Where does a coatings and paint company fall in IATF?

[Whiskey]

...And is being compliant to IATF enough.

We're a toll manufacturer and have an ISO9001 accreditation, with one of our labs having an ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation as well. We don't exclusively supply to the automotive industry, but some of our customers are from there. I think we only do coatings for wheels, but I have to double check that.

My question would be, would I be able to provide a sufficient argument that our ISO9001 cert and compliance to IATF (perhaps referencing the MAQMSR document) is enough as a paint and coatings company, or will we have to be certified to IATF?

I'm having trouble understanding section 8.4.2.3 Supplier quality management system development (sanctioned interpretation), specifically what an eligible organization is.


Excuse my ignorance, I just started this career about 2 months ago and for some reason they thought it was a good idea to hire someone with no experience in the field to "train from the bottom up" to figure out IATF 16949 (not that I don't appreciate the opportunity to learn, it's just a lot to take in and I have no one to guide me).

Thank you!

 

[Howard Atkins]

Eligible organisation from the rules

1-0 ELIGIBILITY FOR CERTIFICATION TO IATF16949
IATF 16949 defines the quality management system requirements for a client providing design and development, production and, when relevant, assembly, installation, and services {see the definition of “Manufacturing” below for the list of services} of automotive-related products.
“Client" shall be understood as the entire entity {including all related manufacturing sites and remote supporting locations} applying for IATF 16949 certitication-
IATF 16949 is applicable to all sites of a client where customer-specified production parts, service parts, and/or accessory parts are manufactured.
“Customer-specified production parts" shall be understood as parts that are an integral part of a vehicle. The only customer-specified parts that do not meet this requirement but are to be included are the following: fire extinguisher, carjacks, and floor mats, owner’s manuals, and warning
triangles- See additions from Rules SI
“Site” shall be understood as the location at which value-added manufacturing processes occur (see IATF 16949 section 3.1 )-A site may also include more than one {1} address {see Annex 4}-
Fabless sites and sites making only non-automotive related products are not eligible for IATF 16949 certification {see section 15-0}.
Note: A client performing value-added activities on their customer's premises can be considered as a remote support location of a site but is not eligible for a stand-alone certification- The function would be identified as "service" on the IATF certificate-
“Manufacturing" shall be understood as “the process of making or fabricating production materials, production of service parts, assemblies, or heat treating, welding, painting, plating, or other finishing services of automotive-related parts" (see IATF 16949, section 3.1).



Your explanation in my mind meets the standard as for development
as it states
suppliers of automotive products and services to develop, implement, and improve a quality management system (QMS) with the ultimate objective of eligible organisations becoming certified to this Automotive QMS Standard. Using a risk-based model, the organization shall define a minimum acceptable level of QMS development and a target QMS development level for each supplier.
a QMS certified to ISO 9001 is the initial minimum acceptable level of development. Based on current performance and the potential risk to the customer, the objective is to move suppliers through the following QMS development progression: YOU HAVE
c) certification to ISO 9091 with compliance to other customer-defined QMS requirements (such as Minimum Automotive Quality Management System Requirements for Sub-Tier Suppliers (MAQMSR) or equivalent) through second-party audits; YOU DISCUSS THIS

The point is Using a risk-based model, the organization shall define a minimum acceptable level of QMS development and a target QMS development level for each supplier.
Your customer needs to see define the risk and make his judgment on the level he wants from you.
To often there is an across the board requirement for ail suppliers to be IATF as it saves trouble and keeps the auditor happy. I see no problem for you

 

[lyuluck]

If the service amount is small, Maybe you can ask your automotive customer to get an processing authorization documents that involved in IATF. If you want to expand your spraying business, or step in auto parts business, it is better to have a IATF certification.

 

[Howard Atkins]

If the service amount is small, Maybe you can ask your automotive customer to get an processing authorization documents that involved in IATF. If you want to expand your spraying business, or step in auto parts business, it is better to have a IATF certification.

I disagree unless there is a customer requirement the status explained by Whiskey is sufficient to meet the requirements of his automotive customers.
As I said before
To often there is an across the board requirement for all suppliers to be IATF as it saves trouble and keeps the auditor happy.
The external auditor asks what are you doing for supplier developments and the auditee shows a letter saying all suppliers MUST be IATF.. I have encountered situations with certain commodities that GM and VW have not required IATF but some company buying once a year a small amount required it.
If you want to be IATF OK but it seems to me that from your point of view MAQMSR is the best way to go especially as I assume that you will have to certify all the plant just for a couple of orders.

 

[lyuluck]

Yes, you are right. Not all customers are from big automobile companies.

 

[Whiskey]

I disagree unless there is a customer requirement the status explained by Whiskey is sufficient to meet the requirements of his automotive customers.
As I said before
To often there is an across the board requirement for all suppliers to be IATF as it saves trouble and keeps the auditor happy.
The external auditor asks what are you doing for supplier developments and the auditee shows a letter saying all suppliers MUST be IATF.. I have encountered situations with certain commodities that GM and VW have not required IATF but some company buying once a year a small amount required it.
If you want to be IATF OK but it seems to me that from your point of view MAQMSR is the best way to go especially as I assume that you will have to certify all the plant just for a couple of orders.

I thought so, thank you for your thorough replies, I really appreciate it.
I was looking through the supplier requirement manuals of our customers and they use the terms "comply" or "compliance" when referring to IATF, but in the e-mail discussions I dug up with the Emergency Managers before me they seem to push for certification. It looks like my predecessors didn't question why we can't just be compliant if that's their own wording and pull up these documents as proof.