itsbiodiversity
Involved In Discussions
the certificate of calibration or test report shall include the mark of a national accreditation body; or
- there shall be evidence that the external laboratory is acceptable to the customer.
Wouldn't evidence of the external laboratories acceptability be explained with a requirement that the laboratory be accredited to the ISO/IEC 17025 standard and demonstrated knowledge of the equipment? It is very common to leave the Logo off of calibrations where it is not "paid for". I see certificates from major companies around the world with no logo and no data charging hundreds. I have worked in the aviation industry for a decade and rarely have ever been requested for an accredited logo.
For instance - a calibration lab is accredited to the ISO/IEC 17025 standard. They perform "general" calibrations, many of which may be gauges specific to the production process and "nameless" (not a mic or caliper per say, but something that measures the exact way). The certificates produced have no logo, because they are reading strictly into their accreditation requirements and it doesn't specifically state "unknown objects measuring linearity of distance" - even though we all know physical dimensional hand tools are similar and if you can do one you most likely can do the other. Regardless - in my opinion - the way I read in to this - that calibration lab would fulfill IATAF requirements regardless of an accredited logo. The gauge owner produces an ISO 17025 Scope of Accreditation for the auditor as proof the external lab is acceptable. The gauge owner's review of the external laboratory's work is also evidence that the external laboratory is acceptable to the customer.
So it boils down to this - a customer requires the laboratory performing calibrations be accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 - point blank. There is no requirement from said customer that each calibration be "accredited". IATAF requirements - fullfilled or not?
Looking forward to some thoughts/opinions.
- there shall be evidence that the external laboratory is acceptable to the customer.
Wouldn't evidence of the external laboratories acceptability be explained with a requirement that the laboratory be accredited to the ISO/IEC 17025 standard and demonstrated knowledge of the equipment? It is very common to leave the Logo off of calibrations where it is not "paid for". I see certificates from major companies around the world with no logo and no data charging hundreds. I have worked in the aviation industry for a decade and rarely have ever been requested for an accredited logo.
For instance - a calibration lab is accredited to the ISO/IEC 17025 standard. They perform "general" calibrations, many of which may be gauges specific to the production process and "nameless" (not a mic or caliper per say, but something that measures the exact way). The certificates produced have no logo, because they are reading strictly into their accreditation requirements and it doesn't specifically state "unknown objects measuring linearity of distance" - even though we all know physical dimensional hand tools are similar and if you can do one you most likely can do the other. Regardless - in my opinion - the way I read in to this - that calibration lab would fulfill IATAF requirements regardless of an accredited logo. The gauge owner produces an ISO 17025 Scope of Accreditation for the auditor as proof the external lab is acceptable. The gauge owner's review of the external laboratory's work is also evidence that the external laboratory is acceptable to the customer.
So it boils down to this - a customer requires the laboratory performing calibrations be accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 - point blank. There is no requirement from said customer that each calibration be "accredited". IATAF requirements - fullfilled or not?
Looking forward to some thoughts/opinions.