The so-called non-compulsory calibration of measuring instruments, including the internal production process control, quality inspection and other measurement equipment, these measuring equipment for verification or testing (can be understood as the current calibration), sent outside the inspection/calibration or internal inspection/calibration, inspection/calibration of the cycle length, are "by the enterprise according to law, independent management ", "self-defined" and "self-determination", "any unit shall not interfere". On the measurement standard assessment of the specification is required to "enterprises and institutions of the highest standard of measurement" must be built and accept the assessment, for internal calibration similar to the standard of measurement of "measuring equipment" does not require mandatory construction and accept the standard of measurement assessment.
"Zhejiang Provincial Measurement Management Regulations" provides that the community to provide metrological verification and metrological calibration services should be built and accept the assessment of measurement standards is reasonable, because some of the community to carry out verification/calibration services using measuring equipment means that it becomes a "social public standard of measurement, the social public standard of measurement must be subject to the assessment of metrological standards. The "regulations" provide that "enterprises and institutions" can establish the unit to use the measurement standard for internal calibration "only in accordance with the provisions of the Measurement Law," the highest measurement standard should be measured by the measurement The competent authorities to assess the qualification", which are reasonable and legal. As long as enterprises and institutions, although the internal calibration but not the establishment of "the highest measurement standard of enterprises and institutions", of course, is not mandatory to accept the measurement standard assessment. However, the internal calibration of the use of measuring equipment must be traceable to the statutory measurement of technical institutions, which is to ensure the traceability of the bottom line. Because in those days there is no domestic "calibration" term, testing, inspection, comparison, experiment, laboratory, calibration, verification, etc. are actually "measurement" of a kind, only verification is specifically for measuring instruments measurement activities, calibration can be for the measurement of equipment measurement activities, can be Calibration can be for the measurement of equipment measurement activities, can also be for the measurement of product activities, the rest are for the product (measurement equipment manufacturing process is considered to be the product before leaving the factory) of the measurement activities. Therefore, the then proposed "test" of measuring instruments can be understood as "calibration".
Currently, with the term "calibration", generally for the measurement of in-use measuring equipment in the measurement activity is no longer used "test" and use "calibration". If the manufacturing process of measuring equipment for measurement, should still use the "test", "inspection", do not use "calibration". Homemade special gauges in the manufacturing process should be issued test reports rather than calibration certificates, once put into use, from the first measurement confirmation, including future periodic measurement confirmation, should be issued "calibration report", measurement confirmation by the measurement confirmation staff based on the results of the calibration results and the measurement process of the measurement requirements for the comparison of the results of the measurement confirmation, issued by the Measurement confirmation mark.
According to current regulations, the CNAS qualification can be oriented to the community to carry out the calibration business, which belongs to the supply and demand side of the business contract within the matter, a willingness to fight a willing, as long as the willing party willing to do so there is no problem.
By regulation to provide verification/calibration services to the community must be measured by the government measurement of the administrative departments based on JJF1069 assessment of qualified statutory measurement of technical institutions or authorized measurement of technical institutions. Only obtained CNAS accreditation can only prove that the laboratory's calibration capabilities, if the non-statutory measurement of technical institutions or non-authorized measurement of technical institutions to provide measurement and calibration services to the community "is not permitted", refers to the calibration of the two sides of the act of behavior is not protected by measurement law. As a result of the dispute is not protected by the measurement law, then how to resolve such disputes? Should be based on contract law and consumer protection law, should be depending on who violated the contract, whether the service provider to provide a defective service for adjudication.
"Mutual trust between the two sides, there is a contract, that is, there is no CNAS qualification is also possible", if "the contract stipulates that the service party B shall obtain CNAS qualification qualification, issued by the calibration certificate shall have the CNAS logo", then party B If "the contract stipulates that the service provider shall obtain CNAS qualification and the calibration certificate shall have CNAS mark", then Party B provides the calibration certificate without CNAS mark, or issues the certificate with CNAS mark without being recognized by CNAS in fact, it is providing defective service and violating the provisions of the contract. Of course, Party A knows that Party B does not have CNAS accreditation, but for some purpose to voluntarily accept the fraudulent behavior, should also bear the legal responsibility for its violation.
In short, CNAS accreditation is a third-party notary's recognition of competence, not qualification recognition. Only with proof of accreditation can it be protected by relevant laws. Those without accreditation but with proof of competence can be trusted by customers and have higher security. Neither the qualification recognition nor the ability to recognize the party must trust it, that is the power of the party, but all the adverse consequences arising from the party should also bear its responsibility.