Certification of a new production plant.

M

Marcel

We are implementing QS9000 in a new production facility. The "head office and production plant" already is QS9000 certified. Now it is not fully clear to us how to deal with certain paragraphs of the QS-Manuals. For example how to deal with 4.2.4 "Product Approval Process (PPAP)" and 4.3 "Contract Review" This contract review is in our opinion not applicable to our production plant because head quarters is dealing with this.

With the PPAP the production-plant has to make the samples and the production runs but the paperwork and measurement is dealt with by the head office. Is it possible to subscribe above points in the quality manual, or is it obligatory that all elements are in the quality manual from the production plant.?

Are there maybe people who are (or have been) in the same situation or who can advise us?
 
D

D.Scott

Marcel - Are both the new facility and the head office following the same procedures and policies? If so, do they share the same manual?

We have 10 plants all under the same corporate manual. Certain elements are only done at the corporate location while others are done to a lesser extent in the remote facilities.

Your new plant may not deal directly with PPAP, however it is likely that they contribute in some way (production, samples, R&R, capability studies, etc). Each facility should (if following the same manual) be able to show their contribution to each element and thereby satisfy the requirement in an audit.

There is no requirement to have seperate manuals for each facility if you both have the same management and follow the same corporate procedures. You should be able to cover both plants with one manual. If you have a seperate manual, then ALL elements of QS-9000 must be addressed.

Check with your registrar and get their input. You should also be able to greatly reduce the audit requirements for the second facility which should translate into a few dollars saved.

Good luck.

Dave
 
M

Marcel

Dave thanks for your answer

Hello Dave,

Thanks for the quick response.

Yes the new facility and the head office are indeed following the same procedures and policies. There is only one “problem”. The new plant is in an other country where they can’t read our language, so we have translated (most of) the procedures. We added some extra paragraphs to make sure that the required information will come to the head office.
For the “contract review” and the “PPAP” we were thinking of only translating the parts of the procedures that are applicable to them, and write in “their manual” that the rest is done in the head office.
Do I understand your answer correct, if I conclude that our “solution” is acceptable??

Regards,

Marcel
 
D

D.Scott

I am not a registrar so I can only give my opinion but it sounds like you plan to do what our registrar has accepted.

I am sure there are others who can give a difinitive answer on this but IMHO you are on the right track. Just be sure you cover the differences at both ends.

Dave
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
I agree with D. The important part is to understand your role in the APQP process (PPAP is really only submission of the warrant and all the APQP stuff such as D mentioned and the fmeas, etc.).

You might want to take a read through the section on documentation mapping and relationships starting at http://Elsmar.com/Imp/sld190.htm It's as applicable to ISO as it is QS.

Every corporation / company structures things such as documentation differently. Take an extreme example - Motorola. Everything starts at the IL headquarters - which has certain policies and procedures applicable world wide. Then there are sectors while must know what ones apply to them and what they need there to 'fill any gaps' AND what they have written which is applicable to those divisions under them. Then there are.... etc. right down to the individual facilities. When I worked with the semi-conductor sector, the documentation aspect was extremely difficult because of gaps in the structure (which we fixed). Make sure you know what exists and are sure the backbone is sound before you integrate. And get buy-in from other facilities - make sure everyone agrees to the structure and who is responsible for what.
 
Top Bottom