of 6

Draft minutes of the TCQA meeting in Prague, Czech Republic, on 2 November PDF

0 views6 pages


All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
European Federation of National Associations of Measurement, Testing and Analytical Laboratories EL_07_03_09_410 TCQA/09/ Draft minutes of the TCQA meeting in Prague, Czech Republic, on 2
European Federation of National Associations of Measurement, Testing and Analytical Laboratories EL_07_03_09_410 TCQA/09/ Draft minutes of the TCQA meeting in Prague, Czech Republic, on 2 November 2009 Attendance: Manfred Golze (chairman), Pericles Agathonos (Greece), Andrzej Brzyski (Poland), Ewa Bulska (Poland), José Duarte (Portugal), Hugo Eberhardt (Austria), Omer Güzel (Turkey), Magnus Holmgren (Sweden), Guy Jacques (Belgium), Pascal Launey (France), Alvaro Ribeiro (Portugal), Miguel Sánchez (Spain), Lorens Sibbesen (Denmark), Jiri Sobola (Czech Republic), Irache Visiers (Spain), Ingrid Lux (minutes) Apologies: Peter Blinksbjerg, Linda Drake, Johal Surrinder, Per-Ove Oyberg. 1 Welcome and arrangements M. Golze, the chairman, opened the meeting of EUROLAB s Technical Committee for Quality Assurance (TCQA) and thanked the host Czecholab for providing the facilities for the meeting. He welcomed Ewa Bulska and Andrzej Brzyski from Poland, Alvaro Ribeiro from Portugal and Omer Güzel from Turkey who attended the TCQA meeting for the first time. The participants introduced themselves in a tour de table. 2 Approval of the agenda The agenda of the meeting (TCQA/09/40) was approved. M. Golze stated that he would like to concentrate on the three most important topics, i.e. items 5 and 6 of the agenda and discuss item 7 directly after lunch adding that item 10 was rather for information and did not need to be discussed in detail. 3 Minutes of the past meeting The minutes of the past meeting () were approved and the actions reviewed. With regard to the assessment of Notified Bodies and to the accreditation of one-man inspection bodies no progress could so far be achieved but G. Jacques was asked to follow these issues with the help of the JTC PTC. With regard to a possible revision of ISO EUROLAB had informed ISO CASCO that EUROLAB would not be in favour of such a revision, but no decision has yet been taken by ISO CASCO. This matter will be discussed at the next ISO CASCO meeting in November. 4 EUROLAB update TCQA Secretariat BAM Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing Unter den Eichen Berlin Germany Telephone: Telefax: EUROLAB Technical secretariat c/o LNE, 1 rue Gaston Boissier Paris Cedex 15, FRANCE page 2 of 6 pages M. Golze informed the delegates that Hannelore-Wessel-Segebade had been appointed as EUROLAB representative to the EA Communications and Publications Committee which will regularly publish a newsletter in future. In a short note addressed to the EUROLAB technical committees she requested them to give her any input on issues which the members would like to channel through this committee to EA (TCQA/09/57). Then M. Golze reported briefly on the past PLG meeting which had taken place in Brussels on 29 October (TCQA/09/53). Five organisations, i.e. CEOC, EA, EURACHEM, EURAMET and EUROLAB, are now represented in the PLG. The future work programme will include the problem of cross-frontier accreditation and the organisation of a workshop on this topic if enough experience will be available, a follow-up of EUROLAB s workshop on flexible accreditation, the functioning of the EA Peer Evaluation Process, and developments in the accreditation of PT providers and RM producers. Although EUROLAB had not been successful in preventing this type of accreditation, EUROLAB should closely follow the developments and verify i.a. what type of organisations will be accredited. G. Jacques gave an account of the EAAB meeting of 29 October (TCQA/09/55) during which he was elected chairman of the EAAB and Martin Stadler vice-chairman. He first mentioned the document EA-2/16 on EA s relations with stakeholders which had been rejected by the majority of EA members. In the new draft the term recognised stakeholders was introduced which might eventually still be changed, but the essence of the document could be accepted. There are still some problems which will have to be solved concerning the compliance of the EA Statutes and the Rules of Procedure with Dutch law. Important issues were flexible accreditation and cross-border accreditation. As there have still no common views been agreed between the EA members themselves, it might be inappropriate to ask the European Commission for advice as they that are likely to pass a strictly judicial decision. Therefore the EAAB Board agreed to set up a Task Force Group composed of members of all colleges of the EAAB which will identify practical problems encountered and deal with all issues related to cross-border accreditation including the issue of flexible scopes. EUROLAB s positions could be supported via the PLG and the EA HHC. Another item on the EAAB agenda was the proposal of EA to introduce a Single European Accreditation Symbol on accreditation certificates. Some members felt that such a mark would certainly provide added value for exporting companies but stressed that such a mark should not replace any national marks. P. Launey mentioned that French accreditation certificates included an explanatory sentence that the accreditation body was a signatory to the EA MLA. As EA has not yet developed a policy document defining the criteria for using the EA symbol, EUROLAB could perhaps decide on a common view and provide it as input to the EAAB (TCQA/09/58). Concerning other items on the EAAB agenda, i.e. the peer evaluation process of CABs for notification purposes and assessment of NBs, EA is called upon to develop solutions to these unsolved problems. The TCQA should follow these discussions and provide input where necessary. Members: inform the Secretariat on any problems encountered with EA Secretariat: submit information on problems with EA to EA CPC through H. Wessel-Segebade Members: provide input to the Secretariat concerning the introduction of EA Single European mark Members: provide input to the Secretariat concerning the assessment of NBs Members: provide input to the Secretariat concerning the peer evaluation process for notification Secretariat: submit above received information to EAAB 5 EUROLAB Cook Book 5.1 Electronic recording of data page 3 of 6 pages M. Holmgren stated that he had encountered difficulties in writing a Cook Book on the electronic recording of data and felt that an IT expert would be required to do this. O. Güzel reported briefly on a system they are using in Turkey. He will pass the relevant information to M. Holmgren and also L. Sibbesen will report back to M. Holmgren after this topic will have been dealt with at the next EUROLAB-Denmark meeting in November. O. Güzel: provide input to M. Holmgren concerning a system of the electronic recording of data. L. Sibbesen: provide input to M. Holmgren concerning the electronic recording of data. M. Holmgren and L. Sibbesen: develop a Cook Book document on the electronic recording of data. 5.2 Internal audits, the auditor M. Holmgren had submitted a draft during the meeting and asked the members to review it and send him their comments. Three main items were addressed: the audits should be ordered by the management, big differences between existing internal and external audits and the handling of non-compliances. G. Jacques suggested to make reference to these points already in the introduction to this document. O. Güzel highlighted another important aspect, namely preventive and corrective actions. It was, however, decided to develop a separate Cook Book on preventive and corrective actions. O. Güzel volunteered to draft some ideas and E. Bulska will send O. Güzel some ideas on experiences made in Poland. M. Holmgren: submit a revised document on Internal Audits (addressed to auditors). O. Güzel: draft a Cook Book on preventive and corrective actions E. Bulska: provide relevant information to O. Güzel 5.3 Suggestions for future Cook Book documents In addition to the Cook Book on preventive and corrective actions, the idea of using EXCEL sheets and their validation in quality management related issues was resumed. Furthermore, M. Golze stated that he would like to write a Cook Book on the assessment of the trueness of an analytical method by means of a certified reference material. E. Bulska observed that they had a problem in Poland on how to evaluate results of PT tests. Although the TCQA had already developed a Cook Book document on proficiency tests, she was asked to elaborate on this topic in a further Cook Book document. O. Güzel: Draft a Cook Book document on preventive and corrective actions in connection with internal audits. E. Bulska: Provide relevant information from Poland. L. Sibbesen: Collect information on using EXCEL sheets in quality management. M. Golze: Draft a Cook Book document on the assessment on the trueness of analytical results by the use of RMs. E. Bulska: draft a Cook Book document on the evaluation of PT results. 7 The future priorities of the TCQA This item on the agenda provoked a very lively brainstorming discussion. Several delegates claimed that mechanisms are needed to identify practical problems and approaches with regard to accreditation and to provide technical assistance and support to laboratories and their customers. Various possibilities were put forward: Continue the Cook Book series page 4 of 6 pages Organise workshops and training courses not only at the international level but also in the EUROLAB member states using the expertise of TCQA lecturers or accreditation bodies Open a Discussion Forum or a Chat Area on the EUROLAB website Carry out regular inquiries on problems encountered with accreditation bodies (e.g. PT participation in ILCs, collection of strange non-compliances etc.) Discussing of problems with accreditation bodies at national or European level Explain quality-related issues to clients of laboratories Economic issues: how can accreditation costs charged in the different European countries be made more transparent? Provide more detailed information on work carried out in other technical committees and working groups related to our activities to all members to be able to react quickly to upcoming problems, possibly also by setting up temporary task forces Examine the idea of establishing a joint working group of EFNDT, CEOC and EUROLAB on the accreditation of NDT laboratories 6. Accreditation developments and problems 6.1 Accreditation with flexible scope: results of the EUROLAB inquiry M. Golze gave only a brief report on the evaluation of the questionnaires on flexible scope as the results will be presented in detail at the forthcoming workshop. Those countries that had not replied will be asked to do so. He stated that in general the picture was better than expected and that most laboratories do not seem to be dissatisfied. Nevertheless the TCQA should closely follow the issue of flexible scopes and collect all problems existing and L. Sibbesen mentioned that there was always a certain flexibility within a fixed scope, however M. Holmgren replied that this may be changing in future as EA will exert more pressure. E. Bulska observed that more responsibility will be put on the laboratories in compiling their list of methods used. It was decided to publish the results as a EUROLAB Technical Report and also in a technical journal, perhaps in ACQUAL. Secretariat: ask those countries to fill in the questionnaire that have not yet replied Secretariat: prepare a EUROLAB Technical Report on accreditation with flexible scope Secretariat: prepare a publication of the results in a journal, e.g. in ACQUAL 6.2 ILAC Guideline G 18 Criteria for the formulation of scopes of accreditation for laboratories The revised ILAC Guideline was considered to be a reasonable document but it was felt that the concept should not be restricted to testing laboratories and that a reasonable way for including calibration laboratories should be found. Discussed were the denotations specific or generic methods and the differences in meaning between method, procedure and technique. With regard to the latter E. Bulska proposed to write a Cook Book document, but J. Sobola referred to the existing VIM definitions. 6.3 ILAC Guidance for the assessment and accreditation of reference material producers M. Golze stated again that EUROLAB was not happy with this document, but that we have not been too successful in amending it. However, this issue will be followed by the TCQA and M. Golze will repeat our arguments to ILAC.The 60 day comment period will close on Friday 6 November 2009. page 5 of 6 pages M. Golze: inform ILAC again of EUROLAB comments 6.4 Cross frontier accreditation The short report by M. Malmqvist on the 2 nd EA HHC meeting had been distributed in the TCQA. G. Jacques stated that the committee members could not agree on a common view and it was just a collection of ideas and that a new draft document will be drawn up. For internationally operating companies the legal status of their branch offices or subsidiaries might be essential. The question was discussed whether this was important for testing laboratories or only for certification bodies. The general opinion was that this document was indeed also important for laboratories and M. Golze will present this view at the EUROLAB National Members Meeting. 6.5 EA/LC: Opinions and Interpretations in test reports The committee members could not agree on a common view of including Opinions and Interpretations in test reports. This item will be put again on the next agenda. Secretariat: put this item on the next agenda. 6.6 EEE-PT position paper on proficiency testing B. Brookman of the EEE-PT had informed the TCQA secretariat that the final draft of the EEE-PT document (TCQA/09/52) had not yet been adopted which will probably be the case at the next EEE-PT meeting on 24 November Standardisation 8.1 Publication of ISO/IEC Part 2:2009 The draft international standard ISO/IEC Part 2 was distributed for information. Voting on this draft will terminate on 17 February Reading list on measurement uncertainty in conformity assessment M. Golze informed the committee members that W. Bremser had to leave the group but that he had still submitted an updated reading list on measurement uncertainty which was considered to be quite helpful. As the ASME document: Guidelines for decision rules: considering measurement uncertainty in determining conformance to specifications was not available, the document will be deleted from the list. The first of the two ILAC documents included on page 3 shall also be deleted and the latest version of the second document will be included. The last document will also be deleted. The final list will be submitted to the EUROLAB secretariat and shall be included in the EUROLAB website. Secretariat: complete the list on measurement uncertainty and send it to the EUROLAB Secretariat for publication on the EUROLAB website. 10 Information from other organisations (ISO, CEN, ILAC, PLG, NICe, TCPTC, EA, etc.) The documents distributed were for information only. 11 Other matters page 6 of 6 pages There were no other matters. 12 Next meetings The next TCQA meeting will be held in Cyprus on 14 April The next EUROLAB National Members Meeting will also take place in Cyprus on 13 April 2010.
View more
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks