ISO/AS Surveillance Audit - Minor for not updating my QA Manual to ISO 9001:2008

[vanputten]

Our registar told us we had to do a formal analysis of the changes from 2000 to 2008. I looked at them like a deer in headlights becasue there are no requirements changes!

So to play the game, I did a "formal analysis" and updated our Quality Manual. for example, section 6.2.2 now states "Training and Awarenss" instead of "Awareness and Training."

What a huge difference! So important.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by J Allen

I just completed the registrars surveillance audit of my company to AS9100 Rev B and ISO 9001:2008.
I received a minor for not updating my QA Manual to ISO 9001:2008.

You can avoid this by eliminating references to the standard from your manual.

[J Allen]

That's exactly what I ended up doing. Documented the review, made the changes, updated the manual. During the next audit he will verify if my corrective action was accomplished and "effective." I think there are more serious issues to resolve on the next update.

[vanputten]

I thought you meant you had to make changes based on the content of the new standard and not the reference to the year.

We don't reference the year of any standard becaue of the lack of value and the non-value added work of updating the year every time a standard changes.

[Stijloor]

In Reply to Parent Post by J Allen

I just completed the registrars surveillance audit of my company to AS9100 Rev B and ISO 9001:2008.
I received a minor for not updating my QA Manual to ISO 9001:2008. I took a look at the changes that were made so I could incorporate them into my manual and realized that the changes that were made for "clarification" did not really affect my QMS. It makes me wonder why so much effort was put into the revision from 2000 that turns out to be of little substance.
Any thoughts?

I am curious. What requirement did the auditor cite in the nonconformity statement?

Stijloor.

[ChrissieO]

In Reply to Parent Post by J Allen

I just completed the registrars surveillance audit of my company to AS9100 Rev B and ISO 9001:2008.
I received a minor for not updating my QA Manual to ISO 9001:2008. I took a look at the changes that were made so I could incorporate them into my manual and realized that the changes that were made for "clarification" did not really affect my QMS. It makes me wonder why so much effort was put into the revision from 2000 that turns out to be of little substance.
Any thoughts?

I see this as the auditor trying to justify his/her existance, what actual part of the standard was this raised against, i assume it was 4.2.3 f/g

As someone said earlier, it was a money making exercise and although most of the changes are "for guidence" or clarification. Not only does it bring in revenue for new copies of the standard but it also facilitates extra auditing/consulting/review days for external auditing bodies and consultants.

A prime example of which is our external auditor is dragging it holding up the "sword of damocles" over our heads, we have a new MR who is a relevant rookie when it comes to ISO, and at first seemed to cling to the word of the auditor, until after their first meeting, I explained her tactics and thankfully the MR saw through the auditor but by this time the auditor has got 4 extra days out of us this year.

The recent changes to TS16949 were even less to the extent that we saw no point in purchasing the required 15 copies at £69 each as they are not available in downloadable pdf format in the UK. These also only come in A5 size in the UK and I like my standards in A4 as I keep them all in one ring binder which is helpful when you are referring to 5.

If they are going to charge huge amounts of money for these at least give them to us in a usable format.

As we work for a very large international company our external TS auditor from germany laughed when we stressed that the four of us in the audit were sharing one copy - yeah right and also inferred that it was a money making exercise.

Chrissie x

[piney]

In Reply to Parent Post by J Allen

I just completed the registrars surveillance audit of my company to AS9100 Rev B and ISO 9001:2008.
I received a minor for not updating my QA Manual to ISO 9001:2008. I took a look at the changes that were made so I could incorporate them into my manual and realized that the changes that were made for "clarification" did not really affect my QMS. It makes me wonder why so much effort was put into the revision from 2000 that turns out to be of little substance.
Any thoughts?

Typically each registrar should have an action plan and timeline for requiring an update of your QMS to ISO 9001:2008. This will include re-issue of your certificate on the wall to the new revision. If they have not provided this or your updated certificate then I would challenge a finding agianst your manual. In then end you will definitely need a manual that is ISO 9001:2008 compliant regardless of how small the changes may seem.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by piney

Typically each registrar should have an action plan and timeline for requiring an update of your QMS to ISO 9001:2008. This will include re-issue of your certificate on the wall to the new revision. If they have not provided this or your updated certificate then I would challenge a finding agianst your manual. In then end you will definitely need a manual that is ISO 9001:2008 compliant regardless of how small the changes may seem.

A manual that's compliant with the 2000 version but doesn't refer to ISO 9001 at all will be compliant with the 2008 version.