Take the ISO 9001 course exam and get the
ISO 14001, ISO 13485, or ISO 45001 course exam for free
LIMITED-TIME OFFER – ENDS SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

Expert Advice Community

Guest

Mass pieces for verification of balance

  Quote
Guest
Guest user Created:   Feb 07, 2022 Last commented:   Feb 08, 2022

Mass pieces for verification of balance

1. In another post on this subject, you say "This means you should have mass pieces that cover the range of use of the balance and have calibration certificates for the mass pieces." Does this mean that if you have mass pieces that are verified on a balance right after calibration of the balance, this is insufficient to prove 'fit for purpose'? 2. 7.8.2.1 e)  The name and contact information of the customer. Is this necessary if only one client - laboratory is on mine property 7.8.2.1 o) Identification of the person authorizing the report. If the report is simplified and emailed from a password protected computer, is this necessary? And finally 7.8.1.3 Is any information that is not reported to the customer readily available? Does this mean that a report with above information must be available as well?
0 0

Assign topic to the user

ISO 17025 DOCUMENTATION TOOLKIT

Step-by-step implementation for smaller companies.

ISO 17025 DOCUMENTATION TOOLKIT

Step-by-step implementation for smaller companies.

Expert
Tracey Evans Feb 08, 2022

You asked

Does this mean that if you have mass pieces that are verified on a balance right after calibration of the balance, this is insufficient to prove 'fit for purpose'?

No that would not be sufficient. To meet the requirement of clause 6.4.5 and 6.4.6, as well as 6.5 such mass pieces should be calibrated (not verified) by a “competent” laboratory. i.e either by a calibration laboratory accredited to ISO 17025 for mass, or at least one which meets the requirements to perfom and report the calibration competently according to ISO 17025.

You also asked a number of questions regarding reporting. Note that ISO 17025 states that all must be included unless you have a valid reason for not. This tells you if you have considered the risk and are confident the results are reported suitably (not ambiguous) then you can justify a simplified report.

7.8.2.1 e)  - If this is an inhouse client, then a simplified report is suitable – as long as the sample is traceable and you have evidence of who the report was provided to.

7.8.2.1 o) The way the authorisation takes place is not the issue, as long as it is traceble as to who authorised the report.

7..8.1.3 No not necessarily in a report, but the information must be available and traceble. Imagine there is a query – all information should be protected (from change) and be available on looking, for example, within a LIMS, database or a record.

Quote
0 0

Comment as guest or Sign in

HTML tags are not allowed

Feb 07, 2022

Feb 08, 2022

Suggested Topics

Guest user Created:   Aug 23, 2022 ISO 17025
Replies: 1
0 0

LEEA and ISO 17025

Guest user Created:   Aug 12, 2022 ISO 17025
Replies: 1
0 0

How to show impartiality in the QMS?