That looks like a fairly obvious typo on Sidney's part.

My mistake. I meant internal, despite the fact that I wrote external.
The underlying issue is that there is no adequate SINGLE answer that fits all scenarios for this question.
The underlying issue is that there is no adequate SINGLE answer that fits all scenarios for this question.
For anyone who is semi-knowledgeable about registrar audits and the games played by some of the registrants to infer that 3[sup]rd[/sup] party auditors should never "duplicate" an internally originated non-conformity, is wrong.
I find very telling that nobody attempted to answer my previous question, reversing the perspective on the issue:
I find very telling that nobody attempted to answer my previous question, reversing the perspective on the issue:
Don't get me started on that!
