|
|
 |
The role of the Japan Accreditation Board for Conformity Assessment (JAB) is to grant accreditation to certification/ registration bodies (see "What is Conformity Assessment?"). Accreditation is granted on an independent and impartial basis, following satisfactory assessment against international accreditation standards. JAB also has an important role to promote mutual recognition with counterpart accreditation bodies in Japan's trading partner countries.
(1) Mutual recognition of accreditation schemes for certification/ registration bodies
If we have accreditation schemes for certification/ registration bodies (bodies that certify and register management systems) that are accepted world wide, we are able to avoid duplication of accreditation by individual national bodies. This, in turn, means that the assessments and registrations granted by accredited certification/ registration bodies can be recognized in different countries, saving time and trouble for our exporters. In order to realize this, it is necessary first to ensure the equivalence of the accreditation schemes and processes and the equivalence of the assessment and registration activities undertaken by accredited certification/ registration bodies. Mutual recognition is based on peer evaluations between accreditation bodies to ensure each otherÁ‚s standards and processes are equivalent and will provide the same outcomes.
At the meeting of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) in May 1998, The Japan Accreditation Board for Conformity Assessment (JAB), as the representative of Japan, was one of sixteen accreditation bodies that signed the inaugural Multilateral Recognition Arrangement (MLA) for the accreditation of bodies that certify and register Quality Management Systems (QMS) against the ISO 9000 series of standards.
Today, we are promoting JABÁ‚s IAF/MLA member status as we work towards improvements in terms of avoiding duplication of assessments among MLA members and improving the quality of accreditation and mutual recognition peer evaluation.
Within IAF there are also regional groupings of accreditation bodies that accredit certification/ registration bodies. Pacific Accreditation Cooperation (PAC) provides a forum where accreditation bodies from the same member countries as Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) can get together to deliberate matters. From Japan, JAB and Japan Accreditation System for Product Certification Bodies of JIS Mark (JASC) are both members of PAC.
Other regional groupings are European cooperation for Accreditation (EA) in Europe and Inter American Accreditation Cooperation (IAAC) that brings together accreditation bodies in Central and South America.
These regional groupings have also developed multilateral mutual recognition arrangements. Fifteen accreditation bodies in the Asia-Pacific region have now achieved membership of the PAC MLA Group. The PAC MLA was admitted to the IAF MLA Group in September 1999. In future, any accreditation bodies within the Pacific region that wish to be admitted to the IAF MLA Group must first apply to be admitted to the PAC MLA Group. Once accepted, they will be also recognized automatically as a member of the IAF MLA Group.
Due to the fact that there are now so many members of IAF, it has been decided that it would be more efficient economically if the actual peer evaluation of individual bodies required for MLA status be conducted at the level of regional groups such as PAC. This has lead to the establishment of new regional groups and these are already actively working towards mutual recognition. There is also a trend towards extending the scope of MLAs. To date, arrangements within IAF have embraced only the accreditation of QMS certification/ registration bodies. Moves are now underway to develop MLAs for other types of accreditation, including accreditation of certification/ registration bodies for Environmental Management Systems (EMS) against the international standard ISO 14001 and accreditation of product certification bodies.
On November 27, 2003, during the 10th Plenary of PAC, an MLA for accreditation of EMS certification/ registration bodies was signed between four accreditation bodies in the region*, including JAB. The recognition of this PAC MLA for accreditation of EMS registration bodies at the level of IAF, however, will have to wait until such time as the peer evaluations carried out by IAF for the PAC MLA and other regional MLAs are completed and the results officially approved by IAF. This is likely to take place during the 2004 Annual Meeting of IAF, scheduled to be held in Cape Town, South Africa, in October.
*: JAB(Japan)
JAS-ANZ(Australia/New Zealand)
NAC(Thailand)
SCC(Canada)
(2) Mutual Recognition of Laboratory Accreditation
An informal international grouping of Laboratory Accreditation Bodies began working together more than 25 years ago as the International Laboratory Accreditation Conference. JAB became involved in the early 1990s when we launched our laboratory accreditation scheme. In 1996, a formal international body grouping Accreditation Bodies for laboratories and inspection bodies, International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC), was established, with JAB as one of the founding members. Over the years, ILAC has developed and published a series of guidance documents on laboratory and inspection body management and accreditation. More recently, ILAC has played a leading role in developing and publishing international standards in the fields of testing, calibration and inspection. These include ISO/IEC 17025 on the operation and management of laboratories; and ISO/IEC 17020 on the operation and management of inspection bodies. The guidance document for the operation of laboratory Accreditation Bodies, ISO Guide 58, will shortly be replaced by an international standard for the operation and management of all Accreditation Bodies, ISO/IEC 17011. The mission of ILAC is to promote the harmonization of laboratory accreditation and to share information with the aim of ensuring that testing and inspection requirements do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade.
In November 2000, the 4th General Meeting of ILAC was held and an "ILAC Arrangement" was agreed to by 37 Accreditation Bodies. This Arrangement aims to: 1) recognize mutually that the accreditation results of individual testing laboratories and calibration laboratories are equivalent; and 2) accept mutually testing/calibration certificates issued by individual testing and calibration laboratories that are accredited by individual Accreditation Bodies. The three members of the ILAC Arrangement from Japan are: the Japan Accreditation Board for Conformity Assessment (JAB); the Japan National Laboratory Accreditation System (JNLA) which is a laboratory accreditation scheme based on the Japan Industrial Standardization Law; and the Japan Calibration Service System (JCSS) which is a calibration body accreditation scheme based on the Measurement Law".
This new ILAC Arrangement means that the Mutual Recognition Arrangements previously established within regional groupings of Laboratory Accreditation Bodies is now a global MRA, and that the test reports or calibration certificates issued by testing and calibration laboratories accredited by signatories to the ILAC Arrangement are now mutually accepted throughout the world. Accreditation Bodies that were signatories to MRAs within the two regional accreditation cooperation organizations, Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) and European cooperation for Accreditation (EA) plus other Accreditation Bodies that were not signatories to these regional MRAs, such as SANAS (South African National Accreditation System), have agreed to mutually accept the results of testing/calibration laboratories accredited by the other signatories. This extends the International Mutual Recognition Arrangement to a total of 37 Accreditation Bodies from 28 countries.
Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) was established in 1995 as the regional grouping of Accreditation Bodies for laboratories and inspection bodies in the Asia Pacific region. APLAC is responsible for developing Mutual Recognition Arrangements among laboratory accreditation bodies in the region, and publishing their rules and policies. It is also actively promoting the implementation of proficiency testing programs in order for laboratories to benchmark their technical competence against each other. APLAC is also in the process of establishing an MRA for the accreditation of Inspection Bodies.
(3) Mutual Recognition of the Accreditation of QMS Auditor Training and Certification Bodies
On October 28, 1999, the 5th Plenary Meeting of the International Auditor and Training Certification Association (IATCA), was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. At that meeting, JAB was approved as a member of IATCA's Multilateral Recognition Arrangement (MLA) for the accreditation of bodies training auditors to undertake audits under ISO 9000 quality management system certification/ registration schemes.
JAB's membership of this Multilateral Recognition group provides assurance that the level of the auditor training courses accredited by JAB is accepted by IATCA as meeting international auditor training criteria. This means that persons who have attended and completed a training course accredited by JAB have cleared one of the conditions to be certified as an IATCA auditor, which is an international auditor qualification. As a result, the road to becoming an international QMS auditor is now open and straightforward.
(4) Benefits from Multilateral Recognition Arrangements(MLAs)
The benefits from "Multilateral Recognition Arrangements" can be summarized as follows:
1. Benefits for purchasers
Multilateral Recognition assures purchasers of products and services that they can have confidence in certificates issued by certification/registration bodies accredited by a foreign Accreditation Body that is a signatory to the MLA. Purchasers can be sure that the certificates are equivalent to and are based on the same criteria as certificates issued by certification/registration bodies accredited by the Accreditation Body in their own country. Should a purchaser find that a product or service does not meet requirements, the MLA can provide a means of redress. If the supplier has a certificate issued by a certification/ registration body that is accredited by an Accreditation Body belonging to the same MLA group, there is a clear process to demand an investigation into the cause and to ensure that the problem does not recur. This is the case, even if the certificate has been issued by an accredited certification/registration body in a foreign country. The complaints and investigation process through the relevant Accreditation Body is the same as if the problem had occurred with a domestic supplier, and a responsible answer can be demanded. It goes without saying that purchasers who seek to purchase raw materials, products or services of good quality at a reasonable price, can only benefit through making sure that their suppliers/operators have a reliable and certified management system in place.
JAB has achieved and maintained membership of the IAF Multilateral Recognition Arrangement for the accreditation of certification/registration bodies for quality management systems and, as required under the MLA, is now working to persuade the Government to extend its procurement policies to include foreign MLA partners. This will mean that the Government will not limit its suppliers to those having a certificate issued by a certification/registration body accredited by JAB, but will also accept all suppliers who have a certificate issued by a certification/registration body accredited by a foreign Accreditation Body that is also a signatory to the MLA.
2. Benefits to organizations
So far, we at JAB have heard practically no one questioning the reliability of certificates issued by certification/registration bodies accredited by JAB. In some foreign countries, however, there are many reports of purchasers refusing to accept suppliers' quality management system certificates issued by certification/ registration bodies accredited by certain Accreditation Bodies. If this happens to suppliers who have certificates issued by bodies accredited by an Accreditation Body that is a member of the MLA, the Accreditation Body in the purchaser's country will explain to the purchaser that if the issuing body is accredited by an MLA member, there is an equivalent assurance of confidence and try to persuade the purchaser to accept the certificate.
3. Benefits to certification/registration bodies
If a certificate issued to a supplier by a certification/registration body that is accredited by JAB is refused by a purchaser in the country of an Accreditation Body that is a member of the same MLA group, the supplier is assured of a route to take the matter up with the foreign purchaser through JAB.
4. Benefits to Accreditation Bodies
As a member of a Multilateral Arrangement, an Accreditation Body has access to more substantial and current information on the quality of the performance of its accredited certification/ registration bodies through the worldwide monitoring network of Accreditation Bodies. The MLA group undertakes regular peer evaluations that benchmark Accreditation Bodies, give feedback on the activities of certification/registration bodies and provide a basis for continuous improvement. |
 |
|
Recognition Arrangement