News (LATA) on hazardous materials shipping regulations. Reference materials manufacturers commonly run into problems shipping samples internationally because of differences in regulations overseas. CRMMA is trying to unify the regulations so that samples shipped under DOT regulations will be accepted by IATA. More information on CRMMA can be obtained at its new Web site (www.crmma.org). Britt Erickson
Unified protection The European Union (EU) has moved one step closer to unified patent protection for inventions filed in member states. The move will avoid the present costs and problems to inventors of having to file individual applications for each country. The measures were described in a policy communication adopted by the European Commission in February 1999, which aims to promote innovation by simplifying the patent process. In June 1997, the commission published its Green Paper on patents, in which an action plan for innovation in Europe and the single market was outlined. The paper asked whether the patent system in Europe should be improved and modernized. It seems obvious now that the answer would be "yes"i given that 12 member states were carrying out individual patent processing with different sets of rules and policies. To ensure full coverage, each patentee needed to file a separate application in each country. The introduction of a unitary patent valid throughout the EU has become a political priority arising from the demands of users to decrease costs and optimize legal certainty. According to Mario Monti, the single market commissioner who initiated the Green Paper, "This coherent policy framework lays the foundations for ensuring that pan-EU patent protection can be obtained more easily and more cheaply than at present. This will serve to promote investment in innovation, which is so crucial to employment, growth, and competitiveness in the EU." The communication calls for new regulations to be written in 1999 to create an "EU Patent", based on a single application. The system would run parallel to national patents issued by individual offices and the European Patent Office. This would provide businesses with a choice of protective systems and allow easier enforcement of patentee rights. 314 A
organization that has an interest in laboratory accreditation. Membership in NACLA, however, does not guarantee recognition as a NACLA accrediting body— all potential accrediting bodies will be evaluated. Although three applications have already been submitted, the procedures for recognizing competent accrediting bodies are still being finalized. The organizational structure of NACLA is also evolving and now includes a board of directors as well as an operations council. Previously, the U.S. Department of Justice ruled that federal employees can serve on the board of directors of standards organizations, such as NACLA, but only in a limited capacity. As a result, federal participants act as nonvoting liaison members. The operations council, which includes all members of the board of directors, includA proposal for harmonizing the patenting the liaison members, was added so ability of computer programs, which inthat federal government employees could cludes chemometrics, bioinformatics, and vote on issues regarding recognition laboratory information management syscedures, proficiency testing, evaluator tem software, will also be put forward betraining and technical requirements The fore summer 1999 to ensure that software operations council is charged with overcompanies can obtain effective patent proseeing applications from the accrediting tection for their inventions in all the membodies and keeping the NACLA recogniber states. At present, patent protection is tion process up to date not particularly cohesive because of the disparate approaches of each member In addition to eliminating duplicate acstate. The action will form part of the Euro- creditations, NACLA is interacting with inpean Commission's fifth framework proternational accrediting bodies, such as the gram on research and development. International Laboratory Accreditation CoDavid Bradley operation (ILAC) and the Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation, to establish worldwide acceptance of credible data NACLA still seeks and agreement on common procedures. members NACLA's strengths are in evaluator training and performance monitoring. BeITie National Cooperation for Laboratory fore the general meeting, NACLA held a Accreditation (NACLA), a public-private three-day evaluator training course to partnership aimed at reducing the number bring evaluator candidates up to speed on of accreditations for U.S. testing and calibration laboratories (Anal. Chem. 1997, the NACLA evaluation process. The 69,161 A; 1998, 70, ,73 A), held its first course covered recognition procedures, annual general meeting on March 25,1999. requirements, and on-site evaluation processes. Evaluator training and perforApproval of the 1999 Board of Directors and affirmation of the NACLA bylaws high- mance monitoring are just two of the requirements for eventual ILAC recognition. lighted the agenda. Although many specifics still need to be In addition NACLA must meet several other criteria, including qualification laid out before the program is up and runregional body. Currently NACLA is not ning, NACLA's biggest concern is to build considered a regional body because it only up its membership. Currently, the number of NACLA members is disappointingly low, represents one country the United says Dave Krashes, Chair of NACLA's States In the future NACLA hopes to membership committee. Out of 5000 poten- broaden its membership to include accredtial members, only 50 were successfully itation bodies in Mexico and Canada recruited during a recent membership which will qualify it as a regional bodv drive. Efforts are under way to bring that More information on NACLA can be number up to at least 500. found at its Web site (http://ts.nist.gov/ Membership in NACLA is open to any nacla). Britt Erickson
Analytical Chemistry News & Features, May 1, 1999
