ANSI-ASQ National Accreditation Board

Accredited Certification Bodies (CBs) 36 AS9100 12 AS9110 27 AS9120

Applicant CBs 4 AS9110

Increased Surveillance Frequency 1 CB (2+ office assessments and witnessed audits per year)

Suspensions 1 nonconforming (since lifted) 1 nonconforming (current) 1 voluntary (current)

Withdrawals 1 AS9120 (voluntary) 1 AS9100 applicant (voluntary)

Revised SR001 Issued

New FAQ’s

ALL CB’s completed the transition (in OASIS)

All CB’s applied prior to 1 Jan 2011 (no suspensions)

Heads Up 170, 175, 181, 187

SR001 – Revised May 2011 SR001 FAQ – Published

www.iaqg.org/oasis

Make sure decision making person/people are competent SR001 9101D

Make sure audits are completed as required / scheduled. Already heard of at least one potential issue with resources

(audit being pushed out)

Three new FAQ’s Conducting an audit to the old standards Transfers Special Audits

ANAB sending assessors that successfully passed the AATT training to office assessments

Vince May, 29 August – 1 Sept 2011

8 NCR’s, 4 Minor and 4 Major

1.Minor - Accreditation Rule 29 not including Resolutions and Supplemental Rule

2.Minor - Internal audit of AS did not include resolutions or SR001

3.Minor - Appendix F’s not completed accurately

4.Major - # of files and time spent at office assessments not accurate per ANAB’s process

8 NCR’s, 4 Minor and 4 Major

5.Major - NCR’s closed without proper responses/evidence.

6.Minor - PEAR form missing from a CB’s audit report and no NCR issued by ANAB.

7.Major - No evidence in office assessment reports that ANAB assessed the CB’s to SR001

8.Major - Findings not categorized properly

9

2

11

10

3

13

10

2

12

3

2

5

3 3

1

7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Valid Invalid/Unable to Substantiate

Under investigation Total

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

372 (Feb 2011) – An organization is complaining about their AS9120 audit and the auditor assigned. CB is redoing the audit because of the first audit. Details were requested, not provided. Follow up during the next office assessment.

Closed, unable to substantiate

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

378 (Mar 2011) – An organization is complaining about their certification status in OASIS; their status was marked withdrawn (by the CB) and it was suppose to be suspended.

Found valid, Action was taken by the CB and OASIS was updated.

Closed, with action

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

379 (Apr 2011) – An AQMS certificate issued without an accreditation mark.

The copy of the certificate was a draft and the final certificate was issued properly.

Closed, invalid

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

380 (Apr 2011) – Questions in regards to the auditor.

Closed, partially valid Conducted a complaint validation audit Conducting additional witnessed audits

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

381 (Apr 2011) – Certificate and scope of certification in OASIS not consistent in regards to inclusions/exclusions.

The items outlined in OASIS were actually sections of the standard that were not audited, not exclusions to the certificate. The CB entered them in the wrong fields.

Closed, with correction.

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

388 (Jun 2011) – Organization continues to have AS9100 certificates referencing ISO 9001:2000

Complaint found valid, NCR issued to CB.

Closed, with correction.

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

389 (Jul 2011) – CB transferred a client whose certificate had been withdrawn.

The CB treated the client as an initial client and did not transfer the certificate.

Closed, invalid

Complaints in italics were provided previously and has no changes.

Complaints in bold are new or were updated since the last meeting.

A91 – Received Dec 2010 – Closed, partially upheld Appealing several NCR’s from an AQMS witnessed audit

NCR in regards to missing items in the Quality Manual – NCR upheld NCR in regards to document control – NCR withdrawn NCR in regards to auditing to sufficient depth – 1 of 4 evidence items

withdrawn, 4 part of the NCR evidence upheld NCR in regards to the accuracy of the scope statement on the

certificate – NCR upheld

Appeals in italics were provided previously.

Appeals in bold are new.

A103– Received Feb 2011 – Closed, appeal denied Appealed a major NCR during an AQMS office assessment in regards

to accepting poor corrective action responses from the CB’s client

The CB discussed why the acceptance of updated documentation from their client and how the results of a check of a large quantity of other data supported that the fault was an isolated incident and therefore, the CB's acceptance of that client's CA response was not an indication of major deficiencies in the CB process.

ANAB discussed the repeat nature of the nonconformity issued to the CB, the lack of objective evidence for the CA taken by the CB client , and the lack of a complete and thorough Root Cause Analysis by the CB client, even though the fault was described as an isolated incident.

Even in isolated incidents the client must still provide acceptable CA to address the root cause to eliminate reoccurrence.

Therefore the panel upholds the NCR as valid.Appeals in italics were provided previously.

Appeals in bold are new.

A108– Received April 2011– Appeal upheld, NCR’s withdrawn Appealed two minor NCRs during an AQMS witnessed audits.

Sufficient sample to draw conclusions Not requiring client to provide root cause to NCR’s.

The panel has found that while statements made during the appeal hearing indicated that nonconformities may have existed at the time of the audit, the documented statements of finding for NCR 01 and NCR02 were not substantiated by objective evidence.

Appeals in italics were provided previously.

Appeals in bold are new.

Office Assessments 45 required (9 additional)

35 completed (7 follow-up) 10 confirmed (2 follow-up)

Witnessed Audits 51 required (5 follow-up and 9 AS9120)

41 completed (5 follow-ups, 7 AS9120) 7 confirmed (2 AS9120) 3 scheduling (all previously scheduled and canceled)

Office Assessments ~ 155 NCRs 37 NCR’s to aerospace requirements during 29 office assessments

12 majors, (5 originally minor, escalated due to timing)

118 NCR’s to ISO 17021 or general requirements during 29 office assessments 20 majors, (4 originally minor, escalated due to timing)

Witnessed Audits ~ 52 NCRs 18 NCR’s to aerospace requirements during 37 witnessed audits

7 majors

34 NCR’s to ISO 17021 or other requirements during 37 witnessed audits 5 majors, (2 originally minor, escalated due to timing)

02468

101214161820

2010 Common NCR -- NCR/CA Process

Melissa Fradkin, Client Coordinator no longer with ANAB Actively looking for a new coordinator

Adam Strachota taking over in the interim astrachota@anab.org 414 347 9858, ext. 7829

Ron Wilmes and John Stratton (Accreditation Assessors) no longer with ANAB

Revising many tools and procedures for Office Assessments and Witnessed Audits

Questions / Comments