the QS-9000 Certificate.

Also, It sounds like the internal auditing to the new standard is going to be quite different, moving away from the traditional checklist to process and product audits. Has anyone given thought to how their going to make that transition.

John Ridge

The Woodbridge Group
http://www.woodbridgegroup.com/

has a very nice Supplier Information Website @
http://www.woodbridgegroup.com/supinfo/iso.html

There is a TS back to QS cross-reference here:
http://www.woodbridgegroup.com/supinfo/supinf.html

Enjoy, Icy.