To access any of the PDF documents included in this page, please use this free Adobe Acrobat Reader as needed. If you encounter any difficulty in accessing the content on this or any other page please contact us for assistance.

PDF Version, Minutes-Montreal, 26Kb

Multi-stakeholder Consultation Meeting
October 15 to 16, 2002
Four Points Sheraton - Montreal

Table of Contents

Meeting Participants
Welcome
Alternate Service Delivery
Device Service Providers
Physical Measurement Standards
Measuring Devices
Commodities
Dispute Resolution
Monitoring and Reporting
Next Steps

Meeting Participants:

Producers:

Michel Beauséjour, Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec
Claude Grenon, Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec
Luc Bournival, Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec
Brian Johnson, Dairy Farmers of Ontario
Dwane Mellish, Dairy Farmers of Nova Scotia
Steve Lyne, Dairy Farmers of New Brunswick
Réjean Bouchard, Dairy Farmers of Canada

Processors:

Marie Christine Belley, Saputo
Patricia Ricard, Natrel
Glenn Ikin, Kraft Canada
Lise Pomerleau, Parmalat

Transporters:

Marcel Beaudry, Association des Transporteurs de Lait

Provincial Marketing Boards:

Michel Houle, MAPAQ
Louis Dufour, Régie des marchés agricoles et alimentaires du Québec

Milk Testing Laboratories:

Merv Reynolds, University of Guelph Laboratory Services

Device Manufacturers & Service/Repair Companies:

Russell Browne, International Dairy Calibrations Ltd.
Gary Collins, Conflow Technologies Inc.
Carroll Rocha, Accurate Metering Systems

Federal Organizations :

John Kane, Canadian Dairy Commission
Gilles Froment, Canadian Dairy Commission

Measurement Canada (MC):

Sonia Roussy, Vice President, Innovative Services Directorate
Jeff Watters, Manager, Weights & Measures Program Development
Marcel Vézina, Acting Volumetric Specialist, Québec Region
Lance Robertson, Dairy Trade Sector Review Team Leader
Roger Alarie, Dairy Trade Sector Review Team Member

Tuesday, October 15, 2002
10:30 to 17:10

1. Words of welcome by Sonia Roussy

2. Lance Robertson and Roger Alarie outlined the objectives of the meeting, the format of the meeting, reviewed the agenda and reviewed the expectations of Measurement Canada’s participants and industry participants.

3. M. Beauséjour of the Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec raised an objection to a meeting taking place in Montreal being conducted in English. M. Alarie explained that the meeting would be conducted in both English and French and would be facilitated in English by Mr. Robertson and in French by M. Alarie. He also explained that simultaneous translation would be used for the entire meeting and that the majority of the meeting would be conducted in French.

4. Alternate Service Delivery (ASD)

Lance Robertson delivered a presentation on what are alternate service delivery mechanisms, how they fit in with Measurement Canada’s (MC’s) strategic direction and gave examples of ASDs that could be used to deliver MC services that are deemed necessary by the stakeholders.

Some stakeholders felt that devolution of MC’s authority was not an acceptable ASD, others felt it was premature to ask the stakeholders which forms of ASD would be acceptable to them. R. Alarie explained that the intention was to let the stakeholders know the different options for ASDs when the discussions center around the services required by the stakeholders and the different options available to deliver those services.

5. Device Service Providers (service/repair companies)

Lance Robertson delivered a presentation on the roles and responsibilities of device manufacturers and device service and repair companies. He outlined the current requirements for the service/repair providers under the Weights and Measures Act as well as the proposed requirements based on the consultation meetings between MC’s Dairy Trade Sector Review team and stakeholders across the country.

All stakeholders agreed that MC should have better control of the service providers but a consensus could not be reached on service providers being granted the authority to do work on MC’s behalf.

The decisions finally adopted after further discussion and clarification were that device service providers whether they are providing any metrological(measurement) services on any trade device or providing service on MC’s behalf must:

be registered or licensed by MC
- The program should be voluntary initially, but should become mandatory in 2 - 5 years when the Weights and Measures Act can be changed.
- The program would be mandatory for companies providing services on MC’s behalf
use certified or traceable standards for device calibrations
use documented test procedures
be trained
be periodically checked for competency by MC.

M. Beauséjour of the Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec was concerned that MC’s lack of presence in inspections in the industry could lead to a loss of confidence and to a loss of MC’s technical expertise.

Sonia Roussy assured the participants that MC was not going to withdraw from the industry but their role would involve more monitoring of the industry and of the service providers with the required inspection services being delivered by a third party. She suggested that MC would perhaps have more presence in the industry with the limited resources that were available.

6. Physical Measurement Standards (provers, 20L/19L measures, test weights)

Roger Alarie delivered a presentation outlining examples of measurement standards, the requirements for maintaining accurate standards, the importance of traceability, calibrations and certification of standards and the hierarchy of measuring standards from field working standards back to the 1 kg standard in Sèvres, France.

M. Alarie, outlined the current requirement for the standards used for calibrating different measuring devices and facilitated a discussion of the proposed requirements based on the consultation meetings between MC’s Dairy Trade Sector Review team and stakeholders.

The decisions adopted after discussion were:

a) Measurement standards used for calibration of dairy farm tanks (provers, 20L or 19L measures), for calibration of milk meters (provers), and for calibration of scales used for direct sales and pre-pack scales used for determining quantity and monitoring packing devices (test weights)

must be certified and traceable to either MC standards or to another recognized organization such as NRC, NIST etc.
- certification by an organization other than MC requires a change in the Weights & Measures Act
must meet rules for mandatory approval of design, initial certification, periodic re-certification, proper selection and use of physical standards
national or international standards used for traceability or certification must not be lower than Measurement Canada’s standards.

M. Beauséjour of the Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec was concerned that if traceability to other standards was accepted that MC would not have the necessary control to ensure that the standards meet the MC requirements. He felt MC should control measurement standards.

b) Measurement standards used for calibration of packing devices and pre-pack scales used for dispensing a predetermined amount of product (test weights)

No intervention required by Measurement Canada
No requirements for test standards needed

The vulnerable parties, the wholesale/bulk consumers, were not adequately represented at the meeting so it was decided that this recommendation would not be adopted until it was accepted by the vulnerable parties.

c) Measurement standards used for certification of laboratory scales used for milk components determination (test weight kits)

must be traceable to either MC standards or to another recognized organization such as NRC, NIST etc.
the standards do not need to be certified but must meet the requirements of the ISO 17025 standard

This recommendation applies as long as the laboratories are part of the Canadian Laboratory Accreditation Program using the ISO 17025 Standard.

M. Bouchard of The Dairy Farmers of Canada, felt that before this recommendation could be accepted he would need to consult with the producer group, P5 that sponsors the program.

7. Measuring Devices (Farm tanks, meters, scales)

Roger Alarie delivered a presentation discussing the different types of measuring devices used in the industry and the different programs currently used by MC to ensure measurement accuracy and equity.

He facilitated a discussion on the proposed level of intervention for MC and the programs needed for each measuring device based on the consultation meetings between MC’s Dairy Trade Sector Review team and stakeholders.

Stakeholders decided that for:

a) Farm tanks

No approval, initial inspection or periodic inspection required
Industry to develop guidelines for installation, calibration and use with help from MC

Brian Johnson of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario, felt that due to the large numbers of farm tanks and the small number of calibrators that at this point it was not feasible to legislate initial and periodic inspections. He felt that industry would be better served by starting with guidelines for installation, use and calibrations which would be sustainable both for MC and for industry.

b) Milk meters, scales used for direct sales and pre-pack scales (used for determining quantity and monitoring packing devices)

Approval by MC
Initial and periodic inspections to be delivered by service companies under an ASD program
- The frequency of the periodic inspections to be determined
MC’s existing written standards continue to be used
Industry to develop guidelines for installation, maintenance and use with help from MC

M. Beauséjour of the Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec and Mr. Steve Lyne of the Dairy Farmers of Nova Scotia felt that MC’s presence was needed at inspections to provide the assurance of an independent third party inspector and avoid conflicts of interest.

After further discussions and clarification on MC’s future role it was agreed that the inspections could be done by a third party such as the service providers on MC’s behalf provided:

MC monitors the work of the service providers through the use of audits or product audits to ensure competency and to ensure the inspections are done properly and in accordance with MC’s procedures.

c) Pre-pack scales and packing devices (used for dispensing a predetermined amount of product i.e. 20L boxes of milk or 20kg blocks of cheese)

No intervention required by MC
No approval, initial or periodic inspections or industry guidelines required
MC’s existing tolerances for devices of the same class can be used for comparison

The vulnerable parties, the wholesale/bulk consumers, were not adequately represented at the meeting so it was decided that this recommendation would not be adopted until it was accepted by the vulnerable parties.

d) Laboratory scales (used for milk components determination)

No approval, initial or periodic inspections required
Existing MC written standards for devices of the same class to be used for comparison
MC to officially recognize the Canadian Laboratory Accreditation Program based on ISO 17025

This recommendation applies as long as the laboratories are part of the Canadian Laboratory Accreditation Program using the ISO 17025 Standard.

M. Bouchard of The Dairy Farmers of Canada, felt that before this recommendation could be accepted he would need to consult with the producer group, P5 that sponsors the program.

Day 2 Wednesday, October 16, 2002
8:30 to13:45

Roger Alarie recapped the decisions from day 1

8. Commodities - bulk or prepackaged dairy products sold by measure for wholesale consumption (cheese, cream, processed milk etc.)

Roger Alarie made a brief presentation on the different types of commodities and the current MC programs used to monitor and ensure the accuracy of the measurement. He also facilitated a discussion on the future role of MC in this part of the industry.

After a brief discussion all the participants agreed that:

MC would conduct net quantity inspections in response to complaints
There would be no periodic inspections
Existing MC written standards will continue to be used for net quantity verification
Industry to develop and use guidelines such as ISO and HAACP programs to maintain quality assurance.

It was suggested that plants that do not have any quality control system in place should be subject to more frequent monitoring by MC.

The vulnerable parties, the wholesale/bulk consumers, were not adequately represented at the meeting so it was decided that this recommendation would not be adopted until it was accepted by the vulnerable parties.

9. Dispute Resolution

Roger Alarie delivered a presentation explaining MC’s current role and policies in resolving disputes and the methodology used to find resolutions.

All participants agreed that the current dispute resolution mechanisms used in the industry were working well and after a brief discussion decided that MC would:

remain the last resort for complaints that cannot be resolved between trading partners
investigate device or commodity complaints and report the results to the complainant.
investigate the transaction records and if necessary conduct device or commodity inspections.
not provide binding compensation

It was noted that MC have not received many complaints in the dairy industry. This could be because the dispute resolution mechanisms were working well or the stakeholders did not know that MC was available as a last resort to resolve complaints.

The vulnerable parties, the wholesale/bulk consumers, were not adequately represented at the meeting therefore it was decided that this recommendation would not be adopted until it was accepted by the vulnerable parties.

10. Monitoring and Reporting

Roger Alarie facilitated a discussion of the monitoring and the reporting mechanisms needed for MC and industry to determine if there is adequate measurement accuracy and equity in the dairy industry.

a) The following performance indicators were deemed necessary to determine the level of measurement accuracy and equity:

Compliance rates based on “as found” results
Number of unresolved complaints
A qualitative and quantitative stakeholder survey.

b) Stakeholders decided that the service providers should be monitored by MC through:

Mandatory audits for companies doing work on MC’s behalf through ASDs
Mandatory product audits for companies doing work on MC’s behalf through ASDs
Mandatory assessment of the competencies of service providers involved in ASD programs by MC

M. Bouchard of the Dairy Farmers of Canada expressed concern that it appeared that MC was not being responsible by allowing third party organizations to fulfill their role of maintaining the accuracy of measuring devices.

Sonia Roussy pointed out that MC was in fact being responsible by trying to find more effective ways of monitoring measurement accuracy and having greater presence in the dairy industry.

Jeff Watters pointed out that under the Weights & Measures Act the device owner is responsible for maintaining the accuracy of trade measuring devices. MC’s responsibility under the Act is to monitor to ensure the devices are measuring accurately.

c) Plants that offer bulk or pre-packaged commodities for sale based on measure should be monitored through:

Product audits or spot-checks of the commodities by MC
The level of monitoring should depend on whether the plant has a QA program for measurement assurance.

d) Stakeholders decided that service providers should provide the following reports on device performance to MC:

Test reports
- The service providers preferred to submit the reports in electronic format.
“As found” test results
All devices found non-compliant with Weights & Measures legislation

e) Stakeholders decided that MC should disseminate the following information:

Compliance Rates
- Should be in aggregate form, i.e. should not contain information on specific manufacturers etc. but should be classified by device type or class, especially for external distribution
- Possibly by province
- Detailed information about organizations, manufacturers or service providers should be available only to MC personnel or to the company involved.
Service Providers Performance
- General information only i.e. which companies are accredited or registered by MC - no specific information about service providers that could be misinterpreted
The information should not be published on MC’s website where it is available to everyone who may or may not be stakeholders in the industry. This information could be misinterpreted and lead to complaints.
Stakeholders will need to see what kind of information is going to be published before consenting to have it published.

f) After a discussion about the appropriate length of the review period the stakeholders decided

a review period of 5 years was adequate
- the period would start after the implementation of the recommendations
an earlier review would be triggered by factors such as
- a major change in the stakeholders, i.e. if one of the major stakeholder groups no longer exists or if one or more of the service providers no longer provide service in the dairy industry
- an increase in the number of unresolved complaints
- changes in technology
- decrease in industry performance, i.e. drop in compliance rates, more complaints etc.

g) Stakeholders were asked how should measurement concerns in the industry be addressed to MC? The response was:

MC should be telling industry how to report measurement concerns since industry does not know the internal structure of MC
The current method of reporting problems through the regional specialists, the district offices or regional offices seems to be acceptable
There is a section on the website where issues or concerns could be raised

11. Roger Alarie summarized the decisions that were made at the meeting. The participants agreed.

12. Lance Robertson gave an overview of the next steps in the process

Minutes will be written for the meeting and would be distributed to all participants
- Participants will verify the contents of the minutes.
A list of recommendations will be developed based on the results from the meetings in Montreal and Calgary.
- Stakeholders will receive a copy of these recommendations and will have an opportunity to determine if this is what was decided at the meetings.
The recommendations will be presented to Measurement Canada’s senior management committee for approval.
A final report will be prepared and sent out to all stakeholders


		Created: 2005-08-04 Updated: 2005-12-02	Top of Page	Important Notices