Page 3 of 8
Document Number: Q-0907-18 / Issued: 12/29/93
Subject: Submitting Reports for Certification Review / Revised: 12/10/04

1.1.PURPOSE

To define the process of Technical Certification review for audit reports which require a certification decision.

2.2.SCOPE

This procedure is applicable to all UL DQS Inc. personnel, programs and reports requiring a certificate decision. Continuous Audits with no changes are included in this process but can be reviewed by a Lead Auditor instead of a Technical Reviewer.

3.3.APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

Q-0000Policy Manual for Management System Registration

Q-0300-1Contract Review

Q-0900-5General Audit Requirements

Q-0907-30Scope Writing Procedure

All program procedures

Q-1123-1Procedure for the Verification Group

Q-1800-1Auditor Appointment Procedure

Q-1800-4Technical Reviewer Procedure

Q-1200-1Corrective/Preventive Actions Procedure

Q-1600-1Control of Records

Q-1307-3Procedure for Updating External Databases

4.4.DEFINITIONS

4.1.4.1.See Definition Document, Q-0000-3.

TR – Technical Reviewer

CDA – Certificate Decision Authority with Veto Power approved by an IATF Oversight Office

DA – Designated Auditor/Subcontract auditor

TA – Technical Advisor: Person with applicable industry or program experience independent of the audit team that performed the audit and has veto power concerning certification decisions related to the particular review.

5.5.General

5.1.5.1.Reviews shall be conducted on all reports that require an approval from a TR and includes the following:

  1. Stage 2
  2. Continuous Assessment – first CA after the Stage 2
  3. Continuous – if Major AR was issued, any changes have been identified and per sampling plan (sampling permitted for allowed programs only)
  4. Triennial (Recertification)
  5. Scope Expansions
  6. Scope Reductions
  7. Special Audits – including limited and suspension
  8. Upgrade in standard revision

Page 1 of 6
Document Number: Q-0907-18 / Issued: 12/29/93
Subject: Submitting Reports for Certification Review / Revised: 7/20/10

5.2.The TR must be competent to perform reviews in accordance with Q-1800-4. Additionally, for each of the following audit types, the TR must be qualified in the industry code for the following (this can be met by using a TA or other competent personal):

  • Registrations, Triennials and Major Scope Expansions conducted in all Standards except ISO 14000 and AS9000/9100: 20xx, 2834, 2869 (Nuclear Fuel only), 3441, 3443 (pressure vessels only), 3721, 3724, 3728, 3731, 7371 through 7376, 80xx, 8211, 8221, 8222 and 8711.
  • Registrations, Triennials and Major Scope Expansions conducted for ISO 14000: 1311, 1321, 14xx, 22xx, 261x, 262x, 263x, 28xx, 2911, 2951, 30xx, 3311, 3312, 3313, 332x, 333x, 334x, 336x, 339x, 347x, 80xx.
  • Registrations, Triennials and Major Scope Expansions conducted for AS 9000/9100: Reviewer must have 3 digits SIC Code for 3721, 3724 and 3728.
  • The TR must not have participated in the audit they are reviewing. Certification Dept. is ultimately responsible for review; therefore while performing review tasks, TR’s report to the Certification Dept and may, at any time, discuss review-related issues independent of the Regional Operations reporting structure.
  • A TA may conduct the review in cases where the TR is not qualified in the program or SIC (if applicable). The TR will review the report in its entirety and may overturn the TA’s decision to grant registration. If the TA overturns the audit teams’ decision and not grant registration, the TR can’t overturn the TA’s decision. The TR and TA will involve the required personnel needed to reach a certificate decision.
  • TR’s are qualified in the base program of QMS or EMS. The following base program for each specific program is defined as follows:

a)QMS: ISO-9001, ISO/TS 16949, TL-9000, AS 9100, AS 9110, AS 9120, ISO 13485, ISO 20000, ISO 27001, Laboratory Audit, Blending and Alternate Assessment Method

b)EMS: ISO 14001, RC 14001, RCMS, OHS, ESD

5.4Corrective actions have been analyzed and accepted by the lead auditor prior to renewal or changing the certificates for all audit types.

5.5Disputes or Appeals will be handled in accordance with Q-0900-5, General Audit requirements.

5.6The review tracking process will ensure all information required for the review is readily available. Each region may use any system that will support a method to use as trend analysis to ensure corporate or department goals are being met. This should include review queues and review records.

6.PROCEDURE:

6.1Review Process

6.1.1After the audit is complete, the Lead Auditor (or designated personnel) will load all report documents into Easy (The documents required to be loaded can be found in Q-1123-1).The appropriate personnel will enter the review into the regional tracking method to indicate a review is required.

6.1.2Customer Service or designated personnel shall confirm that all required documents are in DMS.

6.1.3The TR will choose the highest priority request and conduct the review per the following requirements. These are applicable to all programs (additional program specific review requirements are also documented following this section):

1)Verify a Stage 1 or Stage 1 waiver was completedprior to the audit for audits requiring one

2)Ensure the audit team was qualified per Dynamics and/or other qualification sources and per program requirements in the following: SIC/Industry code, Program, Design Qualified (as applicable) and current qualifications are up to date.

3)Verify scope wording via Q-0907-30 and that the SIC/Industry code matches the scope.

4)Audit days comply with program requirements. Recommendations regarding future audit days (Continuous, Triennial etc) comply with program requirements. Any reductions below program minimum assessor days require a documented justification for the reduction before a Certificate can be approved per Q-0300-1.

5)AR’s are systemic in nature. Observations or OFI’s were non-systemic in nature. AR’s must support the recommendation made by the team.

6)Required notes and/or checklists document there is sufficient objective evidence to support the recommendation

7)Remote locations (RL's) were audited per the quote and program requirements.

8)Agenda content complies as specified in Q-0900-5 and/or program requirements.

9)AR resolution has been completed and that the organizations response(s) included a well defined Root Cause analysis and that correction and corrective action is applicable to the problem statement.

For Triennial reviews, verify no major issues have been raised that would preclude renewal of the certificate.

Verify the required clauses have been audited over the cycle and that the recommendation supports renewal.

6.1.4ISO/TS 16949 Requirements

All documented justifications to go below the minimum man-day requirements or for Site Extensions, must be approved by the relevant accreditation/recognition body and retained in DMS. If approval was not obtained prior to the audit (even in cases where the justification was made in advance but was awaiting approval), the reviewer will assume that the justification was rejected and required man-days must be performed.

A CDA shall review all report types. For reports that require either a new, changed or reissued certificate, the approval record (QF-0907-50 or by signing the report) will be approved by the CDA, sent to the database administrator per Q-1307-3 and loaded into DMS.

A qualified Reviewer may review Continuous Audits with no changes but it must also be approved by a CDA. The Reviewer will review the report and resolve any issues with the Lead. The Lead is required to respond within 7 days. After all issues have been resolved, the report will be sent to a CDA for final approval. If the CDA concurs with the TR, the appropriate approval will be signed and send back to the TR for final closure of the review.

For a multi region review, the region that controls the file is responsible to review all the applicable remote locations and document each project reviewed in accordance with this section.

Letter Of Conformance (LOC) – In cases where an LOC is needed, the requirements of Q-0914-4 shall be followed.

6.1.5ISO14001/RC14001

The following also needs verification:

  1. Audit team has Relevant Experience, Environmental Country of Audit Skill and Environmental Aspects qualification.
  2. AR’s are for system nonconformance’s only and not regulatory noncompliances.
  3. Required pre-audit documentation and core documentation were reviewed and the structure of the documented system noted.

6.1.5AS9100/9120 Requirements

Initial reviews made be performed by regional Technical Reviewers located outside of the U.S. Final review and approval of all recommendations will be made by a U.S. based AS9100/9120 qualified certificate decision makers.

Once the U.S. based AS9100/9120 qualified certificate decision maker approves the release of the certificate, the certificate will be generated. The certificate will then be submitted to a U.S. based AS9100/9120 certificate decision maker for review and approval prior to being sent to the client.

6.2Processing Review Requests

6.2.1New Certificates

Regional personnel (i.e. Verification Group) will generate a review activity. The TR will complete the review and document the review results in the appropriate approval record (Dynamics, CGCM or audit report). The reviewer’s name on the record indicates a qualified reviewer has completed the review. Once the review is complete, the tracking method will be updated and approval sent to RCGG. The review record will be uploaded intoDMS by the reviewer or certificate group as agreed within the region. The cert will be processed per Q-1307-1.

6.2.2Company Requested Changes for Existing Certificates

Requests that require a certificate change should be documented on the Company Information Change Form. If the request is for a company name or address change, the Customer Service Team Leaders are authorized to approve the change for all programs, except for automotive and aerospace (these requests would follow the same review defined in this procedure)

If the change is approved, they will send the client an updated contract or amendment and after the signed contract is received, will update the tracking method and send the request to RCGG for certificate generation.

6.2.3Company Requested Schedule Change

Requests to either postpone an audit or frequency change are processed using the same form as in 6.2.2. When the form is returned, the CSP will have a review requested to approve the change and follows the same process defined in this procedure.

If a request is due to financial hardship, the TR will review the questions pertaining to financial hardship, the audit history of the client and base the approval on this information. If the request results in postponing an audit past the certificate renewal date, the request will be denied and the client will be advised or other options (scope reduction, voluntary suspension, etc.).

6.2.4Continuous Audits (CA) with no changes

For programs that allow this option, CA’s can be sampled over the certificate cycle. The following must be met in order for this option can be utilized:

1)The Lead Auditor has documented competency in accordance with Q-1800-1 (Dynamics or regional method) defines if the Lead has demonstrated competence indicated by the qualification date). Effective April 1, 2008, all Lead Auditors are grandfathered into the sampling method pending their qualification is current and does not have an open major CAR.

2)If the Lead Auditor receives a major nonconformance relative to Service Delivery, a CAR is assigned to their manager and the Lead is automatically taken off the sampling method. The manager is responsible for verifying 10 reports (sampled across programs if applicable) after corrective action has had time to be effectively implemented. If the manager has determined the Lead has demonstrated the competence needed, the reports reviewed will be documented in the CAR’s verification section and notice sent to the regions TR that they can be put back on the sampling method. If the manager finds further nonconformances during the reviews, it’s the manager’s responsibility to take action for the auditor’s performance and the auditor will not be allowed to participate in the sampling method until deemed acceptable by their manager.

3)The first CA after a new Registration or upgrade to a new standard must be reviewed. If this review shows no major findings as defined below, the client can go on the sampling plan.

4)If the client is put on suspension or has received a major nonconformance, the next CA in the cycle must be reviewed. If this review shows no major findings as defined below the client can go on the sampling plan. .

6.3Processing Completed Reviews

6.3.1Major Reviewer Finding – TRshall document any major review findings and initiate corrective actions as defined in procedure Q-1200-1. A major finding is defined as a problem that will preclude the TR being able to concur with the team’s recommendation or where an accreditation or external program requirement has not been met. Examples of these may include:

  1. Auditors not qualified (e.g. SIC or Program).
  2. Objective evidence does not support the recommendation.
  3. Insufficient clause coverage on Stage 2 Audit.
  4. Required activities (per scope) not assessed.
  5. AR’s do not support the team’s recommendation (e.g. Major AR written but registration recommended).
  6. Assessor Days fall below program requirements without justification and required approval.
  7. Any other violation of a specific accreditation or program requirement.
  8. Outcomes of the Review Process

There are three possible outcomes from the technical review process:

  1. Concurs with the recommendation with no major findings identified :

The TR shall document this concurrence in the approval record. The approved document will be put intoDMSand request sent to RCGG to generate the cert in accordance with Q-1307-1.

  1. Concurs with the recommendation with major findings identified but has sufficient containment.

.The TR will contact the auditor or customer service professional (CSP) for resolution for anydiscrepancies found. In the event the lead does not respond, the following escalation process will be initiated:

a)The auditor/CSP will have 2 business days to respond.

b)If a response isn’t received, the TR will forward the email to their manager with 2 business days to respond;

c)If a response isn’t received, the same email will be sent to the applicable Vice President with a 2 business day response time to get the issue resolved.

Once the response is received, the TR will update the review record and send the request to RCGG for generating the cert.

If correction and corrective action is made to resolve the concerns notedhat will allow the TR to proceed, the technical review will be completed. A CAR will be issued and noted in the approval record.

  1. Recommendation is not concurred with and Overturns the decision.

a)The TR shall document the finding as major per Q-1200-1 and assign the corrective action to the lead auditor’s regional management.

b)The TR will inform regional management who will contact the client with the decision. The overturned recommendation will be documented with sufficient information so the reason is understood; including the next actions to be taken and explanation of the appeals process (Q-0900-5). Regional management shall document this discussion in a letter to be retained in DMS.

c)At any time, the TR or regional management may escalate any concerns to the VP - Certifications if agreement between the review function and the auditing function cannot be reached. All objective evidence will be presented and final decision will be determined once all issues have been discussed and resolved. The decision will be processed as described in this section.

Once the review is complete, the tracking method will be updated to indicate the review is complete.

6.4 Records

Records are retained per Q-1600-1.

Page 1 of 6
Document Number: Q-0907-18 / Issued: 12/29/93
Subject: Submitting Reports for Certification Review / Revised: 7/20/10

UL DQS Inc.®

Revision History Sheet

Document Number:Q-0907-18

Issue Date:December 29, 1993

Document Title:Submitting Reports for Certification Review

Date / Description of Change / Originator
1/19/04 / Revisions prior to this date are on file
12/10/04 / Minor clarifications to resolve internal audit CAR.
Update to Defect Codes. Clarified requirements for using a Technical Expert qualified in the program to conduct the review with a Lead Reviewer.
Remove references to RDF/ SRF/ CRF and Biennials. Add reference to CGCM Form.
Update TS Decision Making authority. Remove requirement for RTS to make final decision for AS9100.
Remove requirements for sending job tracking monthly reports and require tracking via STATS.
Remove requirement for two reviewers to approve more than 30% reduction in days since now addressed by contract review form.
Allow Assessors for Continuous Assessments to review Continuous Assessment reports.
Remove allowance to enter minor review findings in EtQ. Allow only major review findings in EtQ. / L. Hamilton
3/30/05 / Change 5.1 to require review for decrease in audit days – not for increase. Aligns with change already made to Q-0300-2. / L. Hamilton
2/13/06 / Add minor defect code – prelim report review not sent to ePro. / L. Ziemnick
6/12/06 / Delete Requirement to note minor findings or observations. Clarify definition of major finding. Remove minor defect codes. Add requirement for IAOB Decision Making Authority review for Continuous Assessments. Add clarification of country of site is responsible for all RL reviews. / L. Ziemnick
C. Blair
L. Hamilton
1/11/07 / Inclusion of SA 8000 reports review / Raju PV
3/18/08 / Revised entire procedure to meet current practice; 6.2 - added sampling criteria for CA’s with no changes / A. Tucker
1/22/09 / Updated to state the new IT systems (Dynamics and DMS). Addressed responsibility for upload of review records in DMS. / A. Tucker
10/16/09 / Updated to reflect current practice; 6.2 – added escalation process; approvals for company requested changes; financial hardship approvals. / A. Tucker
2/24/10 / Under Section 3, Applicable Documents a reference was added for Q-1307-3, Procedure for Updating External Databases, Sub-section 6.1.4 references the database administrator. / A. Tucker
5/20/10 / Copied the 1st CA after the S2 into section 5.1; updated qualification requirements in 5.2; Deleted SA 8000 requirements; Updated escalation process in 6.3.2 / A. Tucker
7/20/10 / Added 6.1.5 – AS9100/9120 Review and Cert Issuance requirements for satellite offices. / M. Barton