Safety managers and equipment managers who run breathalyzers check the condition of the equipment before and after use. Checking whether the power comes on, whether there are error indications on the screen, and whether the exterior is damaged is important management work that can be done on site right away. These checks help catch visible problems early in equipment used for entry control or pre-work testing.
However, finding no problem in an on-site check does not mean the accuracy of the readings has been verified. Calibration is the work of checking the relationship between the equipment's readings and reference values and recording the results, while an on-site check is the work of looking for signs of abnormality in set items. If you record an on-site check result as "calibration complete," it is recorded as if a wider scope had been verified than the work actually done, which can cause confusion when submitting certificates or managing the next calibration.
On site, you look and confirm operation
An on-site check is not a procedure for disassembling the equipment or judging the performance of the internal sensor. Staff can observe and record conditions within a set scope, such as damage to the exterior or traces of liquid, the power coming on, the screen display, and button response. If the user manual for the model in use includes a routine check procedure, it is appropriate to use it as the basis for the check items.
The fact that a number appears on screen or that the test-ready screen comes up does not tell you how that reading relates to a reference value. So rather than writing only "normal" on the checklist, write down what you checked. That way the next person in charge can also tell whether only the exterior and basic operation were checked or whether a separate calibration result was also obtained.
Calibration records are material for managing measurement performance
Calibration is the process of comparing readings with reference values, confirming their relationship, and documenting the results. Routine checks and calibration do not substitute for each other. ILAC-G24:2022/OIML D 10:2022 also treats intermediate checks performed between calibrations and the management of recalibration intervals as separate topics.
So you must not change the date you checked the power and screen on site into the last calibration date. The on-site checklist shows the equipment condition observed that day, and the calibration certificate shows the results of the calibration work. Calibration timing must be managed separately, based on the product's user manual, the organization's equipment management standards, and the content of the certificates on hand.
Records should show the name of the work and the scope checked
Even when the checklist and the calibration register use the same equipment number, it is better to record the type of work and the date separately. On the checklist, record the date of the on-site check, the items actually looked at, and any abnormalities found. In the calibration register, linking the actual calibration date to where the related certificate is kept reduces the chance of one record overwriting another.
| Wording to avoid | Record suited to an on-site check | Data to manage separately |
|---|---|---|
| Calibration normal | Power on, screen display, and button response confirmed | Calibration date and calibration results |
| Accuracy confirmed | Routine check procedure in the user manual performed | Records of comparison with reference values |
| No problems | No exterior damage or liquid traces observed | Internal condition not checked |
| Ready for use | Set on-site check items confirmed | Basis for the deployment decision and limitations |
Rather than leaving blanks as they are, it is better to mark them distinctly, such as "check not performed," "pending confirmation," or "record missing." The follow-up for each of the three is different. Equipment that could not be checked needs the check rescheduled, items pending confirmation need the required data or actions decided, and missing records need a review of whether the facts checked at the time can be reconstructed.
The confusion revealed in a hypothetical case
As a hypothetical example, suppose that because the power and screen of a breathalyzer used for entry control looked normal, the staff member wrote "calibration normal" on the checklist. Later, a request comes in to submit a calibration certificate, but the only material actually on hand is the on-site operation check record, with no calibration result document comparing readings with reference values. Because the records make it look like calibrated equipment, the needed material is found late.
The fact observed in this case is that the power and screen worked. The right interpretation is "no obvious abnormality was seen in the basic operation check, but calibration results have not been confirmed." A possible action is to correct the checklist wording to reflect what was actually checked and to look up the last calibration record and whether a certificate is on hand, by equipment number. Management can be considered complete when the check record holds the scope of the check and the calibration register holds the actual calibration results, without the two being confused.
For signs of abnormality, record observations rather than repeating tests
If you find an error screen, a power fault, damage, or an unusual display, it is more useful to record the situation as you first saw it in detail than to keep reproducing the same symptom. Recording the equipment number, the date and time observed, the screen message at the time, the exterior condition, and the operations tried within the scope the user manual describes, along with their results, provides material for explaining the situation when requesting a professional inspection or repair.
You must not test the sensor by introducing substances not described in the manual or apply another model's check method. Do not record symptoms that the on-site check did not resolve as "no problems"; record what the abnormality was and what scope could not be checked so that follow-up actions can be decided. It is also clearer not to group a repair that restores parts or functions and a calibration that confirms measurement performance under the same completed status.
Link and update documents by device
If your internal system allows only one field for status, you can consider writing the actual name of the work in the remarks field, such as "on-site operation check" or "calibration result document confirmed," and linking it so the original checklist or certificate can be found. If you change the check standards, also record the start date for applying the new standards, so past records are not interpreted under the new standards.
DATECH's official Downloads center posts Korean-language manuals for the AF-50 series and calibration request materials. If you confirm which documents apply to the equipment and link those procedures to the checklist items, it becomes easier to trace which guidance for which device the staff member based the check on. The reason to separate on-site checks from calibration is not to make the record format complicated, but to judge accurately what has been confirmed about the equipment and what actions are still needed.
