TCQA/10/50
/page 2 of 5 pages
TCQA/11/21
Draft minutes of the TCQA meeting
in Istanbul, Turkey, on 11 April 2011
Attendance: Manfred Golze (chairman) (Germany), Pericles Agathonos (Greece), Marios Avraam (Cyprus), Peter Blinksbjerg (Denmark), Andrzej Brzyski (Poland), José Duarte (Portugal), Hugo Eberhardt (Austria), Višnja Gašljevič (Croatia), Ömer Güzel (Turkey), Magnus Holmgren (Sweden), Guy Jacques (Belgium), Pascal Launey (France), Drewin Nieuwenhuis (CEOC), Alvaro Ribeira (Portugal), José Sanchez (Spain), Martina Schwaiger (Austria), Lorens Sibbesen (Denmark), Jiri Sobola (Czech Republic), Štefica Cerjan Stefanovic (Croatia), Irache Visiers (Spain), Mirela Zečević (Croatia), Ingrid Lux (minutes) (Germany)
Apologies: Ewa Bulska (Poland), Paul Jackson (UK)
Guests: Mladen, Jakovčič (Croatian Metrology Society), Roxanne M. Robinson (NCSLI)
1. Welcome and arrangements
M. Golze, the chairman, opened the meeting of EUROLAB’s Technical Committee for Quality Assurance in Testing and Calibration. He thanked Ömer Güzel and Turklab for hosting the meeting and welcomed Roxanne Robinson from NCSLI and new members from Austria and Croatia.
2. Approval of the agenda
With regard to the agenda M. Golze stated he wanted to concentrate on three major topics, namely the Cook Book activities, latest accreditation issues and on the future activities of the TCQA. The agenda was approved.
3. Minutes of the past meeting
The draft minutes of the Brussels meeting were approved and the actions briefly reviewed.
4. EUROLAB update
4.1 TCQA Annual Report
The Annual Report was unanimously approved.
4.2 Report on the EUROLAB BoA meeting on 3 December
The report had been drawn up by Manfred Golze and had been distributed.
4.3 EUROLAB Seminar
Ömer Güzel informed the group that about 120 – 150 people were expected to attend the seminar which is planned to take part on 13 April and which will be hosted by TURKLAB. He stated that a simultaneous interpretation service would be provided.
4.4 Draft EUROLAB leaflet “What is EUROLAB doing for the laboratory community?”
This draft document will probably be approved by the EUROLAB GA the following day. This source of information was originally intended for the national EUROLAB members, but several TCQA members suggested that a condensed version might reasonably be used for external use. However, slightly different versions should be developed for clients and regulators, respectively. This proposal will be submitted to the EUROLAB GA.
Pascal Launey stated that EUROLAB-France will develop an information leaflet in cooperation with COFRAC emphasising the importance of accredited laboratories.
In general it was stressed that EUROLAB should be made more visible and it was i.a. suggested to place the Cook Book documents in a more prominent place on the EUROLAB website. In the course of the restructuring process of the website the EUROLAB secretariat should be informed accordingly.
5. EUROLAB “Cook Book”
5.1 Internal audits (revision of Cook Book no. 9)
Manfred Golze had contacted the authors of this Cook Book in order to harmonise this document with Cook Book no.10 Internal audits – the auditor. The amendments were approved and this Cook Book will now be put on the website as Cook Book no.9 revision 1.
5.2 Internal audits: preventive and corrective actions
This new document was tabled and briefly explained by Ömer Güzel. It was argued that the terms ‘remedial’ and ‘corrective’ actions might cause some confusion and it was suggested to use the definitions used in the ISO 9000 terminology and to illustrate the procedure by giving some examples. The members were asked to send their comments to Ömer Güzel so that he can prepare a revised version for the next meeting.
5.3 Internal audit reports
This Cook Book document was drafted by Irache Visiers. The document was approved. It should be tried to reduce the length of this document somewhat and to put it then on the EUROLAB website.
With regard to the publication of the different internal audit cook books it was decided to keep all documents separate but to make the Cook Book no. 9 the basic document and make a reference to the other internal audit cook books.
The general discussion on the use of internal audit reports by accreditation bodies focussed on the question whether all non-conformities identified should be mentioned frankly in the audit report or whether they should be handled more restrictively as these findings might be used by the accreditation assessors. This problem was considered to be such an important issue, not only in Europe, but for all laboratories worldwide as was stressed by Roxanne Robinson, that it was concluded that Manfred Golze should submit this problem to the EA Laboratory Committee.
5.4 Electronic records
Magnus Holmgren had included all comments he had received and submitted the final version which was approved and will be put on the EUROLAB website as Cook Book no. 13.
5.5 The assessment of the trueness of results compared with the results obtained by the use of RMs
As this document had not been distributed before the meeting the members were asked to give their comments to Manfred Golze who will then table it again at the next meeting.
5.6 Use of interlaboratory comparison data by laboratories Part A
At the past TCQA meeting it had been suggested to include a footnote regarding the EN numbers which had been done by Manfred Golze. The document was approved and will be put on the EUROLAB website as Cook Book no.4 revision 1.
5.7 Use of interlaboratory comparison data by laboratories Part B
As Ewa Bulska who had drafted the document was not present a brief discussion developed. It was questioned whether PT results could be used as a basis for traceability. Alvaro Ribeira promised to provide a publication by M. Cox which should be forwarded to Ewa Bulska and Manfred Golze was asked to pass on the comments to Ewa Bulska.
5.8 The Cook Books no.10, 11 and 12 had been approved at the past meeting and were put on the EUROLAB website.
All members are invited to translate the available Cook Books into their own languages and make them available to their members.
6. Accreditation – developments and problems
6.1 Opinions and interpretations in test reports
Pascal Launey presented an English translation of a Cofrac document on this topic. The members discussed the expression of opinions and interpretations in test reports at length. They felt that customers would indeed want to have a kind of interpretation of the test results but it became obvious that different countries used different procedures and approaches. Manfred Golze informed the members that this issue is indeed also being discussed in the EA/LC and the members of the LC decided to compile pro and con arguments. Nevertheless he will also address this topic during the forthcoming PLG meeting and stress that the TCQA members consider the present situation as unacceptable.
He felt that laboratories should at least have the option of giving any opinions and interpretations. An implicit option would mean that a laboratory accredited to ISO 17025 is per se entitled to give opinions and interpretations and the explicit option would mean that a statement should be included in a certificate that the laboratory is competent to give opinions and interpretations, The TCQA members favoured the implicit option and this should be communicated to the PLG, EA and the EA/LC.
6.2 Problems encountered with EA
Eurolab-Spain had carried out an inquiry on the way scopes are interpreted by accreditation bodies in Europe (TCQA/11/19) which revealed great differences. In order to minimise these discrepancies it was decided to address this topic at the next PLG meeting. Drewin Nieuwenhuis added that it should also be considered to present such important issues directly to the EU Commission to push things.
6.3 EUROLAB Technical Report on accreditation with flexible scope
It was decided that the EUROLAB Technical Report would no longer really be needed as the results are 2 years old and as EA is obviously moving into the right direction. The discussions should rather focus on the definition of scopes instead of calling for flexible scopes. It was argued that a “broad” scope can sometimes be more adequate than a “flexible” scope.
Turklab is working on a new questionnaire. The discussions with EA on scopes will be continued.
6.4 Participation in EA highlighted Interlaboratory Comparisons (ILCs): draft EUROLAB position
Manfred Golze stated that the EUROLAB position (TCQA/10/39) had been sent to Jean-Marc Aublant, but he was not aware whether this position document had been submitted to EA already. The EUROLAB Secretariat will be asked to submit this position document to EA.
7. Discussion on potential future activities
7.1 Future electronic networking in EUROLAB
Manfred Golze reported briefly on the software programme Microsoft Sharepoint which offers work groups the possibility of setting up a centralised and protected web space for sharing information and storing, downloading, uploading and editing documents. As a certain space has to be rented on a server, people need to be trained and permanent care of the structure and procedure needs to be guaranteed, it was felt that such a programme would not be needed by the TCQA members at the moment. Instead the e-mail contacts should be intensified and after a restructuring of the EUROLAB website which is being developed, the website might be more intensively used for exchange of views and documents.
After the past TCQA meeting Mladen Jakovcic of HMD (Croatia) had submitted a document (TCQA/10/51) and proposed to provide and coordinate training and education possibilities for laboratories in the EUROLAB member countries. He offered support in setting up a special committee and an e-learning structure. An extensive discussion followed as the situation regarding training offers differed greatly in the different member organisations. It was decided that Manfred Golze should submit this issue to the EUROLAB General Assembly. If a majority of the EUROLAB members feels this proposal should be further explored, a technical committee might then as a first step be established to fix terms of reference.
7.2 Inquiry on a list of methods with the scope of accreditation
This issue had been raised by EUROLAB-Denmark as the Danish accreditation body had obliged the laboratories to compile a comprehensive list identifying all test methods used in connection with the accreditation scopes because EA had requested their member organisations to enter this information in an EA database. As this is obviously being treated more pragmatically in other European countries EUROLAB-Denmark was asked to make a short comparison how this is handled in the different countries which will then be forwarded to EA to try to harmonise the procedure.
7.3 Inquiry on accreditation costs
As the cost structure differs greatly from country to country, it was suggested to make a small inquiry asking for a few questions only, to get a rough picture of accreditation costs in Europe.
7.4 Technical support for laboratories
The members agreed that the TCQA should seek to establish closer links with EURAMET and EURACHEM to reach common positions and develop guidance documents. Roxanne Robinson pointed out there were quite a number of special NCSLI committees which may be found on the NCSLI website.
7.5 Future organisation of the TCQA
Manfred Golze raised the question of the future organisation of the TCQA as the Internal Rules of EUROLAB lay down that the chairpersons of the EUROLAB Technical Committees shall be appointed by the General Assembly for a two-year period. As he has been in office for three years now the GA should decide on the future chairmanship. Additionally, he suggested appointing also a vice-chairman. So far the secretariat has been provided by BAM and a new solution will also have to be explored.
Items 8, 9 and 10 were not discussed for lack of time and relevant documents were provided for information.
11. Next meeting
The next TCQA meeting will again take place in connection with the EUROLAB National Members’ Meeting and will be held on 11 October 2011 in Cavtat in Croatia.