1. 10. 79 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 247/7 
ANNEX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following passage was amended following the adoption of an amendment at the plenary session: 
Paragraph 2.11, second and third sentences 
'As views differ, especially on the nature and extent of the risks involved, the Section suggests that 
hearings should be organized in conjunction with the Commission on the points covered in 
paragraphs 2.9 and 2.10 to sound out the opinions of experts from the world of science, the unions, 
industry and public interest groups. Afterwards, a paper should be prepared which would serve as a 
basis for aligning safety rules within the Member States.' 
Voting 
The amendment was adopted with no votes against and one abstention. 
Opinion on the: 
— proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and 
administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction products 
— proposal for a Council resolution laying down a list of priority products to be covered by 
Directives implementing Council Directive /EEC/ on the approximation of the 
laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to 
construction products 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 308 of 23 December 1978, page 3. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 11 December 1978 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic 
and Social Committee in accordance with Article 100 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 170th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 17 and 18 July 1979. 
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 100 
thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of the 
European Communities on 11 December 1978 for an 
opinion, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 18 
December 1978 instructing the Section for Industry, 
Commerce, Crafts and Services to draw up an opinion 
and a report on the matter, 
Having regard to the opinion issued by the Section for 
Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services at its meeting 
held on 4 July 1979, Having regard to the report submitted by the rapporteur, 
Mr. Masprone, 
Having regard to the discussions at the 170th plenary 
session held on 17 and 18 July 1979 (meeting of 18 July 
1979), 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
unanimously, with one vote against and one abstention: 
1. The Committee's approval is contingent upon the 
procedure for adopting implementing Directives being 
amended to provide for: 
No C 247/8 Official Journal of the European Communities 1. 10. 79 
— effective involvement, at the drafting stage, of the 
socio-economic groups directly and technically 
concerned, 
— mandatory consultation of the Economic and Social 
Committee before the implementing Directives are 
submitted to the Committee for Implementing 
Directives. 
2. Our approval is also subject to the following 
comments, some of which could be changed if the above 
conditions were not met. 
1. GENERAL COMMENTS 
1.1. Scope 
1.1.1. The Committee's attention has been focused 
on the reasons which prompted the Commission to make 
the outline Directive's scope broad enough to permit the 
adoption of any necessary implementing Directives. 
1.1.2. The implementing Directives must however be 
chosen with great circumspection. The products to be 
covered by such directives should be carefully selected in 
the light of a market survey which should be conducted 
in conjunction with the relevant socio-economic groups. 
1.1.3. This selection process should be based on two 
key economic criteria, viz.: 
— the existence of major barriers to trade, 
— the impact which a free Community market has on 
the profitability of the industry. 
1.1.4. Because of the need for this selective survey to 
be carried out in advance, the specimen products listed in 
point 2 of Annex I should be regarded as being purely 
illustrative. Similarly, the list of priority products 
given in the draft resolution should be revised on the 
basis of the criteria listed above, after the relevant 
socio-economic groups have been consulted. 
1.2. The Committee notes that the outline Directive 
does not contain the usual derogation clause. 
1.3. The Committee also notes that the outline 
Directive is not specific as regards harmonized 
(technical) standards of the standardization institutions 
of the Member States. 2. SPECIFIC COMMENTS 
2.1. Article 1(1) 
2.1.1. In addition to the general comments on scope, 
the Committee notes that the term 'civil engineering' also 
covers work and supplies for military installations in so 
far as military secrets are not involved. 
3, Article 3 
3.1. The graphical representation of the letter 'E' on 
all EEC marks should be standardized so as to avoid 
confusing purchasers, who attach more and more value 
to this mark. 
4. Article 4 (1), third paragraph 
4.1. The Committee calls for clarification of the 
phrase 'shall allow' (second line). The Committee would 
therefore propose the following insertion after the first 
sentence: 
'. . . while ensuring that a product is not saddled with 
the guarantee for a construction whose performance 
depends on other factors related to the design and 
implementation of the project.' 
4.2. The Committee also asks that the second 
sentence of the third paragraph be deleted. 
5. Article 4 (2) 
5.1. It should be indicated that 'as necessary' means 
'as necessary for the abolition of technical barriers'. With 
this clarification, the rules for bringing products into use 
in the area covered by the implementing Directives 
should be maintained. Such rules may influence product 
performance and steps should be taken to avoid 
disparities which could hamper the use of a product in 
this or that Member State. 
6. Article 5 (2) 
6.1. The meaning of 'consistency' should be spelt out. 
It should be stated that the implementing Directives will 
seek to ensure 'that the conditions governing the issue of 
the technical approvals by the competent approved 
bodies are aligned to the extent that a comparable 
qualitative and quantitative assessment is possible and 
such conditions can thus be recognized in each Member 
State'. 
1. 10. 79 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 247/9 
7. Article 6 
7.1. The Committee is aware of the importance of this 
Article, which makes it possible to introduce total 
harmonization for this or that implementing Directive. 
7.2. In view of its potential importance for locally 
manufactured products, such a decision should be taken 
in full possession of the facts. This is further proof of the 
absolute necessity of consulting socio-economic groups 
and, in particular the ESC, when each implementing 
Directive, is being drafted, particularly in deciding 
whether to opt for total or optional harmonization. 
8. Article 9 (1), first paragraph 
8.1. The Committee notes that type approval 
applications may be submitted to any Member State. For 
the sake of clarity this paragraph should read: 
'The application for EEC type approval shall be 
made by the applicant to the Member State of his 
choice . . .' 
9. Article 9 (2) 
9.1. The wording of this paragraph and of point 2 of 
Annex III must be clarifies and must give manufacturers 
every assurance that their applications will be processed 
swiftly and with due care. 
9.2. While recognizing that the time required for 
issuing certificates will obviously vary according to the 
type of product and the nature of the tests to be carried 
out, the Committee would like to see a strict maximum 
deadline, applicable to all Member States, set out in each 
implementing Directive. 
10. Article 10 (2) 
10.1. To prevent inspectors from going further than is 
strictly necessary to assess the specifications of finished 
products, and in order to protect industrial secrecy in 
certain cases, the Committee proposes that the last three 
lines should read: 
'. . . when the application is made inspectors shall be 
guaranteed access to stores and the means to ensure 
that the manufactured products are in conformity 
with the approved type. 
The implementing Directive shall also provide for 
access to the manufacturing plants for inspectors, 
in so far as this is necessary to fulfil the technical 
requirements of the inspection.' 11. Article 11 (1), first paragraph 
11.1. The reference to circumstances which may 
entail the suspension or withdrawal of type approval 
certificates should be worded less subjectively. The 
words 'several samples' should therefore be replaced by 
'a statistically significant number of samples'. 
12. Article 11 (1), second paragraph 
12.1. The phrase 'where necessary' should also be 
deleted in the interests of objectivity. 
13. Article 12 (2) 
13.1. In the event of a dispute, the Commission 
proposes to take 'all measures necessary'. The 
Committee notes that this is a reference to the procedure 
provided for in Article 169 of the Treaty. 
14. Articles 15 to 17 
14.1. The various comments on Articles 10 to 12 of 
Chapter III apply mutatis mutandis to Articles 15 to 17 
of Chapter IV. 
15. Articles 19 (b) and 20 (2) 
15.1. The comments on Articles 10 to 15 also apply 
here. (Restricting access to stores in the normal course of 
events and permitting access to manufacturing plants 
only where this is necessary to fulfil the technical 
requirements of the inspection.) 
16. Articles 19 (c) and 20 (2) 
16.1. The implementing Directives should state 
categorically the number of samples to be taken and the 
type of tests to be carried out. 
17. Articles 22 to 26 
17.1. The Committee notes that there is nothing new 
about self-certification which is already established 
practice in the Nine. Self-certification has been provided 
for in the outline Directive so that it can be used in some 
of the implementing Directives where this is appropriate. 
No C 247/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 1. 10. 79 
17.2. The Committee would strongly urge that the 
procedures adopted be as flexible and straightforward as 
possible so as to avoid placing too heavy a burden on 
manufacturers. 
17.3. The Committee recognizes the importance of 
the choice of procedure for each product. Noting that 
this choice is to be made in the implementing Directives, 
the Committee reiterates its formal request that the 
economic and social circles be involved in drafting the 
Directives and that the ESC be consulted before they are 
adopted. 
18. Articles 27 and 28 
18.1. Without prejudice to the own-initiative opinion 
which the Committee is preparing on the general 
question of the procedures to be adopted for abolishing 
barriers to intra-Community trade, the Committee 
would urge that it be clearly stated in the explanatory 
memorandum, if not in the body of the Directive, that 
those economic and social circles which have a direct, 
technical interest in the matter shall be involved in the 
selection of the products to be harmonized and, 
subsequently, in the preparation of the draft 
implementing Directives. 
18.2. The Committee would also ask the Commission 
to use its powers under Article 149 of the Treaty to 
amend the outline Directive to provide for mandatory 
consultation of the ESC on draft implementing Directives 
before they are submitted to the Committee for 
Implementing Directives provided for in Articles 27 and 
28 of the Commission draft. 
18.3. In this connection the Committee is gratified 
that the European Parliament session of 8 May 1979 
proposed that Article 27 be amended to indicate that the 
Commission should as a matter of course refer the 
implementing Directives to the Economic and Social 
Committee and, where appropriate to the interests 
concerned. 
18.4. The Committee also notes the statements made 
by Commissioner Davignon at the same session 
confirming the Commission's commitment to consult 
these parties. 
19. Chapter VIII 
19.1. Article 29 
19.1.1. Having examined this chapter dealing with 
the health and safety safeguard clause, the Committee would recall its position as regards economic safeguards. 
The Committee takes the view that third countries 
which, by virtue of these Directives, secure trade facilities 
in the Community in respect of products qualifying for 
the EEC mark, should provide similar facilities for 
Community exports. 
19.1.2. Needless to say, we reiterate and confirm the 
reservations expressed above as regards Article 28 (3). 
20. Chapter IX 
20.1. Article 30(1) 
20.1.1. The Committee is somewhat hesitant about 
this Article. While not recommending abolition we feel 
that the Article must be used cautiously to ensure that the 
conditional recognition arrangements are not abused, 
thus hampering any necessary harmonization of 
construction products. 
20.1.2. The Committee's reservations are all the more 
justified in view of the significance of the word 'yet' in 
the second line (English version) of point 1. As presently 
worded, Article 30 would apply not only to products 
which in the short term are to be the subject of an 
implementing Directive but also to all other products 
which may never be covered by a Directive. 
20.1.3. We therefore request that the first sentence be 
amended to read 'This Article may apply . . .'. 
20.2. Article 30 (2) 
20.2.1. In the interests of clarity the first line 
should read: 
'In this event, the following three provisions must be 
observed simultaneously: 
(a) . . .'. 
21. Chapter X 
21.1. Article 31 
21.1.1. The Commission refers to the 'nature of the 
task' entrusted to approved bodies. This could usefully 
be amended to read 'the field of activity for which they 
are approved'. 
21.1.2. The Member States should also be 
recommended to take account, as far as possible, of 
1. 10. 79 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 247/11 
current checking and certification practice by extending 
to Community level the approval already granted to 
national bodies. 
21.2. Article 32 
21.2.1. Article 32 refers to Annex VI, and the 
Committee therefore requests that account be taken of its 
comments on this Annex. 
21.3. Article 33 (3) 
21.3.1. The Committee feels that the Member States 
should not have the sole prerogative of determining 
whether or not a body is operating satisfactorily. Any 
interested party should be entitled to alert the Member 
States which would then be required to check the validity 
of the allegations and take appropriate action. 
21.4. Article 33 (S) 
21.4.1. By the same token, any interested party 
should have the right to refer such matters to the 
Commission. 
22. Chapter XI 
22.1. Article 36 
22.1.1. The Committee would ask that paragraphs 2 
and 3 be run together as follows: 
'The implementing Directives shall specify the basis 
for calculating the costs payable by the applicant.' 
23. Annex I 
23.1. The reference to 'products' iri point 2 should be 
amended to read 'classes of products'. 
Done at Brussels, 18 July 1979. 24. Annex HI 
24.1. The Committee reiterates its request for 
clarification of Article 9 (2) and point 2 of Annex HI. 
24.2. In conjunction with the report's comments on 
Article 11 (3), the Committee urges the Commission to 
examine how purchasers can be effectively protected and 
informed about products whose type-approval has been 
suspended. 
24.3. The Committee also requests that the 
requirement contained in 1.2.2 that the technical dossier 
should comprise 'all the descriptive documents and 
drawings needed to understand the manufacturing 
process' should be enforced only where this is technically 
essential to an assessment of the product's quality. 
25. Annex VI, point 2 
25.1. The Committee requests that the third sentence 
be replaced by the following: 
'The authorized body may however carry out 
independent research on the product, in view of the 
importance of this for supporting checking capacity; 
by the same token, exchanges of technical 
information between the manufacturer and the 
approved body shall be authorized.' 
26. Draft resolution 
26.1. Referring to the general comments made on the 
scope of the outline Directive, the Committee requests 
that the second recital on page 1 of the draft resolution 
be amplified to indicate the need to select priority 
products in the light of economic criteria. 
26.2. Moreover, when examining the subdivisions 
contained in the list of products, the Committee 
wondered whether these products should be grouped 
according to the nature of their constituent materials 
(subdivisions for wood and plastic or synthetic materials) 
or according to the role played by the construction 
components (subdivision for products for fitting out and 
subdivisions for behaviour in fire of construction 
materials). 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Raffaele VANNI 
No C 247/12 Official Journal of the European Communities 1. 10. 79 
ANNEX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following amendment was rejected: 
'Add the following to 1.1.1: 
"The Section finds the Commission's reasoning understandable. However, it does think that legal 
certainty makes it necessary for the Directive's scope to be defined precisely so that Member States 
and socio-economic interest groups know exactly what implementing Directives are to be expected. 
If the Commission should come to the conclusion at some later date that the outline Directive does not 
give it the power to prepare an implementing Directive which is considered to be necessary, the 
outline Directive should be adapted in line with the procedure provided for in Article 100".' 
Reasons 
It is proposed in the outline Directive on construction products that the Commission be authorized to lay 
down implementing Directives in this sector after holding consultations with socio-economic interest 
groups and the Member States. In other words, the power to lay down Directives in this sector is to be 
conferred on the Commission. 
This is acceptable provided that the fields and products to be covered by the Commission's implementing 
Directives are made clear. The Directive does not do so (cf. 1.1.4 of the opinion). 
As long as there is no such clarity, the Commission can lay down practically any Directive it wants to in 
the field of construction products. This creates legal uncertainty and is in conflict with the division of 
power to be found in democracies. 
The aim of the amendment is to ensure that the Commission's powers are clearly defined. 
Voting 
For: 1; against: 60; abstentions: 12. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending for the seventh time Directive 
73/241/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cocoa and 
chocolate products intended for human consumption 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 121 of 15 May 1979, page 7. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 4 May 1979 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic and 
Social Committee in accordance with Article 100 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 170th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 17 and 18 July 1979. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: