The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line

  The Elsmar Cove Forums
  iso 9001/qs9000/iso14001

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   iso 9001/qs9000/iso14001
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 1
From:arthurdale wv usa
Registered: Jul 2001

posted 30 July 2001 02:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for seanj   Click Here to Email seanj     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I just started working for a company as their QS 9000 and ISO 14001 Management Rep. The last five months I have virtually become a monk trying to become familiar with them. This is the first time I had seen before I came here to work. Our plant is the only QS plant the rest are ISO 9001-1994 and going to ISO 9001-2001. I just recently took a course to become a certified lead auditor for ISO 9001-2000 with QS as a supplemental. Corporate has asked me to help with ISO 9001-2000 transition and in doing so I'm wordering if they change their/our Level 2 procedures to the new format (1-8) can we leave our procedures in our format (1-20)? Also, does the TS-16494 procedures align with the (1-8) or (1-20) format or is it all together different? Thanks in advance for your help!

IP: Logged

E Wall
Forum Contributor

Posts: 114
From:Columbus, GA USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 31 July 2001 04:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for E Wall   Click Here to Email E Wall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
TS 16949 is currently aligned with ISO 9001:1994 rev, but it is planned for revision and re-alignment with 9001:2000 rev.

I recommend you stick with the 2000 rev format. As long as you have a good document linkage/reference system in place it doesn't matter whether you are all on the same format. It would make it simpler for folks dealing with both, but is not necessary.

Eileen V. Wall
ISO Coordinator

IP: Logged

Forum Contributor

Posts: 33
From:Southfield, MI
Registered: May 2001

posted 01 August 2001 09:18 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for tomvehoski   Click Here to Email tomvehoski     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
A change to ISO 9000:2000 does not require reformatting your document structure. I never followed the 20 elements in my 1994 based systems. Use whatever format works best for your employees - don't worry about the auditor being confused. If you give them a good cross reference, and they are a good auditor, they should be able to find everything. For example, I usually combine Customer Product (4.7), Product ID & Traceability (4.8) and Handling, Storage... (4.15) into one procedure called Product Control. I did not want to have to make the workers think about where the product was from and then have to figure out which procedure to look at.


IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Marc Smith | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Please Visit the new Elsmar Cove Forums! All these threads are there and much more!

Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!