Commission staff working document accompanying the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of the construction products - Summary of the impact assessment {COM(2008) 311 final} {SEC(2008) 1900}
Date: 2008-05-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EC conformity marking, approximation of laws, building, construction policy, free movement of goods, impact study, quality label, technical rule

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 23.5.2008 
SEC(2008) 1901 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying the  

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council 

laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of the construction products 

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  

{COM(2008) 311 final} 
{SEC(2008) 1900} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

As part of the policy on Better Regulation the Commission has been implementing, an Impact 
Assessment  of  the  draft  proposal  of  the  Commission  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council, laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of the 
construction  products,  has  been  carried  out.  The  Impact  Assessment  Board  delivered  its 
opinion on 10.09.2007 on the draft text of this assessment. The comments of the Board were 
taken  into  account  and  incorporated  in  the  Impact  Assessment  accompanying  this  proposal, 
summarised here as follows: 

The  three  policy  alternatives  considered  in  this  context  were:  Option  1  –  No  EU  action:  no 
change; Option 2 – No legislation; Option 3 – Revision of the CPD. 

OPTION 1 - NO EU ACTION: NO CHANGE 

The  baseline  option  is  for  the  CPD  to  continue  to  be  in  force  as  it  currently  exists.  Its 
requirements  would  not  be  clarified  or  simplified  in  any  other  manner  than  the  changes 
related  to  the  natural  evolution  of  the  legislation  in  its  current  form  and  to  legislation 
applicable to this field beyond the CPD. 

However,  some  of  the  existing  divergences  in  national  requirements  and  in  testing  and 
certification  regimes  could  be  reduced  through  already  initiated  means  of  administrative 
cooperation between national authorities. 

Nevertheless,  the  in-depth  analysis  of  this  option  demonstrates  that  many  of  the  current 
problems,  such  as  the  unclear  meaning  of  CE  marking,  the  different  approaches  to  CE 
marking  (mandatory,  non-mandatory),  the  complexity  of  the  system,  the  insufficient 
acceptance of CE marking and the proliferation of national marks, will continue to exist. This 
is  confirmed  by  the  most  recent  data  on  complaints  and  infringements  in  areas  already 
covered by harmonised technical specifications. Thus, the CPD would continue to fail to meet 
its objective of free circulation and use of construction products in the Internal Market. 

OPTION 2 - NO LEGISLATION 

This option would imply a repeal of the CPD without any substitute, and a reversion to mutual 
recognition taking into account the New Legal Framework. 

In  practice  the  Internal  Market  would  be  based  exclusively  on  the  principle  that  a  product 
lawfully marketed in one Member State can be marketed in any other Member State, even if 
the product does not fully comply with the technical rules of the destination Member State, as 
long as a Member State has not sufficiently justified reasons for banning the product on the 
market in its territory.  

COM(1999)299 final on improving the application of the principle of mutual recognition in 
the Single Market identified construction in the top five sectors for infringements of mutual 
recognition, between 1996 and 1998, under Article 28 (former Article 30) of the Treaty. By 
the time of COM(2002)419 final, the number of infringements in the construction sector had 
increased marginally over the period 1998-2001 to rank in the top four industry sectors. The 
most  recent  available  data  confirms  these  trends  and  shows  that  mutual  recognition  is  not 
sufficient for assuring efficient functioning of the internal market for construction products.  

EN 

2 

   EN 

In  May  2006,  the  stakeholder  consultation  showed  that  manufacturers  almost  unanimously 
consider that mutual recognition would not be able to achieve the free circulation and use of 
construction products in the internal market. 

The  external  study,  contracted  for  preparing  the  Impact  Assessment  of  the  revision  of  the 
CPD,  analysed  whether  or  not  the  ‘no  legislation’  option  would  address  the  problems 
identified in relation to the CPD. Unsurprisingly, given the above discussion, the conclusion 
was that this option would not fulfil the objective of free circulation of construction products 
in the Internal Market. 

OPTION 3 - REVISION OF THE CPD: THE PREFERRED OPTION  

Option 3, to revise the Community legislation, is the preferred option. It consists of a package 
which mirrors the existing necessity and scores best in the Impact Assessment. It is the only 
one fully corresponding to the issues and problems requiring action as well as to the findings 
of  the  stakeholder  consultation  undertaken  in  this  respect.  It  addresses  the  main  identified 
problem drivers in an optimal way and allows the best possible improvements with regard to 
those who are affected. It also safeguards the general acquis and the technical specifications 
established  under  the  current  CPD.  Finally  it  strictly  respects  the  balanced  subsidiarity 
achieved in the field of construction, i.e. Member States are competent for the rules of design 
and building of works, while EU legislation ensures the Internal Market for the products used 
in such works.  

For  these  reasons,  the  Impact  Assessment  recommends  choosing  Option  3  as  the  basis  for 
future actions. 

The  main  changes  to  the  current  situation  foreseen  in  the  proposed  Construction  Products 
Regulation  (CPR)  are  threefold:  clarification  of  the  legal  content,  simplification  of 
implementing mechanisms and reinforcement of the credibility of the system. 

– 

– 

– 

Clarification:  The  proposed  Regulation  contains  definitions  of  the  most 
pertinent concepts in the field of the Internal Market for construction products. 
In  addition,  the  obligations  of  the  manufacturers  and  of  the  importers  are 
precisely  established.  The  specific  meaning  of  CE  marking  for  construction 
products  is  determined  clearly.  CE  marking,  in  this  context,  entails  the 
declaration  of  relevant  information  in  relation  to  the  performance  of  the 
product and means that this information was obtained following the provisions 
of this Regulation and therefore has to be considered accurate and reliable.  

Simplification and reduction of administrative burden: Coinciding with the 
experience gained through the application of the CPD, the proposal includes an 
important number of measures aimed at simplifying the route to CE marking, 
thereby  reducing  the  administrative  burden  of  enterprises  and  in  particular  of 
micro-enterprises. Simplified procedures are also foreseen for the treatment of 
individually  manufactured  products.  In  addition,  the  procedures  for  issuing 
European Technical Assessments (ETA) are to be simplified and clarified. 

Reinforcing the credibility of the system: The proposal introduces new and 
stricter criteria for the notification of bodies carrying out third party tasks in the 
process  of  assessment  and  verification  of  constancy  of  performance. 
Furthermore,  the  proposal  contains  provisions  on  market  surveillance  and 
safeguard procedure. 

EN 

3 

   EN