Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al
Filing
847
Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Samsung's Opposition to Apple's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.. (Attachments: #1 Trac Declaration in Support of Motion to File Under Seal, #2 Samsung's Opposition to Apple's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, #3 Hecht Declaration in Support of Opposition to Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, #4 Ex A, #5 Ex B1, #6 Ex B2, #7 Ex C1, #8 Ex C2, #9 Ex D, #10 Ex E, #11 Ex F1, #12 Ex F2, #13 Ex F3, #14 Ex F4, #15 Ex G, #16 Ex H, #17 Ex I, #18 Ex J1, #19 Ex J2, #20 Ex J3, #21 Ex J4, #22 Ex J5, #23 Ex J6, #24 Ex J7, #25 Ex J8, #26 Ex J9, #27 Ex J10, #28 Ex J11, #29 Ex K1, #30 Ex K2, #31 Ex K3, #32 Ex L, #33 Ex M, #34 Ex N, #35 Ex O1, #36 Ex O2, #37 Ex P1, #38 Ex P2, #39 Ex Q1, #40 Ex Q2, #41 Ex Q3, #42 Ex Q4, #43 Ex Q5, #44 Ex Q6, #45 Ex Q7, #46 Ex R, #47 Ex S1, #48 Ex S2, #49 Rosenbrock Declaration in Support of Opposition to Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, #50 Ex 1, #51 Ex 2, #52 Ex 3, #53 Ex 4, #54 Ex 5, #55 Ex 6, #56 Ex 7, #57 Ex 8, #58 Ex 9, #59 Ex 10, #60 Ex 11, #61 Ex 12, #62 Ex 13, #63 Ex 14, #64 Ex 15, #65 Ex 16, #66 Ex 17, #67 Ex 18, #68 Proposed Order Denying Apple's Motion for Summary Judgment, #69 Proposed Order Granting Samsung's Administrative Motion to File Under Seal)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 4/2/2012) Modified on 4/3/2012 Attachment #1 Trac Declaration placed under seal. Posting of attachments #16, 18, 19, 20 through 33, 37, 38, 47 and 48 are NOT in compliance with General Order 62 (dhm, COURT STAFF).
EXHIBIT 6
COIV~ISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMITIES
COM(90) 456 final
Brussels, 8 October 1990
COMMISSION GREEN PAPER ON
THE DEVELOPMENT OF EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION :
ACTION FOR FASTER TECHNOLOGICAL INTEGRATION
IN EUROPE
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390388
1COMMISSION GREEN PAPER ON
THE DEVELOPMENT OF EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION :
ACTION FOR FASTER TECHNOLOGICAL INTEGRATION IN EUROPE
Table of contents
(p)
INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I°
2
4
THE IMPORTANCE OF EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION FOR THE
INTERNAL MARKET
8
(I)
(ll)
European standards for legislation
European standards In an Integrated market
8
10
EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION TODAY
12
( I) CEN/CENELEC:
- Establishment
- Recognition by the Community
- Present Structure
12
12
14
(11) ETSI
16
I:/:1 ~llIily[va,~ll :llI l ~[eglli: I Iq~F:l IIII q ~ [ei4
I I I. THE MAIN ISSUES FOR EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION IN THE
1990’S:
19
A. The role of European Industry and other Interested
parties
20
B.
22
The organization of European Standardization
Priority Issues
( I)
( li)
(lii)
Efficiency
Coordination and structure
Membership and International cooperation
22
27
31
Other Important Issues
Accountability
Financing
Information
Status of the European Standard
Testing and Certification
Intellectual property rights and patents
( Iv)
( v)
( vl)
(vii)
(viii)
(Ix)
C.
The role of publ Ic authorities
IV.
SUMMARY
47
THE NEXT STEPS
V.
OF
COMMISSION
35
37
40
42
44
46
49
RECOMMENDATIONS
Annex
Standardization Order Vouchers given to CEN
and CENELEC since 1986
Annex
5O
Proposed organizational structure of the
European Standardization System
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390389
2INTRODUCTION
The credibility and success of the White Paper on completing
the Internal market do not come from the fact that three
hundred subjects were Identified for legislative
harmonization, but that a thousand or more Community
Directives were abandoned which might have been necessary If
the old approach, based on detailed harmonization, had been
followed.
The new approach Is based on two principles:
mutual recognition of national rules Is the basic
principle. This presupposes that the objectives of
national legislation - health, safety and so on - are
equivalent and that only the means of achieving them are
different;
legislative harmonization at Community level only occurs
exceptionally In those areas where the objectives of
national legislation are not equivalent; when
harmonization is necessary, Community legislatlon must be
limited to laying down essential requirements for safety,
health, and so on. It Is UP to producers to chose by what
means they wish to comply with these requirements.
Let us take domestic electrical appllcances as an example.
Technical safety requires the presence in the electrical lead
of a third wire, connected to the earth. Before taking
legislative Initiatives, the Commission will see whether the
twelve Member States all require this third wire. If so, there
is no need for legislation to be harmonized; If not, Community
legislation will provide for an earth connection for this type
of appliance throughout the Community, without going Into the
details of whether the third pole should be round or square,
or placed In the middle or at the edge of the plug.
This policy will bring about a slngle Europe for traders, but
not for manufacturers or consumers. A Community citizen may
purchase a washing-machine In the country-next-door and bring
it across frontiers without difficulty, but he may still find
that the plug of the appliance does not fit the socket in his
house.
Thus neither mutual recognition nor the new approach to
harmonization can operate sat Isfactorl ly unless manufacturers
come together and agree upon common instruments - plugs and
sockets - which are Intended to achieve the legislator’s
objectives. That Is the role of the standardization
organizations.
Only European standards wil I bring about a common economic
area. National standards on the contrary compartmental ise the
common market. They cannot be the subject of mutual
recognition, since, not laid down by the authorities,
they
are not obligatory; each producer Is free to fulfill
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390390
3essential requirements by other means and no purchaser can be
obliged to recognize foreign products. Standards will only
fulfill their role In the common market If they are agreed at
the European level and published as European standards.
That Is why the Community encourages the work of CEN, CENELEC
and ETSI, which brings together the standardization bodies of
the eighteen member countries of the Community and EFTA.
The output of the European standardization bodies has risen
spectacularly. Over 800 standards have been adopted In the
last six years, three times as many as In the previous twenty
years. But the completion of the Internal Market requires the
adoption of at least 800 additional standards, or about one
standard a day until 31 December 1992.
The Commission Is responsible for the operation of the common
market, not only for traders but also for producers and
consumers. In order not to have to return to the old approach
of detailed harmonization, It wishes to assist standards
organizations to respond to the growing demand for
standardization In anticipation of 1992. In this Green Paper,
the Commission proposes for discussion suggestions for
Improving the efficiency of standardization organizations as
well as their cooperation and cohesion.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390391
4COMMISSION GREEN PAPER ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF
EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The single Community market will become a reality for European
Industry only Insofar as common technical standards can be
developed progresslvelx at European rather than national
level,
Less than 900 days from the Community’s deadline for
achievement of the internal market, European standardization
has become central to that obJective. Hundreds of European
Standards are today being drawn up to accompany the
Community’s technical legislation which will come into force
before 1 January 1993. This Is the Immediate goal of the
European standardization process.
But as the regulatory barriers to the free circulation of
Industrial products within the Community are removed,
differences In national technical standards stll I constitute a
significant obstacle to the acceptability of those products In
the market.
Although under Community law Member State authorities are
required to accept on their market products which conform to
the legislation and standards of other Member States where
these are Intended to achieve equivalent objectives, the same
principle of "mutual recognition" cannot be applied to the
Individual purchaser n the market, who remains free to set
his own requirements, often by reference to national
standards. Only through the gradual voluntary harmonization of
standards can the Community market fully achieve the economic
rationalization and competition which are prime objectives of
the EEC Treaty.
The objectives of the Green Paper
The main purpose of this Green Paper - a consultation document
addressed to all Interested parties - is to draw to the
attention of producers and users of Industrial products In the
private and public sector the strategic significance of
European standardization for the realization of the Internal
market. Nothing less than the future technological
environment for products on the European market Is at stake.
A second purpose of this Green Paper Is to accelerate the
delivery of European standards, especially those required for
the Implementation of EEC product legislation. The European
standardization bodies have made major efforts to respond to
the Increased demand for their services In recent years, for
which they are to be congratulated, but demand for European
standards Is outstripping supply.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390392
A third objective of this paper Is to stimulate debate on how
to ensure long-term dynamism and stability ............
Standardization so that this economically-Important activity
can be sustained at the pace which will be required during the
next decade.
Contents of the Green Paper
The Green Paper examines a number of Issues relating to the
organizational structure, financing and policies and practices
of standardization bodies, both at European and national
level, and assesses what changes may be needed to make
standardization serve the European market more effectively.
It
Is divided Into two parts.
Part One Identifies the challenges and problems facing
European standardization. Section I explains the Importance of
European standardization for the Community’s Internal market,
both for EEC Directives adopted under the so-called New
Approach to technical harmonization and In terms of common
technical standards in the Community market. Section II
briefly describes the structure and operation of the European
standardization bodies, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI.
Part Two puts forward possible solutions to the challenges
facing European standardization In the 1990"s and addresses
the role of European Industry and other parties In the
standardization process, the organization of European
standardization and the role of public authorities.
The Commission’s main recommendations can be summarized as
follows:
European Industry Is called upon to give Ellropean
standardization a much higher priority in Its strategy
for the Internal market. Without greater Involvement of
Industry In standardization work, and the commitment of
more money and expertise to that process, the ambitious
objectives which the Commission and European
standardization bodies have set themselves may not be
met. Lack of involvement at a strategic level by
European industry Is likely to be a high-cost option, and
wi II reduce the potential of the internal market.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390393
6Standardization bodies are asked to take further steps to
Improve their efficiency and to consider restructuring
the European standardization system to permit sectoral
autonomy In standards-making while ensuring coordination
through new European-level structures (a European
Standardization Council and Board) which wll I lay down
the strategic direction of European standardization.
Other recommendations Include greater direct
participation of Interested parties In European
standardization work, the creation of self-standing
European Standards and a long-term policy for the
financing of European standardization bodies, which
should allow future Community funding of European
standardization to decline from Its present high levels
over the next few years.
The Commission also recommends measures by which the
European Standardization bodies might respond to their
changing external environment, especially In Eastern
Europe.
Governments are asked to step up their promotion and
support of standardization at national and at European
level. At the Community level, the Commission recommends
that the Council of Ministers should decide upon the
basic principles for future cooperation between the
European standardization system and pub Ic authorities
and commit Itself to long-term flnancla support.
(A full summary of Commission recommendations is given in
Section V of the paper).
Follow-up to the Green Paper
This Green Paper will be widely distributed by the Commission.
Interested parties will be COnSUlted In the three months
fol lowing publ Icatlon, with a view to identifying the main
points of consensus.
The Commission will at the same time consult the European
standardization bodies on the priority issues (efficiency, new
structures and external relations) with a view to agreeing
appropriate action as soon as POSSible.
The Commission will, In the light of the discussion of the
Green Paper, also consider making proposals to the Councl I of
Ministers for decisions to formal Ize Its recognition and
support of European standardization.
For further copies of the Green Paper, please apply preferably
by letter or telefax to=
Unit III.B.2,
Directorate General for Internal Market and Industrial Affairs
Commission of the European Communities
200, rue de la Lol
B - 1049 Brussels
Telephone= 32/2/235.46.50
Telefax: 32/2/236.08.51
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390394
- 7 -
PART ONE: THE CHALLENGE
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390395
8I¯
THE IMPORTANCE OF EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION FOR THE
INTERNAL MARKET
1¯
The elimination of technical barriers to trade has been
recognized at the highest political level of the
Community as a priority task In the programme for the
completion of a market without Internal frontiers by 31
December 1992. Since the adoption by the Council of the
so-called "New Approach to technical harmonization and
standardization" In 1985, the harmonization of European
Industrial standards In the areas covered by Community
technical legislation has become an essential Instrument
In achieving that obJective.
As 1993 approaches, European standardization Is also
being perceived as a tool by which to obtain the full
economic benefits of that market. As well as being a
means of eliminating regulatory barriers to trade,
European standards ~re becoming an economic objective In
their own right.
l)
European standards for legislation
2.
In the Council Resolution of 7 May 1985 on the new
approach to technical harmonization and standardization,
which Is now the basis of most Community technical
legislation, reference to voluntary standards was
accepted as the appropriate method of giving technical
expression to the essential requirements of Community
Directives. Under the new approach, EEC legislation
confines Itself to laying down the essential requirements
to which products must comply in order to ensure the
protection of public health or safety, of the environment
or the consumer. European standards are developed In
respect of each Directive In order to provide
manufacturers with a set of technical specifications
recognized In the Directive as giving a presumption of
conformity to the essential requirements. The European
standards concerned, the so-called "harmonized
standards", remain voluntary; manufacturers are still
able to put on the Community market products which either
met other standards or no standards at all, subJect to
fulfilling the procedures for assessment of conformity
laid down by the Directive.
3.
The Councl I has now adopted several Directives based on
the new approach (toys, simple pressure vessels,
construction products, electro-magnetic compatibility,
machines, personal protective equipment and gas
appliances). Further Directives for medical devices and
telecommunications terminal equipment are Ilk ely to be
adopted this Year. A large amount of work has been given
to the European standardization bodies by means of
individual "standardization mandates"
from the Commission, which, after consultation of the
standardization body concerned, establish the scope of
the work, lay down any supplementary guidelines and fix
the timetable by which the standards should be adopted.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390396
9(It should be noted that the EFTA countries, whose
national standardization bodies are also members of the
European standardization organizations, have consistently
supported the Community’s approach and contribute to the
financing of mandated standardization work).
4.
In a separate Initiative, the Community has given
harmonized European standards a prominent role In the
opening up of public procurement markets. The revised
Community Directives on public supplies and works(1),
and the proposed Directive which will shortly extend the
same disciplines to such sectors as telecommunications,
transport, energy and water supply, require purchasing
entitles to refer to national standards transposing
European standards where they exist, subject to some
limited exceptions.
5.
The final success of the new approach and of the use of
European standards In public procurement policy depends
largely on the European standardization bodies. The pace
at which the Community has adopted Its legislation has
resulted in an unprecedented Increase In their workload.
Since 1986 about 30 standardization mandates related to
EEC legislation have been given to the two main European
standardization bodies, CEN (Comlt6 Europ6en de
Normallsatlon) and CENELEC (Comit6 Europ6en de
Normallsatlon Electrotechnlque) for approximately 800
European Standards, most of which are to be completed by
1993(2). More mandates are being prepared, which are
likely to bring the total to over 1,000 standards. This
demand for new standards work has led to a doubling of
CEN/CENELEC Technical Committees and working groups;
between December 1987 and December 1989 the number of
Technical Committees alone rose from 122 to 239. The
number of draft European standards in course of
development in CEN rose from 220 in 1986 to 950 in 1989.
Several thousand people currently participate in
standardization work directly related to mandated
European Standards.
6.
Despite this response from the standards bodies the
overwhelming Dart of this standardization work for the
EEC Internal market still has to be done before 1993.
The annual output of new European standards Is still low
(about 150 were published by CEN/CENELEC in 1989)
compared to the target of at least 800 additional
standards needed for EEC legislation or the production of
national standards in the main standards-producing
countries of the Community(3). Even though current
CEN/CENELEC output represents a rapid Increase from
previous levels (19 In 1985, 102 In 1988), demand for
European standards Is Increasing faster than supply.
(1) Reference: OJEC N° L 127, 20/5/88, p. 1.
(2) A list of the subjects for which standardization
mandates have been given is contained in Annex I.
(3) Purely national standards published by France, Germany
and the United Kingdom in 1989 were approximately
350, 650 and 400 respectively.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390397
- 10 (11) European standards In an Integrated market
7.
The Community’s Interest In common European standards Is
not limited to those to which can be referred to In
Community product legislation. More European
standardization will benefit the single European market
In all sectors, not only In those subject to regulation,
by bringing about the very economic rationalization and
competition which are prime obJectives of the EEC Treaty.
8o
The main motive for promoting any standardization
activity Is economic. The motivation for standardizing
products, processes or services at the national level namely, to reduce costs for producers and to Improve
transparency of the market for consumers - clearly exists
at the European level. Given the current fragmentation of
the European market, economic gains should be much
higher from European standardization than from further
national standardization. Common European standards will
reduce research, production and distribution costs for
producers, ancl promote more Intensive competition, to the
benefit of consumers, In respect of the non-standard
features of products.
9o
A second reason Is that, even in the absence of technical
regulations Imposed by governments, national standards
Inhibit Intra-Community trade and add to costs for
manufacturers. National standards tend to shape customer
preference for products. Important customers In natlona
markets, such as government agencies, reinforce this
effect by favouring national standards In public
procurement. Pressure in favour of known national
standards Is also exercised by bodies such as Insurance
companies. More European standardization can gradually
el Imlnate these hidden technical barriers to trade, by
bul Idlng up a degree of commonality In technical
specifications where the market considers It useful.
10.
For newly-developing technologies (Information
technology, telecommunications or new Industrial
materials) standards are often a pre-conditlon for
Industrial production or marketing. It is crucial that
these sectors, where markets are becoming global,
standardization should, where possible, proceed at the
international or at least the European level from the
outset.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390398
-11 While Europe may have to come to terms with an
Inheritance of conflicting national standards In more
traditional technologies for some time, It must not
repeat history In the technologies of tomorrow.
Standards for new technologies must also be delivered
more quickly than ever before If they are to mest the
needs of the market.(1)
11.
For all the reasons alluded to above, the work which the
European standards bodies are being called upon to do is
extensive and growing quickly.For most of It (two-thirds
of CEN’s activity and one-half of CENELEC’s Is covered by
standardization mandates from the Community and EFTA) the
European standards bodies have contracted to complete the
Job within the next two-and-a-half years. This task alone
requires more than doubling the current annual output of
European standards. To this must be added the growing
demand from Industry for European standards in other
areas, which, although perhaps less urgent, is of longterm economic Importance.
European standardization Is faced with a huge challenge.
It Is unlikely to succeed without a heightened level of
commitment from those who want the standards and from the
standardization bodies themselves.
(1)
The Community’s research and development programmes
already have an Important role in pre-standardlzatlon.
One of the objectives of the Community Bureau of
Reference (8CR) Is to facilitate the Implementation of
standards, and links between research, standardization
and certification policies are currently being
reinforced.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390399
- 12 -
II.
EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION TODAY
In this Section the origin and current structure of the
three European standardization bodies (CEN, CENELEC and
ETSI) Is briefly reviewed, and the main constraints on
expansion of their activity are Identlfled~
( I) CEN and CENELEC
Establishment and early development
12.
The European standardization organizations were set up to
ensure more effective Implementation of International
standards by national standardlzat Ion bodies in Europe,
the harmonization of divergent national standards or the
preparation of standards where none existed. An
association of European national standards, bodies from
the member countries of the EEC and EFTA, the Comit6
Europ6en de Normallsatlon - CEN, was established In
1961, to be followed In 1962 by a similar organization
for the electrotechnlcal area (CENELCOM, which became
CENELEC In 1973).
13.
In the first twenty years the output of these European
organizations was low. CEN adopted 96 European standards
between 1961 and 1982; CENELEC adopted In the same period
37 European standards and 303 harmonized documents (texts
which, while containing common elements, allow for
national deviations on a permanent or temporary basis).
An important distinguishing feature of both
organizations, however, was that their decisions on
common European standards, once adopted, became binding
on those members which had voted for them. Outside the
limited area covered by common standardization work,
national standardization bodies continued to develop
their own standards Independently.
Recognition by the Community
14.
A stronger regional orientation was given to European
standardization after 1983, as a result of initiatives
taken by the Community in order to eliminate technical
barriers to In tra--Communlty trade.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390400
-1315.
The first of these was the adoption, on 28 March 1983, of
Council Directive 83/189/EEC laying down an Information
procedure for standards and technical regulations. This
Directive established the procedures for cooperation
between the members of CEN/CENELEC and the Commission
which still apply today. In particular, It provided for:
the collection by the European standardization bodies
of Information from their members concerning their
planned and current activity (Articles 2 and 4);
requests from national standards bodies to be
associated with the work of another body, or to have
work taken up at European level (Article 3);
a Standing Committee on Technical Regulations and
Standards, composed of Member State representatives
and chaired by the Commission, in whose work the
European and national standards organizations could
participate (Article 5):
requests from the Commission, after consultation of
the Standing Committee, to the European
standardization bodies to draw up standards on
specific subjects (Article 6) ;
best efforts by Member State authorities to ensure
that national standardization did not continue on
subjects for which the Commission had requested
European standards (Article 7).
Directive 83/189/EEC provided a mechanism through which
national standardization could become open to collective
scrutiny and the Community authorities could initiate
European standardization work.
16.
The Councl I of Ministers has formally recognized the role
of European standardization In Community legislation.
The Conclusions of the Council on Standardization of 1984
and the Resolution on the New Approach of May 1985 refer
to the place to be given to voluntary standardization in
future Community legislation, to the advantages of
standardization for Industrial competitiveness In the
Community and In external markets, and to the need for "a
very rapid strengthening of the capacity to standardize,
preferably at European level"
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390401
- 14 17.
In 1984 the Commission defined its relationship with
CEN/CENELEC In General Guidelines for Cooperation. The
Commission committed itself to following the New Approach
as widely as possible, and to giving financial support to
CEN/CENELEC. CEN/CENELEC agreed to coordinate their
activity, to Increase their resources, to align as far as
possible with International standards, to ensure that all
Interested parties were associated with their work, and
to maintain an effective Information service.
The financial aspects of Commlssion-CEN/CENELEC
cooperation were laid down In a Framework Contract, first
agreed In 1985 and renewed In 1989.
18.
Following ratification of the European Single Act in
1987, the Internal regulations of CEN/CENELEC were
revised at the request of the Commission to permit the
adoption and obligatory transposition of European
standards by weighted maJority vote. Under CEN/CENELEC
rules, a draft European standard which receives a
favourable vote from a qualified majority of member
bodies Is deemed to be adopted and Is Implemented by all.
In the event that a standard does not receive a
favourable vote from a majority of the entire CEN/CENELEC
membership, the votes of members from the EEC Member
States are counted separately and a qual Ifled majority In
favour requires the adoption of the standard by all EEC
Member bodies and those EFTA member bodies which had
voted In favour.(1) A similar procedure Is also
provided for In the rules of the European
Telecommunications Standardization Institute (ETSI).
Present structure
19.
The structure of CEN and CENELEC Is that of associations
of national standards bodies or electrotechnlcal
committees, which have the last word on all questions
relating to standardization activity at the European
level. The budget of each European organization is voted
by the national members, as are Its Internal rules, work
programmes, and decisions on the allocation of resources.
In contrast to the situation at national level, the
governing bodies of CEN contain no direct representation
of other Interests than of professional standardlzers
(such as public author Itles, manufacturers, or other
users of standards), although CENELEC Is closely
associated with the electrotechnlcal Industry and
appoints some of its office-holders from Industry.
(1)
It should be noted, however, that the weighted majority
voting procedure used In CEN/CENELEC Is not identical
to that of the EEC Treaty. In particular, the condition
for a proposal to be adopted that no more than 3 members
may vote negatively constitutes a more restrictive
approach than that of Article 148. The Commission has
asked, so far unsuccessfully, for this condition to be
removed from the CEN/CENELEC regulations.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390402
1520.
CEN and CENELEC have responded with energy and commitment
to the Increasing demand for common European standards.
The secretariats of both organizations have expanded
quickly ; in the period 1985 - 89, staff members have
Increased from 10 to 70 In CEN, from 13 to 32 In CENELEC.
A comparison of the annual output of the organizations in
1989 with that of, say, 1982 Is also eloquent: CEN last
year adopted almost seven times as many standards as in
1982 (130 Instead of 19) and CENELEC six times as many
standards and Harmonized Documents (126 compared to 20).
But the distance between today’s achievement and
tomorrow’s goal Is still great. There are today about
1250 adopted European standardization documents of which
about 800 In the electrotechnlcal area ; the number of
national standards In Germany, France and United Kingdom,
Is about 20,000, 13,000 and 10,000 respectively (a
significant proportion of these Is Identical to or
related to International or European standards).
21.
CEN and CENELEC have In recent years recognized the value
of using the services of other organizations, the socalled "Associated Standardization Bodies" (ASB’s), In
the preparation of technical documents destined to become
European Standards. A number of such bodies have been
given this status, such as ECISS - European Committee on
Iron and Steel Standardization, AECMA
Association
Europ6enne des Constructeurs de Mat6rlel A6rospatlal, and
EWOS - European Workshop for Open Systems, and have been
responsible for the programming and drafting of documents
which have only to be submitted to public enquiry by CEN
and voting and CENELEC before becoming European
Standards. Some of these bodies provide for direct
participation In their work of interested parties at the
European level . Approximately 100 European Standards so
far adopted by CEN and CENELEC have been provided by
ASB’s.
22.
Despite this Impressive response to the challenge, the
limits to CEN and CENELEC’s flexibility are becoming
apparent as European activity has Intensified:
In spite of the Introduction of weighted majority
voting for final decisions on standards, a concern to
achieve consensus on draft standards has led to long
delays ;
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390403
16CEN/CENELEC have not yet applied the "project team"
approach to work up Initial drafts of standards system
outside Information technology field; Instead the
organizations continue to apply a "collegiate" system,
In which every stage of the standardization process
assures parity of treatment on a national basis:
Procedures for public enquiry, examination of comments
and final voting are widely Judged to be slow and to
delay the delivery of European standards, particularly
for new technologies ;
The requirement that adopted European standards be
transposed as national standards In each member
country before they can be applied leads to delays In
their availability for use ;
Procedures for the collection and distribution of
Information on national standardization activity under
Directive 83/189/EEC have been applied loosely (In
1989 an Independent report described the Information
as not responding to the needs of the market);
Information on European standardization activity Is
not yet made available In a clear and comprehensive
way to European Industry.
These and other difficulties are the subject of further
analysis and recommendations for change In PART TWO of
this document,
(li) ETSI (European Telecom~nunlcations Standards Institute)
23.
In Its Green Paper on the development of a Community
telecommunications pol Icy (1987) the Commission proposed
that the development of harmonlsed specifications would
be accelerated by the creation of a new European
standardization body. In response, the members of the
European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications
Administrations (CEPT) decided to establish such a body,
which represented a radical change In approach to
European standardization Insofar as It provided for the
direct participation at European level of all Interested
parties In standardization work rather than for
representation through national delegations headed by the
nat Ional standards body,
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390404
1724.
The establishment of ETSI In March 1988 outside the
CEN/CENELEC framework posed a number of problems for the
coherence of European standardization. In the first
place, coordination between ETSI and CEN/CENELEC was
necessary to avoid duplication of effort In
standardization, particularly as the extension of
telecommunications technology Into other technologies
made overlapping Increasingly likely. A second problem
was the need to ensure that the basic principles of
standardization, such as transparency and Independence of
particular Interests, were respected by the new body.
Finally, there was a concern to ensure that the
standards produced by ETSI would be effectively
Integrated into the corpus of European and national
standards.
25.
During 1988 and early 1989 the Commission negotiated with
ETSI In order to resolve these Issues. This led to
amendments to the ETSI rules of procedure and to a
commitment by ETSI to cooperate with CEN and CENELEC. Two
years after the establishment of ETSI, the three European
standardization bodies have recently decided to establish
a Joint Presidents Group in which matters of common
Interest can be discussed, and have negotiated a
cooperation agreement for the handling of technical work.
Because of the pragmatic approach followed In recent
months the dangers of duplication of work appear to have
been avoided. At the time of writing, however, the
Commission is still concerned that the role of national
standards bodies In ETSI’s standardization activity
should be fully recognized.
26.
ETSI has In two years already developed Into a
substantial organization. It currently has 212 members
and 31 observers, representing PTT administrations,
public network operators, manufacturers, users and other
organizations. Its programme of work alms to deliver
nearly 300 European Telecommunications Standards, of
which 40 will be adopted this year and a further 260 are
at the stage of public enquiry. The Commission has
provisionally concluded a framework agreement with ETSI
for one year, and has Issued nine standardization
mandates to It.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390405
- 18-
PART TWO: MEETING THE CHALLENGE
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390406
19 III.
THE MAIN
lggo’s
27.
This central section of the Green Paper Is divided Into
three parts
Ao
ISSUES FOR EUROPEAN STANDARDIZATION
IN THE
The role of European Industry and other Interested
parties
The organization of European standardization
The role of public authorities.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390407
- 20 A. The role of European Industry and other Interested
parties
28.
Effective standardization depends on the motivation and
commitment of those who use standards. The Commission
believes that companies Intending to exploit the benefits
of a single European market, and other Interests, such as
users and consumers of industrial products, should ask
themselves whether they are giving European
standardization the attention It deserves and whether
that attention is exercised at a sufficiently strategic
level within the organization.
29.
In view of the Impact of European standardization on the
acceptabll Ity of products In the market (and therefore on
profitability) companies should accord standardization a
higher priority In their planning for the Internal
Market. Standards have now become too important to be
the exclusive preserve of technical experts. The European
standards developed over the next decade will have a
decisive Influence on the technological structure of the
entire European market; they will change the conditions
of trade not just in export markets but In each national
market as well. European standardization work is already
under way In a wide and growing number of sectors. The
speed and scale of this process means that companies need
to be attentive to what is going on in their sector and,
above all, must become involved In this negotiation.
Standards are not written by or for professional
standardlzers, but by and for those motivated enough to
seek a place at the negotiating table.
30.
The long-term benefits of standardization require
Investment by Individual companies, just as improvements
In productivity, marketing or distribution systems.
Standards organizations need personnel and physical
resources to provide an efficient service. But direct
financial contributions to the costs of standardization
bodies, either at European or national level, is not the
main expense. That comes from participation In the
standardization negotiations themselves, through the
release of technical experts to assist in the drafting of
European standards or In discussion of them in Technical
Committees and working groups. Although streamlining the
procedures of the European standardization bodies may
reduce the time taken to produce European standards in
future, the cost of participation In standards-making
will still appear high. Companies wishing to influence
their future technical environment, however, should ask
themselves whether they really have a choice.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390408
- 21 31.
Besides Influencing the pace of European standardization,
European Industry and other Interested parties will be
asked to play a bigger role In deciding Its future
direction. Although much current European work Is
dictated by the needs of EEC legislation, this will not
always be the case. Even now, a number of Industries are
proposing subjects for harmonization of standards to CEN,
CENELEC and ETSI. The possibilities outlined later In
this document for more sectoral autonomy within the
European standardization system should encourage
Industry to Identify where the absence of European
standardization is Inhibiting economic rationalization
and, If necessary, to set up Its own organizations to do
something about It. Nor is European standardization a
concern limited to large companies; It should also
interest small and medium companies, since It offers an
opportunity to agree on common technical specifications
openly and democratically. In the absence of
standardization, specifications will be set by the most
powerful forces In the market.
32.
European Industry Is faced with a choice. It can accept
the present structure of standardization In Europe, from
which European standards will emerge relatively slowly
over the next few years, or It can decide to commit
Itself whole-heartedly to the rapid development of common
European standards. The second choice will be more
expensive In the short term than the first, and may well
be perceived by some parts of industry as more of a
threat than a benefit. The Commission considers, however,
that companies which delay In coming to terms with what
Is an Inevitable process will find themselves at a major
disadvantage compared to their more enlightened
competitors.
33.
Other Interests, too, such as consumers, users, or
workers, will have to be prepared to organize themselves
more effectively to participate In European
standardization. The Commission has already provided
financial assistance to European Trades Union
Confederation for the establishment of a Technical Bureau
intended to monitor European standardization work which
affects the Interests of organized labour. The Commission
later In this paper recommends that the European
standardization bodies be more open to participation in
their work by non-manufacturing Interests. Any greater
access to the standardization process for such Interests
will only lead to an improved system, however, If those
concerned take up the opportunities that are offered, and
ensure that their needs are articulated.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390409
22 B. 34.
The organization of European standardization
Not all of these challenges facing European
standardization are of the same Immediacy or Importance.
A distinction Is, therefore, made between priority and
other Issues. Priorities which mainly concern Improving
the capacity of European standardization organizations to
meet their commitment to deliver harmonized standards for
the Internal Market. The other Issues, while Important,
are more relevant to the period Immediately following
1992; for some of these too, however, It would be useful
to make progress In the near future to lay the foundation
for the longer term.
Priority Issues
(I)
Efficiency
35.
Efficiency In the production of European standards Is,
from the Commission’s point-of-view, the highest
priority; the operation of Community product legislation
effectively depends upon It." In spite of the mobilization
of an army of technical experts to work on standards for
the Directives that will enter Into force In 1991 and
beyond (such as construction products, machines, electromagnetic compatibility, gas appliances or medical
devices), It Is probable that without a fairly radical
change In working methods delays will occur which will
have a tangible economic cost for Community
manufacturers.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390410
- 23 36.
There seems a real risk that the current working methods
of European standardlzers may not be capable of
delivering the large number of European standards needed
before 1993. It usually takes CEN about two to three
years to produce a draft standard from the Initiation of
work at European level, another year between the
beginning of a public enquiry on that draft and the
adoption of a standard, and at least six months between
adoption and transposition of the standard In all member
countries of CEN/CENELEC. Delays can occur at several
stages: the setting-up of a new Technical Committee, the
ratification of a work programme by executive bodies, or
the translation of working documents. Although the speed
of standardization work ultimately depends on the
difficulty in obtaining consensus on the technical
Issues, the procedural rules under which technical
discussions take place can and do affect delivery times.
37.
New working methods are indispensable and urgent for
European standardization if It Is to match the current
pace of European Integration. At a time when Important
decisions at the political level are taken on the basis
of majority vote, there needs to be a shift away from an
unqualified commitment to consensus In European
standardization, although the Commission accepts that the
use of standards Is related to the degree of consensus
reached In their elaboration.
38.
The Commission recommends for urgent consideration by the
European standardization bodies:
New methods for establishing common workln~
documents
The traditional Committee-based procedure bringing
together 18 national delegations (12 from the EEC,
6 from EFTA) to discuss confl luting solutions to a
technical problem Is costly, laborious and at times
Inefficient. Technical Committees, although an
Indispensable part of the standards-making process,
need to be assisted In their deliberations by
working documents which already put forward common
solutions. One way of doing this would be to use
"drafting secretariats", "project teams", or even
outside consultants to bring together a summary of
the technical Issues In a single document which did
not give a particular advantage to a given national
solution.
The viability of this approach, however, is
directly related to the availability of technical
experts from Industry. Without greater commitment
from European Industry, there can be no significant
Improvement In the present situation.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390411
24 (il)
Greater use of Associated Standards Bodies
CEN and CENELEC could actlvely encourage more
Industry-based associations to offer their services
as Associated Standards Bodies to develop technical
documents as the basis for future European
standards. Such an Initiative would not only
reduce the administrative and financial burden on
European standardization bodies themselves, but
also provide the advantages of a more decentralized
approach, such as direct Industry Involvement In
priority-setting and the execution of work. (CEN
and CENELEC have recently Indicated that they are
prepared to reexamine their rules on Associated
Standards Bodies In order to ensure that sufflclent
flexibility Is given to potential candidate
organizations).
(ill)
Use of new technology to accelerate discussion on
working documents
The distribution by conventional means of working
documents to a membership spread across Europe
takes time. Some of this time could be gained by
more systematic use of modern communications
technology, such as electronic mall. It would be
possible to circulate both working documents and
final drafts by this means, and to encourage the
development of discussion outside formal meetings
by exploiting this channel of communications.
(iv)
Majority vot Ing on proposed draft standards
Much time Is spent n Technical Committees trying
to arrive at a consensus(1) before a draft
European standard Is put out to public enquiry.
This may be appropriate where a standard Is not
particularly urgent; In the case of most of the
European standards now under discussion, however,
decisions are Indeed urgent If the single European
market Is to become a real Ity.
Majority voting on PrOpOSed draft standards should
therefore be used as a matter of course if
consensus (which remains the Ideal objective) is
difficult to achieve within the time avallable ;
this would be particularly important In the case of
mandated standardization work.
(1) Consensus Is defined by the ISO as the absence of
sustained opposition to a particular proposal.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390412
25 The executive bodies of the European
standardization bodies (Technical Boards In the
case of CEN/CENELEC, the Technical Assembly In the
case of ETSI) could, for example, regularly review
progress In Technical Committees and require a vote
to be taken where appropriate. Voting might also
take place at the request of a quorum of members,
to be fixed by each standardization body.
(The Commission assumes that weighted national
voting rules would be aligned with those of the EEC
Treaty).
(v)
Shorter and more flexible public enquiries
If all Interested parties have an opportunity to be
represented In European standardization work and
the quality of Information about that work Is
Improved, there Is scope for the publ Ic enquiry for
a draft European standard to be reduced from the
present six months. Such enquiries could also take
more account of the degree of consensus which has
already been reached on the draft. Where consensus
has been reached without voting, then a two months
public enquiry might be sufficient ; where a draft
standard has been agreed on the basis of a majority
vote, a longer enquiry (but no more than four
months) might be necessary.
(vl)
More rapid handlln~ of comments
At present, the speed with which comments received
In an enquiry are processed depends on the
Technical Committee concerned. Some acceleration of
the examination of comments (which can now take up
to slx months) would result by establishing a
general rule that comments must be examined and
responded to within two months of the conclusion of
a public enquiry. Exceptions would have to be
decided case-by-case by the executive of the
standardization body concerned.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390413
26 -
(vii) Immediate application of adopted standards
Standards agreed at European level currently have
to be "transposed" as national standards before
they become official. A period of six months Is
usually allowed for this, although longer periods
may be granted and national bodies often do not
respect the agreed timetable. National
transposition should no longer be a pre-conditlon
for the use of a European standard (See "Status of
the European standard"). This would eliminate the
time-lag between adoption of a European standard
and its availability to users.
39 °
The adoption of some, or all, of these procedural
recommendations In the short term would speed up the
delivery of European Standards. But care must also be
taken to avoid overburdening the European standardlzatlon
system. It Is Indispensable to set priority objectives
for the first generation of harmonized European
standards, and to discard objectives which are not
strictly related to priorities.
In respect of standardization mandates related to EEC
legislation, for Instance, the technical expression of
essential requirements of a given Directive has to be
Incorporated Into European standards within the tlmescale
agreed. Other aspects of standardization related to, for
example, the efficiency or fitness for use of products,
can be dealt with only If the delivery of mandated work
on time is not compromised. Responslbl Ilty for sticking
to prlorlt [es lies mainly with the European standards
bodies themselves, but the Commission, with the advice of
the Standing Committee on Technical Regulations and
Standards, may give further guidance on priorities to
the standards bodies through supplementary mandates. The
Commission wll I also I Imlt the Issuing of new
standardization mandates In the next two years as far as
possible to items that are essential to achievement of
the Interna Market.
40.
Those concerned with keeping to priorities may have to
discourage attempts to Include every feature of existing
national standards In early European standards. Even If a
full convergence of technical standards In Europe Is
desirable In the long-term, to try to proceed quickly on
all fronts will Jeopardize agreement on the essential
minimum for the functioning of the Internal Market.
Concentrating on performance rather than design
parameters in European standards-making would also assist
the process of reaching agreement.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390414
- 27 (il) Coordination and structure
41.
Improvement In the coordination of European
standardization and organizational stability are a high
priority for the Commission. Efficiency and structural
Issues are to some extent linked. The Commission
recognizes, however, that more time may be needed before
the recommendations In this section can be Implemented.
Nevertheless, Ideas on this mather need to be developed
and discussed as soon as possible.
42.
Of the three European standardization organizations, CEN
and CENELEC have a common set of rules for their
activity, while ETSI has a separate set of rules
reflecting a different structure. Although some
adjustment of the ETSI rules has already taken place to
bring that organization Into I Ins with commonly-accepted
principles of standardization, and further changes are
being considered, the approach to European
standardization Is fundamentally different between ETSI
and CEN/CENELEC. In future other branches of the economy
than telecommunications (such as Information technology,
or the food Industry) may propose that they, too, need to
organize their own standardization activity at European
level. The Commission, while wishing In the splr It of
the New Approach to encourage voluntary standardization
as a preferred alternative to regulation In bringing
order to markets, Is also concerned that new
standardization activities should be properly Integrated
Into the rest of the standardization system.
43.
Standardization activity can only gain public recognition
and legitimacy if it Is governed by a clear set of rules,
known and approved by all Interested parties. Standards
that are establ shed In an open way, providing all
parties with an opportunity to Influence the final
outcome, have a far better chance of being appl led In the
market than those which are not ; standard zatlon Is a
process by which technical documents acquire legitimacy
through adequate consultation. A variety of
organizations, such as Individual companies, trade or
professional associations, may develop technical
specifications for their own purposes, but If these are
to become standards they must be subject to review
through a formal process open to all interested parties.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390415
28 44.
The absence, In 1990, of a fixed and generally-agreed
framework for European standardization results In a loss
of efficiency In the service offered by standardization
to Industry, governments, and other Interested parties.
The organization of more standardization work on a
sectoral basis could be a positive development, allowing
for more direct participation by Industry and perhaps
more commitment to the work. Because of growing pressure
for common European standards In the coming years, there
may be more demand for such sectorally-based
standardization. Unless such standardization Is
coordinated, however, and made subject to certain groundrules, the risk of duplication or contradiction between
different European standardization activities will
Increase. The United States of America, with nearly 400
active standardization bodies, shows the risks of
fragmentation In standards-making ; Europe, which Is now
trying to move beyond Its heritage of nationally-based
technologies, needs to ensure that scarce human and
capital resources are not wasted In duplication of work.
45 .
For this reason the Commission considers that the
CUStomers for European standards, as well as the
Institutions which currently supply them, should now
consider whether the time has not come to establish a
European Standardization sTstem, in which the role of all
participants at national and European level would be
clearly defined In terms of agreed objectives, the most
Important of which would be the accelerated Integration
of European technology through agreement on common
standards.
Such a system could
allow for diversity of organization and autonomy of
management within sectoral ly-based standardization
bodies at the European level, and
assure the coordination, transparency and the
legitimacy of European standardization by applying
common rules to all standardization bodies within the
System, these rules to be developed and maintained by
a new central body, the European Standardization
Council.
The clearer the common rules governing the European
standardization, the more freedom can be g ven to sectors
to organize themselves In the most appropr ate way.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390416
- 29 =
46.
The concept of a "European Standardization System"
implies a coherent whole made uP of a number of component
parts. The system could consist of several European
standardization bodies, provided that they were subject
to common rules as far as the formal process of turning
documents Into European standards Is concerned. The
decision to establish new European-level bodies would
depend on the quality of the service obtained from the
existing organizations. If CEN, for example, as a multlsectoral European standardization organization, can
respond promptly and efficiently to the demands of
European Industry, It Is unlikely that many, If any,
sectors will wish to take the trouble to establish a new
standardization body. Where a sector can demonstrate,
however, that Its needs can only be met through a
separate European standardization body, It should be free
to set one up, subject to compliance with the rules of
the European Standardization System.
47.
The Commission has recently discussed these Ideas with
the European standardization organizations, and a degree
of consensus appears to be emerging on the need for a new
structure for European standardization which can respond
to the concerns already expressed. The Commission
therefore puts forward the fol lowing outline of a new
structure for the future coordination of European
standardization (a fuller descrlptlon of which Is given
in Annex 2):
the European Standardlzatlon Council would be a new
body responsible for the overall policy of European
standardization ; It would comprise persons reflecting
the views of European Industry and social partners,
representatives of the EEC Commission and EFTA
Secretariat and the European standardization bodies;
a European Standardization Board would act as the
executive body of the Counci I , responsible for the
management and coordlnat Ion of European
standardization; Its membership would comprise of the
officers of the European standardization bodies (for
the time being, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI) and the
Secretary of the Standardization Council ;
the European standardization bodies wou d be those
bodies organized at European level and recognized by
the Council as responsible for standardization In
their particular field ; they would enjoy full
autonomy in the programming, financing, preparation
and adoption of European standards, subject to
compl lance with the rules of the European
Standardization System and to formal agreements with
the national standardization bodies;
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390417
- 3,0 the national standardization bodies would carry out
particular tasks on behalf of the European
standardization bodies at national level (public
enquiry, expression of national vote), provide regular
information concerning their national activity and
comply with "standstill" rules during the development
of European standards.
48.
The main benefits of this approach, In the Commission’s
view, would be that:
strategic direction of European standardization would
be assured by representatives of the main economic and
pol Itlcal Interests It Is Intended to serve;
existing sectoral standardization bodies (CENELEC,
ETSI) could maintain their autonomy and dynamism, and
the possibility of admitting further sectoral
organizations Into the system would not be excluded;
a set of common rules for the creation of European
standards would apply to existing and future European
standardization bodies (acceptance of the rules would
be a condition for recognition under the system);
the day-to-day operation of CEN, CENELEC and ETSI
would remain essentially unchanged;
the European Standardization Council would require
limited resources, thereby avoiding unnecessary
bureaucracy and expense;
the role of national standardization bodies In
European standardization would be recognized In every
sector.
49.
Further detailed discussion will be necessary to
elaborate on these Ideas, In particular to define more
exactly the role and organizational shape of the European
Standardization Council. With the cooperation of all
concerned, the Commission believes it Is now possible to
foresee the establishment of this new framework during
the course of 1991.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390418
- 31 -
(I II)Membershlp and International cooperation
50.
The development of European standardization must take
account of the external as well as Internal environment.
The rapid political changes taking place In Central and
Eastern Europe will, over time, lead to a larger, more
closely-Integrated European market economy than exists
today, and common technical standards are one of the
means of assuring an orderly transition to that state-ofaffairs. This raises Important and pressing questions
concerning the relationship between the present members
of the European Standardization System and other European
countries. Closer cooperation with these countries is
desirable, and their Inclusion within the System has to
be considered.
Technical assistance to Central and Eastern Europe In the
standardization field will also be a high priority In the
years ahead: Community financial and technical assistance
under the PHARE operation has already been requested by
both the Polish and Hungarian governments for the
Improvement of standards and measures, particularly with
a view to satisfying Community product requirements.
There Is growing Interest In technical assistance from
non-European countries, too.
Finally, the cooperative relationship between European
and International standardization bodies wll I have to be
further developed to ensure an effective two-way flow of
Information and, where possible, agreement on the best
allocation of standardization work In order to avoid
duplication of effort.
Membership of European standardization bodies
51.
Membership of the three European standardization bodies
Is mainly confined to the member countries of the EEC and
EFTA; CEN and CENELEC membership Is limited to these
countries, while ETSI also has Cyprus, Malta and Turkey
as members. A number of Central and Eastern European
countries have, however, recently expressed an Interest
In becoming members of all three European standardization
organizations, and Turkey has been a candidate for
CEN/CENELEC membership for some time. CEN and CENELEC
have repeatedly stated that membership of their
organizations Is related to that of membership of the EEC
and EFTA.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390419
32 -
52.
It is In the Interests of all countries, European or nonEuropean, that the present pace of development of
European standards is sustained and, If possible,
Increased. The harmonization of conflicting national
standards within Europe, based upon International
standards as far as possible, Is a formidable
contribution to promoting International trade and global
economic growth. The Commission considers that extension
of the full membership of the European standardization
bodies In the short term would compromise that objective,
insofar as It would increase the difficulties facing the
present membership of coming to agreement on complex
technical Issues. Although desirable In the longer term,
wider membership should not be a Immediate priority.
53.
Nevertheless, those European countries which are not
members of the European standardization system but wish
to take over EuroPean standards should be closely
associated with the work of European standardization
bodies, In order to allow them to adapt to new European
Standards quickly and to obtain the economic benefits of
using them. The widespread adoption and use of European
Standards outside the member countries of the EEC and
EFTA Is In Western Europe’s economic Interest. It should
also be recalled that the Community has concluded
Association Agreements with some European countries, and
may conclude similar Agreements with others. For these
reasons, It would be desirable for the European
standardization bodies to offer European countries the
possibility of participation in their work with a status
that would be less than full membership.
The Commission believes that "associate member" status,
which would Imply a right to participate In the work of
European standardization without the right to vote, would
reflect the Interest of the Community and the countries
In question in moving towards a closer economic
relationship, while making allowances for the
uncertainties surrounding those countries’ structural and
economic development. Depending on general economic and
political developments, a transition to full membership
could take place after some years, when the countries
concerned wl II have demonstrated their wl II Ingness and
abi Ilty to apply European standards.
54.
As far as non-European countries are concerned, the
Commission believes that It Is primarily uP to the
European standardization bodies to declde whether t is
In their Interest to offer a I imlted degree of Input Into
their work to the standardization bodies of these
countries. One European body, ETSI, already admits
observer representatives from non-European countries to
some of Its meetings, on the basis of reciprocity. Such
an approach has potentla costs as we I as benefits.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390420
- 33 -
Against the undoubted advantages of Improved transparency
and the opportunity for state-of-the-art Input from nonEuropean sources must be weighed the possible risk of
delay in arriving at consensus and concern that
discussions proper to the International standardization
bodies might take place Instead at the European level.
In a more decentralized, sectorally-based standardization
structure within Europe, however, It seems appropriate
for each European standardization body to take Its own
decision on this matter, provided that reciprocity Is
assured. Meanwhile the admission of observers from the
International standardization bodies to the technical
work of CEN and CENELEC, as proposed below, would in
itself allow other countries to be kept Informed of the
progress of European work.
Technical Cooperation
55.
The standardization organizations of Western Europe are
being called upon to offer technical assistance to other
countries on an Increasing scale as the positive
Implications for International trade of the Community’s
1992 programme becomes better understood. The demand from
Central and East European Countries Is already greatp
but similar Interest has been expressed In other regions
(In the Mediterranean, and South America) and the
Commission already manages cooperation programmes In the
standardization field with India, the ASEAN countries and
the Andean Pact. The main focus of this Interest Is on
Information on current and planned European standards and
the training of Industry and standardization experts in
their application..
56.
The Community Is, In principle, prepared to Include
technical assistance In this field within its cooperation
programmes with third countries, although It must be
remembered that the technical resources for this task are
limited. The Commission has to rely upon the expertise
available In the private sector (and In st, andardlzatlon
bodies in particular) for the execution of such
cooperation ; CEN and CENELEC and their members have
already assisted the Commission In the past.
57.
In view of the European dimension to this activity the
Commission believes that the European standardization
bodies should assume responsibility for the coordination
and management of such technical assistance, even if the
experts concerned are largely supplied by national
standardization bodies. The Commission intends to support
financial ly the development of an appropriate
Infrastructure within the European bodies to service
requests for Information and assistance, which although
an additional burden for the bodies concerned constitutes
an important instrument of the Community’s external
economic relations. It hopes that national
standardization bodies and the Member States will
cooperate by contributing to collective action and
avoiding uncoordinated national Initiatives.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390421
- 34 -
Relations with International standardization bodies
58.
The links between the European standardization bodies and
their International counterparts are Indirect, since only
national standardization bodies participate In the
International Standards Organization (ISO) and the
International Electrotechnlcal Commission (IEC) and
national authorities In the International Telegraph and
Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT). Nevertheless,
cooperation between the International and European bodies
has Increased as the volume and scope of European
standardization have expanded. In the last two years, in
particular, arrangements have been concluded between ISO
and CEN and IEC and CENELEC which provide for regular
discussions In order to compare work p.rogrammes and to
coordinate them where possible. This Indicates the
willingness of both sides to establish a cooperative
dialogue with a view to avoiding duplication and the
waste of scarce expertise.
59.
Other steps may need to be taken by the European
Standardization System, however, to reassure the
international standardization community that Europeanlevel work Is a substitute for national, not global,
standardization.
A first step would be keep the International standards
organizations fully Informed of the progress of European
work, by Inviting observers from the relevant ISO or IEC
Technical Committees to European working groups or
Technical Committees whenever there is a common Interest.
Another positive step would be to continue to ask the
International standards bodies to take on some of the
work which ts now being proposed at European level,
particularly In standardization activity that is not
related to EEC ~roduct legislation. If the International
standardlzatlon~odles can respond by accelerating work
on projects which are of high priority for Europe, with a
view to delivering results within the timetable set by
European requirements, European-level standardization can
be avoided.
60.
If Europe Is to promote further International
standardization, however, others must do the same. The
Community expects that Its leading economic partners, and
particularly the United States and Japan, will be
prepared to commit more resources to International
standardization In the coming years, and, equally
Important, to Implement International standards at the
national level. Unless all the parties concerned act
with the same commitment to International standardlzat on
as Europe has done In the past, this important mechanism
cannot be properly exploited as a means of promoting
International trade and economic growth.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390422
35 -
Other Important Issues
The fol lowing Issues, while Important for the future
development of European standardization, are perhaps less
urgent than those presented in the previous section. It
may be possible to adopt a less pressing timetable for
their resolution, although lack of progress on any of
them would seriously inhibit the growth of
standardization as a force In the European economy.
(iv): Accountability
61.
Standardization Is a service to Industry, and, more
widely, to society. The demand for standards may have
traditionally arisen from manufacturing Interests, but
now Includes a much wider range of "customers", such as
public authorities, workers, users of equipment, private
consumers, or researchers. All of these customers for
standards want this service to reflect their needs and to
be delivered efficiently.
62.
These various Interests are usually represented In the
governing bodies of the national standards bodies, either
directly or through a representative of government. At
the technical level, too, participation In national
standardization work Is generally open to all Interested
parties. At the European level, however, direct
representation of different Interests In standardization
Is much weaker. The situation In the three European
standardization bodies can be summarized as follows:
Participation In
Technical Committees/
Working groups
CEN
- Delegations from
national standards
bodies
-
Representation
In
Governing body
Representatives
of national
standards bodies
Observers from
recognlsed European
manufacturers or
users
associations
CENELEC
- Delegations from
national electrotechnical committees
Representatives
of national
electrotechnlcal
committees
ETSI
- Members
Members
- Observers from
recognized Interested
parties within and
outside Europe
(EEC Commission
and EFTA as
Counsellors)
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390423
- 36 -
63.
The proposals already made for representatlon on the
European Standardlzatlon Council represent a first step
towards greater accountablllty of European
Standardization, but there Is a need for European
standardization to be opened up to Its "customer base" at
all levels. In view of the Importance of European
standardization for Community product safety legislation,
for Instance, all parties concerned with safety Issues,
Including worker or consumer representatives, for
Instance, should be given the Opportunity to participate
In the technical work going on at European level through
their European-level organizations. Its does not seem
appropriate that some Interests (manufacturers,
Industrial users) should be permitted to observe this
work through their European organizations while others
(trades unions, consumer organizations) are not. Greater
openness In the process of European standardization Is
necessary In order to enhance wider public Interest and
confidence In European Standards.
64.
The same point can be made with respect to governing
bodies. If standardization Is a service, then the
customers for European standards should have a voice In
the setting of priorities and the allocation of resources
for standardization work. With the exception of ETSI, the
European standardization bodies are managed exclusively
by representatives of the national standardization bodies
(CEN) or of the Industrial sector concerned (CENELEC). In
order better to reflect the growing public Importance of
European standardization, provision should also be made
for the direct representation within European
standardization bodies of major Interest groups and
public authorities (which are, after all, Important
financial contributors to the work). The method of such
representation can be negotiated later; the principle,
however, must be firmly established now.
65.
It Is Important that national standardization bodies,
too, which form an Integral part of the European
Standardization.System, should maintain the principle of
openness towards other parts of the system. Participation
In national standardization work going on within an
Integrated Community market should not be restricted on
the basis of the nationality or the place of
establishment of the Interested party. Any party from
within the Community wishing to participate in natlonal
standardization which can demonstrate an Interest In the
work and Is wll ling to comply with the norma rules for
participation should be a] lowed to do so. Th s principle
was already provided for under Directive 83/189/EEC; it
Is now time to apply it.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390424
- 37 -
(v):
66.
Financing
Standardization Is not cheap. The expansion of European
Standardization must be based on a clear commitment from
all concerned to support It financially. Considering the
present scale of European standardization and its
foreseeable growth, the current method of funding It
appears relatively unstable, particularly In the case of
CEN and CENELEC activities.
At present, only the national member bodies of
CEN/CENELEC receive revenue directly from the private
sector (from membership fees and sales of standards) and
they fund CEN and CENELEC through annual membership
contributions. Such Indirect and short-term funding may
no longer be appropriate for the scale of European
standardization work that Is foreseeable In the 1990’s.
On the other hand, the volume of standardization work
mandated by the EEC and EFTA means that a large part of
the expenses of CEN and CENELEC (70 per cent of CEN’s
annual budget and 55 per cent of CENELEC’s), as well as
some costs for national members taking on technical
secretariats, are met by revenue from the Commission and
the EFTA countries
Although the budget of the European
standardization bodies Is only a small part of the total
cost of European standardization (much heavier costs are
Incurred at national level In the coordination of
national positions and in partlclpat Ion In European
discussions), the dependence of these bodies on public
money Is a matter of growing concern to the
Commission(I).
67.
This last tendency Is particularly disturbing as It Is
becoming clear that the scale of financing required for
European standardization may soon exceed available
resources within the EEC budget. (The Community Is
expected to commit at least 20 mill ion ECU to European
standardization work in 1990, and significantly more In
1991). A more effective channelling of private money
Into European Standardization has to be found. The
Commission considers that this objective must be
promoted by:
a commitment to long-term financial planning by
members of the European standardization bodies;
changing the present attribution of revenue from the
sales of European standards, to allow a part of this
revenue to be channelled directly to European
standardization bodies;
Instituting membershlp fees for industry participants
In European standardization (as Is already the case
for ETSI).
(1)
ETSI, although directly financed in part by Its
membership, Is also heavily dependent upon extraordinary
contributions from national administrations.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390425
- 38 -
In parallel with such developments, the Council of
Ministers should be prepared to offer a clear (but
limited) commitment of public financial support over
several years (see Section C, "The role of public
authorities", below).
68 ¯
The members of CEN and CENELEC, whose activity and
development Is Increasingly linked to that of the
European standardization bodies to which they belong,
will undoubtedly have to commit more resources to
European work In the coming years. Rather than taking
budgetary declsslons on an ad hoc annual basis as they do
now , It might be more appropriate to develop a long-term
financial plan based on existing and anticipated work
programmes, on the basis of which the IIkely contribution
of each national member over a number of years could be
estimated. This would assist financial planning at the
national level, and would also provide a tangible target
for campaigns to obtain funds from Industry at the
national level. (The Commission understands that longerterm financial planning Is now under study within CEN).
69.
Funding by annual membership contributions Is not,
however, the only way to provide money for European
standardization. National standardization bodies obtain
most of their revenue from the sale of their products,
that Is, standards and information about standards.
Direct funding of the European standardization bodies by
annual member contributions could be to some extent
offset by providing for some of the revenue from sales of
European standards to accrue directly (at least In part)
to the European bodies that are responsible for their
production
This would not, of course, affect the amount
transferred from national to European bodies, but it
could facilitate the transfer , by making It automatic
with every sale of a European standard.
70 °
This would not mean that national standards bodies would
no longer receive Income from sales of European
standards. National bodies play an Indispensable role in
the preparation of such standards, acting as a bridge
between national Interests and the negotiating process at
European level. They are also Indispensable for the
marketing of standards, whether national, European or
International. It would be appropriate to allocate sales
revenue between the European-level bodies and the
national bodies In a way which recognized the essential
contribution of the latter, for Instance by sharing
revenue between the European standardization body
responsible for the standard, the organization (European
or national) that makes the sale and all national
standardization bodies.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390426
- 39 -
71.
Such a system would have several advantages:
It would to a limited (but growing) extent
provide the European standardization bodies with
regular Independent Income;
It would maintain a financial Incentive for
standards bodies to pursue a dynamic sales
policy for European Standards;
it would give all national standards bodies a
share In the Income deriving from sale of a
European standard, whatever the point-of-sale ;
It would remove the current anomaly whereby
public funds for European standardization
generate Income for national standards bodies,
particularly those which publish their standards
In the working languages of CEN.
It would, In other words, reflect the Interdependence of
the European Standardization System In financial terms.
72.
A condition for success In following this approach would
be the introduction of more competition between sellers
of European standards, which would reduce the cost to
European Industry of purchasing standards and probably
Increase the total market. Further market growth would be
stimulated by direct sales by European standards bodies
of their own standards, where this was Judged by their
membership to be appropriate, which Is not permitted
under the present rules of CEN and CENELEC (although the
Commission understands that this policy Is under review).
73.
Additional financing from Industrial membership fees
would be a natural consequence of greater use of
Associated Standards Bodies, which provide for direct
participation of Individual members other than through
national delegations. This already happens, for example,
In the case of the European Telecommunications Standards
Institute (ETSI) and the European Workshop for OPen
Systems (EWOS). The right to participate directly In
standardization work should bring with It Increased
financial responsibility for standardization. If Industry
and other Interested parties believe that their economic
Interests are served by European standardization, they
will be prepared to contribute directly to the costs of
the European standardization organizations.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390427
- 40 -
(vl): Information
74.
Standardization, by defining state-of-the-art technology,
serves to make the economy more transparent. But
standards can only fulfil this function If Information
about them Is accessible, clear, and complete. The
present structure of standardization In Europe, based on
national standardization bodies, has led to Information
being focussed upon each country’s national activity, and
clear and complete Information concerning common European
standards or the national standards of other European
countries Is not easy to obtain. If the Community Is
committed to the creation of a single European market,
and, In the longer term, of an Integrated European
economy, It Is essential that the technological
Information contained In standards be managed from the
European perspective and provide a complete picture of
activity at all levels, national or European.
75.
As far as information about national standardization
activity Is concerned, Council Directive 83/189/EEC
required national standard bodies to supply the European
standardization bodies with Information about their
activity, with a view to promoting closer cooperation
between them and the transfer of activity of common
Interest from national to European level. This procedure
has not, however, fulfilled expectations. Input Into the
CEN/CENELEC database from the national standards bodies
has often been Incomplete, tardy and unclear. A report
made In January 1990 by the CEN/CENELEC secretariat (five
years after the procedure began) pointed out widespread
cases of non-notification, late notification, and
erroneous classification
Poor Input Into the system
has led to poor output; far from being a "map" of current
European activity, the bulky registers compl led from the
Information procedure contain Information which Is
unlntel Ilglble to a non-special Ist and often out-of-date.
Recommendations have been made recently within CEN and
CENELEC decided to Improve the database, but it remains
to be seen how soon decisions will be taken and
Implemented.
76.
It should be noted, however, that CENELEC has since 1988
adopted a parallel Information procedure for the
electrotechnlcal field which Imposes more constraints
than the 83/189 Information procedure, such as a threemonth "standstill" on national work once another member
has expressed Interest and the automatic conversion into
European projects of work involving more than one member
country. The Commission would welcome the extension of
the same disciplines to other sectors where national
standardization activity Is stl II significant.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390428
- 41 -
77.
The distribution of Information about European
standardization has been regarded by the members of
CEN/CENELEC as a national rather than a collective
responsibility. For Instance:
the European standardardlzatlon bodies may not sell
copies of European standards, but must refer those
seeking them to the national member bodies ;
European Standards are not always clearly Identified
In national catalogues, In spite of a CEN/CENELEC
decision of 1987 that they should be ;
Information obtained under the "Information procedure"
Directive Is distributed to the public by the national
members, not by the CEN/CENELEC secretariat.
In the past year some Initial steps have been taken by
CEN/CENELEC to improve the vlslbll Ity of their activity,
such as the Issuing of a monthly newsletter ("Review of
Current Activities") which lists new work Items, new
draft European Standards In public enquiry and newlyadopted European Standards. It Is still, however,
difficult to obtain from the European standardization
bodies a regular and complete overview of their activity.
78. The Commission considers that in information policy, as
In other aspects of European standardization,
responsibility should be shared more evenly between.
European and national bodies. Better-quality Information
about standardization In Europe, which Includes not only
Information about European-level activity but also about
the disparity between national standards, will Increase
the demand for E{lropean standardization. Such Information
should be collected and made avallable at both the
European and national level.
79.
The Commission therefore suggests that Information on
standardization activity be
gathered and distributed
along the following lines:
The Information procedure Initiated under Directive
83/189/EEC should be properly Implemented and
reinforced, to provide for a minimum 3-month "standstill" period during which other national standards
bodies could comment on proposed new nat Ional
standardization activity. The Commission would welcome
any Initiatives taken by the standardization bodies in
this direction; in their absence, It may decide to
propose amendments to Directive 83/189/EEC.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390429
- 42 -
A single European Standardization Database (ESD),
containing bibliographic data on national and European
standards and summaries of current standardization
activity, should be complied under supervision of the
European Standardization Council. This Information
would be available to all Interested parties In a form
and on terms to be decided Jointly by the standards
bodies.
Arrangements for the marketing of ESD Information
would depend on whether the standard or activity
concerned were European or national. In both cases,
however, responsibility for the supply of Information
to the market about standards and standardization
should be shared between the European and national
bodies
Such an approach would not stand In the way of European
or national standardization bodies pursuing their own
Information policies.
(vl I) : Status of the European Standard
80.
Most people are surprised to learn that, In 1990, the
European Standard does not yet exist In Its own right.
European-level standardization work aims at the
harmonization of separate national standards. The
standards agreed within CEN, CENELEC and ETSI have no
formal status untl I the national standardization bodies
transpose their content as one or more national standards
and withdraw any confl Ictlng provisions.
81.
This "two-stage" standardization In Europe has
disadvantages. The first Is delay; at least six months,
and sometimes longer, Is allowed under CEN/CENELEC rules
for national transposition, and the rules are not always
observed. Transposition can also lead to lack of clarity
about which standards are harmonized at the European
level and which are not, although CEN and CENELEC have
laid down rules on the matter. Some national standards
bodies do not fully apply the rules for identification of
harmonized European Standards. If European Industry
cannot know at the end of the European standardization
process which standards are Identical across Europe, then
an essential point has been lost.
82.
More fundamentally, one may question whether national
transposition s In the Interests of the customers for
European standards in every respect. By pursuing
harmonization through the alignment of national standards
national standardization bodles maintain copyright of the
harmonized standards (and thereby exclusive rights to
sales revenue) and reinforce the Image of the national
mark of conformity In the market place. The situation can
therefore arise that the manufacturer of a product
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390430
43 -
conforming to a European standard sold In all parts of
the Community may have to obtain several different
national marks of conformity In order to show the
customer what he Is buying; this Is not what the 1992
programme Is about.
83.
The Commission considers that all future European
standards should exist In their own right and should not
have to be transposed at national level before they can
be used. Copyright of European standards should be vested
In the European standardization body responsible for them
(as Is the case for ETSI) rather than In each of Its
national members (as is the case with CEN/CENELEC). Such
standards could be published at the European level
Immediately after their adoption In the working
language(s) of the European standardization body
concerned. Although national transposition may still be
necessary In order, for example, to make the European
Standard available In the national language and to ensure
that the national standards body withdraws national
standards which conflict with the European Standard, the
European standard should be transposed as such with Its
European-level Identifying reference unaccompanied by any
national reference. European Standards would then stand
out as separate entitles In national standards
catalogues, quite distinct from national standards.
84.
This approach would lead to the development of a stock of
truly European standards universally recognlzeable as a
measure of European technological Integration. Purely
national standards would remain equally visible as
Indicators that such Integration had not yet been
achieved or was not necessary. By following such a
course the Community, and Europe as a whole, would be
able to assess both Its achievements and Its remaining
objectives in the field of standardization.
85.
A logical consequence of self-standing European standards
should be the development of a common mark of conformity
to such standards. The Commission has already urged CEN
and CENELEC to follow this path, as part of the
Community’s global approach to conformity assessment
which was approved by the Council In December 1989. A
single conformity mark to a European standard would
contribute to a clearer public perception of European
standardization, Just as national marks have done for
national standardization. It would save manufacturers the
time and money spent In obtaining several national marks
of conformity to the same standard. And it would probably
Increase demand for third-party certification of
conformity to standards, as the common mark of conformity
to a European standard became recognized as a symbol of
customer acceptability for the entire European market.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390431
- 44 -
86.
A final comment under this heading concerns the
Importance of having a single set of European standards.
The European Standardization System Is intended to be a
homogeneous, all-embracing one. It should provide the
market with a single product - the European standard which is universally recognlzeable, whatever the subject.
It follows that there should be a single designation of
that standard, without variation. This would mean that
the recent distinction between European Standards
("EN’s") produced by CEN/CENELEC and European
Telecommunications Standards ("ETS’s") produced by ETSI
should disappear, both being subsumed Into a new single
designation, the "European Standard" ("ES"?).
(viii) Testing and certification
87.
The statutes of CEN and CENELEC provide for those
organizations to cover activities In all fields relating
to the Implementation of European standards, Including
testing and certification Issues. This Is not the case
for ETSI, as the CEPT has kept these questions within its
area of direct responsibility. CEN and CENELEC have set
up a number of mutual recognition arrangements and
certification systems; the CENELEC Certification
Agreement (CCA), the CENELEC HAR agreement for electrical
cords and cables, the Cenelec Electronics Components
Certification agreement and the CEN CCC agreements. Other
agreements are In preparation. All these agreements
Include provisions on marks of conformity. Thus, for
example, the HAR agreement Is based on a common mark
(HAR) accompanied by national marking, the CCA Is based
on the mutual recognition of test reports which leads to
products carrying a series of national marks and the CEN
CCC agreements are based on a single CEN mark denoting
conformity to the appropriate CEN standards. Both
organizations have also set up structures to cater for
more general questions such as the Marks Committee
(CENELEC) and the CENCER Committee (CEN).
88.
These agreements and structures have proved their
usefulness within their limited amblt, but have not led
to the development of a really European culture In
matters relating to testing and cert Iflcatlon. This Is
hardly surprising as CEN and CENELEC are made up of the
national standardization bodies which represent the
interests of manufacturers more than testing
laboratories and certification bodies. It would be
difficult for the standardization bodies to represent the
latter, as some of their members are major testers and
certifiers in their own right. CEN and CENELEC
certification agreements have therefore tended to be
restricted In practice, closer to the needs of selfelected clubs than to those of a free European market.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390432
- 45 -
89.
In December 1986 the Commission drew attention to this
situation and suggested that a new European organization
should be created In order to complement the European
Standards Bodies by constituting a focal point for all
those active In testing and certification. This led to
the Commission Inviting CEN and CENELEC to draw up
proposals for such an organization which they presented
In outline to the Symposium on Testing and Certification
organized In Brussels In June 1988. The conclusions of
the Symposium were that one of the main conditions for
credibility of this organization was that It be
autonomous, although maintaining close links to
standardization activities. On 24 July 1989, the
Commission sent to the Council Its Communication (COM
(89) 209) on the Global Approach to testing and
certification In which It confirmed the need for the
creation of an autonomous body. The Council agreed on 21
December 1989 to the setting up of the European
Organization for Testing and Certification (EOTC), which
led to the formal signature of the Memorandum of
Understanding between CEN, CENELEC, EFTA and the
Commission on 25 April 1990.
This new organization, which will operate alongside CEN
and CENELEC, has now been set up by the four signatories
for an experimental period which should end on 31
December 1992 with the constitution of a legally
autonomous organization. In the meantime CEN and CENELEC
accept, on a contractual basis, to provide the necessary
administrative support.
90.
The Commission considers that CEN and CENELEC should
start, as of now, to examine their future relations with
EOTC and In particular how they can receive and use Its
results and effectively contribute to Its work. It would
also be appropriate for CEN and CENELEC to bring their
work In testing, certification and quality assurance into
line with the principles of the Global Approach which the
Council of Ministers approved In December 1989, and to
examine how this could be transferred to EOTC. It would
be difficult for two structures dealing with these
questions to coexist, quite apart from the problem of the
cost to European Industry of financing two systems,
directly or Indirectly. The transfer of CEN and
CENELEC’s agreements to EOTC would contribute
considerably to the credibility of that organization.
91.
As mentioned In the previous section, further thought
should be given by CEN and CENELEC to a common marking
system for conformity to European standards. There Is
already a large degree of confusion on the question of
marking, underlined by three different regimes existing
within CEN/CENELEC circles. Moreover, It Is difficult to
Imagine that European Industry can continue to live with
a system-of national marks of conformity to a common
European standard which do not all carry the same
significance, especially within the context of Community
legislation providing for the CE mark.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390433
- 46 -
(Ix) Intellectual property rights and patents
92.
The problem of Industrial and Intellectual property
rights [IPR) as well as patents has become a serious
Issue within the context of standardization
Inclusion
of such elements within a standard can lead to
reinforcement of a dominant position within the market
unless satisfactory conditions for use of such property
have been agreed. In many cases, the lack of adequate
procedures to resolve such problems has slowed down work
and hampered the convergence toward harmonized solutions.
The European Standardization System should take due
account of IPR and patent problems and develop practical
rules to cope with a situation which Is already of
Importance for the new technologies but also extending
rapidly to traditional areas. The reference to European
and International standards In Community Directives
increases the urgency of finding adequate solutions and
practical means to resolve IPR and patent Issues.
The Commission outlines below an approach to the Issue
for further discussion:
Technical specifications Included In standards should,
as a matter of principle, be publicly available and
allow all parties who wish to apply the standards to
do so freely. Contributing technical specfflcations to
a standardization body ensures a wide diffusion of the
tschnlcal know-how which Is generally very favourable
to the promoter’s Idea.
Whenever a contribution to a European standardization
body Is covered by IPR or patents , sufficient
Information should be provided to allow the experts at
the working group level to base their opinion as to
whether to Include specifications covered by IPR or
patent rights on the actual situation, Including, when
appropriate, the applicable licensing conditions.
Public Inquiry should bs envisaged only If fair and
reasonable conditions have been achieved and duly
registered. (It should be noted that this solution is
closely related to the .ISO rules which should be
rlgourously applied In the European context,
especially In the case of work covered by mandates.)
In the exeptlonal cases where It proves difficult to
reach agreement, pragmatic procedures should be at
hand to find solutions which reconcile the need to
adopt effective standards, the legitimate Interests of
IPR as patent owners, and the need to maintain the
transparency of procedures and compliance with
competition policy.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390434
- 47 -
C. The role of public authorities
93.
European Governments have long recognized the Importance
of standardization for the economy, and relations between
EEC Member States and their national standards bodies are
close. Some Member States have recognized their national
standards bodies as having a particular Independent
status (and, In one or two cases, a legal monopoly of
standardization) while all of them give direct financial
support to standards bodies. Standardization Is generally
accepted as a useful mechanism for maxlmlslng economic
efficiency and meeting other social goals. At the
Community level, the Council of Ministers has given
reponslbillty to the European Standardization
organizations for the drafting of technical
specifications for EEC product safety legislation.
94.
As the transition from national to European-level
standardization accelerates, however, It Is likely that
exceptional efforts will be needed from national and
Community-level authorities to ensure that this change
occurs smoothly and without disruption to existing
structures. Governments have to encourage a greater
awareness among the various Interests concerned of the
Important changes now taking place, whlle at the same
time reassuring their national standardization bodies
that they continue to have an Important role and that
their future Is secure.
Action at Community level
95.
In order to give a clear political signal of support for
standardization activity it would be appropriate for the
Community,through an appropriate act of the Council of
Ministers, to formalize Its relationship with the
European Standardization System. Such a political act
could lay down the basic principles for cooperation
between the standardization community and public
authorities within the Community. By defining the roles
and objectives of all parts of the system, It would open
a new chapter In the development of European
standardization, and focus the attention of Interested
parties on the opportunities which the European
Standardization System presents.
96.
Community recognition should Include an undertaking to
give financial support to the European Standardization
System for a determinate period, which the Commission
suggests should be no less than five years. Such a clear
Indication of financial support would have a double
advantage; It would confirm the Community’s Interest In
the further development of standardization on the on8
hand, but would fix a cell Ing on Community assistance, on
the other hand, thereby providing some reassurance to the
Community budgetary authorities, who, in the face of the
rapidly-escalating cost of Community funding, must
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390435
- 48 -
determine the level of the annual appropriations for this
action within the ceilings set by the Community Financial
Perspectives. The Commission considers that future
financial support to European standardization should take
the form of subsidy calculated on the basis of costs
already Incurred by standardization bodies. This would
be a stimulus to find additional private funding for
European standardization bodies, would simplify the
administrative burden of both the Commission and the
standards bodies.
Action at national level
97.
National standardization bodies will remain a crucial
part of the European standardization system. They will
not. only process draft European standards through public
enquiry and national voting, but will also coordinate
national Input Into the technical preparation of European
standards where the direct participation of Interests at
European level Is not considered necessary. It Is
Indispensable that national organizations remain
effective and that public authorities continue to offer
them support.
98.
Revenue from the sales of national standards represents
the most Important source of Income for most national
bodies. If the recommendations made In this document for
changes In the status of European Standards and In
arrangements for their sale were followed, this would
have an Impact on national bodies’ Income over time as
the number of European Standards Increased (although this
Is Impossible to estimate without knowing the proportion
of sales revenue to be allocated to European and to
national bodies respectively). Direct funding by European
Industry and other Interested parties of European
standardization bodies would also tend to reduce national
bodies’ Income. National authorities may in future be
called upon to compensate for such loss of Income, unless
they take steps to encourage a more active commitment to
standardization activity as a whole by the private
sector,
99.
The promotion of a keen Interest In European
standardization Is clearly In the Interest of all Member
States. Those who are most aware of European activity,
and most prepared to contribute to It, wll I be In the
best position to defend their own (and their country’s)
economic Interests at European level. National standards
bodies will remain, for most, the preferred route by
which to obtain Information about what Is going on and to
provide technical Input Into the European standardsmaking process. But Member States must contribute to
public awareness of the critical phase in European
standardization which Is now beginning, and encourage
support of the national, as well as the European, parts
of the European standardization system.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390436
- 49 -
IV. THE NEXT STEPS
100. This Green Paper Is Intended to provoke a wide-ranging
discussion with a view to generating agreement on how to
take the next steps In the development of European
standardization. As these next steps will be the
collective responsibility of all those concerned governments, standards bodies, manufacturers, users of
standards, organized labour and the private citizen-- all
are Invited to reflect on this Green Paper and to offer
comments on It.
101. The Commission will consult the main parties concerned
directly over the coming months, with a view to
identifying the main points of consensus by the end of
this year. It also Intends to ask the three European
standardization bodies to propose basic rules for the
European Standardization System and to come forward as
soon as possible with proposals for changes In their own
procedures and working methods. It may be appropriate to
organize a major conference after the conclusion of the
consultation process In order to allow Interested parties
to react to concrete proposals for action.
102. As has been Indicated before, decisions on the
organization of European standardization must be
voluntary, and will depend on the views of all those who
wish to use standards. The Community Is, however, fully
committed to the promotion of European standardization
because of Its economic Importance. The next stage In
Its development should, therefore, be accompanied a clear
demonstration of Interest, cooperation and support at the
political level.
In the light of public debate on this Green Paper the
Commission will consider making proposals for appropriate
decisions to the Council of Ministers. Such decisions
could, for example, take the form of
(I)
a Council Decision laying down the basic principles
for cooperation between Community public
authorities and the European Standardization
System, and, In particular, defining the role of
European standards within the legislative
framework; and
(11) a Council Decision committing the Community to a
multlannual action In favour of European
standardization, both at the national level and
within a revised organizational framework at the
European level. Such a decision would, In
particular, commit the Community to the principle
of funding the European Standardization System for
a fixed period. The actual level of funding would
be determined annually by the Community Budgetary
Authority In accordance with the ceilings of the
current and any future Financial Perspectives
agreed between the Community Institutions.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390437
50 -
SUMMARY OF COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
A.
To European Industry and other Interested parties
European Standardization should be given a much higher
priority In company strategy for the single European
market
Greater Involvement Is needed In standardization In
terms of
direct funding of standardization bodies (national
and European)
proposing priorities for standardization work
releasing experts for standardization work
(especially project teams)
ao
(i)
To European and national standardization bodies
Efficiency
Procedural changes are required urgently to speed up
delivery of European standards, such as
the use of "drafting secretariats" or "proJect
teams" to accelerate drafting of common working
documents
active encouragement of more sectoral "Associated
Standardization Bodies" by CEN/CENELEC
use of new communications technology to accelerate
discussion on working documents
more systematic use of majority voting to agree
draft European Standards, particularly for mandated
work
alignment of majority voting rules to those of the
EEC Treaty
shorter public enquiry periods (2 months for
consensus drafts, no more than 4 months for
majority vote drafts)
a maximum 2-month period for response to comments
direct applicability of adopted European standards,
without waiting for national transposition.
In addition, priority must be given to work mandated by the
EEC and EFTA, and to performance rather than descriptive
standards.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390438
-.51 -
(11)
Coordination
and structure
Establishment by the end of 1991 of a European
Standardization System, comprising of
A European Standardization Council, made up of
persons reflecting the views of major economic
Interest groups, the EEC Commission and EFTA
Secretariat, and the Presidents of the European
Standardization bodies, with responsibility for the
strategic direction of European standardization;
A European Standardization Board, made up of
representatives of the European standardization
bodies, responsible for management and coordination
of the European Standardization System on behalf of
the Councl I ;
European standardization bodies, recognized by the
Council as exclusively competent In their area,
which comply with the common rules of the European
Standardlzat Ion System;
National standardization bodies, which have
exclusive responsibility for carrying out certain
tasks for the European standardization bodies at
the national level (public enquiry, voting).
(111)
Membership and International Cooperation
Membership
No enlargement of fUll membership of European
standardization bodies for the moment.
Associate membership (participation without voting
rights) for non-member European countries.
Techn Ica I cooperat Ion
European standardization bodies to assume
responsibility for the coordination of technical
assistance programmes to non-member countries.
Internat Ional cooperat Ion
Observers from International standardization
organizations (ISO and IEC) to participate in
European working groups.
Continue European requests to International
standardization bodies to take on work required by
Europe outside the legislative framework.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390439
- 52 -
(Iv)
Accountability
Participation In the work and management of
European level standards bodies to be opened up to
Interested parties, i.e.
direct participation of Individual membership in
the work of Technical Bodies, where appropriate
observershlp of all technical work for Europeanlevel organizations such as trades unions,
consumers
representation of main economic Interests and
public authorities In the management boards of
European bodies (following practice at national
level)
National standards bodies to be open to
participation by Interested parties from other
European Countries.
(v)
Financing
A new approach to financing European standardization
work Is necessary to ensure long-term stability, in
particular by:
more long-term planning by the members of European
standardization bodies
providing for part of the revenue from sale of
European standards to be directed to European
standardization bodies
Increasing competition In the sales of European
standards
wider use of direct financial contributions to
European standardization work from European
industry (such as through more Associated
Standardization Bodies)
a long-term commitment to financial support of
standardization by Community public authorities.
(vi)
Information
Information procedure for standardization activity
under Directive 83/189/EEC to be reinforced, to
provide for a 3-month standstill period following
notification
a European Standardization Database, with
bibliographic data on current national and European
standards and summaries of current activity, to be
developed under the aegis of the European
Standardization Council
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390440
- 53 -
Information to be made available to all Interested
parties
(vii)
Statue of the European standard
European standards to exist In their own right
(I.e. no requirement that they be transposed Into
national standards before use)
When transposed, European standards to be
Identified In national catalogues only by their
European reference number
A common mark of conformity to European standards
to replace national marks
A single set of European standards ("ES"?) to be
established, removing current distinction between
"EN’s" (CEN + CENELEC) and "ETS’s" (ETSI).
(viii)
Testing and Certification
European standardization bodies should define their
relationship with the European Organization for
Testing and Certification (EOTC)
Transfer of CEN/CENELEC certification agreements to
EOTC
(Ix)
Intellectual property rights and patents
The Inclusion of IPR and patents within standards
should be subject to clear rules, which provide for
the right of use of IPR and patents either free or
¯ on fair and reasonable terms.
Co
To Member State authorities
The new European Standardization System should be
formally recognized in Community law, and the terms of
cooperation with public authorities laid down In a
Council Decision
a second Council DecisiOn on a multlannual action Is
necessary, which could commit the Community to the
principle of funding the development of European
standardization for a fixed period (1991-19951 within
the limits set annually by the Community Budgetary
Authority.
Community funding of "mandated" European
standardization to be changed to reimbursement of
Incurred expenses.
More active promotion of European standardization by
Member States.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390441
Annex 1
Standardization Order Vouchers given to CEN and CENELEC
since 1986
Standardization programmes on Iron and steel.
Safety of toys : chemical and mechanical properties,
flammability, migration of certalns metals, chemical toys,
electric toys.
-
Cold water meters.
-
Woven polypropylene sacks Intended for use In food aid.
-
Tactile danger warnings on packaging, requirements.
-
Simple pressure vessels
-
Pressure vessels (reference standards).
Self-propelled Industrial trucks; rules for the
construction and lay-out of pedals.
Gas burning appliances for Instantaneous production of hot
water.
Heat exchangers.
Standardization programme in the field of motor vehicle
fuels.
Standardization programme In the field of construction
products ; timber, concrete, masonry, pitched roofing
products, cement and building limes.
Evaluation criteria for testing laboratories and
certification bodies.
-
Standardization tasks In the aeronautic field.
-
Personnel protective equipment.
-
Machines.
Public procurement : standardization programmes In the
field of drinking water supply, energy and transport, water
supply and drainage/sewerage.
-
Electrical equipment (low-voltage).
-
Storage heater safety standards.
-
Safety standards for earth-leakage circuit-breakers.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390442
2-
Airborne noise emitted by household appliances.
Safety for fans.
Electromagnetic compatibility.
Low voltage air-break disconnectors.
Standardization programme in the field of
ceramics.
advanced
Medical devices: horizontal standards, standards for
active Implantable devices
Advanced technical ceramics
Non-automatic weighing Instruments
Eurocodes
Information Technology
Application Functions
Combined Functions
Application Extension Functions
=
Relay Functions
Character and Control RepertoireSpecification
Telecommunication Functions
P~ogrammlng Languages
Information Processing Systems -Computer Graphic
Magnetic support media
Identification and Banking cards
Trade data Interchange
=
Ergonomics of visual display units
(VDU)
OSI reference model
CD-ROM
ISDN Connector
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390443
3 -
Small cocputer systems Interface
Safety of T equipment
ISDN -PABX (Private Automatic Branch Exchange)
*
ISDN - ISPBX
AudlovIdeo - computer (A.V.C.)
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC)
Technical specification for Electronic components
Bar Codes
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390444
Annex 2
PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR THE EUROPEAN
STANDARDIZATION SYSTEM (*)
The European Standardization System should be composed of:
the European Standardization Council
the European Standardization Board
European Standardization Bodies
National Standardization Bodies
European Standardization Council
The European Standardization Council will be responsible for
the strategic direction of the European Standardization
System.
In particular, It shall be concerned with promoting the
development of the European Standardization System In response
to market needs. It will establish and maintain the common
principles or rules of European standardization, decide on the
method of arbitration In cases of disputes between the Bodies,
and decide on the admission of further European
Standardization Bodies into the European Standardization
System.
The Council will request the European Standardization Board to
take action In order to achieve the broad strategic objectives
It lays down.
The Council will be made up of persons reflecting the views of
the main economic Interests In European standardization
(Industry, consumers, users, trades unions), representatives
of the Commission of the European Communities and the
Secretariat of European Free Trade Association, and the
Presidents of the European Standardization Bodies. Its
President will be a European industrialist. (The proposed
membership of the Council Is outlined In the Annex).
=
See also table I attached
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390445
2 -
European Standardization Board
The European Standardization Board wll I be the executive body
of the Councl I.
It will be responsible for coordinating the work of the
European Standardization Bodies and for carrying out the
policy of the Council, In particular In respect of:
the development of more detailed rules for European
standardization ;
monitoring compliance with those rules ;
developing a common European Standardization Database ;
promoting awareness and knowledge of European
standardization.
The Board wll I be made up of representatives of the European
Standardization Bodies and the Secretary of the Council.
European Standardization Bodies
European Standardization Bodies are those bodies organized to
carry out standardization work at the European level and
recognized by the European Standardization Council as
conforming to the common rules of the European Standardization
System.
The European Standardization Bodies shall have exclusive
competence within their area of responsibility. They wll I be
free to determine their membership and working methods,
subject to compl lance with the common rules of the System.
They shall, however, ensure that all Interested parties are
adequately represented In their work. They shall have formal
links with the National Standardization Bodle~, and shall be
represented In the European Standardization Councl I and
European Standardization Board. They shall also ensure
effective cooperation with International standardization
bodies.
They shall be responsible for:
programming, financing and organizing standardization
work within their area of competence,
delivering draft European Standards to the National
Standardization Bodies for publlc enquiry and final vote,
In accordance with the common rules of the System,
ensuring publication of adopted European Standards, In
cooperation with the National Standardization Bodies, and
managing the copyright of those standards,
promoting European standardization In their area of
competence.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390446
3-
National Standardization Bodies
National Standardization Bodies are those organizations
recognized as exclusively competent to promulgate standards at
national level.
They shall carry out certain tasks at national level within
the European Standardization System, such as:
publ Ic enquiry and the expression of the national vote on
draft European Standards.
publication at national level of adopted European
Standards, In agreement with the European Standardization
Bodies.
They shall comply with common rules for the provision of
Information on their standardization activity to the European
Standardization Database and with the standstill obligations
of the European Standardization Bodies.
Where provided In the rules of a European Standardization
Body, they also assume the secretariat of European-level
Technical Committees, Sub-committees and Working Groups.
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390447
i:I
0
o
l:q
J
0
v’j
]
r.~ ,.el
i:I
o
I*.
.p*~l
0
°~
;:::I
i::I
i::I
0
0
0
I::I
0
0
r.T.1
0
0
0
0
0
i::I
oO
P~
0
o
0
-o
0
0
0
0
0
0
°~-~
"0
0
~4
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390448
ANNEX
Proposed composlt Ion of the European Standardization Counci I
7 representatives of European Industry (one of whom
represents small and medium-sized companies)
2 representatives of Industrial users of goods and
services
2 representatives of consumers
2 representatives of trades unions
1 representative of the Commission of the European
Communities
1 representative of the EFTA Secretariat
1 representative of each European Standardization Body
(plus a Secretary of the Council)
The President of the Council shall be a representative of
European Industry.
Proposed composition of the European Standardization Board
An equal number of representatives of each of the
European Standardization Bodies
The Secretary of the Council
Confidential Business Information,
Subject to Protective Order
S-ITC-003390449