Takashi Horie 16 June, 2010 JASC

1. Report to PAC TC:The Result of the Discussion at IAF TC about the Disclosure of MS accreditation and certification Takashi Horie 16 June, 2010 JASC Ver. 2

2. Background Story • 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.

3. Proposal to IAF TCin Vancouver • 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.

4. Before the TC meeting • 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.

5. Discussion at IAF TC in Vancouver: Supportive Comments • 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.

6. Discussion at IAF TC in Vancouver: Opposing Comments & Counterstatements • 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.

7. Conclusion at IAF TC in Vancouver • 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.

8. WG in Rio de Janeiro • 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. <CBs' Disclosure Status List on JAB's Website> Disclosure item # Symbols show disclosure status: O: Disclosed on website Δ:Available on request -: Not disclosed *: Not applicable CB's name linked with its website http://www.jab.or.jp/bodies/mscb-disclosure-list.html

9. Thank you for your listening.