"Partial Design" Designation and Applicable ISO 9001:2015 Exemptions

M

MichelleMcR

#1
My company is an EMS provider for a variety of customers. As a result, we do not do PCB design or participate in the design process for the most part; however, we provide do DFM analyses when we run into a problem or in order to provide cost savings, etc.

We also provide a workspace for our customers' engineers to come and work on their prototypes and have some techs available to assist them with the practical assembly-based issues. The tech, however, is not responsible for design, as s/he only applies practical knowledge for the engineer's consideration.

Under ISO 9001:2008 our CB certified us as a "partial design" company and our exclusions were as follows:

Exclusions: 7.3.3, 7.3.4, 7.3.5, 7.3.6: "The company" is ISO-registered for Partial Design. This rating allows "The company" to offer design input to our customers. The goal is to help continually improve upon the manufacturability, reliability and other aspects of customer-designed product including cost-reduction.

Can someone help me determine which items from the new 2015 standard I should deem as not applicable in order to maintain this designation? I wasn't here when the original determination was made and those that determined the original designation are no longer here for consultation.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#2
Re: "Partial Design" designation and applicable exemptions

Have you considered simply calling it "Consulting" ?
Seems like a terminology issue costing you time and effort.
 
Last edited:
M

MichelleMcR

#3
My only issue with considering it consulting is that our sometimes our suggestions feed into practical changes that feed our ECO process and all changes to design (from a simple component substitution to adding rails or fiducials to a PCB) have to be specifically approved by the customer.

Or maybe I just don't see how that eliminates the burden of tracking and controlling these as design changes...
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#4
...sometimes our suggestions feed into practical changes that feed our ECO process (which does not make anything tangible) and all changes to our customers design (from a simple component substitution to adding rails or fiducials to a PCB) have to be specifically approved by the customer because, after all, it is not our part...it is our customer's part and they are completely responsible for design...not us..
I added emphasis in bold, and words in red...

Are my additions consistent with your reality?
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Super Moderator
#5
I've never seen a "partial design" certificate. You are either responsible for design or you're not. In your case, the customer is responsible for their designs. You shouldn't make any design changes without customer authorization. You should track the customer design changes just as you would if the customer changed the design without your input.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#6
...also realized that EMS and ECO can mean a number of different things, and that I'm assuming.... please spell these out...Emergency Medical Service and Electronic manufacturing Service are pretty different...

ECO is Engineering Change Order for you?
 
M

MichelleMcR

#7
Ninja:

Yes...Electronics Manufacturing Service & Engineering Change Order

And yes your changes are consistent with the reality here.

Howste:

Yes. We have a certificate that specifies Partial design.

But I don't honestly know why it was added at all. I wasn't here during that revision of the QMS, all I know is that we were previously not design-responsible, but the QMS was revised to incorporate partial design...and the leadership seems to think we need to remain that way. It isn't that I disagree with either of you, at all.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#8
Can someone help me determine which items from the new 2015 standard I should deem as not applicable in order to maintain this designation?
From what you describe there are some aspects of 9001:2015 8.3.2 and 8.3.3 that your organization might have influence over. Especially with the linkage from 8.2.3.1 b)
requirements not stated by the customer, but necessary for the specified or intended use, when known;
Sometimes, suppliers as your organization have to assist customers in better designing/specifying their products because you have more knowledge than the customer does.
 
S

speck

#9
Hello all. Thanks for the input. I searched what I could and found this. Not sure whether to ask here or start a new post about exemptions to the new AS9100 rev D. All the examples I was able to find did not address my situation exactly. I think mine is much less "gray". We have been design exempt for AS9100 as a commercial Aerospace heat treater. We simply receive customer machined parts, heat treat them to the given requirements and then return them with compliance statements. My question is we provide a "service" not a "product" and want to verify this is not the type of "service" mentioned in "8.3 Design and development of Products and Services" in the standard.

I guess my question that may have been asked elsewhere in the cove and may help many others in the future is:

1. Can we claim exemption?
2. To what clauses and what extent can we claim exemption?

I have been given the wonderful task of doing the ISO9001AS9100D upgrade and I do not have the internal leadership I can bounce any of this off of. I would hate to go down the wrong road here before I even start. Thank you so much for any input and be Blessed.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#10
Heat treating is a (so-called) special process. Do you develop the heat treating spec? Do you validate them?

If you just heat treat parts against customer specified processes, then you are not developing the "product/service" and you can disregard the service development aspects of AS9100.

Since OASIS identifies the elements of AS9100 that doesn't apply to you, you should have this already established. The Transition from AS9100C to D should not make any difference whatsoever about this aspect of the QMS.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
C Partial Design Validation and changes to a critical supplier 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
Q Full or Partial FAI? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
D Partial FAI - AS9102 -One single drawing has 10 part numbers AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2
S IATF 16949 - Partial traceability of Aftermarket products IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
B Temperature loop: partial calibration General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 10
S CTS/CSE Waveforms Testing - Partial Recognition of IEC 60601-2-25 Standard by FDA IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
B AS9102 - Completing Partial FAI's for Baseline Part Numbers AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
P AS9102 full FAl or a partial FAI after production inactivity period AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
D Non ASTM Partial Immersion LGT emergent stem correction General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
Q Partial non applicability of ISO 9001 Cl. 7.1.5 (not having services)? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
J Use of Harmonised Standards (Full or Partial) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
M Partial Implementation of ISO 9001 in a Company ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
T Is a Removable Partial Denture classified as Class I Medical Device? EU Medical Device Regulations 6
S When to switch from a Partial AS9102 back to a Full AS9102 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
M Partial Compliance to an ISO Standard for Medical Device CE Marking EU Medical Device Regulations 13
K Partial FAI on Semi-Complete Parts question ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
N Can we do a Partial Gamma Validation on a Similar Product (Syringes) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
M Partial Incoming (Receiving) Inspection Delivery Inspection. Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
D Delta or Partial FAI (First Article Inspection) - What are the differences? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
D Partial FAI form requirements AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 8
D Partial ISO TS 16949 Certification IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
A Classification of Medical Device with Partial Compliance with a particular standard IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 5
P Part 11 Hybrid System - Partial paper based record but with e-signature Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 4
J AS9102 FAI (First Article Inspection) Full or Partial - Changes to NC programming Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
S Error Accumulation - Combined Result without going to Partial Derivitaves Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 2
B Partial Joint (Hip Prosthesis) Replacement Class inquiry EU Medical Device Regulations 3
T Partial Shipping of Lots - Shipping of product prior to the lot being completed ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
I Partial Least Square Regression Result - Question Using Minitab Software 3
E Interpreting Partial Least Square Results Using Minitab Software 1
B Not Full (Partial) Lot at End of the Shift - Sample Size AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 4
S "Partial Buyout" Considerations for TS system - HELP IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
R DFA & DFM - Examples for Design for assembly and design for manufacturability Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 2
D Using Laboratory Notebooks in R&D and Design and Development ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D ISO 13485 - 7.3.6 Design and development verification - Do most folks create a separate SOP? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
K Joint approval between OEM and Manufacturer on Design Documents ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
M API 4F/7K/8C Design Package Validation Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 1
A Design History File - Not ready to share the design drawings or Bill of Material US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
W Need for current design or process control FMEA and Control Plans 2
A What is the difference between Design Process, Process Design and Design Control? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
D Test summary report example for design validation wanted - ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
B Why the Greek god Hephaestus should have done a design FMEA (DFMEA) on his giant robot APQP and PPAP 1
S Documenting Design Verification Test Results (ISO 9001) Design and Development of Products and Processes 1
DuncanGibbons Understanding the applicability of Design of Experiments to the IQ OQ PQ qualification approach Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 0
S Requirement to Conduct New Shelf-life Testing? (re-do testing for design change) EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A Sample Agreement available for Outsourcing Medical Device Design activity? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
DuncanGibbons How is the arrangement between Design and Production organisation envisaged? EASA and JAA Aviation Standards and Requirements 4
L Design & Development of a SERVICE Service Industry Specific Topics 13
C Documentation for items used for Design Verification 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
P Design verification driven by new equipment. How is this different than process validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
A AS9102B - 3.6 Design Characteristics and form 3 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom