Why a complete PO matters more than the test specification — and what we're building to make this easier later this year.
Every lab tech who has been in this industry long enough has a favorite version of the same story.
A PO arrives. The cover sheet says, in its entirety:
"Run the tests."
Sometimes there's a heroic flourish — a part number, maybe a tank — but often the instruction is simply: tests. Plural. Implied. Evidently obvious to the customer, evidently obscure to everyone else.
We get it. From the customer's seat, you've got parts that need to keep moving, an OEM expecting compliance evidence, and a finishing process you've already documented internally to within an inch of its life. The last thing you want to do is repeat all of that on a piece of paper headed to your testing lab.
But the information you put on that PO is what makes the test result mean something — to your customer, to your auditor, and to future you the next time something fails and you need to figure out why.
Why this is a both-sides obligation — not Omega being picky
When a PO arrives at Omega, two separate audit programs are already attached to it before anyone touches a sample. Yours and ours. They look at the same piece of paper from opposite sides, and they want different things from it.
Whatever framework you operate under — Nadcap, AS9100D, ISO 9001, or an OEM-specific approval program — the requirements your customer flowed down to you have to flow down, in writing, to anyone you outsource work to. Including us.
Nadcap Chemical Processing (AC7108) is where most of our customers live. AC7108 Paragraph 1.2 directly governs the use of subcontract laboratories, and Paragraph 3.5.2 is the audit-checklist question that operationalizes the rule — it asks whether written purchase orders are available defining the requirements for the work performed. That's the line item that turns the PO into evidence.
AS9100D, Clause 8.4.3 requires you to communicate to your external providers your requirements for the processes, products, and services to be provided. ISO 9001:2015 has the same intent; AS9100D expands it significantly. Either way: don't hand a job to an outside supplier without telling them, on paper, what you need.
On our side, ISO/IEC 17025:2017 via A2LA requires us to confirm that requirements are defined, documented, and understood before we start any test. If those conditions aren't met when the PO arrives, we don't have discretion to start the test — we have to come back to you and ask. Nadcap AC7101/1 governs how we document everything you send us. You can review Omega's accreditations and approvals to confirm our current standing under both frameworks.
Whichever framework governs you, the operational reality is identical: whichever of our obligations has the higher requirement on a given point becomes the standard for that job. There is no scenario where "just run the tests" survives review.
What an auditor sees first is your PO.
Nadcap job audits trace a job from contract review through shipping. Your audit opens with your customer's PO to you. Somewhere mid-stack — surrounded by your job traveler, your shop paperwork, and your QA records — is your PO to us. That's the moment where flow-down either holds or breaks.
Our audit opens with the same document, but as the first piece of paper in the stack: your PO to us.
Different starting points. Same critical document. Same unblinking question on either side: did the requirements flow down completely?
You can't accept "just plate this." We can't accept "just test this." For the same reason.
The third audience for a complete PO doesn't carry an audit checklist but is just as important. The day a sample fails — and at some point, every plating shop has that day — the first question you're going to ask is: what was different about this lot? If the PO didn't capture the bar lot, the heat lot, the tank, and the process spec revision, that question doesn't have an answer. The investigation starts cold. A complete PO isn't bureaucracy — it's the chain of custody that lets a test result do its job long after the parts have shipped.
The anatomy of a compliant testing PO
At Omega, we send this list to customers as Form FO-055, our Order Request Template. Whether you use our form, embed the same fields in your own PO, or attach FO-055 as a supplement, here's what we need — and why.
Process specification(s) — with revisions. This is the single most-neglected field, and the one that matters most. AMS 2460 has gone through revisions. AMS 2759/9 has gone through revisions. The bake time, sample geometry, or acceptance criteria you're being held to may depend entirely on which revision your customer has flowed down. If a revision isn't stated, our default is to apply the current revision — which is fine when that's what your OEM wants, and a problem when it isn't.
Tank — which tank produced these samples. If you ever need to investigate a failure across tanks, this is the field that lets you do it.
Bar lot / Mfg Lot — when provided consistently, we can normalize your submission against your own historical record and against anonymized performance of the same lot across other customers. When something looks off, that comparison strips out a huge amount of noise and moves you to the actual answer faster.
Test specification — ASTM F519, ASTM B117, MIL-DTL-5541, and so on. This tells us what method governs.
Material and configuration — the substrate alloy and sample geometry. 4340 1a1 is not the same as 300M, and a notched bar is not the same as a flat coupon.
Test handling options — expedite, step-load election under ASTM F519, and sample return or storage preferences. These affect cost and turnaround and should be elected up front, not after the test is in progress.
Month, quarter, year, or qualification reference — when you tell us which period a submission covers, we become a second set of eyes on your testing cadence. If a March submission never came in and April lands instead, we can flag it before it surfaces during your audit prep.
Special instructions — anything specific to this submission. If we don't know, we can't honor it.
When information is missing, the work order pauses while we track down the answer. Best case that's a half-day delay. Worst case — if the answer sits in someone's inbox while they're traveling — it's a week. None of which is on the test clock, and all of which is preventable on the front end.
A quick word on revisions
Specifications are living documents, and the differences between revisions can be more than cosmetic. Bake schedules, sample preparation, and acceptance criteria can all migrate from rev to rev.
Our default is to apply the current revision unless you specify otherwise. That isn't a house preference — it's the ISO/IEC 17025 default under Clause 7.2.1. Where it gets important is when your OEM has flowed down a specific earlier revision. In that case, we need to know on the PO — not in a phone call after the test has started. The information has to land with the work, and silence means current revision. Tell us up front when the default isn't what you want.
What's coming later this year
We've heard this feedback often enough that we've done something about it.
Later this year — currently targeting Q3 — we're rolling out a self-service intake portal that captures the same fields FO-055 covers in a guided online form that won't let you skip the audit-critical entries. You reference your own PO number directly in the submission, and we have the data digitally on our end the moment you submit. We can validate it against your spec stack and flag any gaps while FedEx is still driving to the airport. By the time your samples reach our receiving bench, the work is already cleared to start.
Before we release it to customers, our team is using the same tool internally for two months to validate that the workflow actually reduces effort on both sides. By the time you see it, we'll have stress-tested it on our own work first.
If you're a current customer and want to be on the early-access list, reach out to solutions@omegaresearchinc.com.
Until then — the simple version
Use FO-055. Attach it to your PO, or copy its fields into your own. It captures what your auditor will look for, what your OEM will expect, and what we need to do clean, defensible work the first time.
A clean PO isn't paperwork. It's how we make sure that when a test result matters most — at an audit, in a failure investigation, or eighteen months from now when a customer asks the hard question — the answer is already there.
Email solutions@omegaresearchinc.com or call (940) 648-5828 — a real person answers.
- solutions@omegaresearchinc.com — sales, scope, quoting, and new projects
- testing@omegaresearchinc.com — anything in flight, from sample receipt through report delivery
- billing@omegaresearchinc.com — invoicing, payments, and account follow-through
