Mutual Recognition Signatories – An Obligation

1. Mutual Recognition Signatories – An Obligation Promote the acceptance of accredited test and inspection reports in their economies (regulators, industry and consumers)

2. Trade Facilitation • Regional MRAs avoid multitude of bilateral MRAs • Save costs and time • Avoid duplication of testing

3. APEC MRAs • Telecommunications Equipment (1998) • Electrical and Electronic Equipment (1999)

4. Global recognition by Regulators • Most regulators use and recognise accreditation • 22 countries extensively use the ILAC MRA

5. New European Law • All EU wide legislation (directives) that require notification, to be based on accreditation from 1 January 2010 • Will apply to all laboratories, inspection bodies and certification bodies, in all EU economies

6. Regulators Needs • Public Safety is paramount • Compliance with legal requirements

7. Accreditation Can Help • Confidence in technical results • Reduction of risk • Reduced liability

8. New Zealand Situation • Many regulators require accredited test labs • Water testing, medical testing, dairy testing, meat testing, wine testing, police radar • Electrical product testing, emissions etc.

9. New Zealand Situation continued • Cranes and pressure equipment • Food safety (HACCP) programmes • Dairy inspection • MAF Border Control inspectors • Building consent authorities

10. 25. Inspection bodies: recognition (1) The Secretary may recognise an organisation as an inspection body if satisfied that— (a) It is currently accredited, to a recognised industry standard, by International Accreditation New Zealand on behalf of the Testing Laboratory Registration Council or by the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia; and (b) It operates in Australia or New Zealand; and (c) It has a procedure in place to ensure that every person employed or engaged by it as a design verifier or an equipment inspector is the holder of a relevant certificate of competence; and (d) It has a procedure in place to ensure that every person employed or engaged by it as a trainee design verifier or a trainee equipment inspector is appropriately qualified, is a fit and proper person, and is effectively supervised; and (e) It has a procedure in place to ensure that design verification is carried out only by a design verifier holding an appropriate qualification; and (f) It has a procedure in place to ensure that equipment inspection is carried out only by an equipment inspector holding an appropriate qualification; and (g) It has afforded an employee of the department nominated by the Secretary an opportunity of participating in assessments of the organisation's management system by, in New Zealand, International Accreditation New Zealand on behalf of the Testing Laboratory Registration Council or, in Australia, the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia; and (h) It is likely to carry out its inspection work in an objective fashion that promotes safety and the public interest; and (i) There is no reasonably foreseeable conflict of interest between its design verification work, its inspection work, and any other work it does or is likely to do. (2) The Secretary may recognise as an inspection body an organisation that does not operate in Australia or New Zealand if satisfied that— (a) It is accredited, to a recognised industry standard, by an organisation that has made a mutual recognition arrangement on inspection body accreditation with International Accreditation New Zealand; or (b) It has a status equivalent to an inspection body under the law of the country in which it has its headquarters, and that law imposes requirements comparable to those imposed by these regulations.

11. Key part of regulation: • Requires IB to be currently accredited by IANZ or NATA • Allows the regulator to participate in the assessment • An overseas inspection body (e.g. in Singapore) can be recognised if the accreditation body (SAC) is recognised by IANZ