The Elsmar Cove Forum and Site Map The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page

Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Registrars and National / International Organizations > Registrars (Certification Bodies) and Registration


The Elsmar Cove Forum SideBar!
Monitor the Forum
Monitor New Forum Posts
New Threads Feeds
RSS FeedRSS Feed
Sponsor Link










$ Contributor Forum Access
Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:


Howard's International Quality Services

Atul's Symphony Technologies

Dave Scott's Scott Quality Solutions

Praxiom Research Group


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest Portal

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology

ASQ - American Society for Quality


All the Important Standards and Related Web Sites in the World
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 15th February 2001, 12:35 PM
Jim Biz's Avatar
Jim Biz Jim Biz is offline
Forum Moderator

Registration Date: Mar 2000
Location: MID-WEST USA
 
Posts: 486
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Karma Power: 51
Karma: 114
Jim Biz is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.Jim Biz is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.
Question ISO 9001:2000 - Transition Audit time? A full additional audit day will be required

We have recieved a notification from our registrar - informing us that a full additional audit day will be required when we make the transition from 9002 to the 2000 standards version.

My management has asked me to explain "why" the extra day is needed - and what we recieve for the additional costs.


1) "IS this unique" to our registrar or is it showing up eleswhere?

2) What paragraphs/areas of the new version do you feel have been changed to the point that a full day of auditing would need to be used?

Opinions?/ Comments?

Regards
Jim

Reply With Quote
Thanks to Jim Biz for your informative Post and/or Attachment!

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 15th February 2001, 02:46 PM
Doug Stimson
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
I deal with two registrars and both have indicated one additional day. There is also a "disclaimer" depending on the size and nature of the business. I have talked to both and they admittedly don't have enough data (actual audits) know for sure.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 15th February 2001, 05:29 PM
awk
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a

Adding days for auditing appears to be the standard, this from the registrars I am in contact with. There is a required number of audit days that are mandated by RAB or SCC (Canada), dependent upon the number of employees. The lowest structure is 1 - 15 employees. There are new areas such as Customer Focus, Customer Satisfaction, Communications, etc.

I am advising my clients to enter the new requirements for their surveillance audits, where agreed upon with their registrar of choice.

awk
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 17th February 2001, 10:45 PM
barb butrym barb butrym is offline
Courtesy Access

Registration Date: Dec 1998
Location: South Central Massachusetts
 
Posts: 788
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Karma Power: 63
Karma: 151
barb butrym is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.barb butrym is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.
The 2 registrars I deal with are not adding days...they are auditing to the new standard now, with findings only as "opportunities' so that when the transition period is over, they will have covered the ground.
Reply With Quote
Thanks to barb butrym for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  #5  
Old 19th February 2001, 05:51 PM
Ron Byrge
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
For what it's worth, we're not planning to increase the time required for the transition to the new revision, unless the folks wait until the last day to get started. We will look at the new items as they're ready over the next 2.8 years (whatever) and go forward from there. There really isn't a need to increase the time spent, in our opinion. This is our policy, barring any contrarian "guidance" we receive from the RAB.

------------------
Ron Byrge

http://www.cwcregistrar.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 24th February 2001, 09:45 PM
isodog
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
I Say...

Is it all about money or what???
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 26th February 2001, 04:21 AM
Graham R O'Geran
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Speaking from a UKAS accredited certification body,we were told that the 9000/2000 should not be a money making exercise.
Our view is that we have quoted our clients for a three year term, even if there is additional time required for the transition we have to honour the original quote.
We all new the new standard was coming, surely all certification bodies took appropiate measures???

I ahve only just subsribed to this service and all ready found it very interesting.



------------------
Business Development Director
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 17th March 2001, 12:17 PM
John C
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Jim,
Here in Ireland, my client and myself are planning an audit to '2000 in about two months. The registrar, NSAI, did not mention any extra fee and, far from taking advantage, they seem to be very supportive in our bid to upgrade.
I don't see any reason why an audit against '2000 should take extra time, unless the auditor is not proficient in carrying out such and audit. There will be an extra cost to your registrar, just as there is to all of us, in getting through the learning curve and becoming proficient. Is your registrar expecting you to finance this learning stage? I suggest you ask him, copying your management. And, if not, then ask what is pushing the time up? Logically, if it isn't due to the registrar auditor's lack of proficiency, then it can only be a reocurring charge and will apply again next time. I suggest you ask about that as well.
If you don't get satisfaction, you have an alternative, ie; NSAI, Barb's registrars, etc.
rgds John C
Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Registrars and National / International Organizations > Registrars (Certification Bodies) and Registration

Bookmarks


Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Is ISO 9001 Transition (from 2000 to 2008 version) Training Required? Amexx ISO 9001 - Quality Management Systems Standard 24 13th March 2009 09:22 AM
Required ISO 9001:2000 external audit frequency? sjrutland ISO 9001 - Quality Management Systems Standard 2 23rd August 2005 05:36 PM
ISO 9001:2000 - Required Audit Days D.Scott Registrars (Certification Bodies) and Registration 2 7th October 2002 04:50 PM
ISO 9001:2000 DIS? One day left for delivery of DIS. Will it be on time? Karen ISO 9001:1994 21 4th April 2000 05:01 AM
Third day of our ISO 9001/QS9000/TE audit - What do we put on the letterhead? mibusha QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1 13th February 1999 08:52 AM



The time now is 11:50 PM. All times are GMT -4.
The time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



   

All Y'All Come Back Now, Y' Hear?

Made With A Mac! FreeBSD OS Powered by Apache!
Using php4 Forums provided and maintained by Marc Smith Database by MySQL

FAIR USE and CORRECTNESS NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe herein constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. In addition, I do not guarantee the correctness of the content. The risk of using content from the Elsmar Cove web site and forums remains with the user/visitor.

Responsibility Statement: Each person is responsible for anything they post in the Elsmar Cove forum. Neither I, Marc Timothy Smith, nor any of the forum Moderators, are responsible for the content of posts people make. Liability for post content resides with the poster as does interpretation and/or acceptance and/or use of advice by the reader.

Complaints: If you have a complaint with a post in a forum discussion thread, including Content in general, fighting, flaming, copyright infringement, defamation and/or 'slander', please use the 'Report This Post Report This Post Button button which appears at the top of every post in every thread.

Site courtesy of:
Marc Timothy Smith - Cayman Business Systems, 8466 Lesourdsville-West Chester Road, West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929 - USA
(513) 341-6272

To contact me, click the Google Voice link below, enter Your Name and Your Phone Number and Google will ring your phone and connect you for free!

The Elsmar Cove Web Site is *CopyFree*
no new posts