I was a member of the HPS Lab Accreditation Committee for a few years
before the HPS abandoned that worthwhile project.  ISO17025 was a big part
of our assessment steps.  Tamper seals were not stated as a requirement
but "practical steps to prevent tampering" are a valid point.

Los Alamos does not require tamper seals.  But some of our accessible
calib controls have covers on them.  All of our "smart" instruments have
passwords that prevent tampering of the cal parameters.

We tell the users to use ONLY specific replacement batteries AND we try to
make those specific batteries available.

A broken tamper seal or an indication that unauthorized adjustments had
been made would be an item of discussion at our routine Instrument Working
Team meetings.

Battery checks, zero checks, operational checks, and response checks are
required before use in the operating procedures.  We are working towards
having only calibrated sources for operational checks.

An operational check requires a specific response to a calibrated source
while a response check only requires a meter response to the source.

Tom, LANL



On Tue, April 9, 2019 1:24 pm, Tom Meek via Powernet wrote:
 I have a question regarding tamper resistant seals for calibration on RP
 meters.  A QA audit made a SFR (supplier finding report) at an instrument
 calibration facility stating vendor should be placing these seals on our
 RP meters.   The cited standard is ANSI Z540:1994 Section 11.5, but after
some
 discussion we agreed that this only applies to lab standards.  He also
cited ISO 17025:2017 Section 6.4.12 which states "the laboratory shall
take
 practical measures to prevent unintended adjustments of equipment from
invalidating results."  The auditor said that industry interprets this as
requiring  tamper seals, but also said that complying with the ISO
standard was a matter of lab certification only (not a regulatory
requirement).
>
Does any site require tamper resistant seals on RP field instruments?
Yes   No
>
> If yes how do you handle routine battery and/or desiccant replacement?
>
> What do you do if a seal is found broken or missing.  In short, would the
> event be entered into the corrective action system?
>
> Do you rely on your source check and zero check of the instrument to
> "validate" its calibration in lieu of the tamper seal?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Tom Meek, CHP
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powernet mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://hpspowernet.org/mailman/listinfo/powernet_hpspowernet.org
>



_______________________________________________
Powernet mailing list
[email protected]
http://hpspowernet.org/mailman/listinfo/powernet_hpspowernet.org

Reply via email to