The Operational System of National Accreditation of Laboratories in China

This document gives a brief introduction to CNACL (China National Accreditation Committee for Laboratories). Laboratory accreditation in China is integrally administrated by the China State Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision, a government administrative department of China State Council, which authorizes CNACL to implement Chinese laboratory accreditation activities. CNACL was established on September 20, 1994. It is a full member of both ILAC (International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation), and APLAC (Asia Pacific laboratory Accreditation Cooperation), and signed the APLAC MRA (Mutual Recognition Arrangement) in New Delhi, India on December 3, 1999. CNACL carries out laboratory accreditation activities in full compliance with international general criteria. Its operation complies with ISO/IEC Guide 58 (1993), ISO/IEC 17025 (1999), ISO/IEC Guide 43 (1997) and other international standards.     

Interlaboratory comparison for the determination of five residual organochlorine pesticides in ginseng root samples by gas chromatography

An interlaboratory comparison study for the determination of 5 residual organochlorine pesticides (hexachlorobenzene and 4 hexachlorocyclohexane isomers) in ginseng root was performed. This program [Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) T049] was the first of its kind for an herbal matrix and involved the participation of 70 laboratories from 26 countries worldwide. Consensus mean values were computed statistically from the reported results, which were eventually used to assess the performance of individual laboratories in terms of the z-scores. The distribution of analytical data was found to be widespread, with standard deviation ranging from 43.9 to 55.9%, and the result patterns obtained were similar to those residue pesticide programs using other matrixes. Although the estimation of measurement uncertainty is a crucial requirement for all quantitative tests for laboratories that meet the requirements of International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commisssion (ISO/IEC) 17025, some laboratories in this program had difficulties and showed unfamiliarity with respect to that quality criterion. It was recommended that laboratories review and rectify the situation promptly so that they would have a better understanding of measurement uncertainty or the test service provided.     

Developments in accreditation of flexible scopes in Europe

Accreditation of testing and calibration laboratories is the most frequently used type of accreditation. European Co-operation for Accreditation (EA) as the European network of recognised national accreditation bodies covers accreditation of all types of conformity assessment bodies. In Europe, the number of accredited testing and calibration laboratories covered under the EA Multilateral Agreement is about 15,000 nowadays.     

Can single-operator laboratories comply with all of the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005?

ISO/IEC 17025:2005 states that its requirements are “applicable to all laboratories regardless of the number of personnel” and would therefore include single-operator laboratories. However, there are reservations as to whether these laboratories can comply with all of the requirements without jeopardizing independence of judgement and impartiality. Similarly, there are some requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005 including staff supervision, internal communication processes and appointment of deputies that are considered unlikely to apply to a single-operator laboratory. The ISO/IEC 17025:2005 is widely used as the international standard of quality assurance by which accreditation bodies assess the competency of testing and calibration laboratories. There does, however, appear to exist, disagreement amongst accreditation experts when considering single-operator laboratories. Some accreditation bodies accredit single-operator laboratories, whilst others require additional human resources prior to granting accreditation. This discrepancy leads to unfair competition amongst laboratories as a single-operator laboratory by definition needs less resources (both human and financial) to achieve and maintain accreditation, compared with a laboratory where additional human resources need to be sought prior to and in order to maintain accreditation. The ISO/IEC 17025:2005 is in the process of being revised, and this is an opportune moment to address the issues aforementioned with the aim of removing ambiguity and enhancing clarity. In addition, the hope is to assist the accreditation bodies themselves to adopt a consensus approach when granting accreditation towards single-operator laboratories.     

Accreditation in analytical laboratories: a critical assessment of its impact on human beings and techniques

Summary The relationships between Quality, Quality Assurance and Third Party Approval by accreditation based on formal application of EN 29002, EN 45001 and ISO Guide 25 are briefly outlined for analytical chemical laboratories working in the non-regulated area. The roles of human beings in laboratories and accreditation bodies are discussed and recommendations are made on how to minimize friction during accreditation processes. The structures of the European Accreditation Systems are reviewed and the efforts towards mutual recognition of the national accreditation bodies are described and critically assessed. The lack of competition based on free market conditions in the framework of company law is deplored. The assessment of laboratory systems, rather than assessing the activity of laboratories against technical standards, is recommended (unless it is otherwise requested). The beneficial effects of the process of accreditation on competence and quality of the activity of the laboratory are emphasized.     

EAL interlaboratory comparison Wa1 – Testing of potable water

 The accreditation of laboratories has emphasized the use of interlaboratory comparisons as a tool to monitor the comparability and accuracy of results laboratories produce. An interlaboratory comparison for water laboratories was organized among European Cooperation for Accreditation (EA) member countries; 30 laboratories, 7 of which were not accredited, from 14 European countries participated in this intercomparison. All the laboratories were chosen by the appropriate national accreditation bodies, with the instruction to select as participants those laboratories which act as national reference laboratories in this field. About 90% of the data collected was considered satisfactory after statistical treatment. Non-accredited laboratories performed as well as accredited laboratories. The laboratories were asked to take corrective action and report the corrections to the accreditation bodies. A great variation in the reported uncertainties of the results was observed. There seems to be a need to organize EA interlaboratory comparisons for national reference laboratories analysing water. It is obvious that even reference laboratories need training in how to estimate the uncertainty of results. Received: 22 July 1998 · Accepted: 21 September 1998     

Implementation of ISO/IEC 17025 Standard for the accreditation of analytical laboratories in Russia

The history since 1992 and the current state of affairs of the Russian Accreditation system for analytical laboratories are described. Some national characteristics of the implementation of the ISO/IEC 17025 Standard in Russia are considered. The elucidation of some ISO/IEC 17025 Standard prepositions is presented to facilitate implementation of the Standard by accreditation bodies and analytical laboratories claiming accreditation.     

The accreditation system for Russian analytical laboratories and its development

The analytical laboratories accreditation system (SAAL) began its work in 1992. At first, SAAL was created for laboratories performing quantitative chemical analysis, but its activities have constantly expanded. SAAL presently covers laboratories determining oil and petroleum properties, properties of construction materials, parameters of dangerous and harmful industrial goods, precious stones, rubber, plastic, metals etc. Today, SAAL comprises over 3,000 accredited laboratories, 34 accreditation bodies and over 200 assessors united under the Federal Agency on Technical Regulating and Metrology. Within the Russian Federation, SAAL is recognized by various bodies and organizations as a reliable tool in the demonstration of technical competence of laboratories. This report is devoted to the history of SAAL, describing the separate stages of its development, evolution of its requirements for laboratories and accreditation procedures, the principles on which SAAL was based, and conformity of these principles to the legal requirements of the Russian Federation. Presented at the 3rd International Conference on Metrology, November 2006, Tel Aviv, Israel.     

Capability of laboratories to determine core nutrients in foods: results of an international proficiency test

A proficiency test (PT) to assess the capabilities of laboratories to determine nutrients in a biscuit sample was carried out in September 2009. The need for such interlaboratory comparison arose from an increasing nutrition labeling requirements of different countries around the world. Forty-eight laboratories worldwide participated in this PT program for the determination of total lipids, saturated fat, trans-fat, protein, sugars, total dietary fiber (TDF), ash and sodium in food. This program was organized under the auspices of the Asia-Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC). APLAC considers PT programs as one of the objective means of assessing the performance of the accredited laboratories. The program is one of the APLAC PT series whose primary purposes are to establish mutual agreement on the equivalence of the operation of APLAC member laboratories and to provide an opportunity to identify testing deficiency so that corrective actions can be taken, if necessary. The results of this program indicated that the consensus mean values estimated by robust statistics were in good agreement with the corresponding values obtained in the homogeneity tests except for trans-fat and TDF. The relative standard deviations of participant results for trans-fat and TDF were also found to be higher (19 and 24%, respectively) than the other test parameters. The relative standard deviations for other test parameters were less than 10%. One-half of the laboratories obtained satisfactory z-scores (| z | < 3) (\left| z \right| < 3) for all their reported results. Although participants were instructed to provide the measurement uncertainties of their reported results, only 27.5% of them had done so. Albeit many of the measurement uncertainties appear to be reasonable, some of them were found to vary widely, indicating that some laboratories still have difficulties in estimating measurement uncertainties. Although the overall measurement capability can be considered to be satisfactory, there is still room for improvement of analytical procedures.     

Flexibilization of the scope of accreditation: an important asset for food and water microbiology laboratories

Beltest, the Belgian accreditation body, has investigated flexibilization of the scope of accreditation for chemistry laboratories and food and water microbiology laboratories. This flexibilization, synonymous with test-type accreditation, allows a laboratory to add new test methods or retry previous test methods without having to undergo a new audit by Beltest. It has been used for nearly ten years by German and Swiss accreditation bodies. Flexibilization permits the validation of methods and results, given that the competence of the particular laboratory is already well established. This new concept in microbiology allows client’s needs to be adequately met, and facilitates the quick establishment of a method in several laboratories at once in case of a public health crisis. The first laboratory to participate at this investigation on the flexibilization concept, as a test of the concept, was the Belgian reference laboratory for food microbiology.     

Implementation of a quality management system in a public research centre

In recent decades, it has become increasingly important for public research centres to attract external clients, including government, private and public bodies and companies. They do this by demonstrating their research excellence. A research centre??s ability to provide professional research services can be assessed by competent technical bodies which verify that the research centre??s laboratories operate according to certain predetermined criteria or standards. Although there is no set of generally accepted standards, some regional accreditation bodies already offer accreditation assessment for the R&D laboratories which are in their territory. This article analyses the successful application of a quality management system in a public research centre employing 57 people including researchers, technicians and administrative staff. This system is based on the scheme of regional accreditation of industrial research laboratories which was inspired by ISO 9001:2008 and ISO 17025:2005 and set up by the regional authority. The overall aim of the management system is to monitor all of the industrial research and services which the centre offers to external users, such as government, private and public bodies and companies, and to guarantee that final products, usually technical reports and prototypes, respond to their needs. The accreditation applies to all of the activity of the research centre except for basic research. In this article, the critical factors influencing the success of the implementation of the management system are outlined together with benefits and opportunities. Weak points and problems are analysed, and the actions which were undertaken in order to prevent and manage problems are described.     

The ILAC Arrangement – Part I

As of August 2001, 38 laboratory accreditation bodies of the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) have signed the multi-lateral, mutual recognition arrangement (the ”ILAC Arrangement”) to promote the acceptance of accredited test and calibration data. This Arrangement provides significant technical underpinning to international trade. Until now, there has been no international mutual recognition agreement in laboratory accreditation, which has been a hindrance for some types of international trade. The key to the Arrangement is the developing global network of accredited testing and calibration laboratories that are assessed and recognised as being competent by ILAC Arrangement signatory accreditation bodies. The signatories have, in turn, been peer-reviewed and shown to meet ILAC’s criteria for competence. Now that the ILAC Arrangement is in place, governments can take advantage of it to further develop or enhance trade agreements. The ultimate aim is increased use and acceptance by industry, as well as government, of the results from accredited laboratories, including results from laboratories in other countries. In this way, the free-trade goal of ”a product tested once and accepted everywhere” can be realised.     

Proficiency testing program for the determination of total arsenic, cadmium, and lead in seawater shrimp

The proficiency testing (PT) program for 97 worldwide laboratories for determining total arsenic, cadmium, and lead in seawater shrimp under the auspices of the Asia-Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) is discussed. The program is one of the APLAC PT series whose primary purposes are to establish mutual agreement on the equivalence of the operation of APLAC member laboratories and to take corrective actions if testing deficiencies are identified. Pooled data for Cd and Pb were normally distributed with interlaboratory variations of 21.9 and 34.8%, respectively. The corresponding consensus mean values estimated by robust statistics were in good agreement with those obtained in the homogeneity tests. However, a bimodal distribution was observed from the determination of total As, in which 14 out of 74 participants reported much smaller values (0.482-6.4 mg/kg) as compared with the mean values of 60.9 mg/kg in the homogeneity test. The use of consensus mean is known to have significant deviation from the true value in bi- or multimodal distribution. Therefore, the mode value, a better estimate of central tendency, was chosen to assess participants' performance for total As. Estimates of the overall uncertainty from participants varied in this program, and some were recommended to acquire more comprehensive exposure toward important criteria as stipulated in ISO/IEC 17025.     

Certification of reference materials and accreditation of reference material producers: Questionable terminology leads to confusion

In the view of the Deutscher Kalibrierdienst (DKD) , a certifying body for reference materials can be considered to be a calibration laboratory. Therefore, accreditation of calibration laboratories in accordance with ISO/IEC 17025 is the most appropriate way to establish confidence in certificates for reference materials. If necessary, the criteria of ISO/IEC 17025 can be tailored to specific cases. There is no need to provide any new kind of reference-material specific accreditation. However, in view of the variety of reference materials and the practice existing in other countries, accreditation of testing laboratories and product certification bodies may optionally be acceptable as long as the same stringent principles with respect to traceability and measurement uncertainty are applied. Such accreditations but not accreditations of reference material producers (ISO Guide 34) are also covered by existing international mutual recognition arrangements (MRA).     

Tunisian traceability system

The concept of metrology first appeared in Tunisia towards 1909. At the end of the 1990s, bodies for evaluating conformity of measurement at different levels have been instituted to meet calibration and testing needs of the national industry. These bodies were divided into three categories: Class A where we find mainly the Central Laboratory for Analysis and Testing LCAE and the National Defence Laboratory DEFNAT; these two laboratories are in charge of the technological upgrading of the other bodies of Class B which, in turn, would transfer their knowledge to the industries, the latter constituting Class C. Nowadays, the accreditation of Tunisian laboratories at the international level by recognized reference foreign bodies and participation in the European proficiency network enabled the national laboratories of Tunisia to establish the degree of equivalence between their measurement results and those of other foreign laboratories.     

Interlinkages and recognition of proficiency-testing schemes

 Because proficiency testing (PT) is increasingly used for the accreditation of testing laboratories and as a tool for backing up existing multilateral recognition arrangements between accreditation bodies, the question of performance and comparability of the proficiency-test providers arises. In this paper different approaches to assess the equivalence of European PT schemes and the competence of their providers are presented. As a first step a workshop is proposed to agree on a pilot study. The final aim is to create confidence in the existing PT schemes in Europe and to use them as common European tools.     

The German accreditation system

 In response to the requirements of the "Global Approach" in Germany, a national accreditation system has been established based on traditional experiences in the recognition of the competence of laboratories and certification bodies. In 1991, the German Accreditation Council (DAR) was founded as a coordinating body supported by the Federal and State Ministries and German industry. In this way, it was possible to organise coordinated representation in international bodies, to offer a forum for cooperation between authorities and industry, and to provide for a structure subdivided into sectors which better fits the needs of the industrial sectors and gives them the necessary transparency and acceptance. The DAR itself does not carry out accreditations. This is done by the accreditation bodies represented in the DAR and specialised in for specific subjects, thereby having a close connection with expert groups of a high technical competence in their specific technical fields. At the end of this paper, the procedure for the assessment of the technical competence of a laboratory, an important part of the accreditation, is described.     

The Slovak National Accreditation System

 After the split of the Czechoslovak Federation, the Slovak National Accreditation System was established in November 1993, being the only system in this country executing accreditation and certification. This system is strictly based on EN 45 000 and covers testing laboratories from both the mandatory and voluntary areas of metrological laboratories, products testing and certification, quality systems, and good laboratory practice. It seeks to reach the level of compatibility accepted and recognized by EU member countries. The development and basic features of the Slovak National Accreditation System, its basic principles, and the structure and competence of accreditation bodies are described in this article.     

An accredited laboratory's view of customer expectations

 Accredited laboratories are the accreditation bodies customers – all other interested parties are stakeholders. The ultimate consumer expects his product to be safe, reliable and good value for money. All other expectations in the supply chain relate to the consumer's expectations.     

Quality management, certification and accreditation in medical laboratories – the view of ECLM

 Increasing demands from health care planners and industrialists conducting clinical trials, as well as general competition, are forcing medical laboratories to seek third-party recognition of their quality management systems. There is a tendency to move from certification of a laboratory director, via certification of the laboratory quality system (ISO 9000 family), to accreditation needing proof of professional and technical competence in laboratory tasks. The requirements of accreditation are presented in several national schemes and in the European Standards series (EN 45 000) and the International Organization for Standardization's guide, ISO/IEC 25, to be amalgamated soon. The latter system provides transnational recognition through participation of the accrediting bodies in the European co-operation for Accreditation. Necessary supplementary guidelines exist for chemical laboratories (Eurachem) and medical laboratories CEAC/ECLM). Traceability and reliability of results are obtained by utilizing a global reference examination system and by participating in transdisciplinary work. The costs of achieving accreditation are considerable and mainly involve the production of quality handbooks and written work procedures by personnel. The rewards are an open system, smoother work, emphasis on prevention of mistakes, and satisfied stakeholders. Received: 5 October 1998 · Accepted: 20 October 1998