PPAP Waiver

[Marc]

> Hi Marc,
>
> I am the ISO representative for our company. (We are ISO 9001
> registered) We are an OEM supplier to Ford, and also do some non-OEM
> business with GM. As you know, Ford wants their suppliers to be
> QS-9000 compliant. We are not there yet, but have done a number of

I'm surprised they've let you go this long without QS9 registration.

> PPAP's for Ford, as well as some other customers (non-automotive) who
> have requested PPAP. Ford as well as our other customers have given us
> glowing compliments on our PPAP submissions. I have begun to look at
> implementing the necessary procedures to become QS-9000 compliant.
>
> I am new to the Cayman site, and I find the forum topics, questions,
> and responses interesting. I have read the PPAP chit chat, and I guess
> I want to see if I understand what is being said about PPAP.
>
> 1. I only have to do PPAP for the customers that request it.

You have certain things you do when you design and develop and/or bring a product on-line in production. The APQP process may or may not add things that you do not normally do. That said, a PPAP (per se) is no more than a warrant - a submission document on which you state certain things you did and such. With this document you (typically) submit certain APQP documents (FMEA, Control Plan, runoff capability studies, layout, etc.)

The question becomes 'Do you have to follow the APQP process but not have to submit the warrant?' or 'Are you allowed to ignore APQP requirements?'

You only have to submit PPAP warrants for customers which require it. I assume you do not have to follow APQP if the customer doesn't require it.

For QS9 you have to have (and you say you do) at least 1 PPAP package as evidence you CAN do PPAP.

> 2. I do not have to get waivers from customers not requesting PPAP.
>
> Is this correct?

As I understand it if you are QS9 registered they want evidence (a waiver) that a customer does not require PPAP. I have even seen this addressed as a standard clause on a purchase order. There are 'easy' ways to address this issue.

> I look forward to your response, and participating in the forum
> conversations.
>
> Thanks...

Thanks for your response.

I am also surprised that Ford and GM have not pressured us more to become QS registered. The only thing I can say is that we have always provided them with anything they have asked for (PPAP, etc), and have never had any "product problems" with them.

When we first received Q1 years ago, the SQA told us that if we did not cause him problems, we would rarely hear from him. He said he concentrates on the suppliers who cause him problems, not the ones who don't.

We do have some potential OEM business on the horizon with GM, and they have already told us that they expect us to become QS registered. So I am begining to plan this out and make QS fit our Quality System.