Calculating AS9100 Registrar Audit Man Days

G

Gul_Dukat

Hello, I realise this question has been posted before but I wanted to make sure the information is correct for AS9100 rev C.

Our company has just been asked to provide a headcount to our CB so that they can calculate man days required for transition to rev C and ongoing surveillance days.

I've been trying in vain to find the formula they use for calculating audit days especially as far as headcount goes. Really just for my satisfaction, I can't imagine challenging it but I would like to understand how they work it out.

To give you an idea of what our organisation is like:
1) There are just over 300 staff whose activities affect quality
2) We do design and design support activities. We don't do any manufacturing.
3) We use one QMS across all offices, there are no geographic variations apart from the QSE rep at each site.
4) We fully utilise collaborative software so we can access all documents from any office.

So I am wondering why our small offices (<20 people) regularly get up to 3 audit days when theoretically their activities could all be audited from Head office. We end up in the situation where the auditor spends most of the day just chatting to us or doing the write up, as he can see everything the office does within about an hour or so.

An explanation would help put my mind at rest and give me some details to pass to my senior management also.

Thanks!
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Leader
Admin
I've been trying in vain to find the formula they use for calculating audit days especially as far as headcount goes.
For the TRANSITION audits, the audit-days estimation is described in the IAQG Supplemental Rule Document 001:
The days for all 9100/9110/9120:2009 transition audits shall be as follows:
i.transition during surveillance audit using 50% of initial audit day requirements of IAF MD 5 and 100% of the initial audit day requirements of table 2 of 9104.
ii.transition during recertification audit using 80% of initial audit day requirements of IAF MD 5 and 100% of the initial audit day requirements of table 2 of 9104.
iii.In addition, it is the responsibility of the CB to identify additional days that may be required to audit the new requirements of the 9100/9110/9120:2009 standards and complete the 9101:2009 (Rev D) audit report.
 
G

Gul_Dukat

Sidney, I was not familiar with IAF MD 5. Thanks for your helpful advice, Amy
 
G

Gul_Dukat

Another quick question please - does Aerospace get a special rating in the high/med/low category? Is it automatically high because it is Aerospace?

Apologies if this has already been asked elsewhere.
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Trusted Information Resource
Another quick question please - does Aerospace get a special rating in the high/med/low category? Is it automatically high because it is Aerospace?

Apologies if this has already been asked elsewhere.

I assume you're looking at MD5. Are you looking at Table QMS 1 or Table EMS 1? There are no "high/med/low" categories for the quality management system audits, only for environmental management system audits.
 
J

Joy

An explanation would help put my mind at rest and give me some details to pass to my senior management also.

Thanks!

Are you interested to check if your CB has done correct calculation for you?You have great experts here:).Just answer following

Are you design responsible?
Total employee?
How many locations?

Hope, I did not miss any calculation factors.Sure you would get correct figure and you can accept the CBs count if the variation is within0.5-1MD,considering additional time requirement for reporting,difference in interpretation and calculation errors :)
 
G

Gul_Dukat

Hello,

Yes I have discovered that I was originally looking at the wrong table. On recalculating it's very similar to the days my CB has quoted for transition audit.

I (and colleagues) do however wonder about the wisdom of dividing up audit days in this way. As said before, although we do design work, we do no manufacturing and use a single QMS across all offices with virtually no variations. However, due to the shape of the audit day curve, the auditor will spend about 3 days looking at an office with 16 people, and 5 days looking at an office with nearly 200 people - so the 16 get audited "to death" and we only get a very shallow look at the activities of the office with 200 people.

This is slightly academic as as stated before one can access projects in any location from any other location if granted the appropriate access and making sure it doesn't contravene the law. However the activities audited still seem to be location specific, i.e. the team sitting at the actual computers in one place.

It would make sense to me to spend, say, 1 day at the 16-strong office and 7 days at the 200-strong office. The auditor would be able to look at more varied activities and the sampling rate would be more correct.

Has anyone else had this experience?

Amy
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Trusted Information Resource
Based on the information provided, it does seem disproportionate. Generally the time would be distributed based on employee counts and activities performed at each site.
 
Top Bottom