Title Page
-
Site conducted
-
Prepared by
-
Conducted on
-
Audit Number
-
Facility/Location
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 2.2.3; Number 1
-
AUDIT ITEM: Has the office established a Technical Operating Procedure Manual, under the direction of the Site Quality Manager?
-
AUDIT METHOD: Ask to see a copy and verify required elements from the TOP Manual Required Elements checklist, as appropriate to the office’s scope of accreditation. Verify that the TOPM includes the most recent revision to the TOP template. Complete this review & update during the audit.
-
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE: Make sure the Org chart has the following positions covered. The same person can cover multiple positions but can not be the deputy for themselves.
PE – responsible for all testing
Technical Manager
Deputy Tech Manager
Quality Assurance Manager
Deputy QA Manager
Lab Supervisor -
Does the TOP Manual contain the required elements?
-
Select the applicable Scope(s) of Accreditation
- R18-18
- E329-20
- C1077-17
- D3666-16
- D3740-19
- C1093-19
- ISO 17025
- AASHTO
- AMRL
- A2LA/IAS
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 4.1; Number 2
-
AUDIT ITEM: Do the Technical Manager and the Quality Manager have complete, current copies of the Quality Manual and related documents?
-
AUDIT METHOD: THE OFFICE MUST HAVE A PRINTED COPY OF THE QA-M-5 ON HAND. Ask to see a copy. There must be at least one complete set. Check all sets in the facility to be sure they are current and complete. Verify controlled copy numbers and assignments, Contact Larry for new or current control number(s).
-
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE: Verify the Technical Manager and Quality Manager have a full complete sets. Refer to the attached sheet of revisions.
-
Verify the following documents are current and complete and indicate who has the document on hand.
-
QA-M-5 (version 13)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
QP-CAL (version 10)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
WI-GL (see attached sheet of revisions)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
WI-CCM (see attached sheet of revisions)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
WI-SA (see attached sheet of revisions)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
WI-AS (see attached sheet of revisions)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
WI-ST (see attached sheet of revisions)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
QP-IA (version 10)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
QP-CR (version 2)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
QP-CRN (version 6)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
QP-MR (version 6)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
-
QP-PQ (version 5)
- Technical Manager
- Quality Manager
- Other Responsible Party
- Document Missing or Out-of-Date
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 4.2; Number 3
-
AUDIT ITEM: Has management reviewed new work to confirm that it is consistent with the scope of services provided and that there are enough facilities and resources available?
-
AUDIT METHOD: Select several random project files. Confirm that there are copies of signed proposals/contracts in the
files, in accordance with SOP TR-5.
NOTE: The PSI General Conditions were revised 09/2017. Ensure that offices are aware of this change and are using B900-11(14).
**Florida – Review CS & GEO project lists. No Condo or Townhouse projects allowed. If you have any questions, Call Garrett Smith. Email any findings to Garrett Smith & Larry Johnson**
Construction Services – All contracts should be executed by the CS Mgr or higher (CS Mgr, RVP, Chris Carsten). Chief Engineer cannot execute a contract. All proposals should be signed by the CS Mgr as a minimum. One signature is ok if it is the CS Mgr. At some point there will be more language concerning multiple signatures related to proposal value and/or types of service. Make sure the proper general conditions are attached.
Geotechnical – All contracts should be executed by the Geo department Mgr or higher (Geo Mgr, RVP, Chris Carsten). Chief Engineer Cannot execute a contract. All proposals should be signed by the author and the Geo Mgr or higher (Two Signatures Required). All proposals must be reviewed by the PC. This can be a 3rd signature or a note stating who it was reviewed by. Make sure the proper General Conditions are attached.
************DON’T FORGET - NO CONDO OR TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS IN FLORIDA******** -
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (Notes):
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 12.8; Number 4
-
AUDIT ITEM: Does the office follow the procedure in this section to protect client’s proprietary rights?
-
AUDIT METHOD: Discuss requirements with office staff and review customer files for evidence of a distribution list. How does the office establish the distribution list? Is the distribution of reports in accordance with the client’s direction?
-
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (Notes):
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 4.3, QP-MR; Number 5
-
AUDIT ITEM: Does the office management perform annual reviews of the quality program?
-
AUDIT METHOD: Review office records. Ensure that more than one person has participated in the review and that
comments and improvements/action items have been noted. Are the noted improvements / action
items being implemented. If an IQSMR has not been performed contact Larry Johnson and/or Bret
Reid. -
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (Notes):
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 5.1, QP-IA Section 5; Number 6
-
AUDIT ITEM: Has the office participated in an annual internal audit under the direction of the Corporate QA Manager? Was the previous audit successfully closed?
-
AUDIT METHOD: Ask to see the last internal audit report, and local office responses, if applicable. Were there any items from the prior audit requiring follow-up actions during this audit? Make sure office has it available to present to an external auditor.
-
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (Notes):
CRITERIA: QA-M-5 Section 5.2; Number 7
-
AUDIT ITEM: Has the laboratory implemented a system of checks, in addition to periodic audits, to assure the quality of results provided to customers? (These could include internal quality control schemes, proficiency testing, inter-laboratory comparisons, regular use of certified reference materials, replicate testing, and correlation of results for different characteristics of an item.)
-
AUDIT METHOD: Review the TOP manual for the system. Confirm implementation by reviewing office records.
1. Check the NPS system for Customer surveys. Record the number if Surveys for the last 6 months. Net Promoter Score Summary is under The HUB>Applications>Intertek Intranet>NPS; Then search for applicable office location on the left of the page. Send email to Larry if no NPS is found.
2. Make sure oven & scale checks are being performed on all ovens (not furnaces) and scales, including field scales. These checks must be performed monthly at a minimum. Check the local TOP for their local requirement. -
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (Notes):