Sanctioned Interpretation - Merger / Joint Venture

C

CINDY

#1
All you smart individuals who can assist, please do.

Company 1 - Current Company, quality certified
Company 2 - Brand new company - does not have its first order yet.

Company 1, recently formed a joint venture minority company, Company 2.

Company 1 is fully certified and compliant ready to up-grade to 16949, 14001, and 17025.

Here is the question: What is the best way to add Company 2 with Company 1 without dual certifications? Keep in mind; I only want to manage one system for two companies with both company names on the certifications.

There seems to be some interpretation issues here.

Thanks.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
T

tomvehoski

#2
Some questions:

Do both companies have the same products/processes, or do they differ?

Will both companies be going for all 3 standards (16949, 14001, 17025)?

Are they the same physical location? If not, how far apart?

Is management centralized between the two?

You can build one system for two companies without a problem. If they have different company names and locations this can be a problem for the registration, especially with the three standards involved. Each standard has a different registration guide, so rules can vary based on what you are doing.

Even if they will not allow a single audit, you may be able to get them to reduce the days. For 17025, LAB partners with some registrars, so you may be able to get the same auditor and registrar for all three. This will be difficult since there are not many 16949 qualified auditors around yet. Best bet is to check with your registrar to see what they can do. You can find a list of the LAB partners at L-A-B.com.

I would set up your system for Company 1 and get that out of the way. Sounds like it is still pretty early for company 2. You can build onto the Company 1 system for Company 2 as time goes on.

I have a similar situation with two clients now. They have different owners and products, but work out of the same office. The office manager is shared and she is the Management Rep for both systems. Both are doing ISO 9001: 2000, one is doing ISO 17025. We want individual certificates for each, but would like to have one audit since the systems are almost identical. I am just now getting to the registrar quote stage, so I will update when I get some additional info.

Tom
 
C

CINDY

#3
Tom,

You see my dilemma.

Company 1 is a full service machine shop and testing laboratory. Engineering, Prototype, Detail, Manufacturing, Inspection, and Testing Laboratory.

Company 2 is a Testing Laboratory and Manufacturing shop.

Both are housed under one roof and employ all the same individuals, including management. Currently, the only difference is the name and minority status.

We have two different auditors due to lack of one single auditor qualified for all three standards from one registrar.

Eventually, we would like to move Company 2 to its own facility once it can support itself.

Company 1 and 2 can feed each other work.

Currently, Company 1 has all the required documentation and processes and Company 2 utilizes this system.

Can I include both company's in one (one system with one certification), I do not want to have two separate systems to double all the work including audits. I currently have three systems to audit to.

Thanks for you assistance.


Cindy
 
C

CINDY

#5
Craig,

No there is not a parent company. On paper each company is independant of each other. The only thing they share in common is one of the owners.

Thanks,

Cindy
 
C

Craig H.

#6
Cindy

Ok, they both have the same employees and the same management. How far are the major systems shared (accouting, order taking, purchasing, etc.)? How are the resources allocated?

If the second company moves to another facility, will the two still share the same people? How long do you think it will be before the move is made?

Craig
 
C

CINDY

#7
Craig,

All employees are shared. Company 2 will not move out of Company 1's facility for at least one year, at which point, some employees will be shared. Currently all purchasing, accounting, etc. are supplied by Company 1, thus sharing.

Thanks,

Cindy
 
C

Craig H.

#8
Cindy

Tom is the real expert here. I think his advice is sound so far.

The reason for all of the questions is that I was looking for a common owner, but it looks like the common management/systems might do the trick.

One thought, though, is that it sounds like, when the second company moves, you may have to make a decision on weather 2 systems are needed then.

This an interesting issue. Please let us know how it turns out.

Good luck, whatever you decide.

Have a great weekend!

Craig
 
C

CINDY

#9
Craig,

Thanks for your assistance I will keep you posted.

Hope you can venture outside in the nice weather.


Cindy
 
T

tomvehoski

#10
What I am hoping for with my clients is one auditior visiting one time and issuing two ISO 9001 certificates and one 17025. Per RAB and registrar rules I believe they will have to complete two audit checklists for 9001 I am looking to have the auditor fill out both checklists at the same time for the common systems. Each checklist will be completed alone for the process specific things. 17025 reall messes things up since that will now require a third set of paperwork and a second certification body (L-A-B). Thankfuly I know some registrars and auditors that should help us out on this.

This is almost as much fun as convincing a registrar that my client that had the fire HAS 12 months of production data for TS 16949. Just for six monts parts per month produced = 0. On the bright side, no rejects or customer complaints. I never seem to get the normal ones.

Tom
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
A IATF Sanctioned Interpretation No. 7 - Type and Extent of Control (supplemental) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
T TS 16949 Clause 7.4.1.2 and Sanctioned Interpretation IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 12
howste New IATF Sanctioned Interpretation: Automotive Process Approach Auditing ASQ, ANAB, UKAS, IAF, IRCA, Exemplar Global and Related Organizations 14
A Distributors - QS-9000 3rd edition and sanctioned interpretation C-9 QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 4
L IATF 16949 Contingency plan requirements / Sanctioned Interpretations? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 33
P Sanctioned Interpretations - IATF 16949 Cl. 8.3.3.3 Special characteristics IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
Marc AS/EN/JISQ 9100:2016 IAQG Sanctioned Aerospace Auditor Training Available (Nov 2016) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
J Rules 3rd Edition Sanctioned Interpretations (SIs) Posted 07/16/2010 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
D IAQG Sanctioned Aerospace Auditor Transition Training Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 1
Sidney Vianna IAQG Sanctioned Resolutions for the Aerospace QMS Certification Scheme AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
S Automotive Process Approach Auditing sanctioned interpretations S1 04 04 General Auditing Discussions 1
Sidney Vianna ISO 14001 Interpretations - sanctioned in the USA ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 6
S November 2003 QS-9000 Sanctioned Interpretations - The Use of OEMs for Calibration QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2
Q IASG Sanctioned Interpretations for QS 9000 QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2
S IAOB Sanctioned Interpretations - Duplications/contradictions - TS update/interps? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 18
J TS 16949 Sanctioned Interpretations yet? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
S ISO TS 16949:2002 - Sanctioned interpretations on the new requirements yet? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
Q Previous Sanctioned Interpretations QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1
L Sanctioned Interpretations - GM Definition for 'Level II Controlled Shipping' QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1
J QS Sanctioned Intrepretations of May 29, 2001 QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 28
G Interpreting the Sanctioned Interpretations General Auditing Discussions 1
L Sanctioned format for the Chrysler 7 Step Corrective Action Process Nonconformance and Corrective Action 9
K New QS-9000 Sanctioned Interpretations - 1 July 2001 QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 139
V IASG sanctioned interpretations QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2
G QS-9000 Sanctioned Interpretations QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 5
D AIAG approved for sanctioned training delivery QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 5
R MDR, Annex I, 23.1 Interpretation - IFU on the website EU Medical Device Regulations 5
M MDR Article 22 Interpretation EU Medical Device Regulations 3
I Interpretation of the MDR GSPR 23.4 (u) EU Medical Device Regulations 2
D IATF16949 - Interpretation of Customer Requirements clauses Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 2
A Interpretation of GMP Requirements for class 1 medical device manufacturer (device GMP exempt, only General controls applicable) 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
P MDR Rule 10 interpretation - Active Device EU Medical Device Regulations 3
Q % Study variation low, % tolerance high - GR&R Interpretation help Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
A Interpretation with regards to Ppk > Cpk Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 14
A OHSAS 18001 external auditor finding personal interpretation? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 5
A OEM branding - My interpretation of the LVD Directive makes us a manufacturer CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
P Average Peel Strength - Interpretation of BS EN 868-5:2018 and ASTM F0088/F0088M Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
B ISO 50001 Interpretation of section 3.3.9 (Outsourcing) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
K Interpretation of significant change - material change Canada Medical Device Regulations 3
R MDR Software Rule 11 Formal Interpretation EU Medical Device Regulations 7
F Interpretation of MDR 2017/745 Article 23 - CE Mark Requirements EU Medical Device Regulations 8
U Hand-Held dosing device has no PATIENT - Interpretation of the PATIENT definition IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 6
G Medical Device "Immediate Container" Interpretation of Definition US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
A Interpretation of Article 16 (2b) - Packaging, samples and Certificate EU Medical Device Regulations 10
D EU MDR Corrigendum Interpretation EU Medical Device Regulations 3
M Informational MDCG 2019-3 Interpretation of Article 54(2)b – Pre- market clinical evaluation consultation procedure with the involvement of expert panels Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
G EU MDR 2017/745 Rule 11 interpretation - Re-classification of a Software as Medical Device Other Medical Device Related Standards 0
JoshuaFroud Interpretation of Clause 5.5.2 in ISO 13485:2016 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
qualprod P x I = Value interpretation for residual risk? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
T CSA Z299.3-85 Nuclear interpretation AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom