PQ Systems User Community information?

OK, here are the points I would make. I assume by NRC auditor you mean Nuclear Regulatory Commision. I worked on the DOE side of nuclear, but we followed most of the same source rules. By the way, I wrote the chapter on Control of Electronic Records in the new edition of the "Nuclear Auditing Handbook" from ASQ. So I have researched by DOE and NRC requirements for electronic records. There is a lot more such as backup copies, safeguarding the software, making sure only approved trained and qualified persons use the software, etc.

1. I don't work for the maker of GAGEpack, so do not know what it would take to modify the GAGEpack software. I see they are a COVE Forum sponsor, so someone here may have a connection to them

2. You need to decide what is "THE RECORD" when it comes to your certificates. If "THE RECORD" is indeed the electronic software called GAGEpack, then so be it. That software needs to be controlled as an electronic record. So, no, you would not be taking screen shots with an NRC auditor "breathing down your neck" You would say - sir or madam, this is the official record for that gage, here it is. Be that a file of pdf shots, or the software itself.

3. If you choose to take screenshots, make pdf's etc from the GAGEpack software, then that needs to follow some sort of quality controlled procedure as to how those copies are to be made, and if the copies then become "THE RECORD", then that needs a formal process and designation. Seems easier for traceability to leave the GAGEpack as the official record. And you would need an electronic filing system for access to those pdf's.

4. I would still think if you can "print a cert" from that software, you can print that to the "PDF printer". Again, you need to control that copy, and keep track of what is "THE RECORD". If you are talking about having a "convenient file" of PDF's of the records, then it needs to be labeled and controlled in that manner.

LATE EDIT:

5. The software is made by PQ systems (Jim Wynne let me know this). So I would like to add, especially in the context of Nuclear: I would presume that someone at your facility did an initial acceptance test of the software to ensure it met NRC electronic records and gage calibration requirements. If so (I hope that is so) I would be very careful about making or requesting any changes to that software.

Hi @Aaron Contreras

For your original question, Yes, you can create a PDF of any report from GAGEpack. As Jim and Steve mentioned, most all Windows machines have a print to PDF option among the available printers. GAGEpack can be told to print to a normal office printer or to a PDF creator. You can even pick/choose a specific print option to use per report preview.

One of our GAGEpack Tech Tuesday series videos talks about the Calibration Certificates and some of the surrounding options. You can see that posted HERE, it is the 3rd video recording listed.

If you still have questions or would like to know more, please let us know at [email protected]
Thank you!

At the Home tab, the Reports icon will bring up a list of available reports. Enter your parameters - date range & asset range, and it'll output whatever fits your parameters, and allows you to print or print to pdf directly from the output screen. There is also a report wizard that allows you to build your own report template to meet your needs. (Reports -> New)

I've been using GAGEpack for several years now and I'm confident I'm not utilizing it's full potential. Anyway, there is an option to "Move due dates to end of month". I'm trying to understand why this option would be utilized. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Blackjack_60 said:

I've been using GAGEpack for several years now and I'm confident I'm not utilizing it's full potential. Anyway, there is an option to "Move due dates to end of month". I'm trying to understand why this option would be utilized. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

I'm not speaking for PQ Systems, but many users might find it useful to specify a month for recalibration rather than a specific date. For example, if a device is calibrated on April 14, 2023, you can specify that the next calibration is due in April of 2024. This allows some wiggle room. The function you describe facilitates this idea.

You should make sure that when calibration service has been provided by an outside source, that the provider doesn't specify a specific date on the calibration certificate. Some providers won't honor such a request, so you would need to specify in your own documented requirements that your company's due dates supersede those of the outside provider's.

Jim Wynne said:

I'm not speaking for PQ Systems, but many users might find it useful to specify a month for recalibration rather than a specific date. For example, if a device is calibrated on April 14, 2023, you can specify that the next calibration is due in April of 2024. This allows some wiggle room. The function you describe facilitates this idea.

You should make sure that when calibration service has been provided by an outside source, that the provider doesn't specify a specific date on the calibration certificate. Some providers won't honor such a request, so you would need to specify in your own documented requirements that your company's due dates supersede those of the outside provider's.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the information. Believe it or not, that does help.
What I'm trying to understand here is why an organization would go with the end or month path versus just simply making sure the calibrations are performed before a specific date. Is this simply a convenience thing? Or, is there something else I'm just not understanding?

Blackjack_60 said:

Thanks for the information. Believe it or not, that does help.
What I'm trying to understand here is why an organization would go with the end or month path versus just simply making sure the calibrations are performed before a specific date. Is this simply a convenience thing? Or, is there something else I'm just not understanding?

Click to expand...

Sometimes hitting a specific date isn't so easy. S*** happens. Unless there's a compelling reason to use a specific date, there's no good reason to do so.

Jim Wynne said:

Sometimes hitting a specific date isn't so easy. S*** happens. Unless there's a compelling reason to use a specific date, there's no good reason to do so.

Click to expand...

EXACTLY!!!
That's my take on this as well. But to put that in quantifiable terms is difficult to do.

Basically, I've tried to use the EOM method for convenience sake. Simply because we have some production personnel that seem to want to ignore the cal due dates on some gage calibration labels. There have been absolutely no problems at all with those gages over time, which by using the EOM method seems to make sense. However, if I put EOM on the calibration labels, then they will simply wait until the EOM. If I put the MM/YYYY on the calibration labels then that conflicts with the MM/DD/YYYY that's actually in GAGEpack. To resolve this, I've thought about placing wording in our calibration procedure that states something like "...if EOM is indicated in the gage management software, then MM/YYYY will be shown on calibration label". That makes sense to me, but again some people believe that's allowing the people on the floor to "slide" until the end of the month.
Sorry for the rambling!

Blackjack_60 said:

Thanks for the information. Believe it or not, that does help.
What I'm trying to understand here is why an organization would go with the end or month path versus just simply making sure the calibrations are performed before a specific date. Is this simply a convenience thing? Or, is there something else I'm just not understanding?

Click to expand...

I am the Quality Manager in a small machine shop with 18 total employee's. There are a total of 60 devices that I personally calibrate in house, each with different due dates. I pick a date leaning to the end of a month (say April 2023 I will generate a report around April 24th for everything due in May). Per my very specifically worded calibration procedure, I have until the end of May to calibrate everything due in May as sometime (gasp) I forget to do them on or before the specific date. Also depending on time/tools, I will do Junes in May calibrating a month early (with a new May due date). Some of the tools belong to the company and some are personal tools.

Blackjack_60 said:

Thanks for the information. Believe it or not, that does help.
What I'm trying to understand here is why an organization would go with the end or month path versus just simply making sure the calibrations are performed before a specific date. Is this simply a convenience thing? Or, is there something else I'm just not understanding?

Click to expand...

I will provide two personal examples. We had Preventive Maintenance in the Navy, and the cycles were simply stated as weekly, monthly, quarterly, or annually. So if I wanted to schedule a monthly, I would make the due date the end of the month. Granted we actually set up a daily schedule for what would be worked when.

When I was working at Department of Energy facilities, it was must more restrictive. If it was a monthly, that was to be based upon the last date it was completed. You could not do a PM on the First of April, and then the next on the 30th of May. There was also a complicating factor that some PM's had "Grace Periods" that allowed you to exceed the periodicity IF YOU NEEDED TO, but you absolutely could not exceed the grace period.