0% found this document useful (0 votes)

255 views

IDQP Quality Manual 2020 ED 2 v2

This document is the quality manual for IDQP. It outlines the quality system, quality assurance program, roles and responsibilities, and procedures for revising the manual. The manual governs how IDQP ensures quality in its operations.

Uploaded by

nftferreira

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

255 views

IDQP Quality Manual 2020 ED 2 v2

Uploaded by

nftferreira

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 43

Reference: IDQP QM

Revision: 2nd Edition

IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

APPROVAL PAGE

Step Name Signature Date

Prepared IDQP Quality Manager and

January 2020
by: IDQP Secretary

Reviewed IDQP Ops Committee

January 2020
by:

Approved
IDQP SC Committee January 2020
by:

BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL PAGE .................................................................................................................................................. i
................................................................................................................................................................................. ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................... iii
RECORD OF REVISIONS ...................................................................................................................................... v
FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................................................... vii
APPLICABILITY ................................................................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Development of the manual ............................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Structure............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Abbreviations, Acronyms, Definitions ............................................................................................ 2
1.4 Manual Revision Procedures .......................................................................................................... 2
1.5 Manual Approval Cycle .................................................................................................................... 2
1.6 Manual Revision – Regular & Temporary ..................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2: GENERAL ........................................................................................................................................ 4
2.1 IDQP Documentation System ......................................................................................................... 4
2.2 English Language ............................................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Software Platforms ........................................................................................................................... 4
2.4 Content Changes .............................................................................................................................. 4
2.5 Conflicting Information ..................................................................................................................... 4
2.6 IDQP Documents and Forms.......................................................................................................... 5
2.7 IDQP Authority .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.8 Definitions .......................................................................................................................................... 5
2.9 Organizational Structure .................................................................................................................. 7
2.10 Roles and Responsibilities .......................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 3: QUALITY SYSTEM ........................................................................................................................ 10
3.1 Scope of the Quality System ........................................................................................................ 10
3.2 Quality Manual ................................................................................................................................ 10
3.3 Names and Positions ..................................................................................................................... 11
CHAPTER 4: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM ............................................................................................ 12
4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 Inspection......................................................................................................................................... 12

4.3 Inspectors ........................................................................................................................................ 27

4.4 Quality Evaluation........................................................................................................................... 28
4.5 Quality Assurance Program .......................................................................................................... 28
4.6 Monitoring and Corrective action ................................................................................................. 29
4.7 Feedback to the member airlines ................................................................................................. 29
4.8 Recording......................................................................................................................................... 30
4.9 Disclosure of reports ...................................................................................................................... 31
CHAPTER 5: TRAINING ...................................................................................................................................... 32
5.1 Trainees requirements ................................................................................................................... 32
5.2 IDQP Training Courses.................................................................................................................. 32
CHAPTER 6: FORMS AND SYSTEMS................................................................................................................ 35

RECORD OF REVISIONS

EDITION EFFECTIVE
ISSUE DATE
NUMBER DATE

1st Edition July 2019 July 2019

2nd Edition January 2020 January 2020

DESCRIPTION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES

The following table provides a brief description of the most significant changes contained in this QM Ed. 1.
It is not intended to indicate every editorial change (e.g. typographical correction, formatting improvement),
but should any discrepancy exist, the contents of the individual IDQP provisions have precedence over this table.
Significant Changes
All Chapters


Chapter 1 – Introduction


Chapter 2 – General


Chapter 3 – Quality System



Chapter 4 – Quality Assurance Program



Chapter 5 – Training


Chapter 6 – Forms & Systems



Chapter 7 – Root Cause



Annex 1 – Inspector Quality Assurance Evaluation Form



Annex 2 – Temporary Revision Form



Annex 3 – Risk Assessment



Annex 4 – Inspectors Guidelines



FOREWORD

The IATA Drinking Water Quality Pool (IDQP) Program is an internationally recognized and accepted evaluation
system designed to assess the safety and quality control standards of Drinking Water facilities of the service
provider, in compliance with aviation regulatory requirements.

IDQP is based on industry-proven quality inspection principles, and is designed to ensure that each inspection is
conducted in a standardized manner to achieve consistent results.

Standards contained in this manual were initially developed during the year 2010 by IATA Drinking Water Pool
as part of an IDQP developmental project. When establishing the membership of the IDQP, we invited industry
safety and quality experts including airlines, regulatory agencies, and various other entities possessing
operational inspection expertise. Special care was taken to ensure equal participation from all areas of the
world, such that no single region, alliance, or organization would dominate.

IDQP will continue to update the IDQP Program standards when required, based on stakeholder input, practical
experience, and the latest consensus in operational quality management principles.

APPLICABILITY

This IDQP Quality Manual (QM) contains processes that govern all aspects of the IDQP Program for the purpose
of achieving a standardized and consistent inspection product.
Standards in this manual are applicable primarily to:
a) Inspectors, that will conduct inspections under IDQP;
b) Trainers, that will provide IDQP Inspector Training;
c) Airline Master Representatives and their deputies;
d) IATA Secretary to the IDQP.

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Development of the manual

This manual has been developed to define Quality Standards for IDQP.

1.2 Structure
The Chapters in the QM are organized as follows:
Chapter 1 – Introduction Contains the structure, abbreviations, and
manual revision procedures.
Chapter 2 – General Contains the terminology and a detailed
explanation on the responsibilities and duties of
all parties having a function in this manual
Chapter 3 – Quality System Includes an explanation on the topics addressed,
specification of the feedback system for
corrective actions
Chapter 4 – Quality Assurance Program Contains an explanation on the inspections and
quality audits to be performed, their
scheduling/planning, scope, recording and
evaluation
Chapter 5 – Training Explanation of quality related to IDQP training.
Chapter 6 – Forms and Systems
Chapter 7 – Root Cause

Note: Certain IDQP documents and forms may be included in this manual for the illustrative purpose of providing
examples. Some, or all, of these published examples may have subsequently undergone revision, and thus may
not be the current version of the document and/or form in use for Program activities.

1.3 Abbreviations, Acronyms, Definitions

The terminology used in the QM is consistent with that in the other manuals that comprise the IDQP documentation
system. Additional Abbreviations, Acronym and Definitions can be found in the IATA Reference Manual for Audit
Programs (IRM) latest edition. Any related terms, as they are used in the context of the IDQP Program and its
documents, are defined below:
 IDQP WEB Drinking Water Quality Pool Software
 IATA International Air Transport Association
 IDQP IATA Drinking Water Quality Pool
 IOSA IATA Operational Safety Audit
 ISAGO IATA Safety Audit for Ground Operations
 IGOM IATA Ground Operations Manual
 AHM Airport Handling Manual
 MLA Multilateral Agreement
 QM Quality Manual
 SC Steering Committee
 SG Steering Group
 WHO World Health Organization

1.4 Manual Revision Procedures

The first and subsequent approvals of this manual is done by the Steering Committee.

1.5 Manual Approval Cycle

a) Proposed revisions to the manual shall be submitted to the Steering Committee members who will internally
draft any required changes, in consultation with applicable parties, if necessary.

b) A draft of the proposed revision will then be distributed to the SC members for approval of the language and
wording. Approval may be performed during regular meetings or by electronic voting. The SC will approve
the proposed draft or refer it back to the original submitter for additional information or clarification.

c) Once the language and wording of the draft is approved by the SC, the IATA Secretary will distribute the
proposed draft to all SG members for approval. SG members will vote during the next scheduled meeting or
by electronic voting means. Voting should occur within 10 calendar days or other time period as determined
by the OC. Any vote not received within the proscribed time period shall be considered a “Yes” vote in favor
of the proposed revision-.

d) In the event of a member voting against a proposed revision, the dissenting voter shall provide an explanation
for the “No” vote. The SC shall review the reason for the No vote and will determine if the reason provided
is valid. If it is determined that the reason for the No vote is valid, then the revision will be rejected, a new
proposed revision will be drafted and the approval process will begin again (see step a)

e) Once a proposed revision has been approved by the SG, IATA Secretary will incorporate the approved
revision into the QM and publish the revised manual. An email notification to all Airline Masters, Inspectors,
and Users will be send.

f) The Chair person is the approving authority for any Temporary Revision.

1.6 Manual Revision – Regular & Temporary

a) IDQP will publish revisions to this QM, tentatively once a year, to ensure the content remains current and
meets the needs of the IDQP Program.

b) The QM will be kept as file on the IDQP PRIVATE WEB Server, under the “Downloadable Section”

c) During a short revision cycle, where a rapid change to the QM is required, a Temporary Revision (TR) will be
issued.

d) The TR form will indicate:

i. A unique reference number linking it to the appropriate Edition;
ii. An QM reference number associated to the content requiring change;
iii. A date of issue and effectivity;
iv. The approving authority and the date of approval.

e) During a regular revision cycle, where a detailed change to the QM is required:

i. A change to the QM will always result in a new Edition of the manual, and incorporate previously issued
Temporary Revisions (TRs) since the previous Edition.
ii. The cover and the footer on the pages of the QM will indicate the Edition number and its effective date.
iii. A revision to the QM becomes effective on the date of publishing.

CHAPTER 2: GENERAL

2.1 IDQP Documentation System

This QM used in association with the following related manuals, together comprise the IDQP documentation
system:
a) IDQP Standard, latest edition;
b) IDQP Checklist, latest version;
c) IDQP Forms available under IDQP PRIVATE WEB;
d) IDQP Training Materials;
e) IDQP Multilateral Agreement (MLA);

2.2 English Language

English is the official language of the IDQP Program, and the IDQP Documentation System. They are written in
“international” English, using the Merriam-Webster dictionary (refer to M-W website at: http://www.merriam-
webster.com).
NOTE: Translations of the checklist are acceptable and these are available in the downloadable section of IDQP
PRIVATE WEB, but may not be in the latest revision. In this case, always refer to the official English version.

2.3 Software Platforms

The IATA standard software platforms for IDQP program are:
a) Documentation development and delivery, is the Microsoft Windows Office© suite of software applications.
Any document automation using macros (e.g. within MS Word© or MS Excel©) may not perform as originally
designed when using any other type of software;
b) Drinking Water Quality Pool Software (IDQP PRIVATE WEB) management, is the central database from
eMusici GmbH known as the IDQP PRIVATE WEB Inspection Management System. For further information,
IDQP PRIVATE WEB Instructions Manuals should be consulted.

2.4 Content Changes

A new edition will be accompanied by a Description of Significant Changes table that will highlight only the
significant changes made. It is incumbent on the reader to review every Chapter in detail to familiarize themselves
with the detailed changes.

2.5 Conflicting Information

a) Manuals within the IDQP documentation system are not revised concurrently, thus creating the possibility of
conflicting information in different manuals.
b) In the case of conflicting information in different IDQP manuals, the information contained in the manual with
the most recent revision date can be presumed to be valid.
c) For the purpose of this manual, the masculine gender is used throughout this manual without bias in the
interest of ease of reading, unless specified.

2.6 IDQP Documents and Forms

This QM, and other referenced IDQP documents and forms, are available on the IDQP website at the following
internet address: http://www.iata.org/IDQP.

2.7 IDQP Authority

The IDQP Program operates in close cooperation with IATA Technical Drinking Water Group.

2.8 Definitions
Active Airline: Participating Airline that is active in the IDQP Steering Group and that has the rights and
obligations, as set forth in the IDQP Agreement.
Airline Master (and Deputy): Representative of an active member airline, not necessarily an approved
inspector, being responsible for the administrative follow up and contractual obligations on that active airline. At
least one of them shall be an inspector and full-time employee of the airline.
(Approved) Inspector: An employee of an Active Airline member or a free-lancer who has been accredited by
IATA in accordance with the terms of the IDQP Agreement to perform IDQP inspections;
Associate Airline: Participating Airline that has no voting rights, has access to the IDQP PRIVATE WEB and
that has the rights and obligations, as set forth in the IDQP Agreement.
Evidence: Data or information discovered during an inspection that is analyzed by an inspector and used to
determine conformity with the criteria upon which the inspection is based.
Finding: A documented statement based on factual evidence that describes non-conformity with the IDQP
Standards.
IATA Secretary: Means a representative of IATA; The Secretary shall be a non-voting member of the Steering
Group and the Steering Committee.
IDQP bulletins: Internal communications addressing technical and/or quality issues published by IDQP with the
objective to update inspectors and airline masters on important or urgent matters.
Inspecting Airline: Means an active Airline performing a Drinking Water Inspection by its Approved Inspector
of the Airport or Airports allocated to it.
Inspection: An inspection is a systematic, independent and documented process by one or more of the Active
Airlines on behalf of the IDQP of all assigned Drinking Water facilities including without limitation the supply,
storage and distribution of Drinking Water at any Airports in order to obtain evidence to conformity with the IDQP
Standard and to ask for corrective action for those items which do not meet the prescribed standards.
Inspection Report: Overview of general information, findings and remarks produced by the Approved Inspector
in IDQP PRIVATE WEB as a result of an IDQP Inspection.
Non-conformity: Non-fulfillment of specifications contained in IDQP Standards as determined by the Inspector
in terms of having been documented and/or implemented by the Drinking Watering Company.
Passive Airline: Participating Airline that has no voting rights and no access to the IDQP PRIVATE WEB as
described in the IDQP Multilateral Agreement.
Procedures: Specified and documented way to carry out an activity or a process.
Quality: The aggregate features and/or characteristics of a product or service (e.g. Drinking Water or Inspected
agent) that impact on its ability to satisfy established or implied needs and requirements.

Quality Assurance: Is a quality Program, which should include all planned and systematic actions necessary to
provide confidence that all operations are conducted in accordance with all applicable requirements, standards
and operational procedures.
Quality System: Monitoring System to direct and control an organization with regard to monitor compliance with
the regulations ensuring safe operations
Quality Manager: Experienced inspectors appointed by the SC in collaboration with the trainers in order to
assure implementation and control of the procedures outlined in this QM.
Quality Manual-: The document containing the relevant requirements pertaining to the IDQP’s Quality System
and Quality Assurance Programs.
Recommendation:
a) Positive Recommendation: Documenting a management practice that improves the efficiency of the
operation or exceeds the requirements of the standard, or local regulatory requirement.
b) Negative Recommendation: Documentation of a practice or situation which if not corrected may result in non-
compliance and a subsequent finding.
Safety: The state in which the risk of harm to persons or property damage is reduced to, and maintained at or
below, an acceptable level through a continuous process of hazard identification and risk management. This
definition implies constant measurement and evaluation of an airline’s safety performance and feedback into the
SMS.
Safety Management Systems: Based on ICAO’s definition. ICAO defines an SMS as a systematic approach
to managing safety, including the necessary organizational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures.
Airlines are responsible for establishing and SMS while States are responsible for the acceptance and oversight
of an airline’s SMS.
Steering Committee: Group consisting of the Chair Person, Vice Chair and IATA Secretary of the IDQP.
Steering Group: Group consisting of one representative of each Active Airline Member with authority to vote on
behalf of its airline.
Trainer: A trainer is an experienced inspector, having a technical knowledge about Drinking Water specifications,
technical Drinking Watering equipment, aircraft systems and handling and being active in national or international
airline activities. The trainers act as an advisory board for the SC.
User: A person, organization or other entity that employs the services provided by IDQP.

2.9 Organizational Structure

Steering Committee

 Chair

 Vice Chair

 IDQP IATA Secretary

Steering Group

 Steering Committee

 Quality Manager

 Checklist Coordinator

 Trainers Group

 Airline Masters

2.10 Roles and Responsibilities

2.10.1 Steering Group
i. The Steering Group consists of the SC, Quality manager, Checklist Coordinator and rest of the airline masters.
ii. Individual members of the Steering Group are appointed in their respective positions by the voting members
of the Steering Group.
iii. The SG members review the airline applications to the pool and electronically vote on acceptance.
iv. The SG members represent all Airlines of IDQP for the approval of policy matters, procedures and standards.
v. The Steering Group Members shall attend the annual SG meeting.

2.10.2 The Quality Manager

i. To know and implement Global Aviation Authorities’ requirements.
ii. To plan and organize measures for carrying out the QM system in the IDQP.
iii. To develop and to perform quality-promoting measures.
iv. To check the QM system by means of internal quality evaluations performed during IDQP inspections and to
make a quality report of each such an evaluation.
v. To supervise that persons working in the IDQP and the inspectors are properly trained and that the proficiency
and continuity of the inspectors is adequate and to provide feedback to the SC.

2.10.3 Steering Committee

The Steering Committee shall be responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the IDQP.
i. Members of the Steering Committee are appointed by the SG and enforce measures to uphold the integrity
of the IDQP.
ii. Update the IDQP members of the latest developments in the Drinking Water area.
iii. Define procedures and standards for the IDQP.
iv. The Steering Committee shall meet twice a year.

2.10.4 Chair Person

v. Chair Person is elected at the SG meeting for a period of 3 years and can be re-elected
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

vi. To manage the SC and the SG

vii. Represents the IDQP at International/National industry events
viii. Develop with IATA secretary a year budget and monitor financial health of the pool
ix. Leads missions and/or joint inspections teams if necessary

2.10.5 Vice Chair

i. Vice Chairs are elected for a period of 3 years and can be re-elected
ii. To substitute the Chair Person during his absence
iii. To assist the Chair Person in the day to day business

2.10.6 IATA Secretary

The non-voting Secretary of the IDQP being member of the SC has the responsibility
i. To manage processes for membership, training arrangements and inspection allocation
ii. To ensure legal compliance
iii. To prepare and organize the SG and SC meetings
iv. To administrate IDQP PRIVATE WEB,
v. To take care of finances
vi. To prepare contractual agreements,
vii. To prepare and analyze statistics
viii. To follow on airlines performance
ix. To gather suggestions and proposals for improvement or expansion of extranet tool and manage
implementation of changes
x. To assist the Chair Person and Vice-Chairs in the day to day business and perform other tasks as
described in the MLA.

2.10.7 CHECKLIST Coordinator

The SC evaluates and proposes a capable candidate to the IDQP members for election for a two-year term with
eligibility for re-elections.
The candidate shall have knowledge in aircraft technology, Drinking Water and quality assurance.
It must work in coordination with the SC and trainers.
Integrate, together with Extranet Coordinator, Checklist changes in extranet
Publish updated Checklists.
Communicate Checklist changes.

2.10.8 Trainer
i. To teach the students about the information concerning Drinking Water handling issues.
ii. To teach the students how to perform a correct IDQP inspection, using international standards as well as to
act as an acceptable representative of the IDQP pool.
iii. To advise SC, SG and QM on new technologies and required training/refresh training for the IDQP users.
iv. To inform the Steering Committee on the performance of candidates during training sessions
v. To teach all inspectors at refresher trainings

2.10.9 Airline Master and Deputy

Each airline shall nominate an Airline Master and a Deputy Airline Master, at least one of them shall be an
inspector and airline employee, and both shall:
i. At least complete theoretical classroom training specifically established for Airline Masters.
ii. Represents the active airline in or to send a representative of this airline to the SG meeting.
iii. If a member of SG, to approve new airline applications to become IDQP member on behalf of its own airline
iv. To assure inspections are scheduled in the airline’s allocated airports
v. To comply with established deadlines (inspection dates, reporting dates)
vi. Responsible to keep the proficiency of his inspectors
vii. Responsible for continuous training of his inspectors by making them participate in the next scheduled IDQP
training whenever deemed necessary
viii. Responsible to keep their destinations up to date in the IDQP PRIVATE WEB.

2.10.10 Inspector
i. To prepare and perform inspections according the IDQP standards and checklist
ii. To file a report to the inspected party and to upload it in IDQP PRIVATE WEB within 14 days after the
inspection date
iii. To follow up the findings made
iv. To close the report
v. To guide trainees in OJT and complete the INS.F01 form
vi. To be aware and re-assess any changes in the airport’s Drinking Water facilities
vii. To contact, in case of problematic airport Drinking Water facility issues, the SC in order to establish a plan
of action to solve the problem
viii. Must have performed a minimum of 1 inspection in the last year.

CHAPTER 3: QUALITY SYSTEM

To manage Quality, Quality should be assured; to assure Quality, Quality should be quantified; to quantify Quality,
Quality should be defined.

To define Quality; a Quality System must be set.

IDQP’s Quality System should ensure compliance with IDQP standards and all relevant IDQP documentation.
The Quality System consists of a set of documented procedures and instructions. It defines how IDQP is
performing the work.

3.1 Scope of the Quality System

3.1.1 Addressed topics
All of IDQPs manuals are written, taking into account the following:
a) Every procedure or instruction is written in the aim of meeting current international regulations and is checked
thereon before submittal to the IDQP standards by IDQP’s SC and before approval by the IDQP SG.
b) IDQPs additional standards and operational procedures: wherever a procedure is written or updated, it is
adhered to by all concerned, having a function in the MLA.
c) Documentation (including manuals, reports and records):
i. It is the responsibility of the Steering Committee to ensure that all IDQP manuals are at the latest revision.
ii. Every person active in the IDQP has to keep its inspection reports and quality reports in good order as
stated in this QM
iii. Retention periods, as well as the form and the storage place, of documents are determined in this IDQP
QM under section 4.8.
d) Quality Assurance Program: refer to Part 4 of this manual.
e) Training requirements: all tasks that are required for training, will only be performed by the adequately trained
people. (See chapter 5 of this manual)

3.2 Quality Manual

3.2.1 General
This manual has been issued as a separate ‘Quality Manual’.
a) The SG is holder of the QM.
b) The QG is responsible for preparation of draft of new version
i. Submitting revisions
ii. Receiving/including feedbacks and comments about revisions
c) The SC is responsible for:
iii. Issuing final version and sending revisions to all persons on the distribution list
iv. Verifying that the referenced manuals are reflecting IDQP’s actual situation concerning procedures and
instructions
v. Verifying that the manual is not in contradiction with the actual aviation regulations and acceptable
standards

3.2.2 About Drinking Water

Please refer to IATA Airport Handling Manual and IGOM– latest edition

3.3 Names and Positions

All contacts of SG members, Steering Committee members, Airline Masters, Inspectors and users are available
in IDQP PRIVATE WEB.

CHAPTER 4: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

4.1 Introduction
Once a Quality System is set, it should be monitored continuously in order to minimize non-compliances (when
they occur, or in order to detect adverse trends) or, in rare occasions, to change the Quality System itself.

IDQP’s Quality Assurance Program therefore will include all planned and systematic actions, necessary to
provide confidence that all actions related to inspections and follow up of the inspections are conducted in
accordance with all applicable requirements, standards and operational procedures.

The Quality Assurance Program therefore will consist of a system comprising:

a) Inspections – by approved inspectors
b) Quality Evaluations – by Experienced inspectors
c) Continuous Improvement - by means of the feedback and actions from Inspections and Internal Quality
Evaluations

4.2 Inspection
4.2.1 Definition
An inspection is a systematic, independent and documented process by one or more of the Active Airlines on
behalf of the IDQP of all assigned Drinking Water facilities including without limitation the supply, storage and
distribution of Drinking Water at any Airports in order to obtain evidence to conformity with the regulatory standard
and (working) procedures and to ask for corrective action for those items which are not i.e. the prescribed
standards.

The primary purpose of a quality inspection is to observe a particular event/action/document etc. in order to verify
whether established procedures and requirements are followed during the accomplishment of that event and
whether the required standard is achieved.

It is the most direct way of controlling compliance with the described procedures.

4.2.2 Typical Quality Inspection Areas

a) Quality & Safety Management
b) Drinking Water Uplift
c) Aircraft Drinking Water Equipment & Operations
d) Health, Safety, Environment and Emergency Procedures
e) Records & Miscellaneous
f) Traceability of all actions

The techniques that make up an effective inspection are:

a) Interviews and discussions with personnel

b) The examination of adequate samples of records.

c) The witnessing of the activities which make the operation
d) The preservation of documents and the recording of observations.

4.2.3 Phases
Each inspection will be performed by the assigned inspector within the planned time frame as defined in IDQP
PRIVATE WEB under “Show airports to be inspected next by my airline”

The IATA Secretary is responsible for planning a program of inspections and allocating each inspection to a
member airline. Inspection due dates can be found in the IDQP PRIVATE WEB. As airline schedules are subject
to changes, airline masters must communicate at the latest the 31st of November a list of changes to the current
flight schedule all airports on which member airline will perform at least12 water uplift in the next calendar year.
Based on this information, the allocations will be revised by the IATA Secretary in order to adjust these changes
in the IDQP PRIVATE WEB.
Airline Masters are responsible to update their network directly in IDQP PRIVATE WEB during the reporting
period extensively announced by IATA Secretary.

An inspection cycle includes:

a) Preliminary preparation
b) Detailed planning
c) Inspection opening meeting
d) Inspection conduct
e) Providing evidence in case a finding is made
f) Conducting interviews and asking questions
g) Recording the results
h) Evaluation of the findings and corrective actions
i) Inspection closing meeting
j) Formal reports
k) Follow-up of corrective actions and root cause analysis.

4.2.4 Inspection procedure

4.2.4.1 Preliminary preparation
Once an inspector has been requested to undertake an inspection, some preliminary preparation will be
necessary.

The inspector must have a very good understanding of the task ahead. The full nature and the scope of the
inspection must be defined and clearly understood by not only the inspector but also by the inspected party.

Once the task has been allocated, the inspector must develop an understanding of the situation of the concerned
airport, including time required for inspecting all parties. He, or she, shall consult former reports which can be
found in IDQP PRIVATE WEB for this purpose, as well as the info found under “Airport information for…”.

It is also necessary to communicate with the inspected party what is to happen, when, by and on behalf of whom,
and what part the inspected party must play in the process. For this reason, a mail or written statement shall be
sent by the responsible inspector announcing the inspection on behalf of the IDQP and this, to all parties which
will be inspected. Included in the mail to the inspected party, the agreed full scope, “the letter of the Chair Person”
and the “IDQP checklist” (latest version). In case an inspector expects serious language problems, the inspector
shall ask in the mail for a translator who must be present at the time of the inspection. In case the inspected party
cannot provide such translator, the inspector shall provide such. This has to be agreed upon by the inspector
and the inspected party. An ‘opening’ meeting will be scheduled with all concerned parties. The inspector shall
ensure all companies present at the particular airport by asking in your mail for an overview of all companies at
this airport. This to assure you have the complete picture of the situation at this airport and the inspection will be
as complete as possible.

If an inspected party refuses to be inspected, the inspector shall act as described under the escalation procedure
in point 4.2.4.10 of this QM. Until the inspection is performed the supplier should be shown as **RED** status on
IDQP PRIVATE WEB.

The inspector shall ensure to dress appropriately and to bring the basically required Personal Protective
Equipment, which is as a minimum, safety shoes, bump cap, protective glasses, ear protection and a non-static
high visibility vest.

4.2.4.2 Detailed planning

Once all the to be inspected parties have replied to the proposed dates, make a “plan of action” and send it to all
concerned in order to assure a smooth development of the inspection.

Print the latest version of the IDQP checklist.

A timely request for a visa (if applicable) at the consulate of the visiting country is essential.
Send a copy of the inspector’s passport timely, so that the inspected companies can arrange apron security
passes for the inspectors following their local instructions. By doing this well in advance no time shall be lost at
the moment of the inspection itself.

It is necessary to remember the protocols of inspection opening and closing meetings which should be held with
the manager of the area being inspected in order to avoid misunderstandings.

When preparing the inspection, the inspector must assure to read all former reports about this airport to have a
full understanding of the situation and to make sure these findings are reviewed.

DURING THE ACTUAL INSPECTION:

4.2.4.3 Inspection opening meeting

The opening meeting is the most appropriate moment to list all important issues concerning the inspection.
Therefore, the inspected party should be informed of the inspection times and durations, inspection objective
and scope, inspectors and observers involved, company staff required to be present, and any other special
requirements the inspector(s) may have. It is understood that providing an explanation to the inspected party,
about the purpose of the IDQP, is very important and must be done accurately, especially when the inspected
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

party is not familiar with the IDQP or in case of first IDQP inspection in the inspected facility. Finally, upon
commencement of the inspection itself the inspectors shall arrive on time, clearly introduce him by showing the
IDQP Inspector’s identification and re-communicate all previously communicated details at a short Opening
Meeting.

The latest update list of inspectors can be found at www.iata.org/IDQP or in the IDQP PRIVATE WEB, under the
download section.

4.2.4.4 Conducting the inspection

This should be conducted, i.e. the laid down schedule, respecting and keeping the agreed set times as much as
possible. The purpose of conducting the inspection is to answer all the questions of the latest IDQP checklist
based on the latest IDQP Standard.

As findings are found, they should be clearly recorded in a formal manner, and agreement should be sought that
the facts leading to the finding are true and accurate.

The inspector shall also verify that findings from the previous inspection are corrected and implemented. Findings
not corrected must be reported as repeat findings. Repeat findings are findings that were reported during previous
inspections and have an "Agreed Remedial Action", but were not completed as agreed.

It is the prime responsibility of the inspector to take the lead in the inspection (you decide what you want to see),
ensure that the inspection is satisfactorily completed, having covered all areas originally decided upon and
checked all appropriate system requirements.

In order to assure a smooth inspection, it is a protocol to request a “guide”. This role is to show the inspectors
where to go and to introduce them to interviewees and, most importantly to act as witness to facts found that
relate to findings. They are there to ensure that the inspectors are able to move freely and safely in the company,
are accompanied at all times to meet with the company confidentiality requirements, and to ensure that objectivity
prevails.

Since an inspection is always conducted on behalf of the IDQP, the inspectors have the duty to represent, to the
best of their ability, the pool and IATA. Therefore, their behavior during the inspection must be irreprehensible
and shall have a high ethical standard. He (she) must be calm and polite, open minded and have a fair judgment.
The final goal is a win-win situation.

4.2.4.5 Objective evidence

During an inspection, the inspector verifies that documented procedures are actually implemented. For this
reason, interviews, examination of documents, observation of activities and conditions in the areas of concern
take place. If at a certain moment there is a non-compliance with the IDQP standard, the inspector shall make a
finding. In this case the evidence on non-compliance found during the inspection will be used to support the
finding. This is called ‘objective’ evidence.

For each interview the inspector must seek objective evidence that what actually happens is in full conformity

with the applicable procedures. Thus a verification activity is performed.

4.2.4.6 Recording the results

The inspector must detail clearly and constantly what has been observed and why it is a concern. This because
the inspected party needs to know what the problem is before it can be satisfactorily corrected. Inspectors must
remember that they should report all findings based on objective evidence even if the inspected party does not
fully agree.

It is also important that the inspector tries to agree on this finding with the inspected party before he moves on
to another area. The non-conformity statement needs to be worded so that it is understandable to those who
were present at the time of the inspection and also to those who were not and who may be involved in
implementing or verifying corrective actions.

Therefore, the following needs to be recorded:

a) The reference of the finding on the IDQP checklist and IDQP standard
b) If the inspected party is a company that works according AHM 440, or other regulation reference, the inspector
should also use the references to that particular standard to help them understand the finding.
c) Description of the finding

Such statements need to be communicated during the closing meeting directly following at the end of the
inspection and should be short, comprehensive and to the point.

4.2.4.7 Evaluation of the findings

Some findings may be more significant than the others. Thus the findings, including the repeat findings, must be
evaluated before presenting them to the inspected party.

a) Level 1 finding: Health/Safety Related

Is any significant non-compliance with the IDQP standards which lowers the safety standard and hazards
seriously the flight safety? These are always safety critical findings.

A level 1 finding is rather rare.

Below is a list of level 1 findings examples. However, the possible level 1 findings are not limited to the items in
this list:
a) If the Drinking Water does not meet the standards.
b) Personnel assigned to Drinking Watering operations but not trained to company policy, Drinking Water
procedures, health and safety.
c) Control system of the Drinking Watering equipment not included in a maintenance program or periodic check
or if failed during checks, where applicable.
d) Drinking Water operations performed in total absence of safety/quality procedures.
e) Drinking Water hoses seriously damaged or overdue
f) Any significant non-compliance discovered during aircraft Drinking Water uplift.
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

b) Level 2 finding: Non significant Findings

Is any non-compliance with the IDQP standards which could lower the safety standard but without representing
hazard to the flight safety?

Most of the findings entered will encounter are level 2 findings.

As defining the level of a finding is not always an easy job, the inspector can use the Risk Matrix, whose use is
explained in Annex 3 – Risk Assessment.

4.2.4.7.1 Actions to be taken in case of a finding

a) Level 1 Finding
This will normally involve following actions from the inspected party:
1) Immediate action shall be taken to eliminate or mitigate the risk linked to the non-conformity. Depending on
mitigations duly evidenced, the level 1 finding can be downgraded to a level 2 finding.
2) A written proof of mitigating actions shall be required before the end of the inspection or within 14 days
maximum in order to assure the inspector that this problem will not re-occur.
3) If mitigating actions are acceptable to the inspector, he will set the status to amber or even green, depending
on the condition at the end of the inspection.
For this reason, the inspected party shall provide within this timeframe:
a) what action was taken to correct or mitigate the finding reported
b) what action was taken to ensure that a similar finding does not exist or was corrected in areas not reviewed
by the inspection
c) the root cause of the problem and what action was taken to prevent re-occurrence of the problem
d) supply substantiating evidence as applicable
e) If mitigating actions are put in place and once the inspection report is published and e-mail sent to inspected
party, they shall answer within 7 days.

This will normally involve following actions from the inspector:

1) If, by the end of the inspection, mitigating actions are not put in place, immediately or within 3 days
maximum, the inspector shall inform all airline masters of carriers flying to the affected destination about
the situation, by any means of communication preferably per e-mail. The inspector can download all e-mail
addresses from IDQP PRIVATE WEB.

b) Level 2 Finding
The inspector shall grant a corrective action period of 30 days (following the reporting date and automatic
notification from IDQP PRIVATE WEB) to the inspected party, who shall provide within this timeframe:
a) what action was taken or planned, including mitigation and deadlines, to correct the finding reported
b) what action was taken or planned to ensure that a similar finding does not exist or was corrected in areas not
reviewed by the inspection
c) the root cause (See Chapter 7) of the problem and what action was taken or planned to prevent re-occurrence
of the problem
d) supply substantiating evidence as applicable
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

If no response/reaction after the initial communication within this timeframe, a second request shall be sent,
including a specific period of days to reply, e.g. 7 working days. If after this action the inspector still doesn’t receive
any responses, he shall follow the escalation procedure, as specified in 4.2.4.10.

c) Observation
An observation is a recommendation whilst not a non-conformance as such, indicates that potentially one might
arise if the situation is not adjusted. Items subject to improvement are also of this category.
As no objective evidence of non - conformity is found, none is existing. This observation shall only be mentioned
in the report under “comments”. No corrective action needs to be defined.
Differences between IDQP Standard and acceptable standards will be reported as observations.
Only the level 1 and level 2 findings must be subjected to follow up.

4.2.4.8 IDQP Findings and Local Regulations discrepancy – How to report it?

There was some discussion as to how findings should be identified when it does not appear to be a finding as
per local regulations. The decision was that it should be reported as an Observation with reference to our
standards.

4.2.4.9 Inspection closing meeting

Following an inspection, a closing meeting will be held at which the inspector will provide the inspected party with
an overview of the inspection findings. The overview of the findings and observations shall be made on the last
page of the Checklist under “OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS”. The timeframe in which corrective actions have
to be provided will be communicated and agreed upon. This shall be recorded on the checklist under “AGREED
REMEDIAL ACTION”. It is very important to ensure that the inspector does not leave the area inspected before
telling the manager basically what has been found and is to be formally reported.

In order to have a trace that the inspected party agreed and has fully understood what was said in the closing
meeting, ask the inspected party to sign this “agreed remedial action”. This is to avoid discussions afterwards
about the content of the closing meeting.

4.2.4.10 Formal reports

Following an inspection, the inspector will send the inspected company, within 14 calendar days, a formal report
detailing his findings and his conclusions. The inspector will also mention the timeframe for corrective action
which has been agreed upon during the closing meeting.

Next scheduled inspection, in case of level 2 findings only, is normally within 1 years after this inspection. In
cases where level 1 finding are a fact, a follow up inspection should be scheduled following the first inspection
taking into consideration the potential danger linked to the findings. This follow up check can eventually be carried
out by a local contact person e.g. station manager or ground engineer and it should be performed within one
year.

An amber status will require a regular inspection after 12 months depending on the nature of the answers
received. In case of doubt or unsatisfactory evidence of improvement a follow up check should be scheduled
here as well.
Red status will require a regular inspection within 12 months.

Process on how to deal with providers that don’t respond,

Perform at least 2 more follow ups copying affected airlines and IATA, a station manager if applicable and if
possible inform the service provider headquarters.

If no response, ask the airlines using such provider to intervene for corrective action and closing of findings.

Note: all inspectors shall update the field Destination Specific Information for Airport XXX with latest
useful information, including status of suppliers.

4.2.4.11 Company name change / update

Inspectors as well as airline masters have the responsibility to keep the airports under their responsibility with
the most recent updated information. They have the possibility to update names, to deactivate old companies
not providing services anymore and to create new companies in the system.

For new companies IATA will assign a short name and three letter code.
All reports will be linked to this three letter code.
Inspectors are trusted to make changes to the company name, should this changes be MINOR ONLY.
Changes in company name, from i.e. Flightcare to Swissport, should be done completely different.

The old company (In this case Flightcare) should be set as inactive and a new company, (i.e. Swissport), should
be created. This even if it is the same management, and only name change. It is important that well distinctive
companies are entered in the system or the whole trust on the accuracy of our reports will be lost.

What happens if the company tool is misused or used incorrectly?

As reports are linked to the three letter code, which cannot be changed by the airline, when an airline completely
changes the name, all PAST reports will be generated with the new name, which is totally wrong and inaccurate.

WATER HANDLING AGENT ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION vs LATEST COLOUR RATING

To assess the facility

IDQP has implemented a process where all new inspections are risk rated depending on the level of finding.
Each item on the checklist has been assigned a risk level, or classification. When inspection results are entered
into IDQP PRIVATE WEB the severity of findings, categorized, is recorded. The original risk is displayed under
classification and which is auto populated by th system and classification at this first stage cannot be changed
or altered by the inspector. This will appear as the inspector publish the report and will not change. Colour coding
under “companies” however, can be updated as corrective actions are entered. This classification can and must
therefore by updated at a later stage by the inspector. This must be done going under “My Inspections” and
updating there the classification as corrective actions are submitted by the handling agent.

The color under Companies will then reflect the latest status of the company.

For the purpose of the allocation and frequency, the original risk or classification will be the determining factor.

Following are the colour codes assigned to an agent at an airport as defined by IDQP SG:

Non-significant findings
Green
No operational restrictions
Too many level 2 findings or operational restrictions or
Amber
combination of both
Red Level 1 finding involved
Black Not been inspected

The intent of fixing a classification in the checklist is to remove the subjectivity from the colour rating system
currently in place and provide an objective rating methodology. This classification found under “ Report
Classification” is the original state at time the inspection is performed.

The colour displayed on the “ Show Airport information” page under “ Companies” should be the colour rating
(green, yellow, red) assigned to the vendor by the Inspector after corrective actions are taken.

Allocation for the following year is based on latest status of the company at time of network update.

Contact numbers and e-mail addresses can be found in IDQP PRIVATE WEB.

In order to have a better transparency for quality and /or service related issues, all IDQP inspectors can assess
the capability or restrictions of each location identified by four attention levels.

Green:
 No findings or non-significant findings
 The inspected party can be used without any restriction
 Inspection interval remains at 36 months intervals

Amber:
 Major findings which are not expected to disturb the safe (Drinking Water) operations of an aircraft but is
considered as a safety concern.
 Inspection interval is 12 months or less (follow-up inspection highly recommended).
 Examples: A number of findings, while each is not necessarily critical on its own, but cumulatively indicate a
lack of system controls which may lead to a critical failure.

Red:
 Level 1 finding(s)

 Major findings affecting the safe (Drinking Water) quality on an aircraft

 The inspected party should not be used. The final decision to use such a vendor remains with each individual
airline.
 Follow-up inspection mandatory with an interval of 12 months or less, extension can be granted which will
be agreed with all parties flying to the affected destination.
 Examples: A high number of findings, while each is not necessarily critical on its own, but cumulatively
indicate a total lack of system controls which may lead to a critical failure.

Black:
 Has not been inspected, should not be used

Colour Coding = Guideline

USE COMMON SENSE

How a facility does go back from red or amber status to green?

Going back from red to green:

a) Ask the inspected party to send a corrective action plan within 14 days after the inspection date.
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

b) The inspector shall plan a follow up inspection after the initial inspection date.

Only then, If the inspected party solves all the safety/health finding(s), it can go both to the amber or green status
depending on the nature and number of the remaining findings.

Going back from amber to green:

a) Ask the inspected party to send corrective evidence within 30 days (following the reporting date).
b) Re-inspect the facility within one year and adjust inspection frequency in IDQP PRIVATE WEB
until status is green again. In this case, if the airport has more than one party, the inspector adjusts
the inspection frequency for this destination into one year but the inspector shall indicate in the
“destination specific information” box which inspected party is affected and which are not.
c) A second report of the follow up inspection shall be inserted in IDQP PRIVATE WEB with a green
classification.

4.2.4.12 Corrective Action, Closing, Escalation

Each recipient of an inspection is required to respond to findings in the inspection report within 30 days after
receiving notification and the inspection report. Responses to findings must include the following:
Root Cause. This should be the true root cause of the finding
Corrective Action. This is the immediate action taken to correct the discrepancy. If a corrective action was
implemented while the Inspector was on-site this should be included in this field
Comprehensive Corrective Action: In this field, the respondent should enter which measures or process
changes have been implemented to prevent a reoccurrence of the original finding. The CCA must address the
root cause

Closing Procedure:
When the respondent has submitted responses to all findings, the Inspector will review the responses, assuring
the root cause is plausible, the corrective action is sufficient and the comprehensive corrective action adequately
addresses the root cause.
The respondent shall include in his responses substantial evidences of all actions taken, namely corrective actions
and comprehensive corrective actions.
If satisfied with the responses and evidences, the Inspector will update the status of the vendor as described
previously and close the Inspection. At this time a system email will be sent to all airlines serving that airport that
the inspection has been closed.

When, by any reason, an inspector leaves the airline without closing its reports, it’s the Airline Master responsibility
to close all the reports. If the Airline Master is not an inspector, then he shall reassign the inspections to another
inspector (needs to contact the SC) or ask for advice from another accredited inspector.

Escalation procedure:
If an inspector, despite all his efforts, does not receive a corrective action response after the second request, an
escalation mail or via different communication (telephone, email, fax) shall be sent by him to the inspected party.
If the inspected party fails to respond within another 10 days the Inspector can go directly to the inspected party’s
Headquarters, and all airlines serving that airport shall be copied. (Headquarters contact info can be found in

the downloadable section of the IDQP PRIVATE WEB or at the inspectors’ airline Drinking Water purchasing
department). The purchasing departments of the airlines can send an e-mail to the inspected party’s
headquarters. It remains the sole decision of each airline to take whatever action they deem necessary to ensure
the safety of their operation.
When the previous actions are without result, the inspector can ask the SC to officially contact either the inspected
party’s headquarters, Airport Authorities or the concerned Health Aviation Authority.

4.2.4.13 Destination Specific Information for Airport XXX

The extranet has a provision where the inspector or airline master can enter airport specific information. This
should be updated by the airline responsible for each airport. It is found at the top of each airport page and it is
called: ‘Destination specific information for airport XXX’

Whenever internal (non IDQP approved) airline auditors or local airline staff have findings which may be of any
interest to the IDQP inspector or member airline, the inspector shall bring this information in the box “Destination
specific information for airport XXX” which can be found at the top of the report list of that airport in IDQP
PRIVATE WEB and inform the airline master responsible for this airport. The inspector can act in the same way
if an incident has been brought to your attention and the inspector can assess if it is interesting to comment in
the IDQP PRIVATE WEB. This info shall also have to be brought to the attention of all concerned airlines by
means of IDQP PRIVATE WEB or e-mail directly.
The inspector inserting the info in IDQP PRIVATE WEB shall also mention the name of the person, who made
this remark and the observation date. By doing so, IDQP PRIVATE WEB provides as much relevant info as
possible to the inspector responsible for this airport.

4.2.5 Provisions not to fall under Backlogs

It is the active airline responsibility to plan inspections in due time according to the periodicity established in IDQP
PRIVATE WEB. No backlogs are allowed. Penalties to airlines with backlogs are described in the Multilateral
Agreement
However, there might be situations where it is not possible to respect the due date for an inspection and the
Airline Master has to inform the IATA Secretary and the airline masters of the airlines flying to such destination.
Other alternatives must be considered, such an airport exchange, or ask another airline or another inspector to
cover or perform an audit.

Airlines SHALL complete all their allocated inspections. It is required that at least 50% of the shared allocated
inspections are covered by full on-site inspections. All others, shared and single stations, can be covered by
Desktop Audits. When exceptional cases arise (Political unrest, Natural disasters, Diseases), the airline can
contact the SC (Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary) and seek permission to perform desktop audits instead.

The airlines approved to perform a desktop audit must contact the Water service provider directly and ask them
to provide records, analysis and photos of bowsers, filters, connectors, surroundings of fill points, etc.
Inspector has to complete the checklist, not observed on certain points, and upload all proof sent by the water
supplier.

This provision is made in order to support the airlines and should not be abused. We expect all airlines to strictly
complete their allocated audits so the integrity of the pool is upheld.

For those airlines who fly to seasonal stations, these can and should be covered during the time the airline is
flying to this destination, so the inspectors must not wait until the last day of the deadline when the nominated
airline is not flying there, as this justification will not be accepted.

If an inspector experiences a problem, it is important to communicate to the affected parties immediately. This
will go directly to the SC for their review of the case and their approval or refusal of the request.

Remember if the inspector thinks that the inspection will be late for several valid reasons as Natural Disasters,
Political unrest, etc. the inspector has the option/possibility to exchange stations with other airlines or to hire
other qualified inspectors to cover the stations for assigned to the nominated airline. The stations assigned to
the nominated airline are the airline’s responsibility. Of course the Steering Committee will use reasonableness
and will analyze each request in a case by case basis.

If an airline does not comply with its share of inspections for two consecutive years, the SC reserves the right to
expel such an airline from the Pool.

4.2.6 Allocation Procedures

Every year, Airline Masters shall update their airline destinations in IDQP PRIVATE WEB, typically during the
month of November. This action is performed directly in IDQP PRIVATE WEB in an application specially
developed for this purpose, and upon notice of IATA Secretary.
IATA Secretary shall then proceed with the new allocation till the end of December and inform all airline masters
when it’s completed.
Airline Masters, after receiving the information that allocation is completed, shall plan inspections to the new
allocated stations in accordance with the established procedures.

4.2.7 Period and timeframe to perform inspections

The airline master shall review the assigned IDQP inspections and should schedule the inspections to be
completed by 31 Oct. of each calendar year latest. Once notified by IATA, the airline masters should update the
contact details of their service providers list by 30 Nov. IATA to finalize the IDQP allocation by 30 Dec. Audit cycle
for next year commences 01 Jan – 31 Oct. This would give 10 months for the airline master to schedule and
complete the allocated inspection with accurate information. As it is today, with airline performing inspection late
December and publishing early the following year, the allocation can never be exact or updated.

Airlines masters were requested to inform IATA and the airline master of the airlines that have reported uplifting
at this destination of any discrepancy between handling agents assigned versus reports posted and name
differences. This will allow other airlines of the pool to understand the situation at the airport.

4.2.8 Change on Network during the year

What happens to a station that have been assigned to a pool member who now during the year does not operate
to the destination or withdraws entirely from the pool? If a station has been assigned, this station must be covered.
The airline assigned can always contact other airlines flying to this destination and ask to cover on their behalf.
Exchanges can be done, but they must be notified to IATA for update of the files and audit summary.

4.2.9 Communication and Calendar

Airlines SHALL communicate and consult with the other affected members if they cannot perform the inspection
and provide the plan for when these stations will be covered. An exchange can maybe be agreed. IATA shall be
informed as well in order to update the IDQP Audit Plan and Summary. A calendar will be effective in the extranet
as additional communication tool to inform planned dates of inspection. This will not replace direct notification to
other carriers affected if a delay was to take place.
Members count on the other airlines responsible management. Airline masters and inspectors will be closely
monitored as to proper communication and airlines neglecting their responsibilities can be removed by majority
vote if their performance is not up to standards.

Airlines masters should inform IATA and the airline master of the airlines that have reported uplifting at this
destination of any discrepancy between handling agents assigned versus reports posted and name differences.
This will allow other airlines of the pool to understand the situation at the airport.

There is a box called Destination specific information for airport where inspectors can enter meaningful
information that could be of benefit to other members. (i.e. BOM - entry visa needs 3 months processing and
airport pass is complicated. Plan your visit accordingly.)

4.2.10 Changes in handling Agents at a specific airport

If a new supplier is not providing service to an IDQP member airline, an inspection should be accomplished at the
next scheduled inspection.

The responsible airline should notify the QM in the case of a change of ownership of a current IDQP HANDLING
AGENT, at the same time it should send a desktop audit checklist to the HANDLING AGENT for basic evaluation
and risk assessment of changes. The responsible airline will then provide this information to the Quality Group to
evaluate and determine whether procedural, staffing, equipment, and management changes warrant an inspection
at the start of service under the new operator. If an inspection is determined to be required, the responsible airline
shall inspect this HANDLING AGENT.

If you find out that a company does not exist anymore or does not provide potable water services anymore please
contact IDQP administration at [email protected] to deactivate such handling agent.
If there is a name change also update information.

4.2.11 If an airline files for bankruptcy

If an airline files for bankruptcy, destinations will be reallocated among the remaining active member airlines
flying to these destinations.

4.2.12 Airline that wishes to leave the Pool.

An airline can resign from the pool however their responsibilities remain until the end of the year.

4.2.13 Who must be inspected? Handling Agent or Company we have the contract with?

The answer is: BOTH. Prepare two reports and link or inter info and reference to the other if necessary.

4.3 Inspectors

4.3.1 Minimum requirement to be selected as an IDQP candidate inspector

Following are the minimum requirements for inspector candidates, which are nominated by its members for the
basic training and approval as IDQP inspectors.

Requirements
1. Only inspectors of active or associated airline members are eligible as candidates for the IDQP.
2. Candidates should have completed an SMS and Human Factors training before attending the IDQP
Inspector course.
3. The inspector candidate should have prior experience in handling and quality control of aviation Drinking
Water, or inspecting aviation Drinking Water facilities at airports.
4. Candidates must be able to read, write, speak and understand the English language.

4.3.2 Currency of Airline Assigned Inspectors

1. To keep the currency of an inspector, the following requirements shall be fulfilled:
 Minimum number of inspections 1 every year
 Positive completion of the IDQP refresher training every three years.
 Completed an SMS and Human Factors training
 An acceptable quality record.
2. If an Inspector has not been able to attend (and pass) the refresher training, but performed the required number
of inspections, the attendance of the 2 days Inspector Training Course is acceptable and counted as
alternative (subject to availability and in this case the cost of the full training has to be covered by the airline).
3. If an Inspector has not been able to perform the minimum required number of inspections, but passed the
refresher training positively, he/she must complete the training course again or must observe an inspection
with another qualified inspector only.
4. If an Inspector has not passed the refresher training and did not accomplish all required inspections, he/she
shall complete the entire training and qualification process the same as a new Candidate Inspector (i.e. Initial
Training). The cost of the training has to be covered by the airline.

4.3.3 Requalification of Previous Inspectors

In case a person has been qualified in the past as Inspector and has been inactive for more than 24 months, or
does not meet the currency requirements, a complete initial qualification process has to be repeated.

4.3.4 Currency of Freelance Inspectors

1. In case a freelance Inspector has no airline assigned for the coming year, but fulfills the currency requirements
of performed inspections and quality of reports, he can attend a refresher training.
2. If such an Inspector is not contracted by an airline his access will be blocked to IDQP PRIVATE WEB and will
be deleted from the list of Inspectors. Open reports assigned to this inspector will be reassigned.

4.3.5 Other Information

In case of any deviations from the processes, the Steering Committee shall make a temporary decision about
the further process. The Steering Committee shall vote a final decision.
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

If a station has been assigned to a pool member and during the year this airline does not operate to the destination
or withdraws entirely from the pool, the stations assigned should still be covered. The airline assigned can always
contact other airlines flying to this destination and ask to cover on their behalf. Exchanges can be done, but they
must be notified to IATA for update of the files and audit summary.

If an airline is faced with the situation where they have no qualified inspector available to perform their part of the
assigned inspection plan:
- They may arrange for a swap with another airline,
- They may hire a qualified inspector
- They may approach the SC for an alternate solution or assistance.
- If above case cannot be reached airline could be charged by IATA if requested by the IDQP Steering
Committee, 3.000,00 USD per inspection and another airline will be assigned to compete the.

4.3.6 Revoking or suspending the inspector accreditation

The QG in coordination with the SC and trainers group can decide to revoke or suspend an inspector
accreditation. The following conditions can force the suspension or revocation:
o Inspector does not meet the requirements
o Unsatisfactory result of Quality Evaluation
o Misbehavior or complaints (inspected party) during inspections

4.3.7 Reacquisition of Inspector rights

In both previous cases the reacquisition of inspector rights implies a Quality Evaluation with a positive outcome

4.4 Quality Evaluation

4.4.1 Definition
A quality evaluation is an independent comparison of the way in which an operation is being conducted against
the way in which the published procedures say it should be conducted.
These evaluations will be performed by experienced Inspectors. They will follow the IDQP inspectors during their
planned inspections and evaluate them.
The purpose of these internal quality evaluations are to guarantee the continuous high standard of the
inspections performed by the IDQP inspectors.

4.5 Quality Assurance Program

4.5.1 Introduction
Quality Assurance involves the application of the Quality System, in the form of written procedures, coupled with
specific (and necessary) quality control checks, all designed to ensure that products and/or services meet defined
specifications and satisfy customer expectation. It also involves periodic checks to verify that the systems and
associated quality controls are all being applied and is effective.
The cycle of the scheduled inspections is to be completed during two years and at the latest 24 months after last
inspection.

IDQP inspector may increase the frequency of inspections at his discretion but should not decrease the frequency
without the written agreement of the SC. Nevertheless, it is highly unacceptable that a 24 months period should
be extended for any inspection topic. Also IDQP may issue bulletins, either addressing technical issues, or quality
issues, as a mean of disseminating important information throughout all inspectors and airline masters.

4.6 Monitoring and Corrective action

4.6.1 Introduction
The aim of monitoring within the Quality System is primarily to investigate and judge its effectiveness and thereby
to ensure that defined standards are continuously complied with. Monitoring activity is based upon quality
inspections, corrective action and follow-up and upon internal quality evaluation.

4.6.2 Monitoring regulatory compliance

It is everybody’s responsibility to look for possibilities to bring the company standards at a higher level of quality.
Therefore, the SC, SG, QG and Trainers group, who can take the necessary actions to introduce new or improved
procedures into the Quality System, will hear all ideas, critics or remarks.
A second source, which could lead to a revision, is a change or amendment to e.g. a National Regulation, the
AHM 440 and to the IDQP standards.
Every change or amendment to or new regulations will be closely assessed by the SC who can decide with the
approval of the SG upon modification to the Quality System to keep the organization in compliance with all
applicable regulations.

4.6.3 Follow -up of corrective action resulting from quality evaluations

It is the task of the SC and Trainers Group to review all evaluation reports prepared by the QG.
QG shall prepare an overview of the conclusions resulting from these quality evaluators and present it yearly to
the SG.

4.7 Feedback to the member airlines

4.7.1 Steering Group meeting
4.7.1.1 About inspections
An SG meeting is a comprehensive, systematic, documented review by the SC and the airline masters of the
quality system, procedures, and should consider:
a) The results of quality inspections
b) The overall effectiveness of the quality system in achieving stated objectives.

So, in addition to the annual inspection schedule, periodic evaluation of the quality system is undertaken to
ensure the continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the system.
The following persons are to participate in the SG meeting:
a) SC
b) SG members

c) QM
d) Trainers

An SG meeting should identify and correct trends, and prevent, where possible, future non-conformities.
The SC will use the records of the inspections to guide him towards problem areas or to the problems, which are
caused by the weakness in the system itself.
The SC has decided that an SG meeting will take place once a year. The input during this evaluation consists
out of the following:
a) Inspection results
b) Process performance
c) Customer feedback
d) Status of corrective actions
e) Follow-up actions from previous meetings
f) Possible changes that could affect the quality system
g) Recommendations for improvement
h) Industry updates
i) New technologies

The output of such meeting shall include any decisions and actions related to:
a) Improvement of the effectiveness of the Quality system and its processes
b) Improving the product
c) Resource needs
d) Agreement update
e) other
As explained in the paragraph above, a full report will be prepared by the SC for the SG on a yearly basis.
The results of the SG meeting will assist the SC in the development of the inspection Program for the coming
year.

4.7.1.2 About internal quality evaluations

Refer to 4.4

4.8 Recording
Accurate, complete, and readily accessible records documenting the results of the Quality Assurance Program
will be maintained by IDQP. Records are essential data to enable to analyze and determine the root causes of
findings, so that areas of non-compliance can be identified and addressed.
The following records will be retained for a period of 6 years in IDQP PRIVATE WEB.

a) complete checklist
b) letter to Service provider / airport is applicable

c) any related attachment

Original checklist may be stored by the airline as per local regulatory requirements.

4.9 Disclosure of reports

Disclosure of Inspection Reports is not allowed without the prior written consent of the SC and the Active
Airlines using the facility at the airport, unless disclosure is required by regulation or pursuant to a lawful order
of a competent court or government agency, in which event the Participating Airline shall notify the SC of such
requirement.
In such a case where an airline receives a request from an Aviation Authority, a Board of Investigation of Air
Accidents/Incidents or any other Government Agency to disclose a report, the Airline Master shall follow the
following procedure:
- Print a copy of the report and erase any reference to inspector ID and respective airline that performed the
inspection. Such a document shall be scanned again in order to disclose it.
- Inform the inspector that his report will be disclosed
- Request a written consent to the SC members
- The report can be viewed by the requesting Agency, but no electronic copies or hard copies shall be
provided.

CHAPTER 5: TRAINING

5.1 Trainees requirements

Each Active Airline shall nominate a sufficient number of Candidate Inspectors provided that such Candidates
shall have prior experience in handling and quality control of aviation Drinking Water, or inspecting aviation
Drinking Water facilities at airports. IATA and the Quality Manager reserves the right to refuse a Candidate
Inspector, who does not possess such prior experience, access to the IDQP training, but shall have first consulted
with the Steering Committee which may also request advice from the Trainer’s Group.
Additionally, candidates must show sufficient communication skills in English in order to satisfactorily carry out
his future inspection duties on time as well as being capable of understanding all technical subjects related to
Drinking Water management and aircraft Drinking Water uplift.
Third party trainees can be allowed to attend IDQP training sessions, if approved by IATA and the SC.

5.2 IDQP Training Courses

5.2.1 Training Facilities
IDQP basic training for candidate inspectors shall be undertaken only at suitable training locations.
a) Located at an international airport, with ramp access.
b) Close to a hotel (maximum 45 minutes travelling time)
c) Transportation between the facility
d) In general, must have a positive IDQP inspection results posted in the IDQP web site.

5.2.2 Training Documentation

Following training material is the approved documentation for IDQP basic training:
a) “IDQP Training Manual”, received at basic IDQP theoretical course or upon request. This manual is updated
as necessary by the Trainer’s Group based on technological changes or improvements as well as changes
in reference standards.
b) Checklist
c) standards

For IDQP periodic refresher (every 3 years), a classroom training session will be organized by the Trainers Group
(if considered necessary it may include a practical session), or material will be provided to each airline master in
CD or webinar to distribute within his approved inspector group. The airline master is responsible to advise the
IDQP Secretary on the completion of this training by his inspectors stating that they have reviewed the refresher
training material. Content of the refresher materials are designed and decided by the Trainer’s Group on a case-
by-case basis.
The 3 year refresher period is counted from the date of the latest IDQP classroom training session (basic or
refresher).

5.2.3 IDQP Approved Trainer

A trainer is an experienced inspector or an approved external consultant meeting the requirements and having
a technical knowledge of Drinking Water specifications, technical Drinking Watering equipment, aircraft systems
and handling and being active in international airline activities.

5.2.3.1 Minimum requirements to become an Approved Trainer

a) Up to date Drinking Water Specifications and Technical Equipment knowledge
b) Up to date Drinking Water Handling procedures knowledge
c) Involvement and/or Experience in current International Activities
d) Educational and communicational skills

5.2.3.2 Requirements to remain an Approved Trainer

a) The SC and the Trainers Group jointly decide who can remain a trainer (For exceptional cases the group will
decide upon )
b) The basic training or refresher training should be performed at least once a year
c) Trainers keep each other knowledgeable, up to date and therefore are exempted of attending refresher
trainings
d) Minimum of once a year attend the trainers or Ops Committee meeting.

5.2.4 IDQP Basic Training Contents

IDQP Basic training is a full course where it is mixed theoretical lessons with practical exercises and/ or
demonstrations. All activities are scheduled in the Training Program.
In order to ensure practical exercises are fully understood and all candidates may be involved (“hands-on”), it is
set a maximum of 20 students per Trainer.

This basic training is essential to become an IDQP Approved Inspector. Passing mark is a minimum of 75 points.

5.2.5 IDQP Basic Training Responsibilities

IATA Secretary is responsible to manage and control each basic training course, which means:
a) Control the list of candidates attending the course
b) Coordinate trainer’s availability
c) Coordinate with training facilities.
d) Provide contract to trainers and training facilities
e) Distribute the Training Program, previously agreed with the Trainers.
f) Ensure training material is available
g) Inform all students, trainers and training facilities about training program and all changes
h) Keep all records of theoretical tests done by the candidates
i) Manage the financial cost of the trainers, facilities and invoice the participants

Trainers are responsible to provide the training and evaluate the candidates, which mean:
a) Do all necessary efforts to explain the training subjects.
BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.
Reference: IDQP QM
Revision: 2nd Edition
IDQP Quality Manual
Revision date: 31-Jan-2020

b) Manage time efficiently in order to fulfill the Training Program

c) Coordinate on site with the training facility staff all necessary actions to provide scheduled theoretical and
practical lessons.
d) Organize the theoretical test, with closed-book, ensuring that candidates do not share results. Minimum
passing rate is 75% and Trainer is not allowed to modify the result.
e) Sending test results to IATA Secretary.
f) In case a trainer detects a non-eligible person during the basic training, he must inform to the Steering
Committee. The SC will inform the respective Airline Master about the decision.

Airline Master
a) Is responsible to ensure that his candidates comply with all minimum requirements to be eligible as trainee
(i.e. inspector candidate).
b) In case the Candidate does not meet a requirement, Airline Master shall manage all necessary actions to
ensure he fulfills the requirement or alternatively will propose another candidate appropriately qualified.

CHAPTER 6: FORMS AND SYSTEMS

All forms used in relation to this QM are downloadable from the IDQP PRIVATE WEB download section.

BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only.

ISO 27001 Gap Analysis: Sample Client Report (Redacted)
88% (8)
ISO 27001 Gap Analysis: Sample Client Report (Redacted)
17 pages
Induction Indexing
100% (1)
Induction Indexing
8 pages
AHM650 Ground Incident Damage Report Sheet 01-02 PDF
No ratings yet
AHM650 Ground Incident Damage Report Sheet 01-02 PDF
4 pages
SAPs DOCUMENTS
No ratings yet
SAPs DOCUMENTS
14 pages
Iata Catering Quality Assurance Programme
100% (1)
Iata Catering Quality Assurance Programme
44 pages
Isago Q5iams Auditee Manual Ed2 Sep 10
100% (1)
Isago Q5iams Auditee Manual Ed2 Sep 10
31 pages
Iso 9001 & Iatf Manual
No ratings yet
Iso 9001 & Iatf Manual
93 pages
IDQP 2020 Training Manual 6th Ed
No ratings yet
IDQP 2020 Training Manual 6th Ed
108 pages
FSM Issue 4 Rev 3
No ratings yet
FSM Issue 4 Rev 3
543 pages
Jetstar ISAGO Audit Checklist - SafetyCulture
No ratings yet
Jetstar ISAGO Audit Checklist - SafetyCulture
74 pages
2020 Dangerous Goods Checklist For A Non-Radioactive Shipment
No ratings yet
2020 Dangerous Goods Checklist For A Non-Radioactive Shipment
2 pages
001d Airside Safety
No ratings yet
001d Airside Safety
12 pages
EHEST-SMS-Safety Management Manual-V2 Response Plan
No ratings yet
EHEST-SMS-Safety Management Manual-V2 Response Plan
31 pages
AOC Check List
100% (1)
AOC Check List
10 pages
IATA Training Team
No ratings yet
IATA Training Team
2 pages
SL-QMS-19 Operations Control System
No ratings yet
SL-QMS-19 Operations Control System
7 pages
CAD 19 Safety Management ISS02 - REV00 1
No ratings yet
CAD 19 Safety Management ISS02 - REV00 1
20 pages
U.S. Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
No ratings yet
U.S. Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
12 pages
Cabin Crew and Airports Standards NOV 2022
No ratings yet
Cabin Crew and Airports Standards NOV 2022
20 pages
Aviation Internal Auditor: 4-Day Virtual Classroom Course (20 Hours of Study)
No ratings yet
Aviation Internal Auditor: 4-Day Virtual Classroom Course (20 Hours of Study)
2 pages
AHMIGOM 4th Edition 2015
No ratings yet
AHMIGOM 4th Edition 2015
111 pages
MSC Aviation Management
100% (1)
MSC Aviation Management
6 pages
Integration of QMS and SMS in Aviation
No ratings yet
Integration of QMS and SMS in Aviation
7 pages
(Kaly462f) RSMQCM E3r01
No ratings yet
(Kaly462f) RSMQCM E3r01
615 pages
DG Surveillance Checlists
No ratings yet
DG Surveillance Checlists
67 pages
Audit Tco
No ratings yet
Audit Tco
21 pages
CAA-O-GEN003C The Five Phase Certification and Approval Process
No ratings yet
CAA-O-GEN003C The Five Phase Certification and Approval Process
9 pages
GOM - Aircraft Safety
No ratings yet
GOM - Aircraft Safety
46 pages
Airline-Emergency-Response-Gap-Analysis-Checklist 2
No ratings yet
Airline-Emergency-Response-Gap-Analysis-Checklist 2
11 pages
AOI 10 Safety Assurance and Audits
No ratings yet
AOI 10 Safety Assurance and Audits
9 pages
FOSI Handbook Vol 2 AOC
No ratings yet
FOSI Handbook Vol 2 AOC
116 pages
OACI Doc 9859 (SMM) Manual de Gestion de Seg Operacional
No ratings yet
OACI Doc 9859 (SMM) Manual de Gestion de Seg Operacional
49 pages
DFW Ground Vehicles Manual
No ratings yet
DFW Ground Vehicles Manual
129 pages
Mdca-Ac-Aw006 Foreign Amo Certification Rev 1
No ratings yet
Mdca-Ac-Aw006 Foreign Amo Certification Rev 1
12 pages
Fire Safety and Emergency Manual
No ratings yet
Fire Safety and Emergency Manual
21 pages
Gap Analysis Example
No ratings yet
Gap Analysis Example
7 pages
S9QC29 Airport Risk Assessment Checklist
No ratings yet
S9QC29 Airport Risk Assessment Checklist
6 pages
CAD 1900 Safety Reporting System 1
No ratings yet
CAD 1900 Safety Reporting System 1
68 pages
Dangerous Goods
No ratings yet
Dangerous Goods
3 pages
QID 063 - Fuel Manual - Iss 2, Am 1
No ratings yet
QID 063 - Fuel Manual - Iss 2, Am 1
93 pages
ICAO Annexes Management
No ratings yet
ICAO Annexes Management
31 pages
Safety Regulations
No ratings yet
Safety Regulations
10 pages
A HM 652 Human Factors in Air Side Safety Investigations
No ratings yet
A HM 652 Human Factors in Air Side Safety Investigations
5 pages
Aviation Safety Dashboards See What Matters 1694474677
No ratings yet
Aviation Safety Dashboards See What Matters 1694474677
27 pages
CAA-AC-AWS012 Draft Quality Assurance System
No ratings yet
CAA-AC-AWS012 Draft Quality Assurance System
9 pages
A HM 610 Risk Assessment Matrix
100% (1)
A HM 610 Risk Assessment Matrix
1 page
CGM-Checklist AHBA 06
No ratings yet
CGM-Checklist AHBA 06
18 pages
Mcar SMS
No ratings yet
Mcar SMS
40 pages
Airlines' Quality
No ratings yet
Airlines' Quality
78 pages
IOSA Checklist: ISM Edition 9 - Effective September 1, 2015
No ratings yet
IOSA Checklist: ISM Edition 9 - Effective September 1, 2015
75 pages
Aviation Security Training Module 3
No ratings yet
Aviation Security Training Module 3
17 pages
Easa-Icaa Sms m5
No ratings yet
Easa-Icaa Sms m5
13 pages
Quality and Auditing
No ratings yet
Quality and Auditing
6 pages
ICAO SMS Gap Analysis
No ratings yet
ICAO SMS Gap Analysis
10 pages
CAAS AOC Requirements Rev 17
No ratings yet
CAAS AOC Requirements Rev 17
244 pages
Unit 1
No ratings yet
Unit 1
30 pages
Wildlife N FOD Workshop
No ratings yet
Wildlife N FOD Workshop
41 pages
1.iaw-Qa-Ops01 Flight Ops
No ratings yet
1.iaw-Qa-Ops01 Flight Ops
18 pages
Air Astra GRH Check List
100% (1)
Air Astra GRH Check List
89 pages
Aviation Safety Inspection Checklist
No ratings yet
Aviation Safety Inspection Checklist
3 pages
Quality Management System Manual: QM-00 Index (Full Text)
No ratings yet
Quality Management System Manual: QM-00 Index (Full Text)
5 pages
Writing A 2000 Word Literature Review
100% (1)
Writing A 2000 Word Literature Review
8 pages
Engineering Literature Review Outline
100% (2)
Engineering Literature Review Outline
5 pages
Performance Spotlight - Career and Performance - Oracle Fusion Cloud Applications
No ratings yet
Performance Spotlight - Career and Performance - Oracle Fusion Cloud Applications
5 pages
Brassey 2019 - Statistica
No ratings yet
Brassey 2019 - Statistica
4 pages
Masters Thesis Literature Review Example
100% (3)
Masters Thesis Literature Review Example
6 pages
Evaluation of Information Systems
No ratings yet
Evaluation of Information Systems
29 pages
Legal RAG Hallucinations
No ratings yet
Legal RAG Hallucinations
38 pages
Agile Global Software Development
No ratings yet
Agile Global Software Development
10 pages
PR - Ims.03 Internal Incpection Procedure
No ratings yet
PR - Ims.03 Internal Incpection Procedure
6 pages
MIS604 Assessment+2 20240603
No ratings yet
MIS604 Assessment+2 20240603
7 pages
Project Report Unit 3,4
No ratings yet
Project Report Unit 3,4
10 pages
Literature Review Scholar Google
100% (2)
Literature Review Scholar Google
9 pages
USC - Addendum.GMP - BIM Guidelines.V1.6.rev.10.12.12
No ratings yet
USC - Addendum.GMP - BIM Guidelines.V1.6.rev.10.12.12
28 pages
The Scientific Method - NLP PDF
No ratings yet
The Scientific Method - NLP PDF
2 pages
Cover Letter For Journal Submission
100% (1)
Cover Letter For Journal Submission
7 pages
Complete Download Recordkeeping Cultures 2nd Edition Gillian Oliver Fiorella Foscarini PDF All Chapters
100% (3)
Complete Download Recordkeeping Cultures 2nd Edition Gillian Oliver Fiorella Foscarini PDF All Chapters
55 pages
Free Literature Review Template
100% (2)
Free Literature Review Template
6 pages
W12 Reading Quiz Probability and Confidence Intervals Math For The Real World PDF
No ratings yet
W12 Reading Quiz Probability and Confidence Intervals Math For The Real World PDF
5 pages
Appendix B: Writing Assignment Requirements: Format and Content Instructions
No ratings yet
Appendix B: Writing Assignment Requirements: Format and Content Instructions
2 pages
Asset Criticality Analysis Audi Customized
No ratings yet
Asset Criticality Analysis Audi Customized
4 pages
Main Project-PPT Script
No ratings yet
Main Project-PPT Script
13 pages
Guidelines For MTP
No ratings yet
Guidelines For MTP
4 pages
FairEval_Evaluating Fairness in LLM-Based Recommendations With Personality Awareness
No ratings yet
FairEval_Evaluating Fairness in LLM-Based Recommendations With Personality Awareness
11 pages
Competency Based Assessment User Guide
No ratings yet
Competency Based Assessment User Guide
23 pages
L5 - Statistical Test
No ratings yet
L5 - Statistical Test
27 pages
Planning and Scheduling Group 3 Ec1
No ratings yet
Planning and Scheduling Group 3 Ec1
113 pages
Components of Research Report
0% (1)
Components of Research Report
31 pages
Jesa - 57.04 - 26 (1) - Compressed
No ratings yet
Jesa - 57.04 - 26 (1) - Compressed
12 pages
Assessment Resource Summary: BSBWHS605 Develop, Implement and Maintain WHS Management Systems
No ratings yet
Assessment Resource Summary: BSBWHS605 Develop, Implement and Maintain WHS Management Systems
10 pages