NACLA is a newly established organization for recognition of laboratory accreditation

[Marc]

And along comes the NACLA....

On a white horse????

----------snippo----------

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 18:01:12 -0500
From: "Peter S. Unger"
To: 'Greg Gogates'
Subject: NACLA

NACLA is a newly established organization for recognition of laboratory accreditation bodies, not accreditation. The training in March is for candidates to become evaluators of accreditation bodies.

Peter Unger, A2LA President
5301 Buckeystown Pike, Suite 350
Frederick, MD 21704-8373

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Gogates
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 3:38 PM
To: iso25
Subject: RE17: A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25 (fwd)

Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 17:34:45 -0600
From: David Minesinger
To: 'Greg Gogates'
Subject: RE: Re15: A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25 (fwd)

NACLA is the new kid in the game.
Address is secretariat@nist.gov
Cydney Bunn at 301-975-6472

Per my phone call with NACLA, they will be training auditors in March and offering
accreditation in mid-summer.

David Minesinger
Senior Calibration Tech.
Accurate Solutions, Inc.
800-213-5505

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Gogates
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 1999 4:29 PM
To: iso25
Subject: Re15: A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25 (fwd)

Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 12:06:14 -0700
From: William Abbott
To: Greg Gogates
Subject: Re: R12:A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25 (fwd)

I would like to here the "official" word from A2LA or NVLAP, but my training as a ISO Guide 25 auditor and the documents I have read since then would lead me to believe that one can not "Register" to ISO 25. Furthermore, regardless of what GM requests a registar can not register or accredit anyone to ISO Guide 25, unless they have been given the credentials to do so. I understand that there are only 2 US registars who can do this (A2AL and NVLAB). Also where are these other registars getting there ISO 25 trained auditors?

Bill Abbott
2/.2/99

Greg Gogates on 02/02/99 09:37:26 AM
cc: (bcc: William Abbott/Monfort/ConAgra)
Subject: R12:A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25 (fwd)

Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 07:11:52 -0500
From: Lynne
Subject: Re: Re10:A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25

These firms, are not creating separate divisions, and they are, at the request of GM, REGISTERING laboratories to ISO Guide 25. The registrars themselves have not been asked to ACCREDIT laboratories, in fact it has been made very plan that they will be registering and not accrediting.

Lynne
-----Original Message-----
Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 11:17 AM
Subject: Re10:A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25


>Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 16:04:34 -0600
>From: Mike Linn
>Subject: Re: RE7: A2LA vs. ISO Guide 25 (fwd) -Reply (fwd)
>
>What I heard was "rumor" pure and simple. I have no basis for fact. The person I
>heard this from operates a small lab in Kentucky and is pursuing Guide 25
>accreditation through an auditing firm other than A2LA or NAVLAP. I assume he
>got this information from his auditors. He also read a letter from RAB stating
>that QS/ISO-9000 auditors and registering bodies CANNOT register a company to
>Guide 25. His understanding is that the firms are creating separate divisions
>that specialize in Guide 25 accreditation's. Even to the level of field
>specialties, i.e. a Calibration tech would probably not be able to audit a lab
>that performs gas chromatography and other chemical analysis.
>
>> I personally would like Mr. Linn or others, who feel qualified, to elaborate
>> on or explain the likely basis for the below statement taken from Mr.
>> Linn's enclosed E-mail.
>>
>> "I spoke with someone today that said the QS-9000 group will be
>> "distancing themselves" from A2LA and its interpretation of Guide 25 and
>> leaning toward a more "pure" ISO accreditation."
>>
>
>From the same source as above, meaning that A2LA is ISO Guide 25 plus. Similar
>to the way QS-9000 is ISO 9000 plus. If my understanding serves me right.
>
>I was told that the big three are considering will be backing away from the
A2LA
>type accreditation's and backing a Guide 25 only. It really confuses me because
>Guide 25 and Z540 and the A2LA look pretty much the same to me
>
>
>> it is my belief that statements of this kind, broadcast over the E-mail, do
>> not provide a service to anyone unless the author attempts to explain or
>> justify making such a statement. What is meant by a "more pure ISO
>> accreditation?" From my experience ISO Guide 25 due to its language
>> fosters the need for interpretation. What US interests are pushing for
>> ANSI-Z540 and what is motivating them to do that? Could someone from
>> the QS-9000 group please comment on the statement made by Mr. Linn.

[Marc]

Related thread is: http://Elsmar.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000062.html

[Marc]

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:17:40 -0500
From: Lynne <QA_neumann@email.msn.com>
To: Greg Gogates <iso25@fasor.com>
Subject: Re: ISO 58, EPA etc (fwd)

Bill, You are correct to say the NACLA is made up of accreditors, but it also contains Laboratories, regulatory agencies and users. The view of this organization is to have a Mutual Recognition of the accreditation bodies based on Guide 58 and 25. We already know that their is a need for this in the US, however, we need to get the support/cooperation of our Federal Agencies who need to be willing to accept the results of the evaluations that are performed between the accreditation bodies, with team members from users and regulators.

There are no bodies in the world that certify accreditation bodies such as RAB, RVA, NVLAP and A2LA, and it is my sincere hope that such a body does not develop anywhere in the world. When is it enough? I am satisfied with the accreditations as they are. NACLA is not designed to create another layer of crap on top of what the laboratories already have to pay for. As we all know what goes around, comes around. If laboratory accreditors have to pay more to be in business, they charge the labs more for accreditation, which in turn is passed on to their client, which ultimately ends up costing the consumers more. Stop already. Lynne

-----Original Message-----

From: Greg Gogates <iso25@fasor.com>
To: iso25@quality.org <iso25@quality.org>
Date: Saturday, February 13, 1999 7:18 PM
Subject: ISO 58, EPA etc (fwd)


>Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:18:32 -0500
>From: Bill Tilstone <wjt@nfstc.org>
>To: iso25@fasor.com
>Subject: ISO 58, EPA etc
>
>ISO 58 describes the standards for certifying bodies. There are no
>organizations in the US certified as complying with ISO 58 but NAVLAP
claims
>to comply as (probably) does A2LA. I do not know about SCC.
>
>NACLA is a consortium of accrediting bodies which will be addressing the
>need for a national agency to certify accrediting bodies to ISO 58.
>
>Now for a new acronym - NFSTC. The National Forensic Science Technology
>Center is a not-for-profit agency whose mission is support to quality in
the
>forensic (and related) areas (see www.nfstc.org). One of our main areas is
>accreditation related work, including a contract to develop a fully ISO 25
>compliant version of the current crime laboratory accreditation program
>operated by a voluntary agency.
>
>We have developed a fully ISO 25 (yes, yesterday's guide and not tomorrow's
>standard) compliant accreditation program for the EPA's NEIC laboratory.
>This program will be available to other environmental testing laboratories.
>
>NFSTC is also ISO 58 compliant and we have approached an overseas agency to
>inspect us. This is currently on hold until we know the outcomes of the
>NACLA initiatives.
>
>I would be happy to explain further to anyone interested.
>
>William J Tilstone PhD
>Executive Director, NFSTC
>wjt@nfstc.org
>
>(727) 341 4409