Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
articles:as9100d_oe_requirements-1 [2019/08/18 18:46]
rrandall
articles:as9100d_oe_requirements-1 [2019/08/18 18:50]
rrandall
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== AS9100D Objective Evidence Requirements:​ Part 1 Documentation ====== ====== AS9100D Objective Evidence Requirements:​ Part 1 Documentation ======
  
-AS 9100D is an incredibly poorly written QMS standard littered with ambiguous / vague requirements that have resulted in subjective interpretations and inconsistent implementation. This article discusses the minimum "​Objective Evidence"​ actually by the standard. Any interpretations beyond these minimum requirements (e.g., by an internal or external auditor) are based purely on subjective opinion. ​+AS 9100D is an incredibly poorly written QMS standard littered with ambiguous / vague requirements that have resulted in subjective interpretations and inconsistent implementation. This article discusses the minimum "​Objective Evidence"​ actually ​required ​by the standard. Any interpretations beyond these minimum requirements (e.g., by an internal or external auditor) are based purely on subjective ​//opinion//
  
 The first confusing point to address is which documentation (e.g., procedures) are actually required by AS 9100D. The first confusing point to address is which documentation (e.g., procedures) are actually required by AS 9100D.
Line 44: Line 44:
 <note important>​**#​ 9** \\ The IAQG official [[https://​www.sae.org/​iaqg/​projects/​9100-2016_clarification_table.pdf|"​AS 9100:2016 Series Clarifications"​]] states: //The 9100-series clause 7.1.5.2 was not intended to force organizations to have the register specifically include the "​equipment type, unique identification,​ location, and the calibration or verification method, frequency, and acceptance criteria.” The organization is required to have this information for equipment listed on the calibration register but not specifically in the register.// ​ </​note> ​ <note important>​**#​ 9** \\ The IAQG official [[https://​www.sae.org/​iaqg/​projects/​9100-2016_clarification_table.pdf|"​AS 9100:2016 Series Clarifications"​]] states: //The 9100-series clause 7.1.5.2 was not intended to force organizations to have the register specifically include the "​equipment type, unique identification,​ location, and the calibration or verification method, frequency, and acceptance criteria.” The organization is required to have this information for equipment listed on the calibration register but not specifically in the register.// ​ </​note> ​
  
-<note tip>**# 9** \\ Almost ​no one identifies the “method” or “acceptance criteria” in their “register” (database)... unless they have a full in-house calibration laboratory. What auditors typically see is: \\ 1. the “method” identified on the calibration certificate (from the calibration/​metrology lab). \\ 2. the  “acceptance criteria” either identified in the calibration certificate (from the calibration/​metrology lab) OR for the company to have a copy of the calibration “method” that was used (containing the acceptance criteria). ​ \\ \\ While the company could have the instrument specifications,​ if those specifications can’t be matched to the actual calibration method used, then there is no way to confirm that was the actual “acceptance criteria” used in performing the calibration. ​ </​note>​+<note tip>**# 9** \\ Consistent with the above "​official"​ interpretation,​ almost ​no one identifies the “method” or “acceptance criteria” in their “register” (database)... unless they have a full in-house calibration laboratory. What auditors typically see is: \\ 1. the “method” identified on the calibration certificate (from the calibration/​metrology lab). \\ 2. the  “acceptance criteria” either identified in the calibration certificate (from the calibration/​metrology lab) OR for the company to have a copy of the calibration “method” that was used (containing the acceptance criteria). ​ \\ \\ While the company could have the instrument specifications,​ if those specifications can’t be matched to the actual calibration method used, then there is no way to confirm that was the actual “acceptance criteria” used in performing the calibration. ​ </​note>​
  
 <note important>​**#​ 12** \\ When asked whether clause no. 8.5.1a) of ISO 9001:2015 "​availability of documented information"​ means "​maintain documented information”,​ the " <note important>​**#​ 12** \\ When asked whether clause no. 8.5.1a) of ISO 9001:2015 "​availability of documented information"​ means "​maintain documented information”,​ the "