Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

Rules: 1.0 Eligibility - exclusion

Discussion in 'IATF 16949:2016 - Automotive Quality Systems' started by John C. Abnet, Jun 5, 2020.

  1. John C. Abnet

    John C. Abnet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2017
    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Upper Midwest- USA
    Looking for some input from the QFO team on a topic which I have never encountered directly.

    Rules, 5th edition states ...
    "1.0 Eligibility for certification to IATF 16949"
    If a site supplies to a customer requiring 3rd party certification to IATF, then all automotive customers of the site shall be included in the scope of audit.


    However, the rules then go on to state...
    "At the request of the client to the CB, the client may exclude a site...that supplies ...parts to automotive customers not requiring ...certification to IATF 16949."

    At first glance, these two statements appear to contradict each other. Has anyone had actual experience with requesting this type of exclusion from the CB? Was the CB agreeable to it?

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,852
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Yes! Some CB's do not subscribe to what's known as "ring-fencing" and some do.
     
    John C. Abnet likes this.
  3. John C. Abnet

    John C. Abnet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2017
    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Upper Midwest- USA
    Thanks @Andy Nichols ;
    Seems the rule allows an exclusion...seems "odd" (wrong?) that CB,s handle it arbitrarily.
     
  4. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,852
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    I think it's based on the principle that if the org. is serious about "quality" they don't pick and choose what requirements apply or not.
     
    John C. Abnet likes this.
  5. John C. Abnet

    John C. Abnet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2017
    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Upper Midwest- USA
    Well, in my professional experience, I would indeed recommend organizations "apply commonly" . I have seen the "pick and chose" method, and the method of "different" systems, depending, ... Those situations always lead to confusion for their teams, (and leadership !).

    Thanks for the feedback @Andy Nichols

    Be well.
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  6. johnnymo77

    johnnymo77 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Location:
    Niles Michigan
    Didn't Honda or one of the other Asian OEMs "not require"?
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  7. Gre19

    Gre19 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2020
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hi, see your point and will try to explain the differences to the best of my ability.

    If you are seeking IATF certfication the application shall include the "entire entity" which shall be understood as not only a specific site but all related automotive manufacturing sites and remote locations.
    Let say that you have one manfucaturing site only producing Honda parts and you have a written confirmation from Honda that they do not require IATF certifcation then this site can be excluded from the entire entity.

    If you have a customer requiring IATF certification then you need to include all automotive customers in the scope of certification and you can not make exclusion.

    Greg.
     

Share This Page