AS9003 flowdown to suppliers - Use of Mil-I-45208 in our quality clauses

[gnesslar]

During our recent AS9100 upgrade (from ISO 9001:2000) audit, our auditor wrote a finding for our use of Mil-I-45208 in our quality clauses. While we knew that 45208 was obsolete, we still have some customers that flow down the requirement to us using 45208 and I was not familiar with any replacement other than ISO 9001.

Does anyone have any positive experience flowing AS9003 to suppliers or with just flowing ISO 9001 compliance?

[BadgerMan]

Does anyone have any positive experience flowing AS9003 to suppliers or with just flowing ISO 9001 compliance?

We currently flow down compliance with ISO 9001. When you consider section 1.2, the standard can be tailored to fit most applications.

We should begin to consider flowing down AS9003 or AS9120 compliance, as an option, since it would apply to many (if not the majority) of our suppliers.

[Graeme]

Originally Posted by gnesslar

During our recent AS9100 upgrade (from ISO 9001:2000) audit, our auditor wrote a finding for our use of Mil-I-45208 in our quality clauses. While we knew that 45208 was obsolete, we still have some customers that flow down the requirement to us using 45208 ...

I would suggest objecting to that finding, for these reasons ...

• First, MIL-I-45208 is obsolete and therefore cannot be specified as a requirement for new procurements by the Government. (It can still be used, though, if the procurement is a follow-on for something that was started while the specification was still in force.) The fact that a military specification is obsolete for government use does not necessarily make it unsuitable for any other non-government use.
• Second, you state that use of this specification is a customer requirement. Provided you can document that then I don't see how the auditor can object to your doing something your customer tells you to do.
• Third, even if this was a new government procurement, the contractor can propose use of an obsolete specification and it can be used if approved by the government's contracting officer.

(Note: by "the government" I specifically mean the US Department of Defense.)

The overall policy document is DOD 4120.24-M Defense Standardization Program (DSP) Policies and Procedures -- the link should take you there. The rules appear to be still the same as they were when I was a government worker involved in standardization documents and procurement issues in the late 1990's.

[Aerospace Man]

Originally Posted by BadgerMan

We currently flow down compliance with ISO 9001. When you consider section 1.2, the standard can be tailored to fit most applications.

We should begin to consider flowing down AS9003 or AS9120 compliance, as an option, since it would apply to many (if not the majority) of our suppliers.

I am with a registrar and I think flowing down AS9003 and AS9120 is a solid option ahead of either AS9100 or ISO to the right organization. AS9003 is based on the old 1994 ISO standard and removing parts of AS9100 that are not necessary in the testing and inspection environment. AS9120 for pass-through distributors that DO NOT provide value added services. Each of these are more specific than ISO would be for their respective businesses. All that is necessary is for the primes to mandate it to the suppliers more clearly.