Subcontractor Development - What is Minimum Required? Clause 4.6.2.1

[deuce]

Subcontractor Development question. (4.6.2.1)

Interpretation question guys:

Do tier three suppliers of major components have to be a minimum ISO-9001 certified?

Any help on this would be appreciated. That book seems to be written in Greek sometimes.

 

[Tom W]

Interpretation question guys:

Do tier three suppliers of major components have to be a minimum ISO-9001 certified?

Any help on this would be appreciated. That book seems to be written in Greek sometimes.

Under the QS standard, The second note under 4.6.2.1 states that you set the priority of development based on the importance of the product supplied.

This topic has created several discussions over the years. Some of the Gurus around here might have or know of good links for you to follow. I believe that QS does not require any suppliers to be registered, it only states that the goal is to have their quality systems compliant to QS-9000 and that it should be their fundemental quality system program.

It might be splitting hairs to say that they require certification to ISO or QS.. ISO/TS 16949:2002 is a lot more clear on this, yet they still give an out clause. TS has the same conformity requirement but goes further and requires that, "Unless otherwise specified by the customer, suppliers to the organization shall be third party registered to ISO 9001:2000 by an accredited third-party certification body."

Hope this helps.

 

[db]

Interpretation question guys:

Do tier three suppliers of major components have to be a minimum ISO-9001 certified?

Any help on this would be appreciated. That book seems to be written in Greek sometimes.

Sanctioned Interpretation C-9 States that subcontractors (read vendors) to any company that is QS-9000 registered must meet one of two requirements:

1) registered to the current version of ISO 9000 (excluding 9003)
2) pass an assessment by an OEM or an OEM-approved second party


Ford is also issuing waivers, although the Sanctioned Interpretation does not allow it (and they say QS failed because of the Registrars).

So based, on the C-9, and how I read your post, my answer would be yes.

Hope that helps.

 

[Tom W]

So based, on the C-9, and how I read your post, my answer would be yes.

Hope that helps.

I might look at this differently, but it gives you two choices there and only one is registration. The other looks like a customer audit. An OEM-approved second party is a wide range of OEM suppliers. The OEMs want their suppliers to monitor their suppliers and so on and so on.

We recently went through a Ford WHTX audit (Heat treat) by Ford STA, however they (FORD) still require their suppliers to come in and audit us as well. We are TS2 and that has no impact on the number of requests we get from OEM suppliers to audit our processes.

 

[D.Scott]

"An OEM-approved second party is a wide range of OEM suppliers."

I was under the impression that there were very few "approved second partys". I remember a letter from the big 3 relating to how you could become approved and that the pre-requisite auditing requirements were quite strict.

The original question delt with tier 3 suppliers which complicates the issue. All tier 1 suppliers are required to have QS. As Dave said, anyone supplying them must have 9K certification - these are the tier 2s. If the tier 2 had QS, then the tier 3 supplying them would be required to be at least 9K certified, but what if the tier 2 were only 9K and not QS? This casts a different light on the tier 3. If the tier 3 supplys only 9K customers I don't believe this requirement applies to them.

This is of course just my opinion.

Dave

 

[Tom W]

We supply companies that are down the list of tiers, like 3 / 4 Companies that supply companies that supply companies that supply OEMs. We were required by most of our automotive customers to obtain QS. Plus we saw it as a tool to generate sales. Now with TS2 we once again are ahead of most if not all of our customers.

Ford STA came in and audited us, they approved us as a Ford Supplier. However they require all of their suppliers that use us to be responsible for auditing our system. They do not want their customers to use us based on Fords' approval. They are shifting that responsibility to the individual company that supplys Ford. This is the basis for the "Approved Second party" audits. Ford stated that their supplier (our customer) had to come in and audit us to Fords requirements in order to use us, even though Ford had already approved us. And even though we are TS2 certified.

To blankly say that all your suppliers need to be ISO registered is a mis-representation of the requirement. You customers dictate that as much as anyone else. We have a situation that we purchase critical component for our equipment from one supplier. They are the only supplier that make the components, and the laugh at ISO / QS / TS. What do you do then???

We can only do so much as their customer. They know we have to use them. To encourage them to get ISO is one thing, to demand it is another.

 

[db]

To blankly say that all your suppliers need to be ISO registered is a mis-representation of the requirement.

C9 Supplier Development
"...Minimum subcontractor compliance shall be certification by an accredited certification body to a current version of the ISO 9000 Wuality Managmeent Series of Standerds, excluding ISO 9003: plus any requirements specified by the customer. Assessment by an OEM or an OEM-approved second party will be recognized as meeting subcontractor compliance..."

The only way your subcontractor (vendor) avoid registration to ISO 9001, or ISO 9002 is to undergo an approved assessment. Where you are in the tier structure is meaningless. If you are QS 9000, then your suppliers must be either registered, or pass the approved assessment. There is no wiggle room, and no waivers. Take your choice, either a) registration, or b) approved assessment. I have major heartburn with this (TS as well). The status of your registration may very well hinge on what another company does. It is stupid! But I didn't make the rules.

 

[Tom W]

Actually the requirement in TS starts by saying Unless otherwise specified by the customer...

meaning they built in the ability to get around this. JMO.

 

[Trolle]

Actually the requirement in TS starts by saying Unless otherwise specified by the customer....

Concerning such a customer "waiver", does it have to be in writing?

We have to close an NC (ISO TS) concerning this very issue. Unfortunatly one qualified and prefered supplier has decided to go without 9001 and instead taking it all to 14001. I do hope, but one never knows ..., that our customer will allow us to keep this supplier.

/Trolle

 

[Howard Atkins]

see this thread for more info
https://elsmar.com/elsmarqualityforum/threads/7574/