7.4.1.2 Supplier Development

[dbzman]

We are a Heat Treating facility and are seeking TS registration.

I just recveived the "Quality Quickbytes" from AIAG and they had a nice definition of a supplier.

The article says, " a 'Supplier' in the 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."

My question is - would any of our suppliers actually be suppliers under this definition? We purchase items such as electricity for the furnaces, quench oils, nitrogen, ammonia and natural gas. All, or some, of these are used in the furnaces. We also purchase controllers for the furnaces and furnace parts. I have heard it said by QS auditors that all of these need to be on an approved suppliers list because they are quality critical suppliers.

We Heat Treat the parts our customers send us. We do not add anything to them, unless you count the carbon added, and we do not take anything away. We change the chemistry of the parts.

Under the definition given would we have any suppliers that we would have to control other then any outsourced Heat Treating?

Thanks!

 

[tomvehoski]

There should be a definition of supplier in the 1694 standard itself. I would be careful about basing interpretations on a magazine that is not official. That definition sounds about right - I don't have the standard in front of me right now.

I would first worry about any heat treating or outside processing you do. Do you ever subcontract heat treat due to capacity issues? If so, this heat treater would be a supplier.

Sounds like most of your suppliers are distributors so you really don't need to consider them critical and approve them as suppliers. I believe there is an exclusion for distributors from having to be ISO certified - this may be a QS requirement though - my mind is cloudy on the QS/TS differences on this subject now.

From a control standpoint I would still qualify my preferred distributors. You need to consider what happens if they supply the wrong purity of gas, are late on a shipment of carbon, etc. If these have a realistic chance of affecting quality or delivery to the customer, I would have reviews and monitor their performance.

Tom

 

[dbzman]

Same

1. There should be a definition of supplier in the 1694 standard itself. I would be careful about basing interpretations on a magazine that is not official. That definition sounds about right - I don't have the standard in front of me right now.

(The magazine is "Quality QuickBytes" distributed by the AIAG and listed the IATF Sanctioned Interpretations. Is this publication not to be used when evaluating the standdard?)

2. I would first worry about any heat treating or outside processing you do. Do you ever subcontract heat treat due to capacity issues? If so, this heat treater would be a supplier.

(We have taken care of this. Any outsourcing due to production capability or Contingency Planning are listed on the Approved List.)

3. Sounds like most of your suppliers are distributors so you really don't need to consider them critical and approve them as suppliers. I believe there is an exclusion for distributors from having to be ISO certified - this may be a QS requirement though - my mind is cloudy on the QS/TS differences on this subject now.

(This would not be a worry for us since only Heat Treating facilities would be on our listing.)

4. From a control standpoint I would still qualify my preferred distributors. You need to consider what happens if they supply the wrong purity of gas, are late on a shipment of carbon, etc. If these have a realistic chance of affecting quality or delivery to the customer, I would have reviews and monitor their performance.

(Our other suppliers are controlled by the GM who takes care of this. We are a small shop consisting of 4 managers and a total of 60 workers. If we had a problem with the gasses we purchase he would know and take action.)

I was just wondering if all we would be required to have TS control over would be the Heat Treaters we use and nothing else.

Thanks!

 

[tomvehoski]

You probably only need to worry about the heat treaters. A couple other things to watch for - calibratoin (must be ISO 17025) and freight (if you specify carrier). Sounds like you have it pretty well covered.

I have not read the AIAG publication you mention, but I would still be cautious about using anything that does not come straight from the IATF - you never know if an authors interpretation could differ from the IATF.

Tom

 

[dbzman]

Thanks!

Thanks Tom for you help!!!!!

 

[Sam]

dbzman said,
"I have heard it said by QS auditors that all of these need to be on an approved suppliers list because they are quality critical suppliers. "

There is no requirement in QS or in TS2 for an approved suppliers list. The requirement is simply "supplier development".

 

[Bill Ryan - 2007]

Tom said:
must be ISO 17025

There is no SHALL be accredited to ISO 17025 as I read the standard (but my head hasn't fully cleared yet, either )

Bill

 

[tomvehoski]

Bill,

7.6.3.2 Bullet points:

* there shall be evidence that the external laboratory is acceptable to the customer, or
* the laboratory shall be accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 or national equivalent.

So you are correct that customer approval may waive the 17025 requirement, but I doubt that it will be easy to get a waiver. Making sure your suppliers are 17025 is probably the easiest way to go. There is still an exclusion for equipment manufacturers if there is no 17025 company available.

Tom