My gut instinct is that the auditor doesn't have any business telling you a specific procedure to use.
What I believe is justified in is requiring you to have adequate procedures. If they meet requirements for a properly written, documented and revision controlled procedure, I don't quite comprehend how he can require you to use federal or equivalent procedures.
What I don't know is why he didn't like you procedures. Did the auditor, without any detailed review of the content of your procedures, make a blanket requirement that you use federal or international procedures? Or was the case that you only had the manufacturer's specs, and were using those as your calibration procedure?
An internally written procedure which includes a unique document number, revision control, environmental requirements, detailed requirements of exactly what standards must be used, step by step instructions for the calibration process, documented data points including upper and lower tolerance limits (there may be other details, but I believe I have covered the majority), and a review process by person(s) documented as competent to approve the procedure, should be indisputable.
If I had a procedure in that format (refer to NCSL - National Conference of Standards Laboratories Recommended Practice RP-3, "Calibration Procedures Content & Format for Measuring & Test Equipment (M&TE), Measurement Standards (MS), and Measurement/Test Systems (M/TS)"), and it gives detailed guidance on proper procedure writing.
As for federal or international procedures, one resource is GIDEP (Government - Industry Data Exchange Program). If you are a member, they have the various Air Force, Navy, Army and other procedures, most definitely including those for calipers and micrometers, etc. Perhaps ANSI or ASTM may have some documented procedures as well.
Those are just a few thoughts. Bottom line, you do need a good procedure. If in the auditors opinion it wasn't good enough, he may have made some recommendations. I have a problem with a registrar auditor being prescriptive. I've been to ISO9000 Lead Auditor course. I do remember the instructor (who was a 30 plus year veteran in the auditing business) saying that he gets irritated on a regular basis by auditors who try to tell auditees specifics as to how to resolve an issue. He stated that the auditor can write you a nonconformance for not having an adequate procedure (spec). But he can't tell you what to do about it, as it is considered to be a conflict of interest, as he is functioning as an auditor and a consultant (in his view, a no-no).
Perhaps some others could add to my thoughts. Hope I haven't confused the issue even further.
------------------
What I believe is justified in is requiring you to have adequate procedures. If they meet requirements for a properly written, documented and revision controlled procedure, I don't quite comprehend how he can require you to use federal or equivalent procedures.
What I don't know is why he didn't like you procedures. Did the auditor, without any detailed review of the content of your procedures, make a blanket requirement that you use federal or international procedures? Or was the case that you only had the manufacturer's specs, and were using those as your calibration procedure?
An internally written procedure which includes a unique document number, revision control, environmental requirements, detailed requirements of exactly what standards must be used, step by step instructions for the calibration process, documented data points including upper and lower tolerance limits (there may be other details, but I believe I have covered the majority), and a review process by person(s) documented as competent to approve the procedure, should be indisputable.
If I had a procedure in that format (refer to NCSL - National Conference of Standards Laboratories Recommended Practice RP-3, "Calibration Procedures Content & Format for Measuring & Test Equipment (M&TE), Measurement Standards (MS), and Measurement/Test Systems (M/TS)"), and it gives detailed guidance on proper procedure writing.
As for federal or international procedures, one resource is GIDEP (Government - Industry Data Exchange Program). If you are a member, they have the various Air Force, Navy, Army and other procedures, most definitely including those for calipers and micrometers, etc. Perhaps ANSI or ASTM may have some documented procedures as well.
Those are just a few thoughts. Bottom line, you do need a good procedure. If in the auditors opinion it wasn't good enough, he may have made some recommendations. I have a problem with a registrar auditor being prescriptive. I've been to ISO9000 Lead Auditor course. I do remember the instructor (who was a 30 plus year veteran in the auditing business) saying that he gets irritated on a regular basis by auditors who try to tell auditees specifics as to how to resolve an issue. He stated that the auditor can write you a nonconformance for not having an adequate procedure (spec). But he can't tell you what to do about it, as it is considered to be a conflict of interest, as he is functioning as an auditor and a consultant (in his view, a no-no).
Perhaps some others could add to my thoughts. Hope I haven't confused the issue even further.
------------------