|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums 
|
|
|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums
|
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
|
 The New Elsmar Cove Forums
 QS-9000
 QS 4.7 control of customer supplied product
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: QS 4.7 control of customer supplied product |
|
EricChan Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 |
posted 14 May 2001 03:35 AM
   
I have one client (producing automobile electrical spare parts) experienced a QS registration audit several days ago. One NC states that no documented procedrue for the control of customer supplied product which does not conform to the requirement of 4.7 of QS9000. The fact is the factory has no customer supplied product at all. All of their products are not for manufacturers including oem, instead, only for the maintenance market. In its quality manual, it is clearly stated that 4.7 is not covered in the qs system for the time being. Another fact is that the qs audior himself admit there are no existing customer supplied products. No parts, no toolings, no drawings/specs, no packagings except purchase orders. Last fact is the QS auditor insists that an extra produre should be prepared to address 4.7 requirements. (His point is suppose you have in future customer supplied products, how you manage them). The auditor asked too much or NOT? eric IP: Logged |
|
Al Dyer Forum Wizard Posts: 622 |
posted 14 May 2001 08:25 AM
I can't see where the auditor went wrong. 4.7 is one of those elements that requires procedures. It should be a fairly easy issue to cover since you have no customer supplied product. The procedure (s) would be hypothetical and easy to change if you do get customer supplied product. ASD... IP: Logged |
|
tim banic Forum Contributor Posts: 28 |
posted 14 May 2001 12:20 PM
I would agree with Al, in the manual 4.7 is a shall. It can be as easy as "All incoming product/material from the customer is identified in the same fashion as all other incoming material (refernce to 4.8 Product ID & Traceability). Don't forget to add a statement about customer supplied equipment also. good luck "if it moves, train it...if it doesn't move, calibrate it...if it isn't written down, IT NEVER HAPPENED!" IP: Logged |
|
EricChan Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 |
posted 15 May 2001 02:03 AM
I clearly understand 4.7 is a shall requiring procedures.Same case in 9k (which is also a shall requiring procedure), the auditor can be easily persuaded around. One other example is I know one QS certified company has no procedrue for 4.19 for it declares in quality manual no on site service either at oem or end user side.In the latter case, customer complains addressed in 4.14 and external NC product in 4.13. My concern is how we use the standards, NOT the other round.In this sense, I would say the year 2000 9k is a good revision, which allows for exclusion. IP: Logged |
|
Al Dyer Forum Wizard Posts: 622 |
posted 15 May 2001 07:28 AM
quote: Eric, I think 90% of the companies registered to QS-9000 do not include elements 4.4 and 4.19 (Design/Servicing) because they don't do either and there is a clause in QS-9000 that allows these elements to be excluded (page 3 QS-9000 3rd Edition). You mention 2000 9k, in your post, are you mixing apples with oranges, you are going between QS and ISO? Maybe some more detail? Al... IP: Logged |
|
EricChan Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 |
posted 15 May 2001 12:25 PM
Al, I meant ISO 9000:2000 gives more flexibility of exclusion, for instance, 7.5.4 (customer property) can be excluded if the user has no customer property at all. However, in QS9000, this requirement 4.7 must be addressed with a procedure regardless of whether the user has it or not. I would say this is meaningless. On second thought, since 4.4 & 4.19 can be excluded why 4.7 cannot? I would guess the standard designer took it for granted that every standard user has customer supplied product. The reality does not support that. (one fact is they did not expect so many users as it is now). IP: Logged |
|
ALM Forum Contributor Posts: 80 |
posted 15 May 2001 01:21 PM
"Customer-supplied products/equipment is handled as if it were wholly-owned by ABC Company. As such, it is governed by the same handling, storage, packaging, preservation, traceability, and identification procedures as detailed in our manuals." Auditor: Show me customer supplied product. Me/You: We have none, but we have surely covered any future situations whereby they may supply us with product and/or equipment. Good luck. IP: Logged |
|
EricChan Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 |
posted 15 May 2001 11:07 PM
ALM, I like your fix of same procedures ... (but fyi some auditor dont buy it) eric IP: Logged |
|
ml retcher Forum Contributor Posts: 22 |
posted 19 June 2001 02:29 PM
We have added a page in level one document that states: 4.0 Design control Not used in our method of operation We currently do not design products for our customers. Design control will be addressed if and when it becomes a customer requirement for our facilities. One of our OI's were to perform an audit with one question asking if this is still not part of our operations. I instead wrote in level one of 4.17 it will be reviewed through APQP and when it becomes part of our operation we will begin to audit this element. Then we included it in the APQP documents. IP: Logged |
All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
Hop to: |
Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!
Main Site Search 
