IATF 16949 - Customer Authorization for Concession or Deviation Permit

tongxiaozhi

Involved In Discussions
#1
It states in IATF16949 that:

The organization shall obtain customer concession or deviation permit prior to futher processing whenever the product or manufacuring process is different from that what is currently approved.

The organization shall obtain customer authorization prior to further processing for " use as it" and rework disposition of nonconforming product. If sub-components are reused in the manufacturing process, that sub-component reuse shall be clearly communicated to the customer in the concession or deviation permit.

The organization shall maintain a record of the expiration date or quantity authorized under concession . The organizaiton shall also ensure compliance with the original or superseding specification and requirements when the authorization expires. Materil shipped under concession shall be properly identified on each shipping container.

Here, I have three question:
(1) We don't submit our process parameters to customer, if it is changed, do we need to obtain approval from the customer.
(2) What is sub-component?
(3) Identification on each container means each box or each pallet?​

thank you very much for your reply.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Sebastian

Trusted Information Resource
#2
From general to details.
8.7.1.1 is part of 8.7. It means Control of nonconforming outputs, so focus on nonconforming product.
8.7.1.1 is related to usage of nonconforming product in further manufacturing process. According to 8.7.1 we shall prevent their unintended use.
Some persons here probably make false assumption, that only possible rework is limited to repeating manufacturing process with a currently approved parameters and this time product would be ok. No, rework can be also performed by changing currently approved manufacturing process to fit it to nonconforming product used, to make them totally ok. So if approved process is changed, customer concession or deviation permit is required.

Rework activities have to be specified and documented. I met one customer representative who asked whether we perform rework. If we want to perform rework or reuse sub-component it is ok for him, as long we include it in manufacturing flow chart, PFMEA and control plan. This will be evidence that we know, what we are doing.

Coming back to your questions.
1. I do not know your customer, its approval procedure, whether it requires submission of control plan and how do you comply to requirement Annex A, A.2 Process control a).
2. Semi-product used as input to next step of your manufacturing process.
3. What packaging is used to bring your parts at customer's manufacturing station? Box or pallet? I guess box, so box has to by identified.
 
Last edited:

tongxiaozhi

Involved In Discussions
#3
Thank you very much for your reply.

(1) During the PPAP submission, we submit our control plan to our customer, which references the process parameter form, but we don't submit process parameter form to customer.

(2) Normally, we deliver pallets which contains many boxes to customer.
 

tongxiaozhi

Involved In Discussions
#4
Thank you all very much for your help. I have one more question regarding nonconformity handling

(1) In 8.7,1.1, it states that" The organization shall obtain customer authorization prior to furter processing for "Use as is" and rework dispositions of nonconforming product. But, in 8.7.1.4, it states that" If required by the customer, the organization shall obtain approval from the customer prior to commencing rework of the product.

Are the two in conflict with each other? one is " Shall" and the other one is" if required by the customer"
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#5
The "USE-AS-IS" disposition clearly has to be authorized by customers.

The rework disposition customer approval requirement might be waived, on a case by case or a blanket approval.
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
#6
Thank you all very much for your help. I have one more question regarding nonconformity handling

(1) In 8.7,1.1, it states that" The organization shall obtain customer authorization prior to furter processing for "Use as is" and rework dispositions of nonconforming product. But, in 8.7.1.4, it states that" If required by the customer, the organization shall obtain approval from the customer prior to commencing rework of the product.

Are the two in conflict with each other? one is " Shall" and the other one is" if required by the customer"
Typical IATF stuff. IMHO they rushed this thing thru. If you read the standard they are bouncing back and forth all over the place. It's nuts. Good luck.
 

morteza

Trusted Information Resource
#7
The "USE-AS-IS" disposition clearly has to be authorized by customers.

The rework disposition customer approval requirement might be waived, on a case by case or a blanket approval.
Hi Sidney,

According to clause 8.7.1.1, it seems that IATF 16949 has clearly required to obtain customer authorization for "rework disposition". It states:

The organization shall obtain customer authorization prior to further processing for "use as is" and rework dispositions of nonconforming product

So, I believe that there is a conflict between clause 8.7.1.1 and 8.7.1.4.

May any one explain more on the consistency between these two requirements? One requires customer authorization for rework without any reference to customer specific requirement (clause 8.7.1.1) and another refers to CSR for customer authorization for rework disposition (clause 8.7.1.4)

thanks all
 

Sebastian

Trusted Information Resource
#8
Few months ago I agreed, that there is a conflict, but meanwhile I grew up and tried to find a logic in it. Now I don't see conflict, but maybe I am wrong.
ISO 9000:2015 says said:
Rework - action on a nonconforming product or service to make it conform to the requirements.
I see there two scenarios. First, implement action to return nonconforming products to state of conformity and then use them. Second, implement action to "get along" with nonconforming products (accept them as they are) and get fully conforming products.

Rework in 8.7.1.4 - Organization puts again nonconforming products through standard process (status approved by customer) which initially failed, but this time it gets conforming products.
Flow: Process 1 -> Nonconformity -> Process 1 -> Conformity -> Process 2 -> Conformity

Rework in 8.7.1.1 - Organization puts nonconforming products through process following process which failed, but specially for nonconforming products standard process is changed (status not approved by customer yet) and gets conforming products.
Flow: Process 1 -> Nonconformity -> (Altered) Process 2 -> Conformity

Three options are available - IATF made mistake, I am right or better look in current of new CSR for clarification, as there are other examples where IATF 16949 profited from them.
 

morteza

Trusted Information Resource
#9
Few months ago I agreed, that there is a conflict, but meanwhile I grew up and tried to find a logic in it. Now I don't see conflict, but maybe I am wrong.

I see there two scenarios. First, implement action to return nonconforming products to state of conformity and then use them. Second, implement action to "get along" with nonconforming products (accept them as they are) and get fully conforming products.

Rework in 8.7.1.4 - Organization puts again nonconforming products through standard process (status approved by customer) which initially failed, but this time it gets conforming products.
Flow: Process 1 -> Nonconformity -> Process 1 -> Conformity -> Process 2 -> Conformity

Rework in 8.7.1.1 - Organization puts nonconforming products through process following process which failed, but specially for nonconforming products standard process is changed (status not approved by customer yet) and gets conforming products.
Flow: Process 1 -> Nonconformity -> (Altered) Process 2 -> Conformity

Three options are available - IATF made mistake, I am right or better look in current of new CSR for clarification, as there are other examples where IATF 16949 profited from them.
Hi Sebastian,

I think your definition for rework is different from that stated in ISO 9000:2015. ISO 9000:2015 says:

rework - Action on a nonconforming (3.6.9) product (3.7.6) or service (3.7.7) to make it conform to the requirements (3.6.4)
Note 1 to entry: Rework can affect or change parts of the nonconforming product or service.

As you see there no emphasis on the process used for making a nonconforming product to conform to the requirements (standard process or altered process which you mentioned). The emphasis is on converting to conforming product, whether you use the same process or a different process. Also, I searched through some CSRs and they have no other definitions for rework than ISO 9000:2015 stated.

Again, I believe that there is a conflict between clause 8.7.1.1 and 8.7.1.4.
 

Sebastian

Trusted Information Resource
#10
Dear morteza, I did not put ISO 9000:2015 section numbers for used definitions (e.g. 3.6.9) and Note 1 in my definition, but it did not change its meaning. It is ISO definition and we are talking about IATF requirement, so no surprises it does not mention process.

During APQP we design among others manufacturing process to materialize product design specification. This process together with its output - product is approved by customer through PPAP procedure. This process has own specification with one condition - components/sub-products who are inputs have to be conform to requirements. Using components/sub-products who are not conform to requirements require altering approved by customer process to get conform outputs. Altering process specification already approved by customer through PPAP procedure requires its approval.

This is how I try "to excuse" IATF 16949 and thank you for searching CSRs for further clarification. IATF shall take position on this matter.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
B FCA US Customer Specific IATF 16949- Critical Characteristics 8.6.2 Customer and Company Specific Requirements 0
B FCA US IATF 16949 Customer Requirements updates Customer and Company Specific Requirements 3
D Customer Specific Requirements / Distributors (IATF 16949) Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
K IATF 16949 "if required by the customer" Internal Auditing 7
J IATF 16949 Cl. 7.5.1.1 d - Customer Requirements - How are people addressing? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
E IATF 16949 Cl. 8.2.3.1.2 - Customer-designated special characteristics IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
D IATF 16949 Cl. 4.3.2 - Customer Requirements vs. Customer Specific Requirements IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 17
B IATF 16949 Cl. 4.3.2 - Meeting Customer Specific Requirements IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
T Customer Authorization for Concession - IATF 16949 Clause 8.5.1.1 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
dubrizo IATF 16949 Clause 8.7.1.6 - Customer Notification - Your Inputs Requested IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
earl62 What is the best way to control special characteristics in Control plan? Is it Mandatory to have SPC for IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
L IATF 16949 certification costs IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
B IATF 16949 News Six month extension on all valid IATF 16949 certs IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
earl62 IATF 16949 Clause 9.1.1.1 - What is the batch conformance to specification method? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
S Can assembly manufacturing sub-supplier be certified IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
D IATF 16949 Requirement for CMMI in a Global Company Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 0
M Tips on preparing for IATF 16949 Internal Lead Auditor exam Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
A IATF 16949 4.3.1 - Determining the scope of the quality management system - supplemental IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
S Definition of "worldwide" in view of IATF 16949 and Product conformity IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
R Where does IATF 16949 address Process mapping? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
A Document "Correspondence IATF 16949 vs ISO13485" available? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0
H Remote product audits in Coivd-19 - IATF 16949 9.2.2.4 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
S IATF 16949 - Partial traceability of Aftermarket products IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
M IATF 16949 8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups - Do we need secondary check? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
C Industrial scales and MSA (IATF 16949 requirement 7.1.5.1.1) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 30
V Generic IATF 16949 Audit Checklist wanted IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
M Scope of Combined ISO 9001 and IATF 16949 QMS - Non-automotive customers ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
D Postpone IATF 16949 audit due to COVID-19 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 41
J Does anyone have an excel IATF 16949 Internal Audit checklist I could use? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
T Reaction Plan To Drive suppliers to IATF 16949 registration IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
B IATF 16949 - Is a Deviation required for sample components in a prototype build? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
C IATF 16949 - Scope or not? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
L "IATF-Compliant" IATF 16949:2016 certification? What does this mean? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
B Go Beyond ISO 9001 WITH IATF 16949 (January 28) [Paid] Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 1
V IATF 16949 8.4.1 Control of externally provided processes, products and services - Should the CB be on our Approved Supplier List? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
S Can we provide training plan as corrective action for IATF 16949 Non conformity? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
C Design and implementation of process audits as defined within IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
Q VDA 6.3 questions vs IATF 16949 clauses VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 0
N IATF 16949:2016 7.1.5.3.2 External Laboratory - How to approve the Testing Laboratory without accreditation scope IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M IATF 16949 (6.1.1 - Planning and Risk Analysis for a remote site) Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 5
D IATF 16949 FAQ 24 (8.4.2.2 Countries of Destination) - How is this actually being interpreted? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
Jimmy123 What is the difference between Error Proofing and Controls? ISO/IATF 16949 - Control Plans FMEA and Control Plans 16
P IATF 16949 8.4.2.4 Supplier Monitoring IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
V IATF 16949 9.2.2.1 Internal Audit Program - "Process Changes" IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
Sidney Vianna IATF 16949 News Presentations from the latest IATF Stakeholder Event - Expectation that IATF 16949 certification should equate with product quality. Misguided? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
C IATF 16949 8.3 Exclusion - Manufacturing process design and development IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
J IATF 16949 8.4.1.2 Supplier selection process IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
M IATF 16949 CAPITULO 7.3.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
Casana IATF 16949 7.1.5.3.2 External Laboratory - On Site Calibration IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 8
M IATF 16949 7.2.3 Internal Auditor Competency - Trainer's competency Internal Auditing 7

Similar threads

Top Bottom