Requirements For Equipment Returning From Outside Calibration

[briansalomon]

Note: I inadvertently posted this in the "General" section. After thinking it over, I have decided it actually belongs here.

I have an ISO accrediting organization (well known) insisting that we start "verifying that equipment returning from outside calibration is within the specified manufacturer's tolerance".

In the past, we would audit shipping methods and packing material, verify the vehicles used had adequate padding etc...

At first I thought this was just a junior auditor who was just learning the ropes but the issue does not appear to be going away, and my QC manager (who is competent and reasonable) is searching for a solution.

Is anyone else getting this requirement form their accrediting organizations?

Have you found a reasonable way to comply?

[NC-Cals]

  Are they asking if you are reviewing the calibration certificate to ensure the as left data is within spec or are they expecting you to test the UUT to verify it is operating correctly. If you run performance verifications on your equipment then I would run a performance verification. We ran into an issue where our Fluke low pressure standard returned from calibration. We check it against a DWT once a month so we have a history vs that standard., When I ran the comparison, I found they Fluke unit was out of tolerance. We returned it and they found damage from shipping.
  We run and document these performance verifications on many of our critical standards.

[briansalomon]

The accrediting body is saying we are required by ISO to "verify all equipment sent for outside calibration is still within manufacturer's specification when it returns from calibration".

I have a PMEL (Lowry 1982) background and am currently working in the QC department at a testing laboratory. Some departments have accreditations for specific disciplines, but we aren't a traditional calibration lab.

The QC department where I work reviews the certificates of calibration for equipment sent for outside calibration and logs the results.

We accept that damage can occur during shipping and I am looking at equipment that will monitor/record shock during shipping. If we monitor for it and there is no reason to believe there is any shipping damage, the view we have is that it's reasonable to expect that accredited calibration results are valid.

We believe we are doing a good job of verifying our equipment is within manufacturer's tolerance, and want to remain in compliance with the accrediting body. We are wondering if anyone else has experience with this particular issue, and if there is a reasonable solution.

[NC-Cals]

   I would ask for clarification of the "requirement". What action would be required by you to satisfy the "requirement"? Also, ask them the reference in the standard they are referencing so you can read it yourself. Then put a statement in your quality manual as to how you satisfy the requirement.
   Some auditors have their own interpretation of the standard, but it is not necessarily the intent of the standard. If your interpretation is the review the calibration document and verify the As Left data on the certificate is within tolerance, then I believe you meet the verification requirement.