ASTM E699-03(2008)
(Practice)Standard Practice for Evaluation of Agencies Involved in Testing, Quality Assurance, and Evaluating of Building Components
Standard Practice for Evaluation of Agencies Involved in Testing, Quality Assurance, and Evaluating of Building Components
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This practice provides basic criteria for evaluating the qualifications of agencies utilizing the test methods promulgated by ASTM in Section 4, Construction, of the Annual Book of ASTM Standards. The existence of a formal accrediting authority such as a federal, state, municipal, or nongovernmental body is not necessary for the use of this practice. These criteria may be supplemented by more specific criteria for particular classes of testing, quality assurance, and evaluative agencies. Specification E 329 can be used for on-site construction projects.
The intent of this practice is to provide a “consensus-system” standardized basis for evaluating a testing, quality assurance, or evaluating agency with respect to its capability to provide the specific service(s) needed by the user without prejudice to the agency offering other services or being affiliated with other agencies or organizations. In those situations where a strict literal interpretation of the phrase “shall be made available,” as used in this practice, would be inordinately burdensome to an agency, it will generally be sufficient that the agency concerned has the information available for “on-site” review.
The criteria of this practice are described in terms of the basic information necessary for an accrediting authority to evaluate the capability, with respect to objectivity, and competency of a testing, quality assurance, and evaluating agency regarding common characteristics pertaining to the organization, human resources, material resources, and quality systems employed by the agency in performing the services offered. Typically, accreditation of an agency involves the following three essential phases:
Submittal, to an involved accrediting authority, of basic information in accordance with the criteria of this practice by an interested agency.
Evaluation of the agency-submitted information by the involved accrediting authority.
Verification, “on-site,” of the agency-submitted information ...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a guide for the information to be obtained and provides specific recommended criteria for evaluating the capabilities of an agency to conduct inspections and tests and to report on tests performed in accordance with ASTM standards primarily on factory built components and assemblies.
1.2 The criteria in this practice describe the basic information used in judging the capability of an agency to perform its intended functions objectively and competently as well as to disclose possible conflicts of interest judged from the standpoint of the user of this practice. Testing, approval, and certification of a company's own products and services by its own testing agency does not necessarily constitute a conflict of interest.
1.3 The criteria presented herein are divided into three categories of endeavor, namely,
Part A—Standards and Criteria for Testing Agencies
Part B—Standards and Criteria for Quality Assurance Agencies
Part C—Standards and Criteria for Evaluating Agencies
1.4 The fundamental purpose of this practice is to provide criteria for evaluating an agency as denoted in 1.3 either by a user of that service or by an accrediting authority.
1.5 It is not the purpose of this practice to provide a basis for determining the quality of a product or service being evaluated.
1.6 This practice is not intended for the evaluation of those activities normally associated with the production and sale of products and the like, such as a manufacturer's internal quality program. However, any organization may request or perform an evaluation of its own in-house facilities under this practice if it so desires.
1.7 It is not the intent of this practice to be the basis for the determination of the type of agency to be selected by the user.
1.8 This practice can be used in conjunction with Specification E 541 and Practice E 651
1.9 Specification E 329 specifies minimum requirements for agencies ...
General Information
Relations
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
An American National Standard
Designation:E699–03 (Reapproved 2008)
Standard Practice for
Evaluation of Agencies Involved in Testing, Quality
Assurance, and Evaluating of Building Components
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 699; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope 1.9 Specification E 329 specifies minimum requirements for
agencies testing and/or inspecting materials used in construc-
1.1 This practice provides a guide for the information to be
tion and which are primarily assembled on the jobsite.
obtainedandprovidesspecificrecommendedcriteriaforevalu-
ating the capabilities of an agency to conduct inspections and
2. Referenced Documents
tests and to report on tests performed in accordance with
2.1 ASTM Standards:
ASTM standards primarily on factory built components and
E 329 Specification for Agencies Engaged in Construction
assemblies.
Inspection and/or Testing
1.2 The criteria in this practice describe the basic informa-
E 541 SpecificationforAgenciesEngagedinSystemAnaly-
tion used in judging the capability of an agency to perform its
sis and Compliance Assurance for Manufactured Building
intended functions objectively and competently as well as to
E 651/E 651M Practice for Evaluating Capabilities of
disclose possible conflicts of interest judged from the stand-
Agencies Involved in System Analysis and Compliance
point of the user of this practice. Testing, approval, and
Assurance for Manufactured Building
certification of a company’s own products and services by its
own testing agency does not necessarily constitute a conflict of
3. Terminology
interest.
3.1 Definitions:
1.3 The criteria presented herein are divided into three
3.1.1 accrediting authority—a formal body (or an indi-
categories of endeavor, namely,
vidualuser)thatevaluatesthecapabilityofanagencyincertain
Part A—Standards and Criteria for Testing Agencies
specific fields of activity.
Part B—Standards and Criteria for QualityAssuranceAgen-
3.1.2 affıliate—as used in this practice, a corporate or
cies
organizational entity that has a management or an ownership
Part C—Standards and Criteria for Evaluating Agencies
relationship, or both, with the agency being evaluated. It does
1.4 The fundamental purpose of this practice is to provide
not refer to a contractual relationship between organizations,
criteria for evaluating an agency as denoted in 1.3 either by a
nor does it include the membership of a trade or similar
user of that service or by an accrediting authority.
association, or to the companies represented by such member-
1.5 Itisnotthepurposeofthispracticetoprovideabasisfor
ship.
determiningthequalityofaproductorservicebeingevaluated.
3.1.3 agency—an organization or part of an organization,
1.6 This practice is not intended for the evaluation of those
engaged in the activities of testing, quality assurance, or
activities normally associated with the production and sale of
evaluating test results.
products and the like, such as a manufacturer’s internal quality
3.1.4 certification—the process by which recognition is
program. However, any organization may request or perform
obtained from an appropriate party that a product meets certain
an evaluation of its own in-house facilities under this practice
specified requirements. Prototype or production models, or
if it so desires.
both, of the product(s) will have been tested and inspected to
1.7 It is not the intent of this practice to be the basis for the
check that they do meet the requirements. Quality assurance
determination of the type of agency to be selected by the user.
programs are used to ensure that the product(s) continue to
1.8 This practice can be used in conjunction with Specifi-
comply with the specified requirements. Satisfactory tests,
cation E 541 and Practice E 651
inspections, and quality assurance are for the basis for certifi-
cation. Certification may be evidenced by labeling of the
product.
This practice is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E36 on Laboratory
and InspectionAgencyAccreditation and is the direct responsibility of Subcommit-
tee E36.70 on Construction and Building Testing/Inspection Agencies. For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
Current edition approved May 1, 2008. Published October 2008. Originally contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
approved in 1979. Discontinued September 1995 and reinstated in 1999 as E Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
699–99. Last previous edition approved in 2003 as E 699–03. the ASTM website.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
E699–03 (2008)
3.1.5 criteria—common characteristics pertaining to orga- particular classes of testing, quality assurance, and evaluative
nization, human resources, material resources, and quality agencies. Specification E 329 can be used for on-site construc-
systems which provide a basis for evaluating agencies as to tion projects.
their capability to objectively and competently provide the
4.2 The intent of this practice is to provide a “consensus-
specific service(s) needed by the user.
system” standardized basis for evaluating a testing, quality
3.1.6 evaluating—the function of obtaining data developed
assurance, or evaluating agency with respect to its capability to
by a testing agency, and utilizing such data to perform
provide the specific service(s) needed by the user without
calculations, determine suitability, project results, or otherwise
prejudice to the agency offering other services or being
draw conclusions resulting from an analysis of these data.
affiliated with other agencies or organizations. In those situa-
3.1.7 human resources—those elements of support and tions where a strict literal interpretation of the phrase “shall be
capability that are provided by humans using their mental and
made available,” as used in this practice, would be inordinately
physical capabilities. burdensome to an agency, it will generally be sufficient that the
3.1.8 inspection—the process of measuring, examining, agency concerned has the information available for “on-site”
testing, gaging, or making other determinations with respect to review.
materials, products, services, or environments.
4.3 The criteria of this practice are described in terms of the
3.1.9 material resources—theinstrumentalities,documenta-
basic information necessary for an accrediting authority to
tion, environments, structures, etc., needed to augment the
evaluate the capability, with respect to objectivity, and compe-
elements of support and capability provided by humans. (see
tency of a testing, quality assurance, and evaluating agency
human resources.)
regarding common characteristics pertaining to the organiza-
3.1.10 organization component—a portion of an organiza-
tion, human resources, material resources, and quality systems
tion with specific tasks and activities that constitute a part of
employed by the agency in performing the services offered.
the total effort and accomplishments of the organization.
Typically, accreditation of an agency involves the following
3.1.11 quality—the totality of features and characteristics of
three essential phases:
a material, product, service, system, or environment that bear
4.3.1 Submittal, to an involved accrediting authority, of
on its capability to satisfy a specified need(s).
basic information in accordance with the criteria of this
3.1.12 quality assurance—a planned system of activities
practice by an interested agency.
whose purpose is to provide assurance that the overall quality
4.3.2 Evaluation of the agency-submitted information by
controlprogram(seequalitycontrol)isinfactbeingeffectively
the involved accrediting authority.
implemented. This system involves a continuing evaluation of
4.3.3 Verification, “on-site,” of the agency-submitted infor-
the adequacy and effectiveness of the overall quality control
mation by the respresentative(s) of the involved accrediting
programwithaviewtohavingcorrectiveactioninitiatedwhere
authority.
necessary. For a specific material, product, service, etc., this
4.4 Although three categories are presented, an agency may
involves verification, audits, and evaluations of the quality
provide one or any combination of these categories for which
factors that affect the specification, production, inspection, and
it can qualify. An agency requesting qualification under more
use of the material product, service, system, or environment.
thanonecategorymustsatisfythecriteriaforeachcategoryfor
3.1.13 quality control—a planned system of activities
which acceptability is desired.
whose purpose is to provide a level of quality that meets the
4.5 The criteria set forth herein represent areas upon which
needs of users; also, the use of such a system. The objective of
agreement can be reached. There may be other areas to be
quality control is to provide an overall system integrating the
given consideration which may be of importance to the user.
quality factors of several related steps including: the proper
The user should include such other areas as a part of its own
specification for what is wanted; production to meet the full
criteria.
intent of the specification; inspection to determine whether the
4.6 This practice represents minimum criteria necessary to
resulting material, product, service, etc., is in accord with the
perform, monitor, or evaluate the test results of those standards
specification; and review of usage to determine necessary
promulgated by ASTM Committee E-6.
revisions of the specification.
3.1.14 testing—the determination, by technical means, of
4.7 It is anticipated that the ultimate user of this practice
theproperties,performance,orelementsofmaterials,products, will have the expertise necessary to exercise good judgment in
services, systems, or environments, which may involve appli-
the areas of human resources, physical resources, and quality
cation of established scientific principles and procedures. systems of the agency being evaluated.
NOTE 1—For example, when judging the qualifications of the various
4. Significance and Use
individuals in a particular agency, related factors or alternative resources
4.1 This practice provides basic criteria for evaluating the
(such as mechanical, electrical, or electronic equipment used to aid,
control, or monitor the work of the personnel) should be considered when
qualifications of agencies utilizing the test methods promul-
assessingtheoverallqualificationsofsuchindividuals.Thejobexperience
gatedbyASTMinSection4,Construction,oftheAnnualBook
and the reliability of the individual should also be considered in the
of ASTM Standards. The existence of a formal accrediting
judgment, where applicable.
authority such as a federal, state, municipal, or nongovernmen-
tal body is not necessary for the use of this practice. These 4.8 When assessing the organization and the resources of a
criteria may be supplemented by more specific criteria for particular agency, the judgment should take into account only
E699–03 (2008)
those factors or resources specifically related to the technologi- 5.1.6 A brief resume of all full-time managerial and super-
cal area being served by the agency in terms of the specific visory employees used to perform the services for which
evaluation, and only as necessary to form an adequate judg- accreditation is being sought. Where part-time employees,
ment in relation to the evaluation. Conversely, those techno- contractors, consultants, etc., are utilized in any capacity for
logicalareasservedbyaparticularagencythatarenotrequired these services, their relationship to the agency shall be stated.
to be evaluated in a specific instance should not be impugned 5.1.7 A statement determining the managerial or financial
through the lack of such evaluation. The absence of evaluation relationship, or both, between the agency, its owners, its
or the denial of accreditation by any one party should not management, its directors, and the users of the services to be
prejudice future evaluations by other parties because small performed.
differences in needs can influence the judgement of users. The
PART A—STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR
use of this practice does not abrogate the right to “due process”
TESTING AGENCIES
necessary to all assessments under this practice. The right of
rebuttal to any conclusions drawn during an accreditation
6. General
procedure shall be extended to the agency.
6.1 The testing agency is responsible for the performance of
4.9 Each act of evaluation should be viewed as a “one-to-
the applicable tests with the objective of ascertaining that the
one” judgment and should not be construed as being a
manufacturer’s product complies with the testing requirements
universal judgment by others interested in the agency’s ser-
of the applicable standard or specifications. An understanding
vices. In order to ensure proper interpretation of each act of
of the requirements of each individual test method to be used
evaluation, the purpose of the evaluation and the evaluation
is a necessity. It is essential that the test agency has a copy of
area shall be clearly specified in any report of an evaluation
each applicable test method available, in its entirety, before
made pursuant to this practice.
undertaking the test program.
5. Organization of the Agency
6.2 The test agency shall prepare and submit a report in
compliance with the requirements of the test method. This test
5.1 The following information shall be made available by
the agency: report shall stipulate that the tests were performed in accor-
dancewithallrequirementsofthetestmethodwhensuchisthe
5.1.1 A description of the organization including:
5.1.1.1 The complete legal name and address of the main case. In those cases where a deviation is made from the test
office. method requirements, each such deviation shall be enumerated
5.1.1.2 Thenamesandpositionsoftheprincipalofficersand in the test report separately so that proper evaluation of the test
directors. results can take the deviations into account.
5.1.1.3 The agency’s principal ownership, its managerial 6.3 The function of a test agency encompasses only the
structure, and its principal members. performance of the tests required, the reporting of the results,
5.1.1.4 All relevant internal organizational components in- and a statement of compliance to the p
...
This document is not anASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of anASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
An American National Standard
Designation:E699–03 Designation: E 699 – 03 (Reapproved 2008)
Standard Practice for
Evaluation of Agencies Involved in Testing, Quality
Assurance, and Evaluating of Building Components
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 699; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope
1.1 This practice provides a guide for the information to be obtained and provides specific recommended criteria for evaluating
the capabilities of an agency to conduct inspections and tests and to report on tests performed in accordance withASTM standards
primarily on factory built components and assemblies.
1.2 The criteria in this standardpractice describe the basic information used in judging the capability of an agency to perform
its intended functions objectively and competently as well as to disclose possible conflicts of interest judged from the standpoint
of the user of this standard.practice. Testing, approval, and certification of a company’s own products and services by its own
testing agency does not necessarily constitute a conflict of interest.
1.3 The criteria presented herein are divided into three categories of endeavor, namely,
Part A—Standards and Criteria for Testing Agencies
Part B—Standards and Criteria for Quality Assurance Agencies
Part C—Standards and Criteria for Evaluating Agencies
1.4 The fundamental purpose of this practice is to provide criteria for evaluating an agency as denoted in 1.3 either by a user
of that service or by an accrediting authority.
1.5 It is not the purpose of this practice to provide a basis for determining the quality of a product or service being evaluated.
1.6 This practice is not intended for the evaluation of those activities normally associated with the production and sale of
products and the like, such as a manufacturer’s internal quality program. However, any organization may request or perform an
evaluation of its own in-house facilities under this standardpractice if it so desires.
1.7 It is not the intent of this standardpractice to be the basis for the determination of the type of agency to be selected by the
user.
1.8 This practice can be used in conjunction with Specification E 541 and Practice E 651
1.9 Specification E 329 specifies minimum requirements for agencies testing and/or inspecting materials used in construction
and which are primarily assembled on the jobsite.
2. Referenced Documents
2.1 ASTM Standards:
E 329Specification for Agencies Engaged in the Testing and/or Inspection of Material Used in Construction Specification for
Agencies Engaged in Construction Inspection and/or Testing
E 541 Specification for Agencies Engaged in System Analysis and Compliance Assurance for Manufactured Building
E 651/E 651M Practice for Evaluating Capabilities of Agencies Involved in System Analysis and Compliance Assurance for
Manufactured Building
3. Terminology
3.1 Definitions:
3.1.1 accrediting authority—a formal body (or an individual user) that evaluates the capability of an agency in certain specific
fields of activity.
This standard is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E36 on Conformity Assessment and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E36.70 on Construction
and Building Testing/Inspection Agencies.
Current edition approved June 10, 2003. Published July 2003. Originally approved in 1979. Discontinued September 1995 and reinstated in 1999 as E 699–99.
This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E36 on Laboratory and Inspection Agency Accreditation and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee
E36.70 on Construction and Building Testing/Inspection Agencies .
Current edition approved May 1, 2008. Published October 2008. Originally approved in 1979. Discontinued September 1995 and reinstated in 1999 as E 699–99. Last
previous edition approved in 2003 as E 699–03.
For referencedASTM standards, visit theASTM website, www.astm.org, or contactASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standards
, Vol 04.02.volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on the ASTM website.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
E 699 – 03 (2008)
3.1.2 affıliate—as used in this standard,practice, a corporate or organizational entity that has a management or an ownership
relationship, or both, with the agency being evaluated. It does not refer to a contractual relationship between organizations, nor
does it include the membership of a trade or similar association, or to the companies represented by such membership.
3.1.3 agency—an organization or part of an organization, engaged in the activities of testing, quality assurance, or evaluating
test results.
3.1.4 certification—the process by which recognition is obtained from an appropriate party that a product meets certain
specified requirements. Prototype or production models, or both, of the product(s) will have been tested and inspected to check
that they do meet the requirements. Quality assurance programs are used to ensure that the product(s) continue to comply with the
specified requirements. Satisfactory tests, inspections, and quality assurance are for the basis for certification. Certification may be
evidenced by labeling of the product.
3.1.5 criteria—common characteristics pertaining to organization, human resources, material resources, and quality systems
which provide a basis for evaluating agencies as to their capability to objectively and competently provide the specific service(s)
needed by the user.
3.1.6 evaluating—the function of obtaining data developed by a testing agency, and utilizing such data to perform calculations,
determine suitability, project results, or otherwise draw conclusions resulting from an analysis of these data.
3.1.7 human resources—those elements of support and capability that are provided by humans using their mental and physical
capabilities.
3.1.8 inspection—the process of measuring, examining, testing, gaging, or making other determinations with respect to
materials, products, services, or environments.
3.1.9 material resources—the instrumentalities, documentation, environments, structures, etc., needed to augment the elements
of support and capability provided by humans. (see human resources.)
3.1.10 organization component—a portion of an organization with specific tasks and activities that constitute a part of the total
effort and accomplishments of the organization.
3.1.11 quality—the totality of features and characteristics of a material, product, service, system, or environment that bear on
its capability to satisfy a specified need(s).
3.1.12 quality assurance—a planned system of activities whose purpose is to provide assurance that the overall quality control
program (see quality control) is in fact being effectively implemented. This system involves a continuing evaluation of the
adequacyandeffectivenessoftheoverallqualitycontrolprogramwithaviewtohavingcorrectiveactioninitiatedwherenecessary.
For a specific material, product, service, etc., this involves verification, audits, and evaluations of the quality factors that affect the
specification, production, inspection, and use of the material product, service, system, or environment.
3.1.13 quality control—a planned system of activities whose purpose is to provide a level of quality that meets the needs of
users; also, the use of such a system. The objective of quality control is to provide an overall system integrating the quality factors
ofseveralrelatedstepsincluding:theproperspecificationforwhatiswanted;productiontomeetthefullintentofthespecification;
inspection to determine whether the resulting material, product, service, etc., is in accord with the specification; and review of
usage to determine necessary revisions of the specification.
3.1.14 testing—the determination, by technical means, of the properties, performance, or elements of materials, products,
services, systems, or environments, which may involve application of established scientific principles and procedures.
4. Significance and Use
4.1 This standardpractice provides basic criteria for evaluating the qualifications of agencies utilizing the test methods
promulgated byASTM in Section 4, Construction, of theAnnual Book ofASTM Standards. The existence of a formal accrediting
authority such as a federal, state, municipal, or nongovernmental body is not necessary for the use of this standard.practice. These
criteria may be supplemented by more specific criteria for particular classes of testing, quality assurance, and evaluative agencies.
Specification E 329 can be used for on-site construction projects.
4.2 The intent of this standardpractice is to provide a “consensus-system” standardized basis for evaluating a testing, quality
assurance,orevaluatingagencywithrespecttoitscapabilitytoprovidethespecificservice(s)neededbytheuserwithoutprejudice
totheagencyofferingotherservicesorbeingaffiliatedwithotheragenciesororganizations.Inthosesituationswhereastrictliteral
interpretation of the phrase “shall be made available,” as used in this standard,practice, would be inordinately burdensome to an
agency, it will generally be sufficient that the agency concerned has the information available for “on-site” review.
4.3 The criteria of this standardpractice are described in terms of the basic information necessary for an accrediting authority
to evaluate the capability, with respect to objectivity, and competency of a testing, quality assurance, and evaluating agency
regarding common characteristics pertaining to the organization, human resources, material resources, and quality systems
employed by the agency in performing the services offered. Typically, accreditation of an agency involves the following three
essential phases:
4.3.1 Submittal,toaninvolvedaccreditingauthority,ofbasicinformationinaccordancewiththecriteriaofthisstandardpractice
by an interested agency.
4.3.2 Evaluation of the agency-submitted information by the involved accrediting authority.
4.3.3 Verification,“on-site,”oftheagency-submittedinformationbytherespresentative(s)oftheinvolvedaccreditingauthority.
4.4 Although three categories are presented, an agency may provide one or any combination of these categories for which it
E 699 – 03 (2008)
can qualify.An agency requesting qualification under more than one category must satisfy the criteria for each category for which
acceptability is desired.
4.5 The criteria set forth herein represent areas upon which agreement can be reached. There may be other areas to be given
consideration which may be of importance to the user. The user should include such other areas as a part of its own criteria.
4.6 This standardpractice represents minimum criteria necessary to perform, monitor, or evaluate the test results of those
standards promulgated by ASTM Committee E-6.
4.7 It is anticipated that the ultimate user of this standardpractice will have the expertise necessary to exercise good judgment
in the areas of human resources, physical resources, and quality systems of the agency being evaluated.
NOTE 1—For example, when judging the qualifications of the various individuals in a particular agency, related factors or alternative resources (such
as mechanical, electrical, or electronic equipment used to aid, control, or monitor the work of the personnel) should be considered when assessing the
overall qualifications of such individuals. The job experience and the reliability of the individual should also be considered in the judgment, where
applicable.
4.8 When assessing the organization and the resources of a particular agency, the judgment should take into account only those
factors or resources specifically related to the technological area being served by the agency in terms of the specific evaluation,
and only as necessary to form an adequate judgment in relation to the evaluation. Conversely, those technological areas served by
a particular agency that are not required to be evaluated in a specific instance should not be impugned through the lack of such
evaluation. The absence of evaluation or the denial of accreditation by any one party should not prejudice future evaluations by
other parties because small differences in needs can influence the judgement of users. The use of this standardpractice does not
abrogate the right to “due process” necessary to all assessments under this standard.practice. The right of rebuttal to any
conclusions drawn during an accreditation procedure shall be extended to the agency.
4.9 Each act of evaluation should be viewed as a “one-to-one” judgment and should not be construed as being a universal
judgment by others interested in the agency’s services. In order to ensure proper interpretation of each act of evaluation, the
purpose of the evaluation and the evaluation area shall be clearly specified in any report of an evaluation made pursuant to this
standard. practice.
5. Organization of the Agency
5.1 The following information shall be made available by the agency:
5.1.1 A description of the organization including:
5.1.1.1 The complete legal name and address of the main office.
5.1.1.2 The names and positions of the principal officers and directors.
5.1.1.3 The agency’s principal ownership, its managerial structure, and its principal members.
5.1.1.4 All relevant internal organizational components including their locations and their primary functions.
5.1.1.5 Allrelevantorganizationalaffiliatesoftheagency,andtheprincipalofficersoftheaffiliatesanddirectorsoftheaffiliates,
where applicable.
5.1.1.6 External organizations and organizational components and their functions that are utilized for significant supporting
technical services.
5.1.1.7 A brief history of the agency, including its relationship with its organizational components, affiliations, and other
supporting information.
5.1.2 A general description of the geographical area served.
5.1.3 A general description of the types of users of the services.
5.1.4 A listing of the relevant technical services offered.
5.1.5 A functional description of the agency’s organizational structure for the services listed in 5.1.4 including oper
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.