ISO 9001:2008 vs. ISO 10012:2003 - Can anyone expain the need for 10012:2003

[Magirus]

Hi,

Can anyone expain the need for 10012:2003?
Since, if you follow the requirements in 9001:2008 you will also fulfil all requirments in 10012:2003.

And since the reference as guide in ISO 9001 have been removed and it is not supposed to be a stand alone document, I do not see the intetion any longer with this standard.

Br
Magirus

[suffelde]

The primary need is going to be if the standard is called out on a P/O or contract. There is no specific requirement in the standard that requires any particular standard whether it be 10012 or ANSI Z-540. 17025 might come into play for certain industries, but the best thing to do is look at your customer requirements, make sure you have traceability, uncertainty and correction factors are applied, etc.
Dave

[Magirus]

Thanks for the quick response; But I am in the System Audit business and would like to know what if there is anything more (Specific) I can expect from a company that claims compliant with ISO 10012:2003 compared to a company only comliant with ISO 9001:2008


Br
Magirus

[howste]

In Reply to Parent Post by Magirus

Can anyone expain the need for 10012:2003?

Like any other standard that's not a requirement, you can use it for guidance. It represents good practice for measurement processes and equipment.

In Reply to Parent Post by Magirus

Since, if you follow the requirements in 9001:2008 you will also fulfil all requirments in 10012:2003.

Not true. ISO 9001 gives very vague requirements for measuring equipment, while ISO 10012 gives more specifics.

For example, ISO 9001 says "The organization shall determine and manage the work environment needed to achieve conformity to product requirements." ISO 10012 says "The environmental conditions required for the effective operation of the measurement processes covered by the measurement management system shall be documented.
Environmental conditions affecting measurements shall be monitored and recorded. Corrections based on the environmental conditions shall be recorded and applied to measurement results."

Another example: ISO 9001 states, "...measuring equipment shall be calibrated or verified, or both, at specified intervals...." ISO 10012 states, "The methods used to determine or change the intervals between metrological confirmation shall be described in documented procedures."

These are just two examples of many that show that conformity to ISO 9001 does not guarantee conformity to ISO 10012.

In Reply to Parent Post by Magirus

And since the reference as guide in ISO 9001 have been removed and it is not supposed to be a stand alone document, I do not see the intetion any longer with this standard.

I don't see where it says it can't be a stand alone document. It says it's "not intended to be used as a requisite for demonstrating conformance with ISO 9001, ISO 14001 or any other standard" This means it's not mandatory for ISO 9001 or 14001, but it doesn't say any ways it can't be used.

It can be used as a guidance document. In fact it says "It specifies the quality management requirements of a measurement management system that can be used by an organization performing measurements as part of the overall management system, and to ensure metrological requirements are met."

[suffelde]

Even from a systems audit point of view, if the QMS states they are compliant with the 10012 standard, then the standard becomes a part of their QMS. In this event, they should have as one of their external documents this standard and be able to show evidence of the standard.

It is not uncommon to see this standard on a P/O or Contract. Therefore there is an audit trail to the 7.0 of the 9001 standard. Also, it would flow down to calibration vendors.

As I recall, this standard replaced the Mil Q 45662A since the military made it obsolete. Just like the post above, you can see that it gives guidance on the management of the metrology system.

Let me know if this is stuff you already know or not or if you want more info.
Dave