29. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/23 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision laying down a procedure for the provision 
of information in the field of technical standards and regulations 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the 
European Communities No C 253 of 1 October 1980, page 2. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 19 September 1980 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the 
Economic and Social Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
186th plenary session held in Brussels on 25 and 26 March 1980. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community, and in particular 
Article 198 thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of 
the European Communities on 19 September 1980 
for an opinion on the proposal for a Council 
Decision laying down a procedure for the provision 
of information in the field of technical standards and 
regulations, 
Having regard to the decision taken by the 
Committee's Chairman on 26 September 1980 
instructing the Section for Industry, Commerce, 
Crafts and Services to prepare an opinion and 
report, 
Having regard to the opinion adopted by the Section 
at its meeting on 7 January 1981, 
Having regard to the Committee's opinion on 
21 November 1979 on the problems of trade barriers 
and the alignment of laws in this area, 
Having regard to the oral report made by the 
Rapporteur, Mr Evain, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 186th plenary 
session, held on 25 and 26 March 1981 (meeting of 
25 March 1981); 
Whereas progress in removing technical barriers in 
the Community has been inadequate, particularly in so far as new specifications in restraint of trade are 
being introduced in the Member States; 
Whereas steps should be taken to prevent the 
introduction and maintenance of such technical 
barriers; 
Whereas the agreement on technical barriers to 
trade, which entered into force on 1 January 1980, 
provides for the contracting parties to be informed of 
draft technical regulations and standards, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
with no votes against and one abstention: 
1. General comments 
1.1. The draft Decision seeks to increase the 
Commission's armoury for implementing genuine 
free trade within the Community. 
1.2. The proposed arrangements are designed not 
merely to abolish established trade barriers but to 
prevent new ones being created by the Member 
States. 
No C 159/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 6. 81 
1.3. The proposal should ultimately help to limit the 
number of harmonization directives to be issued by 
the Commission, thus cutting down red tape. 
1.4. For these reasons, the Committee can only 
endorse the principle of the Commission proposal. In 
its 1979 initiative opinion, the Committee had in fact 
stressed the inadequate progress in abolishing 
technical barriers and in introducing genuine free 
trade. It agrees with the letter and spirit of the 
declaration made by the Council of the European 
Communities, which forms the preamble to the 
Council's proposal for a Decision. 
1.5. The Committee nevertheless considers that the 
eighth recital of the proposal (second recital on 
page 2) should be amended to read as follows: 
'Whereas in practice, national technical standards 
and technical regulations can in certain cases have 
similar effects on the free movement of goods 
when technical regulations refer to standards.' 
1.6. In view of the above, the Committee considers 
that a new recital should be inserted after the eighth 
recital, reading as follows: 
'Whereas in so far as there is a manifest advantage, 
the harmonization of certain national technical 
standards is desirable to ensure the free movement 
of goods within the Community;' 
1.7. The Explanatory Memorandum cites the recent 
Court of Justice ruling that trade barriers arising 
from differences in commercial or technical rules are 
permissible in the following circumstances only: 
— if the rules are necessary, that is appropriate and 
not excessive, in order to satisfy mandatory 
requirements (public health, protection of 
consumers or the environment, the fairness of 
commercial transactions, etc.); 
— if the rules serve a purpose in the general interest 
which is compelling enough to justify an 
exception to a fundamental rule of the Treaty, 
such as the free movement of goods; 
— if the rules are essential for such a purpose to be 
attained, i.e. are the means which are the most 
appropriate and at the same time least hinder 
trade. (Communication from the Commission 
concerning the consequences of the judgment 
given by the Court of Justice on 20 February 1979 
in Case 120/78 Cassis de Dijon)(•). 
(>) OJ No C 256, 3. 10. 1980. 1.8. The Committee recognizes the importance of 
the Court's ruling, which can enable the Commission 
to combat unjustified trade barriers more effectively. 
It trusts that the Member States — in liaison with the 
Commission — will review rules and practices within 
their territories in the light of the criteria laid down 
by the Court of Justice. The Committee also 
considers it necessary to provide, as the Commission 
has done in the draft Decision, for measures which 
will genuinely eliminate existing technical barriers to 
trade, and prevent new ones from appearing. 
1.9. In the light of the above, the Committee regards 
the Commission proposal as an appropriate 
instrument for systemizing information on draft 
standards and strengthening and expanding the 1969 
Standstill Agreement on national technical 
regulations. 
1.10. The Committee would, however, make the 
point that under the new arrangements the emphasis 
will have to be on technical regulations, since it is 
primarily these regulations that have created barriers 
to trade. 
1.11. The Committee also considers that the 
administrative workload involved in the proposed 
procedure should be lightened by not applying the 
procedure to all technical regulations and standards 
but only to those which impede or may impede the 
import or marketing in a given Member State of 
products generally sold in another Member State. It 
asks the Commission to incorporate a number of 
criteria for this purpose in the Directive. Steps should 
also be taken to ensure provision of information on 
certification rules. 
1.12. The Committee further takes the view that if 
the arrangements are to operate properly there will 
have to be a special appeal procedure under which 
the Member States and the parties concerned can 
notify the Commission of regulations and standards 
that have been found to impede trade. 
1.13. The Committee hopes for a positive outcome 
from closer contacts between national 
standardization bodies and between these bodies and 
the Commission, with a view to providing 
information on their respective standardization 
programmes. The Committee considers that relations 
between the Commission and CEN/CENELEC 
should be closer in order to gauge the need for 
European standards and frame the European 
standards programmes that would possibly follow. 
29. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/25 
1.14. CEN and CENELEC should as far as 
possible be empowered to frame the European 
standards desired by the Commission and this could 
be done on a case-by-case basis. Article 2. CEN and CENELEC should be involved 
as far as possible in order to lighten the 
Commission's workload. 
1.15. The Committee wonders why the list of 
national standards bodies appended to the 
Commission draft omits some independent national 
bodies, despite the fact that it is proposed to contact 
them also and that they are competent both to frame 
programmes and to draw up standards. This 
comment affects the various articles which refer to 
national standards bodies. It would become 
superfluous if the standards bodies belonging to 
CEN and CENELEC were listed in the Appendix. 2.4. For the same reason the Committee feels that 
the quarterly work reports of the national standards 
institutions should be confined to summary 
information unless the Standing Committee or other 
interested parties request further details. This applies 
in particular where draft standards merely transpose 
existing international standards into national 
legislation (Article 4). 
2.5. The Committee recalls its earlier opposition to 
a proliferation of technical committees and suggests 
that the proposed Standing Committee could be 
merged with the technical committee set up under the 
Council Decision of January 1980 and the committee 
responsible for the certification of non-Community 
products (Article 5). Given the terms of reference of 
the proposed committee and the number and variety 
of documents to be dealt with, the Committee 
considers that it should comprise members of the 
European standards organizations, CEN and 
CENELEC, and national standards organizations. 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. National laws, regulations and administrative 
procedures are the main source of technical barriers. 
The Articles of the Commission document should 
therefore be rearranged. Articles 9 and 10 should 
become Articles 1 and 2 respectively and the 
proposal should be retitled: 'Proposal for a Council 
Decision laying down a procedure for the provision 
of information in the field of technical regulations 
and standards'. 
2.2. The Committee calls for the following addition 
to the last sentence of Article 1: 
'in the light of data supplied by the Member States 
concerned.' 
2.3. Given the sheer volume of the material 
involved, document-processing equipment will be 
necessary to centralize and analyze the information 
on standards. Provision should be made for this in 2.6. The Commission should, as far as possible, 
collaborate with the appropriate standards 
institutions when it compiles reports on the 
feasibility of European Standards and how they 
should be drawn up (Article 6). 
2.7. In the interests of clarity the terms 'industrial 
associations or individuals' (Article 7, first indent) 
should be replaced by 'interested natural or legal 
persons'. 
2.8. When the Commission provides for 
notification of intention to draw up technical 
regulations (Article 9), it must specify which stage of 
the procedure this requirement applies to. Reference 
could be made to the GATT rules on this matter. In 
any case the GATT procedure and the arrangements 
proposed by the Commission must tie in with one 
another. 
No C 159/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 6. 81 
2.9. It would also clarify matters if the term 
'communications' (Article 10, second line) were 
replaced by 'notification'. 
2.10. The proposal to defer the adoption of national 
technical regulations (Article 10) does not cover the 
eventuality of the Commission submitting a proposal 
which is not subsequently adopted. Where the Commission states its intention to submit a proposal 
national regulations should be deferred for a further 
six months. 
2.11. As regards the requirement to inform 
contracting parties to the Agreement on Technical 
Barriers to Trade, the Committee feels that the 
proposed Community procedure should not lead to 
duplication of effort. 
Done at Brussels, 25 March 1981. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Tomas ROSEINGRAVE