CT 01 Accreditation Process For Certification Bodies
CT 01 Accreditation Process For Certification Bodies
CT 01 Accreditation Process For Certification Bodies
CT 01
ACCREDITATION PROCESS FOR
CERTIFICATION BODIES
Page
1 The Scheme 1
2 Definitions 5
3 Organisation Structure 8
3.1 Council Committee for Management Systems and Product 8
3.2 Working Groups 8
3.3 Assessors / Technical Experts 8
4 Accreditation Process 9
4.1 Introduction 9
4.2 Application 9
4.3 Preliminary Assessment (optional) 10
4.4 Initial Assessment 10
4.5 Award of Accreditation 13
4.6 Routine Surveillance and Reassessment 13
4.7 Non Routine Assessment 15
4.8 Categories of Non-Conformities and their Effects 15
4.9 Prohibition of Issue of Certificates to Accreditation Standards 16
4.10 Accredited Certificates for earlier (non-accredited) Certified 17
Companies to Management Systems
5 Branch Offices 17
6 Safety 18
1.1 The Accreditation Scheme for Management Systems, Personnel and Product
Certification Bodies is the national accreditation scheme of the Singapore
Accreditation Council (SAC) which is managed by SPRING Singapore. The
said scheme will be referred to as “Certification Bodies Scheme”.
1.4 SAC accredits certification bodies that can demonstrate compliance with the
following requirements and scope:
Note:
(1) IAF MD: IAF Mandatory Documents
(2) Please see Annex 1 for the list of above-mentioned standards.
Fire Safety Products (FSP) ISO/IEC 17065 Refer to SCDF Fire Safety
SAC CT 12 Guidelines 1
1.5 This document shall be read in conjunction with SAC 01 – Terms and
Conditions for Accreditation, SAC 02 – Rules for Use of SAC Accreditation
Marks and Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) Marks, ISO/IEC 17021-1,
ISO/TS 22003, ISO/IEC 17024, ISO/IEC 17065, the corresponding IAF
mandatory and guidance documents, and any specific requirements that may
be published relating to the Certification Bodies scheme.
2.1 Accreditation
Third party attestation (refer to 2.8) related to a conformity assessment body
(e.g. certification body) conveying formal demonstration of its competence to
carry out specific conformity assessment tasks
2.5 Appeal
Request by a certification body for reconsideration of a decision made by SAC
relating to accreditation
2.6 Assessment
Process undertaken by SAC to assess the competence of a certification body,
based on particular standard(s) and/or guide(s) and/or other normative
documents for a defined scope of accreditation
2.7 Assessor
A person assigned by SAC to perform, alone or as part of an assessment
team, an assessment of a certification body
2.8 Attestation
Issue of a statement, based on a decision following review, that fulfilment of
specified requirements has been demonstrated
2.9 Certification
Third party attestation (2.8) related to products, processes, systems or
persons
2.11 Complaint
Expression of dissatisfaction, other than appeal, by any person or
organisation, to SAC relating to the activities of SAC or of an accredited
certification body, where a response is expected
2.13 Expert
A person assigned by SAC to provide specific knowledge or expertise with
respect to the scope of accreditation to be assessed
2.16 Non-conformity
Non-fulfilment of a requirement
Note: Gross lack of competence may arise from lack of competent staff for
critical activities, inappropriate environment for critical activities, lack of
critical equipment, lack of critical traceability, totally invalid test, calibration or
inspection method, total breakdown of the record or documentation system,
lack of or totally ineffective quality assurance procedures or other causes.
2.20 Observation
An assessment finding that does not warrant a non-conformity but is identified
by the assessment team as an opportunity for improvement.
2.25 Surveillance
Routine examination of a certification body to evaluate its continued
conformance with SAC requirements, normally every twelve month period.
3 Organisation Structure
3.1.1 The Council Committee for Management Systems and Product (CCMP) is a
specialist committee appointed by the SAC Council. The CCMP is
responsible for the formulation of policies, provides guidance and oversees
the operation of the Accreditation Schemes for Management Systems and
Product Certification Bodies.
3.1.2 The CCMP is authorised by the SAC Council to review, evaluate and approve
assessment reports for accreditation of certification bodies through the CCMP
Review Committees. The CCMP may also co-opt individuals with relevant
technical or management expertise as advisors for the review of assessment
reports.
3.1.3 The term of office for CCMP members is three years with provision for re-
appointment.
3.2.2 The composition of the Working Group is approved by the CCMP. The basis
of appointment will be the members’ knowledge and expertise in respective
technical field or area. The Working Groups are to recommend criteria for new
schemes/programmes.
3.2.3 The term of office for members of the Working Group is for the duration of the
development of the scheme.
3.3.3 The assessment team submits assessment reports to the CCMP Review
Committee for approval, after each assessment on the granting, extension,
reduction, renewal, suspension or withdrawal of accreditation.
4 Accreditation Process
4.1 Introduction
4.1.3 The certification body is advised to study in detail the SAC terms and
conditions to ensure that it can substantially meet the accreditation criteria
before it lodges an application for accreditation.
4.1.4 The management system of the certification body shall be operational for at
least two months before SAC carries out an assessment of the certification
body.
4.2 Application
4.2.1 All applications shall be made through SACiNet (online platform for
accreditation process). All applications are to be supported with documents
containing sufficient information regarding its staff, management system,
equipment (where applicable) or other information necessary or requested by
SAC from time to time for the assessment of the certification body.
4.2.2 The applicant shall nominate a management representative to liaise with SAC
on all matters relating to accreditation and the applicant shall keep SAC
informed of any change in the representative.
4.2.3 Upon receipt of a duly completed application made through SACiNet and
satisfactory supporting documents (including completed assessment
checklist) relating to its management system and equipment (where
applicable), an acknowledgement notification will be sent to the applicant
through SACiNet.
4.2.6 The composition of the assessment team will also be sent to the applicant for
agreement.
4.3.1 SAC may arrange for a preliminary assessment at the request of the
applicant. If a preliminary assessment is conducted, SAC will issue a
preliminary assessment report highlighting to the certification body on the
gaps identified.
4.4.1 Before the initial assessment, the assessment team shall review all relevant
documents and records supplied by the certification body to evaluate its
system, as documented for conformity with the relevant standard(s) and other
requirements for accreditation.
4.4.2 SAC may decide not to proceed with an on-site assessment based on
nonconformities raised during the document and records review. SAC shall
report the nonconformities in writing to the CAB.
b When deciding how many and which audits are to be witnessed, a balanced
selection, based on the scopes applied will be made covering the scopes to be
accredited. In general, SAC shall take into account factors such as:
i. the Certification Bodies’ overall performance;
ii. factors such as process complexity or legislation etc. which
influence the ability of the certified organisation to demonstrate its
ability to meet the intended outcomes of the Management System;
iii. feedback from interested parties including complaints about
certified organizations;
iv. the results of the Certification Bodies 's internal audits;
v. scheme owner requirements, etc.;
vi. changes in Certification Bodies work patterns – growth of work
within a specific region or technical area;
vii. number of clients within the Certification Bodies’ scope of
accreditation;
viii. confidence in the Certification Bodies’ auditor evaluation and
approval process; and
ix. previous or other office or witnessing assessment results, etc.
4.4.8 The assessment shall take place at the premises of the applicant and on a
representative sample of witnessed assessments as recommended by the
assessment team. For initial assessments, in addition to visiting the main or
head office, visits shall be made to all other premises of the certification
bodies from which one or more key activities are performed and which are
covered by the scope of accreditation. The key activities are described in
Clause M7.5.7.2, M7.5.7.3 and M7.5.7.4 of IAF/ILAC A5.
4.4.9 The applicant shall be informed on the assessment findings which include
comments on competence and conformity. During the assessment, non-
conformities (critical, significant or minor) and observations may be raised.
Please refer to clause 4.8 for categories of the non-conformities and their
effects. The management representative should ensure that the non-
conformities and observations raised are fully understood and acknowledged.
4.4.10 The applicant will be given one month to submit corrective actions for the non-
conformities from the date of the closing meeting. The management
representative should ensure that the non-conformities and observations
raised are fully understood and acknowledged. Once the applicant has taken
CT 01, 8 March 2018 Page 12 of 39
the necessary corrective actions, the assessment team shall review the
corrective actions and if it considers necessary, conduct a verification visit to
verify the actions taken, and shall submit an assessment report to the Review
Committee within a reasonable time frame. For critical non-conformities,
accreditation shall not be granted. The applicant would be re-assessed after it
has rectified the critical non-conformities.
4.4.11 The Review Committee comprises appropriate members from the CCMP.
4.5.1 The CCMP grants accreditation to the applicant upon being satisfied that the
certification body meets the criteria for accreditation.
4.5.2 All decisions of the CCMP on the granting of accreditation, extension, reduction,
renewal, or suspension or withdrawal shall, unless expressly provided herein, be
final and not called into question by the certification body.
4.5.4 The accredited certification body shall pay to SAC an annual fee and a levy
based on the number of accredited certificates issued, and other assessment
and administrative fees as determined by SAC from time to time.
4.5.5 All accredited certification bodies will be listed in the SAC website.
4.6.3 The certification body has to submit corrective actions on the non-conformities
within one month from the date of closing meeting and the corrective actions
have been verified to be satisfactory. There is no need for the certification
body to respond to the observations. However, the certification body is
encouraged to do so. If the certification body chooses to address the
observations, the response should be submitted within one month from the
date of the closing meeting. A verification visit may be conducted to verify the
actions taken. For critical non-conformities, the related accreditation scheme
or scope(s) may be suspended or withdrawn. A re-assessment may be
conducted. Upon approval by the CCMP review committee (for
reassessment), a revised Certificate will be issued to the certification bodies
to reflect the change in the expiry date.
4.6.4 The certification bodies may request for an extension or reduction in the
scope of accreditation for consideration during the surveillance and
reassessment. For extension of scope, the certification bodies shall write
formally to SAC preferably one month before the date of assessment. During
the assessment, the extension of scope will be assessed, if needed. Upon
approval by the review committee, a revised Schedule will be issued to the
certification bodies to reflect any changes in the scope of accreditation.
4.6.6 If the certification body’s certified client does not allow SAC to witness the
audit, the certification of the client may be withdrawn. SAC will also inform all
its accredited certification bodies of the withdrawal. If the client chooses to
seek certification from another certification body, SAC will inform the new
4.7.1 Non-routine assessments will include visits made to consider requests for
extension in the scope of accreditation, or to investigate complaints made
against the accredited certification bodies on areas within the scope of
accreditation, if these could not be conducted during the surveillance visits.
4.8.1 All non-conformities raised by the assessment team during an assessment will
be categorised as “Critical”, “Significant” and “Minor”.
a) Critical Non-conformity
A critical non-conformity or a series of non-conformities which seriously
threatens the credibility of the relevant accreditation scheme. Gross lack of
technical competence and persistent violation of SAC Terms & Conditions,
regulations, gross lack of commitment of the organisation to qualify or comply
to accreditation criteria and existence of serious doubt on the integrity and
impartiality of the organisation. A management system breakdown, as
indicated by a series of significant non-conformities which seriously threaten
the quality of all activities under the system, warrants a critical non-conformity.
Note: Gross lack of competence may arise from lack of competent staff for
critical activities, inappropriate environment for critical activities, lack of critical
equipment, lack of critical traceability, totally invalid test, calibration or
inspection method, total breakdown of the record or documentation system,
lack of or totally ineffective quality assurance procedures or other causes.
c) Minor Non-conformity
A minor non-conformity shall have no serious adverse effect on the validity of
the activity, its results or the competence of the organisation.
4.10.1 For transfer of accredited certificates under IAF MLA issued by other IAF MLA
members to SAC accredited certificates, the certification bodies will be
required to meet the requirements of IAF MD 2 – IAF Mandatory
Documentation for the Transfer of Accredited Certification of Management
System.
4.10.2 For transfer of non-accredited certificates which are not under IAF MLA to
SAC accredited certificates, the certification body has to check on the
qualifications of the auditor who conducted the non-accredited audit and the
duration of the non-accredited audit. In addition, the scopes must be
accredited.
a) If the auditor meets the qualifications for the respective schemes and the
duration of the audit is adequate (as indicated in IAF MD 5), the
certification body can grant the accredited certificate to the client without
further audit.
5 Branch Offices
5.1 An accredited certification body shall seek approval from SAC if it wishes to set
up a branch office to conduct certification covered in the scope of accreditation.
The certification body shall not issue SAC accredited certificates unless
accreditation has been extended to cover the work performed in the branch
office.
5.2 If an accredited accreditation body wishes to seek accreditation for its branch
office, it shall apply formally to SAC to request for an extension of the
accreditation to the branch office.
5.3 SAC may consider on a case to case basis the accreditation of overseas branch
office with Headquarters (HQ) in Singapore, if it meets the following:
The HQ oversees and controls the management system and its
implementation in the branch office; and
The branch offices must operate to the same management system and
procedures as the HQ.
6.1 Safe working conditions are essential to good certification practice and
management. The certification body shall observe all necessary safety
precautions to ensure that its certification activities are performed in a safe
working environment.
6.2 SAC will not arrange for on-site assessment if it considers the certification
body premises to be unsafe.
6.3 It is the certification body’s responsibility to comply with relevant health and
safety requirements.
1
NACE Code (Rev. 2) Description Critical Scopes
A01 – Crop and Animal Production, Hunting Agriculture; e.g. non-processed
and Related Service Activities Fishing foods, primary products
A03 – Fishing and Aquaculture
1 Activities involving manufacturing, production or distribution of product or services which have direct
impact on health, safety or the environment (examples in bracket) are defined as critical scopes.
Scope of Accreditation for HACCP-based Food Management System [All are critical
scopes]
J Equipment Manufacturing
1. Information technology
2. Language and literacy
3. Manufacturing
4. Productivity and innovation
5. Professional and personal development
6. Quality, including management systems
7. Workplace safety and health
8. Security
9. Service excellence
10. Others
Information technology
Food Safety For the FSMS Certification Scheme, the number of witnessed
Management assessments shall be based on IAF MD 16.
System
(FSMS) Clusters
1. Farming (A+B)
2. Food and Feed Processing (C+D)
3. Catering (E)
4. Retail, Transport and Storage (F+G)
5. Auxiliary Industries (H+I+J)
6. (Bio) Chemicals (K)
51 - 200 certificates
2 initial or recertification or surveillance audit per scheme
Quality and At least one witnessing activity in each technical cluster of each
Environmental Management Systems scheme, to be complemented with other
Management assessment activities to guarantee that each technical cluster,
System (QMS shall be assessed within two successive accreditation cycles.
and EMS)
Food Safety At least one audit in cluster 2 (if covered by the accredited scope
Management of the Certification Body) shall be witnessed by SAC annually and
System at least one audit in each of the other clusters during the
(FSMS) accreditation cycle.
1 – 50 certificates
1 initial or recertification or surveillance audit per product category
(eg RMC, fire safety products)
51 - 200 certificates
2 initial or recertification or surveillance audits per product
category
Note 2 Audits witnessed during the application for extension of scope, if any, will be taken into
consideration.
Note 3 Management system: For each scheme, witnessed audits must include at least one of
the certification standards during the cycle. For example, for QMS, at least one SS 524
and one ISO 9001 audit must be witnessed during the cycle; for OSHMS, at least one
SS 506 Part 1 and Part 3 must be witnessed during the cycle where the accreditation
covers both standards.
Note 4 Product: Witnessed audits must cover all product categories during the cycle. For
example at least one ready-mixed concrete, E & E, FSP, building & construction and
BRC must be witnessed during the cycle.
Note 5 The number of certificates issued is based on the last submission by the certification body
for the annual billing of the fees.
Quality and The following witnessing rules apply for the extension of
Environmental accreditation of each scheme to be complemented with other
Management assessment activities to guarantee the appropriate coverage of
System the applicant scope: