IATF Rules

6th Edition –
Overview of
Key Changes
Presenter(s):
Joseph W. Krolikowski – QMS
Program Manager
Shannon Craddock – Programs and
Accreditation Manager

This webinar is for informational purposes only and does not represent joint marketing between the parties presenting. This platform is for presentation of technical information from
varying perspectives within the industry. This in no way represents endorsement by Perry Johnson Registrars, Inc. of any product or service(s) presented.
Please Note:
• All participants are muted.

• Please type your questions in the “Question”

section of the dashboard – we will take questions
at the conclusion of this presentation.
• Please note that copies of today’s presentation will
be available for download shortly on our website
under “Past Webinar Slides”.
• This webinar recording (and all other past PJR
webinars) will also be available for review on our
website under “Past Webinars”.
• Reach out to pjr@pjr.com with any additional
inquiries.
Overview of Topics

What Does IATF Rules

What Is IATF Rules 6th
6th Edition Have To Do
Edition And Who
With Me And My
Enforces It?
Company?

What Are The Major Concluding Remarks

Changes? And Your Questions
 • The International Automotive Task Force (IATF) is responsible for
What Is IATF Rules
6th Edition?
publication of two key documents (among others) that impact
automotive quality management system certification.

 IATF 16949:2016 – this is the primary document that (along with

ISO 9001:2015) the company manufacturing a product for
the automotive supply chain is held accountable to in their
audits from the certification body (PJR);

 IATF Rules – this is the primary document that PJR is held

accountable to as an accredited certification body.

• The official title is “Automotive Certification Scheme for IATF

16949 – Rules for Achieving and Maintaining IATF Recognition”

• We will be referring to this document throughout our presentation

as “R6.”
 • There are five official “Oversight Offices” that are tasked

Requirements?
Who Enforces These with enforcing IATF R6 for the various certification
bodies. These oversight offices are:
 SMMT (UK)
 VDA/QMC (Germany)
 IATF France
 ANFIA (Italy)
 IAOB (USA)

• PJR’s accreditation is issued through the IAOB.

 • The IATF Rules impact your certification in a number of
Have To Do With
What Does This

Me?
ways, including areas such as:
 Audit duration;
 Eligibility for certification; and
 Timelines for submission of information.

• With R6 – the IATF has introduced a number of important

changes that will potentially impact you. In our estimation
all PJR clients will be impacted by these changes – some
to a lesser degree, some to a significant degree.

• R6 compliance will be mandatory on 1/1/25. Copies of R6

can be purchased by following the links provided at the
IATF’s website – www.iatfglobaloversight.org.
 • Our presentation today will review the changes brought by

Change Categories
R6 in the following key areas:

 Eligibility changes;
 Audit planning and timeline changes;
 Audit duration changes; and
 Changes impacting the process for responding to a
nonconformance.
Eligibility Changes

A key hallmark of IATF 16949 (going

all the way back to when it was TS
16949) has been its exclusivity to
R6 introduces key verbiage changes
companies that manufacture a product
that are intended to provide clarity on
that is used in the manufacture of an
what types of products are IATF 16949
automobile. The older versions of the
eligible.
Rules included language about the
requirements being applicable to things
like heavy trucks, motorcycles, etc.
“Homologation” • Eligibility is discussed in section 1.0 of R6 – and
the following statement is made:
 “Only organizations that manufacture and where
applicable design and develop automotive
products and vehicles are eligible for IATF 16949
certification.”
 Section 1.0 goes on to state that the term
“Automotive Vehicles” means “Homologated
vehicles that are intended to be driven on
public roads.”
 “Homologation” itself is defined in Section 10
of R6 as “The whole vehicle approval process
that results in a government issued certificate
that allows a vehicle to be sold in a particular
market.”

• Bottom line: If the vehicle is primarily intended

for public roads (cars, buses, motorcycles, heavy
trucks, etc.) all parts that make up the
manufacture/assembly of that vehicle qualify for
IATF 16949 certification.
“Automotive • The term “Automotive Products” as referenced in the past slide is also given
special explanation in Section 1 of R6 – here’s what it says that term

Products”
includes:
 Parts (including with embedded software) and processed materials which
are manufactured to an automotive customer’s specifications and
integrated into the automotive vehicle during it’s manufacture.
 These are usually referred to as “Production Parts”
 “Processed Materials” usually refers to bulk materials that are used
in the manufacturing process. This can include preparation of
ingots, filaments, sheets, etc. It is important to note that the
acquiring of raw materials (mining, excavation, etc.) is NOT eligible
for IATF 16949 certification.

 Parts manufactured to OEM specification that are procured or released

by the OEM and integrated into the automotive vehicle after its
manufacture and before or after delivery to the final customer.
 Please note that this includes aftermarket products which
were formerly excluded by the IATF Rules.

 Replacement parts and materials for automotive vehicles, including

remanufactured parts.
 These are commonly called “service parts.”

• Bottom line: There are many, many more types of products that are IATF
16949 eligible under R6 than there were under the previous version of the
Rules.
What If I Manufacture BOTH
Production And Aftermarket Parts?
• Under the new language that we’ve just reviewed in the prior two slides – it
is clear that any product used on a homologated vehicle is eligible for IATF
16949 Certification.

• Organizations that are currently certified for their production parts only
(and who also manufacture aftermarket products) can expect the
aftermarket product lines to be subject to audit at their next IATF 16949
audit starting in 2025.

• This new language also means that companies that exclusively manufacture
aftermarket products are now eligible for IATF 16949 Certification.
Extended Manufacturing Sites – Two
Key Changes
• One of the more dramatic changes from R6 impacting certified clients are
the requirements pertaining to Extended Manufacturing Sites (EMS).

• The most impactful of these changes are the following locational

requirements:
 All EMS must be no more than 10 miles from the manufacturing site they support;
and
 All EMS must be no more than an hour’s drive from the manufacturing site they
support.

• There is also some new language pertaining to management personnel at an

EMS. Where in the past all management team members were required to be
located at the manufacturing site – under R6 it states:
 “Management personnel may be located at an EMS, provided these personnel are
responsible for controlling and managing their relevant area of responsibility at both
the main site and the EMS, not just the EMS.”
What If I Have An EMS That No Longer
Qualifies?
• PJR has a handful of clients that operate an EMS that will no longer qualify
for EMS designation under R6. Such clients have the following options:

1. Transition the EMS to a full site certification (potentially as part of a campus

scheme with the existing site); or

2. Remove the EMS from the site certificate and operate the EMS as an
uncertified facility.

• When your 2025 audit is due to be scheduled, PJR will need your
organization to have decided on how you wish to address your (newly
ineligible) EMS.
Audit Planning and
Timeline Changes
• The next major area of impact from
the client’s perspective is in the area
of planning and timeline expectations.

• There are many new rigorous

expectations that will potentially
impact your certification, and the
information required from you in
advance of your audit.
Confirmation of • New language in Section 5.7
Audit mandates that the actual dates for
Arrangements – the audit must be confirmed between
90 Days the client and the CB no less than
90 days before the audit is slatted to
begin.
Providing Pre- • All versions of the IATF Rules have required that organizations
provide certain data (customer scorecards, headcount
audit Planning information, KPI performance, etc.) in advance of the audit to
enable the audit team to be prepared for the audit and to develop
Data – 30 Days the audit plan.

• In the past if such data wasn’t provided PJR had an option to

add additional onsite audit time to give the auditor a chance to
review the information just before the audit was set to take
place.

• Under R6 that permissiveness has been removed. Effective in

2025 – if a client does not provide PJR with all required planning
information at least 30 days prior to the start of the audit PJR is
required to “delay the audit.”
 Please note that in most cases PJR will not have the available
auditor resources to “delay” an audit for a short period of time.
 R6 clause 5.7.1 goes on to state that delaying the audit may
result in a loss of certification.

• Bottom line – if we don’t get the pre-audit planning data

from you on time, we may have no choice but to revoke
your certificate.
 No More Suspensions For A Delayed
Surveillance Audit – BUT…!

PJR is no longer required to suspend a However: if a client’s surveillance audit

certificate for failure to perform the does not take place on time we are
surveillance audit on time. required to revoke the certificate.
“On time” in this context means that your surveillance audit
ENDS no more than 3 months prior or 3 months after the
anniversary date of your last Stage 2 or Recertification
audit.
Support Locations That Work With
Other Certification Bodies (Part 1)
IATF Rules mandates that interactions between manufacturing sites and their
support locations must be audited “from both sides.”

A few of our clients have one or more support locations (sales offices, design
centers, etc.) that have their IATF 16949 certification through another
certification body (Dekra, NSF, etc.)

In situations such as this the expectation is that the audit reports will align in
terms of what the support provided is.

The support can become difficult to substantiate if the other CB’s audit report
doesn’t mention PJR’s client or the manner of support isn’t consistent.
Support Locations That Work With
Other Certification Bodies (Part 2)
In the past – if the audit report from the other CB wasn’t usable – PJR was permitted
to audit the support location ourselves to ensure that the support to our client was
assessed.

This type of arrangement is no longer permitted in R6.

R6 section 5.5.3 now states that if PJR can’t

use the report from the other CB, we must Again – delaying the audit is going to be difficult
in a lot of cases and may lead to certificate
delay the audit until the other CB’s report is revocation.
updated to reflect support to our client.
Relocations Will (In Almost All Cases) Now
Require A Full Stage 1/Stage 2 Audit
• R6 section 5.15 is dedicated to “Relocation” and outlines that an “initial”
audit is required for all situations involving a manufacturing site, extended
manufacturing site, or a support location moving from one building to
another.
 Yes – this includes moving across the street.

• “Initial Audit” is defined as comprising of BOTH a Stage 1 and a Stage 2

audit.
 In the case of a support location being moved – PJR is allowed to exercise some
discretion in the duration of the “initial” audit.

• R6 Section 3.2 makes clear that PJR must receive prompt advance notice of
any client plans for a relocation event (or any other change impacting the
IATF 16949 certification.)
Remote Audits Are Now (Sort Of)
Possible
• Currently all requested remote audit arrangements must be approved in
advance via a waiver process.
• Starting in 2025 PJR will be allowed to provide some very limited remote
auditing services to our IATF 16949 clients without having to request a
waiver.
• In order to be approved for a remote audit the following conditions must be
met:
 The location can only be a support location (i.e. not a manufacturing site) that has
no product handling or design responsibilities;
 The audit in question must be a surveillance audit; and
 The location’s most recent surveillance audit cannot have been done remotely.

• Bottom line – you’re allowed to have a qualifying support location be

assessed virtually once every three years during the surveillance cycle.
 Remote audits are also possible in the case of a failed Stage 1 audit to permit rapid
review of missing/incomplete information.
Audit Time (Onsite
and Offsite) Changes
• The next major change we will explore
from R6 are the many changes made
that will impact audit planning and
audit duration changes that will
potentially have an impact on the cost
of your IATF 16949 certification.
Changes To Audit Planning Time
• Under the prior version of the Rules PJR was given a certain amount of leeway
in how much planning time we would assign to enable auditor review of planning
information (KPI data, customer scorecards, etc.)
• R6 clause 5.7 now mandates that each manufacturing site and support
location must receive a minimum of 0.5 day of billable offsite planning time.
 If a manufacturing site has a dedicated support location (such as a nearby warehouse)
PJR is permitted to assign a single pool of audit planning time (i.e. only 0.5 day) to the
audit.
 If the support location is providing support to multiple manufacturing sites (such as in a
corporate scheme) PJR will likely have to provide our auditor with a special dedicated
pool of audit planning time intended for the support location.

• You will be expected to provide appropriate pre-audit planning data for all
manufacturing sites and all support locations.
 Please note that the data required for a support location will not be as extensive as that
required for a manufacturing site.
 PJR has updated our audit planning checklist (F108tsdata) to include new prompts for
this change.
Corporate Scheme Time Reduction
Changes
• There have been a few key changes for clients who utilize the corporate
scheme option from IATF Rules.
 A Corporate Scheme arrangement means that there are two or more manufacturing
sites (possibly with one or more support locations) that all share a common quality
management system, upper management team, and a central location (usually
referred to as “HQ” by most companies.)

• The most important of these changes has been the elimination of the tiered
audit time reduction table from Rules 5th Clause 5.3.

• Under Rules 6th Edition – corporate scheme clients will only receive a 15%
reduction in site audit duration (regardless of the number of participating
sites.) (Please refer to the third paragraph of R6 Clause 5.3.)
More Audit Time Onsite And (Likely) More
Audit Planning Time (Part 1)
• Under the older versions of the Rules, PJR was permitted to provide certain
generous audit time reductions, including:
 Up to a 40% reduction for a Corporate Scheme certification;
 A 50% reduction for a company transitioning from a Letter of Conformance to a full
certification.

• Both reduction allowances have been eliminated in R6 section 5.2 and

replaced with a maximum audit time reduction of 30%. This includes the
following permitted reductions:
 Companies that don’t have product design responsibility – 15%
 Corporate Scheme reduction – 15%
 Companies transitioning from a Letter of Conformance to a full certification – 30%
 Companies upgrading from ISO 9001 to IATF 16949 – 30%

• The maximum discount is 30% regardless of how many discounts

you qualify for.
More Audit Time Onsite And (Likely) More
Audit Planning Time (Part 2)
• Another key change pertains to the time added for verification of prior
nonconformances (PNCRs)

• Under the prior version of the Rules PJR was permitted autonomy in
deciding how much PNCR time was needed.

• Under R6 clause 5.2o it is now mandatory to add:

 30 to 60 minutes for each Minor NCR from the most recent audit (unless those
Minor NCRs were already verified at a Special Audit.)
More Audit Time Onsite And (Likely) More
Audit Planning Time (Part 3)
• As prior indicated each site and each support location will need a minimum
of 0.5 day of offsite planning time.

• IATF Auditors were previously allowed to perform a single 12-hour audit

day to ensure shift coverage. Audit day duration has now been capped at 8
hours – meaning that more calendar days are likely in certain situations.
 Team members (if applicable) are now required to perform a minimum of 8 hours
per audit.

• Under new R6 clause 5.2q - underperforming scorecards from an IATF OEM

member (Ford, GM, etc.) will mean a minimum of 4 additional audit hours,
up to a maximum of 8 additional audit hours.

• Lastly – R6 clause 5.2g indicates that a manufacturing site’s minimum audit

duration following application of all discounts must be 1.5 days for all audit
types.
Elimination (Sort Of) Of The 1-Hour Pre-
Audit Review
• Current clients no doubt are quite familiar with the “one hour pre-audit
review” activity that precedes the official opening meeting of the audit.
 This event was positioned as a re-review to ensure that the pre-audit planning
information provided to the auditor was current and to ensure the auditor had a
chance to review any changed information (and potentially update their audit plan.)

• R6 clause 5.7.2b has eliminated the 1-hour event but has replaced it with
language calling for a review of the same information during the opening
meeting with management present.

• PJR presumes this has two intentions:

 Ensuring that management is committed to the success of the audit and is activity
reviewing critical information such as scorecards; and
 Making the review of current information an actual part of the audit itself (bear in
mind that IATF Rules mandates that an audit cannot be terminated once it has
started without suspension of the certificate.)
Changes • The final category of change we will
Impacting The explore are the changes that pertain
Process For to the process followed for responding
Responding To A to a nonconformance (whether a
major or a minor.)
Nonconformance
Major NCRs – A Shorter Timeframe To
Respond
R6 clause 5.11.1 mandates that a client has 15 days to provide its
initial response to a major nonconformance. This initial response
includes:

A correction/containment
An acceptable root cause A plan for a systemic
statement supported by
analysis; and corrective action.
evidence;

Prior versions of the Rules allowed 20 days for this information to

be provided.
Major NCRs – The Special Audit Is “One-
Time Only” Now
• One of the more stringent requirements of the IATF standard has long been
its requirement that a major nonconformance means automatic certificate
suspension and a mandatory special audit to confirm effective
implementation of corrective actions.

• In the past, PJR was allowed to perform multiple special audits if needed so
long as final approval was issued within 90 days.

• That latitude has been removed by a statement given in R6 clause 5.11.4

which stipulates that the mandatory Special Audit is a “one-time” event. If
the Special Audit result is negative the certificate is withdrawn, and the
client must start over with a new Initial Audit.

• Bottom line – make sure you’re ready for the Special Audit because you’ll
only get one chance at it.
Special Audits For Major And Minor
NCRs Have Mandatory Durations Now
• In the older version of the Rules, PJR was granted autonomy on the needed
duration for a Special Audit.

• Under R6 clause 5.2.2c it is mandated that a Special Audit being performed

to verify one or more major and/or minor NCRs must use the following time
requirements:
 1-3 hours for each major; and
 30-60 minutes for each minor.

• This is required regardless of what the NCR was written for.

Changes To “Open But 100% Resolved”
Protocol (Part 1)
• R6 clause 5.11.3 mandates that all corrective actions must be verified within
90 days of the end of the audit (whether through correspondence in the case
of a minor NCR, or though a Special Audit in the case of a major NCR.)

• In some cases, it is simply not possible for the corrective actions to be

verified, such as when a client’s corrective action includes:
 Training to be provided by an outside source with no availability within 90 days;
 Many items that need to be resolved (200 gages requiring an MSA analysis, etc.)
Changes To “Open But 100% Resolved”
Protocol (Part 2)
• Such cases can be addressed using the “Open but 100% resolved” provision
now found in R6 clause 5.11.3.1. This clause allows PJR to accept your
response and perform a Special Audit to verify full implementation later (in
excess of 90 days.)

• The key differences from past versions of the Rules are that:
 The mandatory Special Audit must now take place 90 days or more prior to the next
regularly scheduled audit;
 The client is required to provide evidence of implementation of their delayed
corrective actions 30 days or more prior to the Special Audit; and
 The Special Audit is a one-time event and cannot be repeated.
Miscellaneous Changes Of Note (Part 1)

R6 section 5.1.1 has eliminated the

R6 clause 3.1h mandates that if a possibility of a semi-annual surveillance
consultant is present and/or participates audit. All certified clients must have
in the audit PJR is required to terminate their surveillance audit once a year.
the audit. It is noted that this includes Current clients will be allowed to
both “direct and indirect” participation complete their cycle and transition to
by a consultant. annual audits after the next
recertification.

R6 clause 6.1c (taken in tandem with R6

clause 5.15.1) mandates that PJR is
R6 clause 2.5.2e mandates that PJR can
required to collect a new application
no longer offer a “Pre-Assessment” audit
from the client if any of its locations
for IATF 16949
either reopen following a closure or
following a relocation event.
Miscellaneous Changes Of Note (Part 2)
• R6 Section 6.1 presents a whole new list of required that PJR must acquire
to provide a prospective client with a quotation for certification. Among the
newly required information points are the following items:
 Information on prior IATF 16949 certifications held within the past 3 years;
 Information on known USI numbers (this is a special number assigned by the IATF
database and shown on your certificate);
 Interaction of Processes map;
 A written declaration of product design responsibility;
 The intended scope statement for all manufacturing sites;
 Information on failed certification efforts from the prior 6 months;
 Information on performance complaints from any IATF OEM members; and
 Information on prior IATF Letters of Conformance from the last 3 years.
Conclusion

IATF Rules 6th Edition It is our hope that the

presents a host of new content of this
requirements that will presentation will enable
impact nearly all PJR’s you to be prepared for
IATF 16949 certified the new expectations
clients. coming in 2025.
• “Understanding PJR's PRO-3 and
Related Bylaws Governing Proper
Promotion of Your Management System
Certification”
 This webinar offers helpful information on
how to promote your certification and stay
within the various bylaws that dictate such
practices.
Please Tune In
• “Your Ongoing Relationship with PJR.”
 This webinar explores what is expected of For One Of Our
PJR’s client when changes occur at your
business while also providing a detailed Next Webinars!
explanation of the disputes process.

• We offer a variety of webinars on other

topics including Process Mapping, Stage
1 Audits, ISO 9001:2015, and ISO
14001:2015.
Want To Stay Connected?

Do you want to be kept informed of the latest

news automatically?

Please opt in for future updates by visiting

our website at www.pjr.com.

At the bottom of the page, enter your email

address in the provided space and click
“Subscribe.”
 As a reminder, the slides and voiceover will both be
accessible on the PJR website shortly.

Thank you
Perry Johnson Registrars,
Inc. (PJR)
248-358-3388
pjr@pjr.com
www.pjr.com

Request A Free Quote

This webinar is for informational purposes only and does not represent joint marketing between the parties presenting. This platform is for presentation of technical information from varying
perspectives within the industry. This in no way represents endorsement by Perry Johnson Registrars, Inc. of any product or service(s) presented.