CERTI F 0888.

14
01/2021
NOTICE OF DECISION AND ANALYSIS OF THE AUDIT page 1 / 5
REPORT ACCORDING TO AN ASD STANDARD
EN 9100 / 9110 / 9120 v2018 et ISO 9001:2015

IDENTIFICATION OF THE REPORT AND CONCLUSIONS

File number: 42318364 Operation supervisor Alina MIROSHNIKOVA
Report date: 22/06/2023 Audit dates from 29/05/2023 to 30/05/2023
Lead Auditor : Mister Jasmi SULAIMAN
Type of audit: Initial
Standard: ISO 9001 : 2015
Standard: AS9100:D / JISQ 9100:2016 / EN Certification structure: SINGLE
9100:2018
Stage 1 YES

Organization audited: SMARTLINK ENGINEERING SDN. BHD.

(main site) 2, JALAN ANGGERIK MOKARA 31/57, KAWASAN INDUSTRI KOTA KEMUNING, 40460 SHAH ALAM,
SELANGOR, MALAYSIA. KAWASAN INDUSTRI KOTA KEMUNING, SHAH ALAM MY-

ASD expert name: Jean-Noël GABILLARD

(signature on page 4)

Self-evaluation
Preparation review and audit plan C/NC/NA Comments and OFI
by the LA
The 3-year audit program is documented. Process coverage is
1
ensured over the 3-year cycle.
C
The LA approved the audit durations in accordance with those
prescribed (EN 91X0 or even ISO 9001 with a larger scope and
2
perimeter) and the number of employees announced in the CDA
C
(preparatory review).
The audit plan covers the mandatory fields to be audited and
3
specific references to the EN chapters are present.
C
The audit plan presents a sampling of special processes (including
4
outsourced ones), including those defined by the client.
NA

5 The time allocated appears to be consistent with the topics audited. C

6 The duration of the audit days (8 hours and/or 4h) is respected. C
If activities are not sampled, all production shifts (day, night,
7
weekend) are audited.
C
Elements of the document review are present in the report (off-site
8
review or stage 1 report).
C
If applicable, the LA has identified in the audit plan the duration and
the interview concerning the verification of the effectiveness of the
9
corrective actions related to non-conformities identified during the
NA
previous audit and not closed.
In preparing for the audit, the LA has identified customer specific
10 requirements (if applicable - the 5 major ones). Otherwise they C
were identified during the audit.
The scope and perimeter indicated in the ISO9001 annex are
11 identical to those validated in the audit report and in conformity with C
the use of the AFAQ Mark.
The scope and perimeter indicated in the annex EN9100/9110/9120
12 are identical to those validated in the audit report including the C
closing meeting.
In case of a remote audit, the ICT used and the date of the
13 functional test are mentioned in the audit plan (pre-test prior to the NA
audit)
OASIS's Self-evaluation
Stage 1 Report - Form 1 C/NC/NA Comments and OFI
ITEM# by the LA
14 All fields are completed. - C
The "Confirmation of requirements" section is
15
correctly filled in. (see Instruction Form1).
20 C
 CERTI F 0888.14
01/2021
NOTICE OF DECISION AND ANALYSIS OF THE AUDIT page 2 / 5
REPORT ACCORDING TO AN ASD STANDARD
EN 9100 / 9110 / 9120 v2018 et ISO 9001:2015

The section "Key information": in case of N/A, a

16 summary explanation explains the non- 26 C
applicability.
Section 27 "Sensitive Points", includes a summary
description of each of the potential NCs identified
17
in sections 20, 22, 25 and 26, which require
27 C
correction prior to the on-site audit.
Does the section specify the
composition/competence required to perform step
18
2 (including experts and translators if applicable) in
32 C
relation to the company's activities?
The LA has taken a position on the organization's
19
ability to move to Stage 2.
28 C

OASIS's Self-evaluation
Audit & Audit Supplemental Report - Forms 5 and 6 C/NC/NA Comments and OFI
ITEM# by the LA
The applicable RAI (1,7,8) forms are used as an
20 appendix to Forms 9101 (+ feedback sheet in - C
case of remote audit).
21 The scope of the audit is clearly identified. 8, 36 et 22 C
In the case of multi-sites, the scope per site is
22
identified.
22 NA
The wording of the certificate/technical appendices
23
is consistent with the audit scope.
22 C
Exclusions from program, client and/or activity
24 requirements are stated with the corresponding 23 C
justification.
The certificate number and its end of validity are
25
correct.
13, 14 NA

26 The dates of the audit are correct. 4 C

The ADC (calculation tool) is available in the
27
OASIS database.
- C
The audit summary adequately describes the
performance of the quality system in the language
28
of the audit + English (see Form5 instructions for
30 C
content).
The use of the AFAQ mark has been verified. 30
29
RAI-1
NA
Opportunities for improvement and observations
30
are clearly indicated and are not NCs.
31, 33 C
Follow-up provisions (requests for containment,
31
closure of actions on NCs, ...) are clearly defined.
38 C
The verification of "Representative", "User" and
32
"OASIS Administrator" is mentioned.
30 ou 38 C
On-site verification of feedback tickets and their
33 processing in the presence of the customer was 30 ou 38 NA
carried out.
LA proposal: the LA has checked the correct
box(es) including the "sign off" of the previous
34
audit report possibly reopened as "modification in
39 C
progress".
If the major NC(s) is not corrected within 60 days,
and effective corrective action is not taken within
35
90 days, the auditor must propose a suspension
11 et 9 NA
(box 39).
Transfer Audit: The LA has clearly stated that no
non-conformity is in "open" status in previous
36 reports, that no customer complaints are pending 39 NA
and that the organization is in "certified" status
under the OASIS database.
 CERTI F 0888.14
01/2021
NOTICE OF DECISION AND ANALYSIS OF THE AUDIT page 3 / 5
REPORT ACCORDING TO AN ASD STANDARD
EN 9100 / 9110 / 9120 v2018 et ISO 9001:2015

For non "single site" structures, if the audit report

(form 5) does not sufficiently detail the conclusions Form5
37
for each site concerned by the certification, then an (Form 6)
NA
additional report (form 6) is used.
Special audit: the reason for the special audit is
entered in box 3. Box 30 contains a summary or
commentary on the reason for the special audit (or
38
Form 6 if necessary). 2 boxes are ticked if the
3 NA
special audit is in conjunction with a surveillance or
a renewal
The date in box 40 cannot exceed 14 days from
39 the end of the audit. 40 C
(Requirement EN 9104 -1 § 8.5a)
The LA only mentioned the number of days on site
40 in Form 5. If 100% remote audit, then 0 audit days 5 C
"on site" in box 5.
OASIS's Self-evaluation
Nonconformity Report (NCR) – Form 4 C/NC/NA Comments and OFI
ITEM# by the LA
The discrepancy defines a non-conforming
41
situation.
12 C

42 The objective evidence(s) is (are) mentioned. 13 C

The classification of the NC (Ma or Mi) and the
43
wording of the discrepancy are consistent.
11, 12 C
A NC classified as minor contains a objective
44
evidence for its classification.
12 ou 13 C
In the case of a major CN where product
45 conformity is in question, the non-containment 13 NA
decision is justified.
A major nonconformity is issued on the corrective
action process (§10.2) when there is a recurrence
46
of the same or similar nonconformity found during
11 et 9 NA
successive audits at a particular site/location.
The dates of completion of the corrective actions
are entered on each NC (boxes 21 and 22). These
47
dates cannot exceed 60 days after the last day of
16, 21 et 22 C
audit mentioned in box 16.
The dates of completion of corrective actions
48 entered in boxes 26 and 27 do not extend beyond 26 et 27 C
the expiry date of the certificate.
The analysis identifies the root causes (note that
the AFNOR Audit Guide mentions the use of 5M
49
type methods, etc.) and the corrective actions
23, 25 C
relate to these causes.
The auditor has specified the references of the
evidence examined and made a decision on the
50
return to conformity within 60 days, including the
30 C
NCs remaining open from the previous audit.
Process Effectiveness Assessment Report PEAR – OASIS's Self-evaluation
C/NC/NA Comments and OFI
Form 3 ITEM# by the LA
There is at least one PEAR form for each audited
operational process that meets a requirement of
51
chapter 8 of EN9100:2018 (in particular clause
21 C
8.4).
It describes the method used by the organization to
52 determine the results of the process (those 17 C
expected by the QMS).
Each KPI is correctly filled in: objectives, results
53 and comments supporting the rating, particularly in 19 C
the case of performance not achieved.
54 A summary of the relevant audit trails and 20 C
 CERTI F 0888.14
01/2021
NOTICE OF DECISION AND ANALYSIS OF THE AUDIT page 4 / 5
REPORT ACCORDING TO AN ASD STANDARD
EN 9100 / 9110 / 9120 v2018 et ISO 9001:2015

associated objective evidence (i.e. statements of

fact or information that are relevant to the audit and
verifiable with due regard to confidentiality) relating
to the audited process, including statements of
conformity and non-conformity.
In the event the source of objective evidence is
from multiple locations, the objective evidence
should be traceable to that location.
The rating is consistent with compliance and
55
performance assessments.
21 C
For all PEAR forms rated at level 1 there is at least
56
1 NCR (MA) open on process management.
21 NA
If the PEAR rating of a process is at level 5, all
57 objectives are met and there is no NC on that 21 C
process.
OASIS's Self-evaluation
QMS Process Matrix Report – Form 2 C/NC/NA Comments and OFI
ITEM# by the LA
All of the organization's processes are identified in
section 8 and those audited are aligned with the
58
audit plan (including the one incorporating the
8 C
requirements of section 8.4).
There are no blank lines and the entries in the
59 boxes are exclusively the following: Blank box, 14 C
N/A, N/E, C or N.
60 No N/E box in section 14 for I and R audits. 14 C
"The section "Summary of objective evidence"
specifies, for each clauses 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 of
the applicable standard(s), the following for each
61 clause 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 of the applicable 16 C
standard(s) :
- Summary of Audit Evidence and Audit Trails
- " Conformity and non-conformity status".
 CERTI F 0888.14
01/2021
NOTICE OF DECISION AND ANALYSIS OF THE AUDIT page 5 / 5
REPORT ACCORDING TO AN ASD STANDARD
EN 9100 / 9110 / 9120 v2018 et ISO 9001:2015

DECISION PROPOSAL (DECISION SUPPORT TOOL)

ASK LA TO CORRECT THE REPORT
EXPERT'S DECISION
FAVOURABLE DECISION
ISO9001:2015 Aerospace COMMENTS
Certification X X
Continuation of certification
Renewal
Need to modify the report before OASIS publishing? Yes
If yes, which ones:
Preparatory review & Audit plan stage 2 – Page 4/6 and Page 5/6 – Audit dates do not match between.

Opportunities for improvement to be communicated to the LA to be taken into account in the next audits? Yes
If yes, which ones:
Could more challenge on performance evaluations (All target achieved - 100% ????)

Documentary verification by the CB at 6 months? No

If yes, for the following items:

Time required to verify corrective actions at the next audit? No

(this time is dedicated to the closure of NCRs following surveillance audits)
If so, how long? (in man days, e.g. 0.25 days)

Date and signature of the ASD

expert
01/08/2023

UNFAVOURABLE DECISION
ISO9001:2015 Aerospace COMMENTS

Additional on-site audit

Documentary verification on
site
Suspension of certificate
(6 months maximum)
The expert cannot make a decision on this report, items to be
Incomplete report for decision provided:
(awaiting additional elements)

Date and signature of the ASD

expert