WORDING OF CERTIFICATES – ISO 17020 Inspection Bodies

Presentation

To guarantee propriety of declaration enrollment the accompanying phrasing on authentications should be utilized, ordinarily as a reference.

“This is a licensed authentication approved for issue by Authorization Administration for Confirming Bodies LLC who have surveyed XXXX against characterized models and in cognisance of ISO 17020:2012 Similarity appraisal — Necessities for the activity of different kinds of bodies performing assessment’.

Notes: (I) Congruity Evaluation and Similarity Appraisal Body are just terms characterized inside segments 2.1 and 2.4 of ISO 17000:2004 ‘Congruity Evaluation – Jargon and general standards’.

Endorsement Data
Declarations or examination reports ought to, as a base incorporate the accompanying data:

• Client name
• Client address
• Appraisal standard(s)
• Starting appraisal date
• Re-affirmation date (assuming intermittent observation is required)
• Date of authentication
• Expiry date of authentication (on the off chance that the confirmed status is time restricted)
• Name and address of declaration granting body (review body)
• Any vital admonitions in regards to limits on legitimacy (for example liable to agreeable execution and observation visits, and so forth)
• Logo of granting body (assessment body)
• Logo of authorization body, if material
• Required data as characterized in segment 7.4 ‘Review reports and examination endorsements’ of ISO 17020:2012 norm.

COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE TO THE WORDING, CONTENT, AND ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES FOR ISO 17020 INSPECTION BODIES

Presentation and Introduction

Within the globally recognized framework of conformity assessment, inspection plays a critical role in providing independent assurance that products, processes, services, or systems conform to specified requirements. ISO/IEC 17020:2012, “Conformity assessment — Requirements for the operation of various types of inspection bodies,” provides the definitive benchmark for competence, impartiality, and consistent operation in this field.

A core output and a primary form of external communication for an accredited inspection body is the certificate or inspection report. These documents are not mere administrative formalities; they are tangible representations of the body’s authority, the rigor of its processes, and the verified status of the inspected client or item. Consequently, their wording, content, and presentation are of paramount importance. They must be precise, unambiguous, and resistant to misinterpretation to maintain trust in the inspection process and the accreditation system that underpins it.

This guide delves into the critical aspects of certificate wording, mandated content, and best practices for issuance. It aims to provide inspection bodies, their clients, and end-users of inspection certificates with a thorough understanding of the principles that govern these pivotal documents, ensuring propriety in declaration and enrollment within accredited schemes.

Section 1: Foundational Principles and the Role of Accreditation

1.1 The Conformity Assessment Ecosystem

To understand the requirements for certificates, one must first grasp the ecosystem defined by ISO standards.

ISO/IEC 17000:2004 (Conformity Assessment — Vocabulary and General Principles): This is the foundational standard. It defines key terms:
- Conformity Assessment (Clause 2.1): A “demonstration that specified requirements relating to a product, process, system, person or body are fulfilled.” Inspection is one activity within this broad field.
- Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) (Clause 2.4): A “body that performs conformity assessment activities.” An inspection body accredited to ISO/IEC 17020 is a type of CAB.
ISO/IEC 17020:2012: This standard specifies requirements solely for the operation of inspection bodies, a subset of CABs. It focuses on their competence, impartiality, and consistent operation, whether they are classified as Type A (independent), Type B, or Type C bodies.

1.2 The Purpose of Accreditation and its Declaration

Accreditation, performed by an authoritative body like an Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment Bodies (ASCAB), is a third-party attestation that a CAB (in this case, an inspection body) is competent to carry out specific conformity assessment tasks. It is a continuous process involving rigorous initial assessment and ongoing surveillance.

When an inspection body is accredited, it signifies that its management system, personnel competence, inspection methodologies, and reporting processes have been evaluated and found compliant with ISO/IEC 17020. The inclusion of a reference to accreditation on a certificate is a powerful claim. It transfers the trust vested in the accreditation body to the inspection body’s work. Therefore, the phrasing must be exact to avoid misleading users about the scope and nature of the accreditation.

Section 2: Mandatory Phrasing for Accreditation Reference

The provided phrasing is a template designed to ensure a standardized and correct declaration. Let’s deconstruct it and explore its components in depth:

Standard Phrasing:

“This is an accredited certificate authorized for issue by [Name of Inspection Body, e.g., XXXX Inspection Services Ltd.] who have been assessed by [Accreditation Body, e.g., Accreditation Service for Conforming Bodies LLC] against defined criteria and in cognizance of ISO/IEC 17020:2012 ‘Conformity assessment — Requirements for the operation of various types of bodies performing inspection’.”

2.1 Detailed Analysis of Key Phrases

“This is an accredited certificate…”: This is a definitive statement of status. It clearly differentiates this document from a non-accredited opinion or report. The term “accredited” explicitly links the certificate’s validity to the inspection body’s accredited status.
“…authorized for issue by [Inspection Body]…”: This establishes legal and professional responsibility. It names the entity that performed the inspection and stands behind the findings. The inspection body’s name must be its legally registered name.
“…who have been assessed by [Accreditation Body]…”: This is the core of the accreditation claim. It identifies the independent, third-party accreditation body that has evaluated the inspector. It is crucial that the accreditation body is named accurately and is a signatory to international mutual recognition arrangements (like the ILAC MRA) to ensure global acceptance.
“…against defined criteria…”: This is a critical qualifier. “Defined criteria” typically refer to the specific accreditation standards (ISO/IEC 17020) and any relevant scheme-specific or regulatory requirements (e.g., for pressure equipment, lifting gear, electrical installations). It implies that the accreditation is not generic but tied to a specific scope of inspection activities listed in the body’s accreditation schedule.
“…and in cognizance of ISO/IEC 17020:2012…”: This explicitly names the standard against which the inspection body’s system was assessed. The standard’s full title, including the year of publication, must be used to avoid confusion with other versions. The phrase “in cognizance of” is important—it indicates that the accreditation assessment was conducted with the requirements of ISO/IEC 17020 as the foundational benchmark.

2.2 Common Errors and Misinterpretations to Avoid

Claiming Accreditation for the Product/Service: The certificate must not imply that the client’s product or service itself is “accredited.” Accreditation applies to the inspection body and its processes. The correct statement is that the inspection was performed by an accredited body.
Overstating Scope: The accreditation reference is only valid for activities within the formally accredited scope. A certificate for an inspection type not listed on the accreditation schedule should not carry the accreditation statement.
Using Outdated Standards or Body Names: References to superseded standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 17020:1998) or former names of the inspection or accreditation body invalidate the document’s credibility.
Ambiguous Language: Phrases like “working towards accreditation,” “approved by,” or “recognized under” are not equivalent to “accredited” and must not be used if making an accreditation claim.

Section 3: Mandatory Certificate Data and Content

ISO/IEC 17020, particularly in its clause 7.4 “Inspection reports and inspection certificates,” requires that these documents contain all essential information necessary for their interpretation and to facilitate traceability. The following list expands on the provided minimum data, detailing the “why” behind each element.

3.1 Identification of Parties

Client Name and Address: The legal entity that commissioned and is responsible for the inspection. This is crucial for contract validity, invoicing, and defining responsibility for the inspected item/system.
Name and Address of Certificate Granting Body (Inspection Body): Full contact details of the issuer, establishing accountability. This should include the specific branch or office that managed the inspection if applicable.

3.2 Description of the Inspection Activity

Appraisal Standard(s): This is arguably the most critical technical element. It must precisely list:
- The specification or standard against which the inspection was conducted (e.g., ASME B31.3, EN 1090-2, a specific client drawing/requirement).
- The edition/version/revision of that standard.
- Any applicable inspection plan or procedure number.
- Example: “Inspection of welded structural steelwork against DIN EN ISO 5817:2014, Quality Level B, as per Inspection Plan IP-2023-01.”
Object of Inspection: A clear, unambiguous description of what was inspected. This could be:
- A specific product (with serial numbers, batch numbers).
- A process (e.g., “In-process surveillance of coating application”).
- A system (e.g., “Fire detection and alarm system at 123 Main Street”).
- A piece of equipment (with registration or ID number).

3.3 Chronological Data

Initial Assessment/Inspection Date(s): The date(s) on which the physical inspection activities took place. For long-term projects, this may be a date range or multiple dates.
Date of Certificate Issue: The date the certificate is formally signed and released. This may differ from the inspection date.
Re-Affirmation Date (if applicable): For surveillance or periodic inspection schemes, the date when the next routine inspection is due. This informs the client of the maintenance schedule for their certification.
Expiry Date (if applicable): The date after which the certificate is no longer valid. This is common for certificates of conformity for items with a defined safe operational life (e.g., lifting equipment, pressure vessels). The absence of an expiry date must be justified and clearly stated (e.g., “This certificate relates to the condition of the item on the date of inspection only”).

3.4 Legal and Limiting Conditions

Necessary Warnings Regarding Limits of Validity (Mandatory Disclaimer): This section protects the integrity of the certificate and prevents misuse. It typically includes statements that:
- The certificate reflects findings at the time of inspection only.
- Continued validity is conditional on the item being maintained in accordance with relevant standards and not subjected to undue modification or abuse.
- The certificate is non-transferable unless expressly stated.
- The inspection body’s liability is limited as defined in its general terms and conditions.
- Any unauthorized alterations void the certificate.
Statement of Independence and Impartiality: A declaration, often referencing the inspection body’s Type (A, B, or C per ISO/IEC 17020), confirming freedom from conflicts of interest.

3.5 Technical and Traceability Information

Unique Certificate Number: A reference number allowing for unambiguous retrieval of all records related to the inspection (work orders, checklists, photographs, technician notes).
Location of Inspection: The physical address where the inspection was carried out, which may differ from the client’s address.
Identification of Inspecting Personnel: The name(s) and/or unique identifier(s) of the lead inspector and any significant team members, demonstrating the use of competent personnel.
Summary of Inspection Methods and Results: A concise description of the activities performed (e.g., visual examination, dimensional check, NDT methods used) and a clear statement of the outcome (e.g., “The inspected items were found to conform to the requirements specified above,” or “Non-conformities were raised as detailed in attached report NCR-457”).
Signature and Title: The certificate must be signed by an authorized, competent individual (e.g., Chief Inspector, Certification Manager). An electronic signature is acceptable if it is secure and verifiable.

3.6 Logos and Branding

Logo of the Granting Body (Inspection Body): The corporate logo of the inspection body.
Logo of the Accreditation Body: The internationally recognized logo/mark of the accreditation body (e.g., UKAS, A2LA, DAkkS). Its use is strictly governed by the accreditation body’s rules and is only permitted on documents within the accredited scope. Its presence is the visual shorthand for the accreditation claim made in the text.

Section 4: Operationalizing ISO/IEC 17020 Clause 7.4

Clause 7.4 of ISO/IEC 17020 mandates that inspection documents be accurate, clear, unambiguous, and objective. It requires procedures to control their preparation, review, approval, and issuance. This translates into a mandatory management system within the inspection body:

Document Control: Templates for certificates must be controlled documents, with version history and approval.
Review and Authorization: A process must ensure every certificate is technically reviewed and administratively authorized by designated personnel before release.
Amendment and Re-Issuance: Strict procedures must govern how errors are corrected, and re-issued certificates are controlled, ensuring the invalidated original is retrieved where possible.
Record Retention: The certificate, along with all supporting records, must be retained for a defined period in accordance with legal, contractual, and accreditation requirements.

Section 5: Special Considerations and Complex Scenarios

5.1 Certificates for Non-Conformity

Truthful Reporting and the Integrity of Accreditation

The issuance of an inspection certificate following the discovery of non-conformities is a critical test of an inspection body’s impartiality and commitment to the principles of ISO/IEC 17020. A common misconception is that an “accredited certificate” is synonymous with a “pass certificate.” This is fundamentally incorrect and risks undermining the entire purpose of independent inspection. The accreditation statement attests to the competence, impartiality, and procedural rigor of the inspection process itself, not to the conformity of the inspected item.

Therefore, when non-conformities are identified, the inspection body has an unequivocal obligation to report them truthfully, accurately, and without dilution. The form of this report can vary based on the contractual agreement and the nature of the findings:

A Statement of Non-Conformity or Inspection Report: In cases of widespread or critical failure, the primary deliverable may be titled as a “Detailed Inspection Report” or “Statement of Findings.” This document must contain all the mandatory data elements required by Clause 7.4. It serves the same evidentiary purpose as a certificate but frames the outcome around the reporting of defects. The accreditation statement is equally crucial here, as it assures the client and any regulatory authority that the non-conformities were identified through a competent and assessed process.

A Certificate of Inspection with Detailed Deviations: The document may still be structured as a certificate but will contain a prominent “Results” section stating non-conformity. It must include a clear, unambiguous list of deviations, referencing the specific clauses of the standard or specification that were not met. The final declaration would read similarly to: “The inspection revealed the non-conformities detailed in Section 4. All other inspected aspects were found to conform to the requirements.” The accreditation statement remains fully valid on this document.

5.2 Subcontracted Activities

If critical parts of the inspection were subcontracted, the certificate must clearly identify the subcontracted party and the activities they performed. If the subcontractor is also accredited for that work, it may be appropriate to reference their accreditation as well.

5.3 Electronic and Digital Certificates

The principles remain identical. Digital certificates must have equivalent controls against falsification (e.g., secure digital signatures, PDF encryption, registry systems). The logos and text must be embedded, not simply attached as an unprotected image.

5.4 Multi-Site and Ongoing Surveillance

For management system inspections or plant certifications, a single certificate may cover multiple locations. It must then clearly delineate the scope for each site. Surveillance visit reports, while not always full re-certificates, must also conform to the core data requirements when they are used to confirm ongoing compliance.

Conclusion

The wording and content of certificates issued by ISO/IEC 17020 accredited inspection bodies are far from a mere formality. They are the culmination of a rigorous, accredited process and serve as a vital link in the chain of conformity assurance. By adhering strictly to the mandated phrasing for accreditation references and meticulously including all required data as per ISO/IEC 17020:2012, inspection bodies uphold their integrity, protect their clients, and maintain the global trust placed in the accreditation system.

The certificate is the face of the inspection body’s professionalism. Ensuring its propriety in every word, datum, and logo is a fundamental responsibility, safeguarding the value of inspection services in a world dependent on verified quality, safety, and reliability.

Branches

SDAB Accreditation

SDAB Head Office

SDAB Sanatan Dharma Accreditation Board
SDAB House
C/O Mr.Garry 54, Glengarnock Avenue,
E-14 3BP Isle Of Dogs, London UK
Tel .: +44-8369083940
email: info@sanatanboards.com
Website: www.sanatanboards.com

MUMBAI Head Office

Sanatan Dharma Accreditation Board (SDAB)
SDAB House
B-401, New Om Kaveri Chs. Ltd., Nagindas pada,
Next To Shiv Sena Office, Nallasopara (E)
Tel .: +91-7499991895
email: info@sanatanboards.com
Website: www.sanatanboards.com

DELHI-NCR Regd. Office

Sanatan Dharma Accreditation Board (SDAB)
SDAB House
Asaoti, Dist Palwal
Faridabad Delhi NCR, Haryana
Tel .: +91-7979801035
Fax: +91-250 2341170
Website: www.sanatanboards.com

sanatanboards