Calibration Source not ISO 17025 accredited

Crusader

Trusted Information Resource
I have a Colorimeter that is sent back to the manufacturer for calibration. The manufacturer states that they "satisfy the requirements of MIL-I-45208A, MIL-STD-45662A, ISO-IED Guide 25, and ANSI/NCSL-Z540-1." They do mention traceability to NIST, though.
The manufacturer has their own laboratory and advertises the calibration services, but no mention of ISO 17025.

It is a specific color meter instrument...I suppose there might be someone else who can check it. Arghhh.

Per ISO 9001 requirements, this isn't good, huh?

What do you recommend?
 

Michael_M

Trusted Information Resource
As far as I am aware, calibration only need to be traceable to international or national measurement standards; where no such standards exist, the basis used for calibration or verification shall be recorded. Requiring ISO 17025 would be an internal procedure requirement.

Most gage manufactures that I have seen (not that many) are only compatible to a standard but do not have any certification to the standard. The internal procedures I have to follow do specify "No contracted metrology laboratory is used until it has been qualified to ISO/IEC 17025. Certification will qualify any potential laboratory" but again, this is from an internal procedure.
 

Hershal

Metrologist-Auditor
Trusted Information Resource
There are very specific fields in calibration for which accreditation is generally not sought. This may be one. If you are given the traceability path, then you may likely be stuck. Understand, if the traceability includes the so-called NIST number, you have the full right to request a copy of the report for that number, and match it to the cert provided to you.

Hope this helps.
 

dwperron

Trusted Information Resource
Per ISO 9001 requirements you must have it calibrated traceable to "national measurement standards". If the manufacturer claims "traceability to NIST" then the manufacturer must be able to supply their traceability path to you for their calibrations, ask them to do so. I have had to do that for many customers over the years, it is part of the business of calibration.

You mentioned 17025 - do you have any requirements for 17025 accredited measurements that you use this colorimeter for? That would change everything.
 

1010011010

Starting to get Involved
Hi! We've just had our recertification audit last week and had the same topic, with a different gauge. As the others already pointed out, the calibration only needs to be retraceable to national or international standards, that's totally sufficient for ISO 9001. 17025 is a requirement from ISO/TS 16949, however if there is no accredited calibration lab you "just" need to get your customers approval.

So if none of your customers or any other institution requires this, you should be fine ISO 9001 wise.
 

Hershal

Metrologist-Auditor
Trusted Information Resource
The traceability is the key for the calibration. The traceability path must be supported.

If they give the "NIST Number", then it must be matched to the specific calibration by NIST of THEIR standard. If they do not have the report of NIST calibrating THEIR standard, then there is a broken link and there is no traceability. That is because the "NIST Number" is a work order number, and must be matched to a specific calibration at a specific time in order to be valid for traceability.

Also, they should not include ISO Guide 25 in their verbiage, that standard was officially retired in 1999. That should automatically raise questions to force evidence of traceability.

Hope this helps.
 

AndyN

Moved On
Also, they should not include ISO Guide 25 in their verbiage, that standard was officially retired in 1999. That should automatically raise questions to force evidence of traceability.

As should the MIL-I- and MIL-Q standards, since they are obsolete now.
 
Top Bottom