Draft (3)Minutes. First Joint ILAC/IAF General Assembly Meeting. Kyoto International Conference Hall 2 and 5 November 2001

Transcription

1 Draft (3)Minutes First Joint ILAC/IAF General Assembly Meeting Kyoto International Conference Hall 2 and 5 November Welcome and Convening of Meeting The Chair, Dr Takashi Ohtsubo, Chair of IAF, welcomed delegates (refer Annex 1) to this historic meeting. The Chair introduced Mike Peet, Chair of ILAC, and the Secretaries of both organisations, who were on the podium with him. He invited all delegates to introduce themselves to the meeting. The Chair reminded delegates that this first joint meeting of members of IAF and ILAC was being held following resolutions in the General Assemblies of both organisations last year encouraging closer co-operation. Mr Sadao Takeda Director General of METI, responsible for Standards and Conformity Assessment, addressed the meeting. He welcomed delegates to Japan and wished them well in their work. 2. Apologies There were no apologies. The Chair declared that a quorum of members of both organisations was present. 3. Approval of Agenda The meeting approved the draft Agenda, with the addition of items 5.2a, Rules of decision making procedures for the Joint General Assembly, and 5.2b, Endorsement of the establishment of JCCC and its Terms of Reference. 4. Addresses by the Chairs 4.1. ILAC Mike Peet spoke briefly on the expectations of ILAC from co-operation between the two organisations. 22 May 2002 Page 1 of 16

2 4.2. IAF Takashi Ohtsubo also spoke briefly on the expectations of IAF. 5. Report from Joint Executives 5.1. Matters Arising from the First Meeting of the Joint Executives The Chair advised the meeting that the Executive Committees of IAF and ILAC had first met in the U.K. in July and met again the day before the Joint GA meeting. The minutes of the first meeting had been circulated in the papers for this meeting. The Executives had agreed that each Executive would make decisions as appropriate for its own organisation. Thomas Facklam reported on behalf of the two Executive Committees that they had agreed that joint action would only be taken when such action would benefit both organisations Report from the JCCC (Refer Annex 2) Thomas Facklam submitted the report of the JCCC. He reported that the JCCC had agreed that it would concentrate its resources on projects with clearly identifiable benefits to both organisations. However the work program of the JCCC would be continually reviewed and revised as appropriate to the needs of the two organisations. He outlined the areas of immediate interest to the JCCC as - Clarification of the differences between Certification and Accreditation; Presentation of both organizations to the outside world; Proposal for a world wide logo for ILAC and IAF Accreditation bodies; Harmonisation of Peer Evaluation Process and Peer Evaluators Training; Inspection; Development Support for New and Emerging Accreditation Bodies. Endorsement of the structure for the working arrangements for ILAC and IAF will be done when procedures for making these decisions have been established. Thomas Facklam advised that the next task of JCCC is to set time frames for the activities undertaken by the JCCC this was overlooked at the meeting in Windsor. 5.2a Rules of decision-making procedures for the Joint General Assemblies The Executive Committees proposed that the Joint GA agree that its procedure for operation will be that each issue put to it will be discussed in plenary as far as necessary prior to a vote being taken. When voting is necessary the members of each organisation would vote separately according to the rules for that organisation, and the decisions of each organisation would be declared separately. After some debate the meeting adopted the following resolution 22 May 2002 Page 2 of 16

3 Resolution JGA The members of IAF and the members of ILAC present, voting separately, resolved that the rules of procedure for joint General Assemblies of members of IAF and ILAC will be as follows - (1) the delegates present will discuss issues in plenary as needed, and will accept reports without voting unless there is disagreement; (2) if a decision on any matter is required, the decision will be made by the members of each organisation voting separately and sequentially according to the rules of each organisation. 5.2b Endorsement of the establishment of the JCCC and its terms of reference The Joint Executive Committees proposed the establishment of the Joint Committee for Closer Cooperation between ILAC and IAF (JCCC), its Terms of Reference and its membership. After some debate the meeting adopted the following resolution Resolution JGA The members of IAF and the members of ILAC present, voting separately, received the report from the Joint Executives, endorsed the decision to establish the Joint Committee for Closer Co-operation between IAF and ILAC (JCCC), and endorsed the Terms of Reference and membership of the JCCC, as reported to the meeting. Thomas Facklam reported that the Joint Executive Committees had agreed at its meeting the day before this meeting that the work of facilitating co-operation between IAF and ILAC would be delegated entirely to the JCCC and that the two Executive Committees would only meet jointly when there was an identified need. 5.3 Strategic Objectives After some debate the meeting adopted the following resolution - Resolution JGA The members of IAF and the members of ILAC present received the report of the JCCC and agreed that the future work by the JCCC should be in areas of benefit to both organisations. 5.4 Agreement on Areas Where Cooperation is Beneficial The meeting accepts the areas where cooperation is beneficial as proposed in Item 5.2 above. Resolution JGA The members of IAF and the members of ILAC present agreed to accept the areas where cooperation between ILAC and IAF is beneficial, as proposed in Item 5.2 above. 22 May 2002 Page 3 of 16

4 5.5 Agreement on Bounds for Co-operation Thomas Facklam submitted on behalf of the JCCC that co-operation between IAF and ILAC would be restricted to items defined in the strategic objectives of IAF and ILAC. The submission was received. 5.6 Rules for Co-operative Activities Thomas Facklam submitted a chart demonstrating the proposed lines of reporting for joint activities to both organisations. After discussion it was agreed that Thomas Facklam would prepare a revised version with both a written description and diagrammatic representation. 5.7 Report on Activities of Subordinate Groups This topic is covered under the other headings in Section Presentation of both organisations to the Wider Community Hans Mittmann reported that ILAC had established a WG to look at the development of ISO/CASCO standards. He suggested this work should also be conducted jointly in future. 5.9 Report on Joint MLA/MRA Activities Peter Unger reported on the work of the WG which is preparing draft common procedures for the management of the mutual recognition arrangements of both organisations. The JGA is not being asked to approve the A1 document as it is not yet at the stage where this would be appropriate further work is required. Terms of Reference for the JWG on Harmonisation of Peer Evaluation Procedures- comments only are requested at this stage. Daniel Pierre thanked the JWG for their efforts as the procedures will now be used in the joint evaluation of EA in December Report on Development Support Activities John Gilmour reported that the Joint Development Support Committee and Seminar where scheduled for the coming weekend. He also drew the meetings attention to the draft terms of reference for the Joint working Group in the Agenda Papers. He advised that Veronica Solorzano would report on these activities further during the Monday session under Item IAF/ILAC Joint Working Group on Inspection Lars Ettarp and Llew Richards reported on the meeting of the Joint Working Group on Inspection Bodies which met during the weekend. They reported that a great deal had been achieved in a cooperative atmosphere. They proposed that the Terms of Reference for the JWG be amended to "Members are nominated by the members of IAF and ILAC, including the inspection bodies themselves." They also advised that they wanted an open working group, welcoming input from as wide a viewpoint as necessary The working group would anticipate and provide input for a revised ISO/IEC May 2002 Page 4 of 16

5 RESOLUTION JGA The members of IAF and ILAC, voting separately, endorsed the amended Terms of Reference for the JWG on Inspection. The JWG will review the results of the survey of IAF and ILAC members which it had conducted and the results will be in the minutes of its meeting. The JWG on Inspection plans to prepare an Application document to ISO/IEC The goal is a global (IAF/ILAC) application document on inspection which will form the basis of a global multilateral mutual recognition arrangement. The aim of the Working Group is to present a draft document for approval by both IAF and ILAC at the Berlin Meetings. The JWG has compared the EA and the APLAC application documents and agreed on a first preliminary draft application document, which will be considered by a small drafting group consisting of L Richards and L Ettarp and one representative each from ENAC, HKAS, IFIA, CEOC and the laboratory community. Comments and input will be sought from all members of the working group about 60 in all. 6. Activities of Regional Groups (Refer to written reports in Agenda Papers & those supplied during the Joint GA) 6.1. APLAC Helen Liddy submitted a report on behalf of APLAC. The General Meeting of APLAC was held in Beijing a week before the IAF and ILAC meetings. Two new signatories had been admitted to the APLAC MRA CCIBLAC and TLAS. One new Full Member had been admitted to APLAC VLAC. APLAC is developing a Code of Ethics for application to its members. APLAC evaluation by ILAC to be commenced in The meeting notes the report of APLAC and congratulates them on their activities EA Daniel Pierre, Chair of EA, presented his report. Membership Extension to the East and Central Europe. ( This is a result of the training efforts for developing accreditation bodies.) Stakeholders Expectations The EA Advisory Board requests: - impartiality; - transparency; 22 May 2002 Page 5 of 16

6 - consistency; - cost effectivness; and asks EA Members to measure customers' satisfaction. Sector Specific Schemes Development in the laboratory fields as well as the certification field. In need of deep attention. MLA on Inspection The peer evaluations have started. Improve the Information Service The creation of an EA database will improve the information service. The meeting notes the report from the EA Chair and congratulates them on their activities IAAC Maribel Lopez, Chair of IAAC, reported that IAAC is the regional body for accreditation of laboratories, certification / registration bodies, inspection and testing for all the Americas. IAAC will soon have MLA s covering those areas in place and will then apply to become a member of both the IAF and ILAC MLA s. IAAC has recently incorporated in Mexico and is working towards financial self-sufficiency. Ms Lopez thanked UNIDO of their support in funding the attendance of the following people at the meetings in Kyoto - representatives from Cuba, Colombia, Bolivia, Mexico and the IAAC Chair. The meeting notes the report from IAAC and congratulates them on their activities PAC Xiao Jianhua, Chair of PAC, reported that PAC had expanded its MLA and had developed improved procedures for internal audit and peer evaluation reports. PAC is providing assistance to a number of developing accreditation bodies using funds provided by APEC. The meeting notes the report from PAC and congratulates them on their activities SADCA Maureen Mutasa, Chair of SADCA, reported that SADCA is a regional group under the auspices of the Southern African Development Co-operation. It has 14 member states, but only South Africa (SANAS) and Mauritius (MAURITAS) have accreditation bodies at this stage, with Botswana, Tanzania and Zimbabwe looking to establish accreditation bodies. The other states do not intend to establish their own accreditation bodies but expect to fulfil their needs from SADCA either bilaterally or through a regional infrastructure. The SADCA MoU and by-laws are drafted and it is hoped that these will be approved at the SADCA meeting in April 2002 in the Seychelles. 22 May 2002 Page 6 of 16

7 Ms Mutasa expressed her thanks to both IAF and UNIDO for the financial assistance they had given to SADCA thus allowing for her attendance at the Kyoto meetings. The meeting notes the report from SADCA and congratulates them on their activities. 7. International Liaison 7.1 ISO ISO/CASCO The Chair of ISO/CASCO John Donaldson introduced his report. He outlined the work of CASCO and drew attention to a number of items in the current issue of the ISO Bulletin / 17024/ Committee Drafts of these 3 documents are currently being circulated. Long term strategy for ISO/CASCO has been published. Impact of electronic media on surveillance is being investigated. No article representing an industry perspective in the ISO Bulletin. This reflects the need to do more work to reach this market. Mr Donaldson indicated that conformity assessment was now taken seriously in ISO generally, but Technical Committee s do not always follow the rules. He asked IAF and ILAC to consider developing procedures which would allow them to provide their expertise to CASCO when needed to review draft standards. An issue for ISO/CASCO is working with the technical committees in ISO. CASCO has the responsibility for working with TCs when they are working on conformity assessment activities. It is difficult as there are a number of TCs and the number of documents they are working on is increasing. CASCO review the TC documents and they then decide on whether they need to get technical expertise. They need to have access to more technical expertise as often the time is short and technical input is required urgently, eg with CASCO are looking for a better way to tap the expertise in the conformity assessment community. John Donaldson asked the ILAC/IAF Chairs if they could assist in tapping into this technical expertise within their respective communities. Chair advised that ILAC has identified this as a priority area Thanks to the ISO/CASCO Chair - John Donaldson for his report on ISO/CASCO Joint Working Group on Image and Integrity of ISO John Donaldson also reported on the work of the JWG on ISO Image. The JWG was set up because it seemed that much of the criticism of ISO conformity assessment standards was really related to conformity assessment practice. CASCO asked IAF and ILAC to assist in finding some solutions. Some good work had already been done in the JWG, however, it is clear that illegal activities occur outside the normal accredited system. 4 categories were identified as priorities. Illegal practices. Usually carried out by bodies outside the system of IAF and ILAC. Need to ensure the appropriate authorities are notified and suitable action taken. 22 May 2002 Page 7 of 16

8 Conformity assessment bodies employing unethical practices (intentionally or unintentionally) Are the accreditation requirements being applied correctly? What can be done to prevent this problem? Misrepresentation by certified bodies. ISO produced a document re: Good Practice for Management Systems Certification. This needs to be updated as it is based on (ISO ). Currently it relates mainly to advertising, however, its revision will be an opportunity to focus on a wider scope. Specific Issues ISO 9000 certification by a 3 rd party versus that by self declaration ILAC - Accreditation v Certification - impact of ISO 9000 on a laboratory as opposed to the impact of accrediting to ISO/IEC Confusion in the market place still exists. It is known that one major international organisation is confusing this issue publicly, John Donaldson invited all ILAC/IAF Members to provide input on these matters so that the JWG can advance these aims. This call was reiterated by the Chair Mike Peet. ANSI sponsored ISO/CASCO Chair to attend this meeting and to do all of the ISO/CASCO Chair work. Thanks to the Chair of ISO/CASCO (John Donaldson) for his report on the JWG ISO/TC 176 Sandy Sutherland introduced the report on ISO/TC176. He reported that the Strategic Plan Horizon 2010, included specific reference to regular liaison with IAF and ILAC. TC176 proposed to set up a Sector Liaison Forum so that we could learn from each other on how we deal with industry sector schemes, and avoid duplication of work. The TC176 Interpretations Group was working, but the process needs improvement. TC176 had agreed that it would not consider planning any changes to ISO9001 before Feedback on experience is essential. Nigel Croft said that the focus of the TC176 Strategic Plan was Customer focus. It was important that users of the standards received accurate information. TC176 recognised that the work on guidance for the application of the ISO9001:2000 standard conducted jointly with IAF had resulted in an excellent outcome. TC176 saw an important part of its mission as safeguarding the integrity of the standards. TC176 was keen to develop closer co-operation with IAF and would be taking action in that area later in the week. Thanks to Sandy Sutherland and Nigel Croft for their reports. 7.2 ICSCA The ICSCA delegate presented separately to both the IAF Plenary and ILAC General Assembly meetings. 7.3 WTO Vivien Liu, Secretary of the WTO TBT, reported that conformity assessment was an important issue for TBT. TBT was looking for better harmonisation of conformity assessment practices and for more action to deal with the problems faced by developing countries. On the other hand it recognised that governmental and non-government bodies may adopt different approaches for good reasons. 22 May 2002 Page 8 of 16

9 TBT hoped to encourage harmonisation of rules and procedures to avoid duplicated work. It encouraged the mutual recognition approach and also openness and transparency. The quality of the content of standards was important, but so was the IAF and ILAC guidance and similar documentation. Ms Liu thought that developing countries were becoming increasingly interested in conformity assessment issues to meet the needs of their export markets. Developing countries needed help, but WTO does not provide assistance although it may be able to co-ordinate assistance. TBT recognised that IAF and ILAC are also not funding agencies but they can give expertise to assist developing countries. Ms Liu was very happy to hear about the support of UNIDO to the developing accreditation bodies and the work in the area of technical assistance being undertaken by the Regional Bodies. She was also very happy to see the work of the Development Support Committee carried out over the last 2 days. Ms Liu drew attention to the need for input on the needs of the developing countries. There is a questionnaire being sent out regarding the needs of the developing countries. If the Governments are unable to fill out the questionnaire, then the accreditation bodies should help their Governments carry out this task. Results of the ILAC/IAF survey will be given back to the WTO to provide knowledge on the needs of developing countries. There are 142 WTO members, many of whom are ILAC/IAF members. The development in the regional bodies is very good and they are doing a lot of work on technical assistance activities in their regions. Much has already been done by the ILAC/IAF community and Ms Liu asks that the results of all this good work be brought back to the WTO so they can be of assistance to the developing countries also. This will then open the way to look for funding for the developing countries needs. The Chair thanked Vivien Liu for her report and raised the importance of a voice for ILAC at WTO. 7.4 UNIDO Otto Loesener-Diaz, Programme Manager UNIDO, reported that UNIDO had changed its management of funding from a regional basis to an integrated approach. He indicated that there was considerable harmony between what the JCCC/1 intends to do and with the UNIDO Integrated Programme Approach. Currently the focus of its technical assistance program, of $50m per year, is Africa. The meeting resolved to thank UNIDO for the assistance it has given to developing accreditation bodies in the past and to ask it to continue to work with IAF and ILAC in providing such assistance in the coming years. Otto Loesener-Diaz congratulated ILAC and IAF on the 3 November 2001 signing ceremony and he said how pleasing it was that many developing countries where among the new signatories to the ILAC Arrangement and the IAF MLA. UNIDO would like to see a closer cooperation between ILAC and IAF, regarding the pre-peer evaluations, which will facilitate the increase in developing bodies being ready to sign the ILAC Arrangement and the IAF MLA. The Chair thanked Otto Loesener-Diaz for his report. 22 May 2002 Page 9 of 16

10 7.5 Report on Developing Countries Workshop (Refer also to Item 5.10) Sean MacCurtain reported on the Joint Development Seminar held for the first time on Saturday 3 November More than 80 participants had engaged in lively discussion. The topic of the Seminar was the value and use of mutual recognition. A number of issues of concern to developing accreditation bodies were canvassed, such as promotion by national accreditation bodies of the MLA, auditor competence and cross border accreditation. Veronica Solórzano reported that 37 delegates attended the Joint Development Support Committee meetingon Sunday 4 November Much the same issues were discussed as had been raised at the Seminar. The Committee recommended that IAF and ILAC consider translation of their documents into the languages of developing economies, such as Spanish and Russian. The Committee was planning to conduct another Seminar in Berlin in The Chair noted the reports of all the speakers in the Developing Countries area and welcomed their suggestions for ILAC/IAF assistance and asked for similar assistance to provide a voice in the WTO arena. 8. Other Business No other business was raised. 9. Future Annual Meetings Annual Meeting, Berlin, Germany - September 17 to 27. Thomas Facklam outlined the program for the meetings of both IAF and ILAC in Berlin in 2002 and circulated the promotional brochure for the joint meetings. He assured delegates of a warm welcome in Berlin. He asked Committee and WG Chairs to tell him of their needs (re: meeting room sizes, etc) as soon as possible, so that appropriate arrangements for meeting rooms can be made in good time Annual Meeting, Bratislava, Slovakia - 15 September to 26 September. Mr Marian Weidlich of the Slovak National Accreditation Service, advised delegates that the dates for the 2003 meetings had now been agreed and the meeting location had been booked. He is working with both Secretaries to complete planning for the meetings and the web site is already operational ( ). The first publicity brochure has been published and is available to all delegates Annual Meeting, Cape Town, South Africa Mike Peet asked the meeting to agree to the 2004 Cape Town meetings being held over the period 1 to 12 November The meeting agreed Annual Meeting, New Zealand Llew Richards advised that both IAF and ILAC had accepted the invitation to hold the 2005 meetings in New Zealand. 22 May 2002 Page 10 of 16

11 10 Close Takashi Ohtsubo reminded delegates that both IAF and ILAC had resolved to encourage closer cooperation between the two organisations. This first Joint General Assembly and the other joint meetings held in Kyoto had demonstrated that closer co-operation would work well and be in the interests of both organisations. He said that ILAC and IAF are committed to the same values ie. to provide value-added accreditation to stakeholders. Mike Peet extended thanks on behalf of ILAC, IAF and all delegates, to the Kyoto Organising Committee and to the host organisations JAB/JCSS/JNLA/JASC and he congratulated them on the excellent facilities provided for delegates. He wished all delegates safe travel home. The Chair closed the meeting at 12:30 pm 22 May 2002 Page 11 of 16

12 JOINT ILAC/IAF GENERAL ASSEMBLY KYOTO NOVEMBER 2001 DELEGATE LIST Name Takashi Ohtsubo (Chair Day 1) Mike Peet (Chair Day 2) Thomas Facklam Daniel Pierre Belinda Collins M Aparicio Tony Craven Steve Keeling A Russell Guenter Friers David Stanger Margareth Lafin Mauricio A Soares Gilles D Beland Joan Brough-Kerrebyn Jo Anne Dupont Elva Nilsen E Wilsen Marisol Valenzuela Li Yan Wang Yu Wei Hao Song Gurlan Wu Jing Liu Xiaohong Yin Jianjun Xiao Jianhua Organisation IAF Chair SANAS (South Africa) ILAC Chair DAR / TGA / DATech (Germany) IAF Vice Chair COFRAC (France) EA Chair ILAC Vice Chair Past ILAC Chair (USA) OAA (Argentina) JAS-ANZ (Australia) JAS-ANZ (Australia) NATA (Australia) BMWA (Austria) UILI (Belgium) INMETRO (Brazil) INMETRO (Brazil) CEA (Canada) SCC (Canada) SCC (Canada) SCC (Canada) SCC (Canada) IAR (Carribean) CACEB (China) CACEB (China) CCIBLAC (China) CERBLAC (China) CNAB (China) CNAB (China) CNACP (China) CNACR (China) 22 May 2002 Page 12 of 16

13 Xu Yougang Hsu Chang Jiu Ruzicka Vagn Andersen Juulikke Hattula Nathalie Saveant Gunther Beer Hans Ulrich Mittmann Monika Wloka Beatriz Rivera Ignacio Pina Meire Walsh Norbert Mueller Tommy Fung Michael Lam K T Ting Vijay K Mediratta Suprapto Mirmohamad Rouzbeh Tom Dempsey Orna Dreazen Roberto Perissi Lorenzo Thione Chikafumi Morita Yasuo Hidaka Morio Hosaka Shinichi Iguchi Nobukazu Ishizu Yuichiro Isu Tetsuro Kanehira Tetsuro Kawaberi Shigeo Nonaka Shinichiro Ohara Kuihiro Tanabe T Shibamiya CNACR (China) CNLA (China) CAI (Czech Republic) DANAK (Denmark) FINAS (Finland) COFRAC (France) BDI (Germany) DAR (Germany) DAR (Germany) ENAC (Spain) ENAC (Spain) EURACHEM (Germany) EUROLAB (Germany) HKAS (Hong Kong, China) HKQAH (Hong Kong, China) HKQAH (Hong Kong, China) NABCB (India) KAN BSN (Indonesia) SGS (Iran) NAB (Ireland) ISRAC (Israel) ENIQ (Italy) SINCERT (Italy) IQNET JQA (Japan) JACB (Japan) 22 May 2002 Page 13 of 16

14 Sakurada Michio Tsutomo Tosaka Mitsumori Nishimoto Hisash Inove Kiyoto Mitsui Juichi Nagiano Masaki Oshita R Lorenzoni Kerim Primkulov Hon-Joo Choi Sooyoul Jung Donghee Kwak Jaemin Kim Kyung Shik Lee Mim Hyoung Lee Baek Worki Won Tae Choe Yoon-Kil Hwang Seung Ju Jeun Choi Bong Sik Jong Sooyul Shim Dong Sup Lee Wan Gye Cho Chun-Haeng Kim Hong Gyung-Ihm Rhyu Beer Budoo Maribel Lopez Veronica Garcia de Solorzano Araceli Suarez Jos Leterink Llew Richards Helge Kildal Karol Hauptmann Phua Kim Clive JASC (Japan) JASC (Japan) JCSS (Japan) JLA (Japan) JLA (Japan) JNLA (Japan) METI (Japan) TUV Rheinland (Japan) KAZMEMST (Kazhkstan) KAB (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAS (Korea) KAS (Korea) KAS (Korea) KAS (Korea) KAB (Korea) KAS (Korea) KOLAS (Korea) KOLAS (Korea) KOLAS (Korea) KOLAS (Korea) MAURITAS (Mauritius) EMA (Mexico) EMA (Mexico) EMA (Mexico) RVA (Netherlands) IANZ (New Zealand) NA (Norway) PCA (Poland) SAC (Singapore) 22 May 2002 Page 14 of 16

15 K S Tan Dusan Konilky Marian Weidlich Elsabi Steyn I J Steyn Steve Sidney Sean Mac Curtain Lars Ettarp Merih Malmquist Katarina Wenell Gunnar Wivardsson Don Gray Hanspeter Ischi Jean Pierre Jaunin Sophia Chang-Chien Neng Jong Lin Nigel N L Jou Man-Li Wei Chaiyong Krittapholchai Kittiphong Pholsukcharoen Prasong Prayongpetch Aymen Mikki Mohamed Badri Moataz Khalaf Roger Brockway Graham Talbot Peter Unger John Donaldson Joseph R Dunbeck Maureen Breitenberg Randy A Dougherty Lane Hallenbeck George Q Lofgren Scott Richter Dale Misczynski SAC (Singapore) SNAS (Slovakia) SNAS (Slovakia) DTI (South Africa) DTI (South Africa) NLA (South Africa) SANAS (South Africa) SWEDAC (Sweden) SWEDAC (Sweden) SWEDAC (Sweden) SWEDAC (Sweden) IEC CAB (Switzerland) SAS (Switzerland) SAS (Switzerland) CNAB (Chinese Taipei) CNAB (Chinese Taipei) CNLA (Chinese Taipei) CNLA (Chinese Taipei) NAC (Thailand) NAC (Thailand) NAC (Thailand) TUNAC (Tunisia) Dubai Accreditation (United Arab Emirates) TACAS (United Arab Emirates) UKAS (United Kingdom) UKAS (United Kingdom) A2LA (USA) ANSI ISO/CASCO (USA) ANSI-RAB NAP (USA) ANSI-RAB NAP (USA) ANSI-RAB NAP (USA) ANSI-RAB NAP (USA) ANSI-RAB NAP (USA) ANSI-RAB NAP (USA) ITIC ICSCA (USA) 22 May 2002 Page 15 of 16

16 Cathleen Trail Jeffrey Horlick Ho Tatthang Vu X Thuy Tran Van Khoa Jan Kranghand Sandy Sutherland Hans Buser Milos D Jelic Maureen P Mutasa Stamenkovic Aleksandar Vivien Liu Nigel H Croft Alcides Erice Mike Gledden Robert Kaarls Helen Liddy Otto Loesener-Diaz Kevin McKinley John Gilmour Alan Squirrell P Davies Annette Dever Noel Matthews NIST (USA) NVLAP (USA) VILAS STAMEQ (Vietnam) VILAS STAMIQ (Vietnam) Univ of HCMC (Vietnam) CIES Global Food Safety Initiative (World) IIOC (World) IQNet (World) JUAT (Yugoslavia) SADCA (Zimbabwe) JUAT KVALITET WTO ISO/TC176 ONARC NATA Laboratories CIPM APLAC Secretary UNIDO SCC ISO/TC176 ILAC Consultant ILAC Secretary ILAC Secretariat ILAC Secretariat IAF Secretary 22 May 2002 Page 16 of 16