According to TS16949 7.4.1.2, "Unless otherwise specified by the customer, suppliers to the organization shall be third party registered to ISO 9001:2000 by an accredited third-party certification body."

To which suppliers does this requirement apply? Obviously suppliers of direct material that would go into your saleable product would be required to be registered, but what about suppliers of indirect material such as tooling & equipment, coolants, or anything else that could affect product quality? What about prototype suppliers? Suppliers of services such as design/CAD work?

If, as Note 1 of 7.4.1 states, purchased products include all products and services that affect customer requirements...then one could make a case that all of the suppliers listed above would be required to be registered.

Anyone have any clarification on this requirement for me?

I'm surprised there hasn't been a resonse to this. Any takers or thread recommendations?

I too need some clarification on this one. I have recommended to the senior executive group that we upgrade from QS-9000 to TS16949 at our June 2003 re-certification. But I have a number of key vendors (tooling, outside processors etc.) that are either ISO9001 or 2 :1994 that are not due to upgrade to ISO9001:2000 until after our June date. As far I can read into the TS standard this won't fly. It does not seem reasonable to demand that those vendors move up their dates and disrupt their normal audit cycles (at additional costs no doubt). Any advise here would be greatly appreciated.

AIAG has a new free program called Quality QuickBytes that lets subscibers receive the latest information on TS-1694492002.

mows.aiag.org/asppages/quickbytes.asp

Or just go straight to the AIAG site and look for the link.

www.aiag.org

I'm also looking for some clarification on these issues. I've been asked to get a second opinion on the Supplier Requirement. Does a QS9K:98 with a ISO 9002:1994 base meet the TS 16949 Requirement? It was my understanding that ISO 9***:2000 was the minimum, anything over is extra. How much is required beyond this, i.e. plan to achieve TS?

Thanks very much,
Canoehead

TS 16949:2002 states:
7.4.1.2 Supplier Quality Management System Development
Organization shall perform supplier quality system development with the goal of supplier conformity with this Technical Specification.
Conformity to ISO 9001:2000 is the first step in achieving this goal.

This is what we are working to accomplish.

Thanks for the prompt response, but I want to be sure I've got your answer. We've got a supplier that is QS-9000:98, based on ISO 9002:1994. Does this meet the 7.4.1.2 requirement, and if not, why and what else is required?

Thanks once again

Thanks for the prompt response, but I want to be sure I've got your answer. We've got a supplier that is QS-9000:98, based on ISO 9002:1994. Does this meet the 7.4.1.2 requirement, and if not, why and what else is required?

Thanks once again

If you are the organization certified to TS2 and this is your supplier, then No, they do not meet the the requirement. Refer to the note at the bottom of of 7.4.1.2.

TS2 for your supplier is a goal set by you the organization. However there is no requirement for your supplier to achieve that goal.

We have discussed these issues before.
Please see also this thread
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9444

I agree with Sam :agree1: - QS doesn't meet the requirements of ISO 9001:2000. When we were jointly registered to both QS & ISO 9001:2000, and using our parent company's Quality manual, which was only QS-9000 we had to add an additional section to comply with the ISO 9001:2000 requirements. For furtehr clarification of supplier development, go to the IAOB web site and check out #2 under ISO/TS 16949 regarding supplier development. The address is: www.iaob.org/faq

We faced a similar problem with supplier certification - our auditor and registrar accepted a plan to address the fact that not all of raw material suppliers are, or are willing to pursue registration to ISO 9001:2000. If you have non-registered suppliers - develop a plan to assist them in getting registered.

Regards,
Kevin

Thanks all, this is what I had told my Mgmt., but they wanted a second opinion; we all know experts are those off-site with briefcases - or those on an internet forum.

Thanks again.

I'm not sure that the question asked by Kerry was answered.

"According to TS16949 7.4.1.2, "Unless otherwise specified by the customer, suppliers to the organization shall be third party registered to ISO 9001:2000 by an accredited third-party certification body."

To which suppliers does this requirement apply? Obviously suppliers of direct material that would go into your saleable product would be required to be registered, but what about suppliers of indirect material such as tooling & equipment, coolants, or anything else that could affect product quality? What about prototype suppliers? Suppliers of services such as design/CAD work?

If, as Note 1 of 7.4.1 states, purchased products include all products and services that affect customer requirements...then one could make a case that all of the suppliers listed above would be required to be registered.

Anyone have any clarification on this requirement for me?"

where is the cutoff where you no longer say that a supplier falls under this requirement?

:bonk:

The answer to that is in the IATF guidance: “Supplier” in this clause (7.4.1.2) refers to sites where production and/or service parts specified by the customer are manufactured. See also the definition of “manufacturing”, 3.1.6.

This means that T&E suppliers, consultants, design companies, trucking companies, etc. are exempt from this requirement.

A couple of other thoughts.

1) look at the FAQ at the iaob website. They give you three years to get it accomplished.

2) look at your customer specifics. Some of them will accept QS ilo 9K2K.

I'm also looking for some clarification on these issues. I've been asked to get a second opinion on the Supplier Requirement. Does a QS9K:98 with a ISO 9002:1994 base meet the TS 16949 Requirement? It was my understanding that ISO 9***:2000 was the minimum, anything over is extra. How much is required beyond this, i.e. plan to achieve TS?

Thanks very much,
Canoehead

Our auditor read me something about this during our audit, it was an exception that was published by IATF (if I remember correctly) allowing for suppliers to be QS registered. I've sent him an email asking for this again, when he replies, I'll post the info. Also, you can use a supplier who is not registered to any standard, as long as you have the customer sign a waiver stating that it is ok for you to use that supplier. I had to do that for one of ours. They're not registered to any standard or specification, but are customer specified.

Hope this helps!
Jonell

I think the QS exception isn't from the IATF, but in individual customer-specific requirements.

DCX: "DaimlerChrysler will accept registration to QS-9000 in lieu of ISO 9001:2000 until July 1, 2004."

Ford: "Subcontractors to achieve accredited third party certification to ISO/TS 16949:1999 or ISO/TS 16949:2002, QS-9000, or the current version of ISO 9000."

GM: "Registration to QS-9000:1998, (QS-9000, 3 Edition) shall be accepted as an alternative to registration to ISO 9001:2000."

I think the QS exception isn't from the IATF, but in individual customer-specific requirements."

You're right, it wasn't from the IATF. Here's what he sent me.

"The answer came from an IASG sanctioned interpretation and advisory".

I'm asking him to send it to me, I can't find it on the websites he gave me.

Jonell

Hello everyone,

As an employee for a TS-2 registrar, I'm partly in charge of answering questions that arrive from our website's online submission form. Being that I'm not an auditor, I don't always have the answers people are looking for, so I usually either ask an auditor, or direct them to this awesome forum.

I promised an inquirer that I would post his question here in hopes of receiving feedback. He has a good question along the lines of this topic, and I want to share it with you all. Please feel free to comment! :yes:

Here's his question:

We are a TS registered company and recently completed our 4th continuing
surviellance audit. There is one issue we continue to struggle with and
therefore would like an independent view. Some of our suppliers are
QS9000, some ISO9001 and some aren't certified at all. Many of these
suppliers are customer dictated. For those that are not customer dictated,
we have waivers from our customers. Nonetheless our auditors state that
regardless of any of this, the fact that we ourselves are TS, that as part
of supplier development that we MUST develop our suppliers to TS
compliance. These companies could care less if they are compliant, our
customers could care less if our suppliers are compliant. How do you
develop someone to something that they do not want? Many of these
suppliers are mom and pop type shops. I just feel that our auditors are
"looking" for something. I understand the TS requirements but am really
struggling with this one. Could you provide your opinion?

There are two separate issues here.

1) Registration: This is where the "waiver" comes in.

2) Development: I would agree that supplier development is separate from the registration requirement. However, The real question is: "How do you eat an elephant?" Answer: One bite at a time. The same approach can be used with supplier requirement. There is no time requirement for this, as indicated by the note. So, as you deal with your supplier, you slowly get them to implement parts of the requirement. For example, you have to apply PPAP to your suppliers. You can also move them through quality, or delivery issues. Things like that.

Over a longer period, they will become mostly compliant.