Report to PAC TC:The Result of the Discussion at IAF TC about the Disclosure of MS accreditation and certification

Takashi Horie16 June, 2010

JASCVer. 2

2

October 2008: IAF TC in Stockholm JASC made a proposal to IAF TC as a representative of

Japanese & Korean ABs and Japanese CB volunteers The proposal was to form a task force to discuss and

develop an IAF document of the disclosure of MS accreditation and certifications to improve the credibility of the certifications.

But, no consensus was reached. The proposal was asked to be clarified.

June 2009: PAC TC in Taipei JASC called for PAC members to support Japanese

discussion proposal on the disclosure to IAF TC. There was consensus that PAC would support the proposal.

October 2009: IAF TC @ Vancouver JASC made the proposal to IAF TC under the name of

PAC.

Background Story

3

In order to improve the credibility of management systems certifications, PAC requests IAF TC to organize a Task Force (or assign to an existing Task Force) to study and discuss disclosure and develop a IAF informative document which stipulates;

1. by whom and to whom the information should be disclosed,

2. what kind of information should and could be disclosed not to breach confidentiality,

3. how the information should be disclosed to ensure reliability of information.

Proposal to IAF TC in Vancouver

4

The issue was discussed at IAG and Re-engineering TF before TC.

Various approaches of Japanese ABs and CBs for the improvement of MS certifications were introduced.

Disclosure, one of the very important approaches, was admired at the meetings.

Before the TC meeting

5

I am interested in how far Japanese can go. It is a good idea.

I would be interested in what kind of people belonged to a committee which safeguarded the impartiality of a multi-national CB (if the committee members were disclosed).

The proposal was based on an idea that JAB would make a list of what kind of information CBs was voluntarily disclosing. Market pressure is positively used for enhancing CBs to disclose their information. There are no additional requirements for accreditation.

It would be a good bench mark for not only certification clients, but also CBs.

We support the proposal. Companies often ask us which CB is good. What we can do is to answer them to review CBs' websites. But there is no good information on their sites.

Discussion at IAF TC in Vancouver: Supportive Comments

6

If one CB disclosed its information and others did not, it would be a distorted competition.

In Japan, we are encouraging CBs to voluntarily disclose their information.

JAB will speak to CBs not accredited by JAB for the disclosure.

ABs are responsible for disclosed information and it would cost ABs some money. But a market would not take care of such a cost.

ABs are always checking CBs' websites. So, no additional cost would be needed.

Discussion at IAF TC in Vancouver: Opposing Comments & Counterstatements

7

There was consensus to have the issue of disclosure of information related to accreditation and certification to improve the credibility of management systems certifications monitored by the WG on management systems certification.

Conclusion at IAF TC in Vancouver

8

The first meeting of the WG on Credibility of Management System Certification was held in March.

The implementation of Japanese was reported to the WG members.

WG in Rio de Janeiro

<CBs' Disclosure Status List on JAB's Website>

Disclosure item #

Symbols show disclosure status:

O: Disclosed on websiteΔ: Available on request

-: Not disclosed*: Not applicable

CB's namelinked with its website

http://www.jab.or.jp/bodies/mscb-disclosure-list.html

Thank you for your listening.