Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

PECB ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Exam - Topic 5 Question 37 Discussion

The certification body has not been able to verify the implementation of corrective actions for any identified major nonconformity within six months after the last day of the Stage 2 audit. What must the certification body do in this case?
A) It must issue an unfavorable recommendation of certification
B) It must conduct all audit activities from the beginning
C) It must conduct another Stage 2 audit before granting certification

PECB ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Exam - Topic 5 Question 37 Discussion

Actual exam question for PECB's ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor exam
Question #: 37
Topic #: 5
[All ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Questions]

The certification body has not been able to verify the implementation of corrective actions for any identified major nonconformity within six months after the last day of the Stage 2 audit. What must the certification body do in this case?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth

According to ISO 17021-1:2015, Clause 9.4.10 (Corrective Actions for Major Nonconformities):

If a major nonconformity is not corrected within six months, the certification body must reject the certification request.

Another Stage 2 audit (C) is not required unless the organization reapplies for certification.

Restarting all audit activities (B) is unnecessary; instead, certification is denied.

Thus, A is the correct answer.


ISO 17021-1:2015, Clause 9.4.10 (Corrective Actions for Major Nonconformities)

by German at Jan 05, 2026, 05:16 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Cristina
2 months ago
C makes sense too. Another Stage 2 audit could clarify if they really fixed the problems.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jodi
2 months ago
But what if they need more time? B could be an option to ensure everything is done properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dana
3 months ago
I agree, A seems right. Six months is a long time to wait for corrective actions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dell
3 months ago
I think the certification body should issue an unfavorable recommendation. It’s clear they didn’t fix the issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosamond
3 months ago
B sounds a bit harsh, but I guess rules are rules!
upvoted 0 times
...
Flo
3 months ago
They have to follow the rules, so C makes sense too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alberta
3 months ago
Wait, can they really just start over? Seems excessive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Graham
3 months ago
Totally agree, no proof means no certification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Letha
4 months ago
A is correct, they can't certify without verification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamella
4 months ago
Option A is the clear choice. The certification body has to take a firm stance on major nonconformities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anika
4 months ago
Haha, option B would be like starting from scratch. That's overkill, don't you think?
upvoted 0 times
...
Reita
5 months ago
Option C is the way to go. Another Stage 2 audit is necessary to ensure the issues are properly resolved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eladia
5 months ago
I agree with option A. The certification body needs to take action if the organization fails to address major nonconformities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nada
5 months ago
Option A seems the most appropriate. The certification body should issue an unfavorable recommendation if they can't verify corrective actions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wendell
5 months ago
I feel like option A makes sense, but I also recall something about needing to conduct another audit if the issues aren't fixed. Maybe it's a mix of both?
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused about the options. Does issuing an unfavorable recommendation mean they can't certify at all, or just that they need more evidence first?
upvoted 0 times
...
Yan
5 months ago
I remember a practice question that mentioned the need for a follow-up audit if corrective actions weren't verified. Could it be option C?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ming
6 months ago
I think the certification body has to take action if the major nonconformity isn't resolved in six months, but I'm not sure if that means they have to start over completely.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brandon
6 months ago
Okay, let me think this through step-by-step. If they can't verify the corrective actions in 6 months, they have to do another Stage 2 audit before granting certification. So it's not a full restart, but they do need to do that additional audit. I think I've got it now.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karl
6 months ago
Ugh, another Stage 2 audit? That's going to be a pain. I was hoping I could just memorize the right answer and move on. Guess I'll have to really understand this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rashida
6 months ago
I think the key here is that the certification body has to conduct another Stage 2 audit before granting certification. The question is pretty clear that they can't just issue an unfavorable recommendation, they have to do another full audit.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
6 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. Do we have to do the whole audit process over again from the beginning if they can't verify the corrective actions? That seems like a lot of work.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tiera
7 months ago
This seems pretty straightforward - the certification body has to issue an unfavorable recommendation if they can't verify the corrective actions within 6 months.
upvoted 0 times
Haydee
11 days ago
Exactly, they can't just ignore it!
upvoted 0 times
...
Sue
16 days ago
Makes sense, no verification means no certification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aileen
2 months ago
I agree, they have to issue an unfavorable recommendation.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel