Official ISO Interpretations - A Formal Process for ISO9001 Interpretation Requests

[Louis Reimer]

The posting of the ISO interpretations and some of the results were surprising and I agree are debatable, the results trump our options and negates issuing any nonconformances during third party audits. I find that the access of these interpretations provide me with another tool for mutual agreement with the auditee so all parties leave on a positive note.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

...and negates issuing any nonconformances during third party audits.

Not sure why you say that. These documents, as I mentioned before, are non binding. No organization implementing ISO 9001, nor an assessor performing an audit of a QMS against ISO 9001 are mandated to follow these "interpretations".

 

[Louis Reimer]

Not sure why you say that. These documents, as I mentioned before, are non binding. No organization implementing ISO 9001, nor an assessor performing an audit of a QMS against ISO 9001 are mandated to follow these "interpretations".

I'm confused If the authors of a standard provide insight in a document that everyone refers to as "Official ISO Interpretations" why would we not use it? Should a client contest a finding based on the information within these interpretations would they not prevail?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I'm confused If the authors of a standard provide insight in a document that everyone refers to as "Official ISO Interpretations" why would we not use it? Should a client contest a finding based on the information within these interpretations would they not prevail?

I am not saying that one should not use them. I am just saying that, during an appeal process of an NC, the CB is not required to accept them as final rulings. During this whole thread, I questioned the fact that this interpretation process exist at the ISO TC level, and I have also questioned the wisdom of a couple of such interpretations. Interpretational issues depend immensely on the context of the specific situation. Something that represents no risk or harm if I am dealing with commercial, off the shelf items, might have a tremendous risk if I am dealing with a radioactive component.

 

[Louis Reimer]

thanks for the clarification

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Re: Official ISO Interpretations - A Formal Process for ISO9001 Interpretation Reques

During this whole thread, I questioned the fact that this interpretation process exist at the ISO TC level, and I have also questioned the wisdom of a couple of such interpretations. Interpretational issues depend immensely on the context of the specific situation. Something that represents no risk or harm if I am dealing with commercial, off the shelf items, might have a tremendous risk if I am dealing with a radioactive component.

It has been over a year since the last "official" ISO 9001 interpretation was posted. Seems to me that the TC 176 is coming to it's senses and realizing that an official interpretation process is nonsensical, questionable, counter-productive, out of place and border-line useless and meaningless. The fact that the number of new interpretations are dwindling, leads me to believe that the support for this process is waning. Had they listened.....

 

[ccochran]

Re: Official ISO Interpretations - A Formal Process for ISO9001 Interpretation Reques

Sidney,

You're exactly right. Interpretations are made everyday out in the field, with give and take between organizations and auditors. Interpretations from committees of experts are of questionable value. The Elsmar Cove, a peer resource, is probably the best source for interpretations yet...

Craig

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Re: Official ISO Interpretations - A Formal Process for ISO9001 Interpretation Reques

It will be interesting to see if the "official interpretations to ISO 9001:2000" will be revoked after the ISO 9001:2008 standard is released. After all, the revision was intended to clarify the existing requirements. If the TC 176 did their job, with the amended document, we no longer need such interpretation documents. The interpretation documents were also part of the input used during the ISO 9001 revision process.

I learned, during the last year, that the biggest proponent and force behind the establishment of this interpretation process has passed away.

 

[ccochran]

Re: Official ISO Interpretations - A Formal Process for ISO9001 Interpretation Reques

Sidney,

When you say "passed away," do you mean died? Who was this?

Craig

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Official ISO Interpretations - A Formal Process for ISO9001 Interpretation Reques

It will be interesting to see if the "official interpretations to ISO 9001:2000" will be revoked after the ISO 9001:2008 standard is released. After all, the revision was intended to clarify the existing requirements. If the TC 176 did their job, with the amended document, we no longer need such interpretation documents. The interpretation documents were also part of the input used during the ISO 9001 revision process.

I learned, during the last year, that the biggest proponent and force behind the establishment of this interpretation process has passed away.

I seem to recall a set of sanctioned interpretations for the first release of QS9000, and they were all incorporated into the next release, but it wasn't very long before there was a new set of sanctioned interpretations. In fact, iirc, the sanctioned interpretations document contained more pages than the standard itself.