Transcript Document 7142140

Workshop on Low Voltage Directive
PRIORITIZING AND PLANNING,
PRODUCT SELECTION AND SAMPLING IN
RELATION TO THE PRODUCTS COVERED
BY THE LVD
Why Market surveillance?
 Market surveillance is essential tool for the
enforcement of product legislation
 The purpose of Market Surveillance is:
 Ensure compliance with legislation
 Establish community wide equivalent level of protection
 Help to eliminate unfair competition
Member States are obliged to organize and carry out
Market surveillance. (Article 10 of the EC treaty)
Market surveillance
 Investigate (the levels of) compliance with
legislation
 Determine non compliances
 Intervene when non compliances are found
 Aim for increased levels of compliance
Prioritizing & Planning
 Select and perform MS activities in
such a way as to make optimal use
of the available resources
 Dependent on the objectives and
criterions defined
Prioritizing and market surveillance policy development
MARKET SURVEILLANCE –
PLANNING CYCLE
Planning Cycle
Governmental
Product safety
Policy
Market Surveillance
Vision
Long term
program
(3 years)
Short term
program
(1 year)
Operational
Activity program
Evaluation
Carry out
Activity program
Policy development
Market Surveillance
Vision
 Vision (where do we want to be in future?)





How do we want to operate:
Consumer protection/fair competition
Enforcement/compliance assistance/education
Product, business or risk oriented approach
System oriented approach, document checks, tests or both
 Strategy (How to go there)
 Surveillance of the environment:






Long term
program
(3 years)
Technological developments
Legal developments
Political developments
Consumer Trends
Demographic Developments
Emerging risks
long term strategic program (3 year period,
annually updated)
 Leads to a
Long term program
Market Surveillance
Vision
Long term
program
(3 years)
 Sets global priorities for the next period
 Indicates necessary adjustments to the
organization
 Adjustments in the way enforcement
activities are performed
 Adjustments in the fields of interest
 Necessary Investments in laboratories
 (Re)training of personnel
Long term program -> Short term program
 Examples of considerations in the long term program
 Less administrative burden on business/trade and industry
 More ‘compliance assistence’
 Directed by considerations of health gain
 Reducing accidents and injury
 also dependent on organization
 Capacity for specific tasks
 Laboratory capacities
Short term program
Long term
program
(3 years)
 Divide capacity between the tasks (Directives)
 Guided by long term program
Short term
program
(1 year)
 Aims to contribute to public health, e.g.








Centers on products that present hazards
Based on expert judgment of relative hazards of product categories
and assessment of the relative risks for these fields
Makes use of analysis of accident and fire statistics
Uses information from consumer complaints
Uses information from regular inspections by field inspectors
Takes into account results from previous investigations
Weighs also concerns in society and political concerns
Takes into account the possibilities of the organization
Short term program
Leads to:
Capacity division between the main terrains:
 Machines
 Electrical products
 Gas appliances
 GPSD products
 Toys
 Playground equipment and amusement rides
Operational activity program
Short term
program
(1 year)
Operational
Activity program
 This leads to activity program:
 Detailed project descriptions
 Detailed description of activities.
 Which products, where to inspect, how many inspections, how
many samples and which samples
 What to test
Short term
program
(1 year)
Operational
Activity program
Prioritizing for product safety
MARKET SURVEILLANCE
ACTIVITY PROGRAM
Activity program
 Detailed project descriptions
 Detailed description of activities.
 Which products, where to inspect, how many
inspections, how many samples and which samples,
which tests
Objectives
 Product safety
 Commonly Accepted as the main criterion for
prioritization
 GPSD
 Consumer protection
 Level Playing field
 Important for trade and industry
 Fair competition
Prioritization
 AIM: optimum contribution to increased
consumer protection with available resources

 Variables to consider:
 Economic operators
 Market surveillance methods
 Products
 Selection of inspection items and tests
Economic operators
 According to LVD:
 First Importers into EU (small scale, large scale)
 Manufacturers in the EU (small, large)
 According GPSD
 Distributors
 Retailers (small, large, chains), anybody who trades
Economic operators
Who has to comply?
 Manufacturer or EU importer
 Maximum effect EU-wide
 Distributor (or importer in Member
State)
 Maximum effect in Member State
 Distributors lower in chain
 Retail chains
 Retailers
Economic operators
Surveillance at the source
•
•
•
•
•
Ignorant Compliers
Spontaneous Compliers
Conscious Compliers
Deliberate Breakers
Ignorant Breakers
(expert estimate for small cafeterias take-away restaurants in NL)
Economic operators
Who complies and why
Spontaneous Compliance Sanction Dimensions
Control Dimensions
Knowledge of the rules
Cost Benefit
Level of Acceptance
Loyalty of the target group
Informal Control
Control Probability
Detection Probability
Selectivity
No or minimal Influence
Sanction Probability
Sanction severity
Quality of the rules
Indirect Influence
Direct Influence
Economic operators
What is influenced by Market Surveillance?
 Ignorant breakers and compliers
 Communication on requirements
 Enforcement communication
 Compliance assistance
 Breakers
 Enforcement communication
 Enforcement
 Sanctions
Economic operators
Interventions
Prioritization
 AIM: optimum contribution to increased
consumer protection with available resources
 Variables to consider:
 Economic operators
 Market surveillance methods (enforcement)
 Products
 Selection of inspection items and tests
requirements
Inspection of compliance with administrative requirements
 CE marking
 declaration of conformity
 Third party certification when required
 Advantages:
 Simple, fast and cheap
 No equipment required
 No laboratory investigation required
 Inspectors need not be highly trained
 Disadvantages:
 Inspection does not really focus on product deficiencies
 Not directly linked to product safety
Market surveillance methods
1
Inspection of compliance with administrative
Product inspections ‘in the field’
Limited inspection and tests of products during inspection
by a field inspector
 Advantages
 Zooms in on shortcomings in the product
 May aim at shortcomings that present hazards
 Disadvantages
 Possibilities for testing in the field are limited
 Requires better trained inspectors
 Quality assurance procedures not as good as in the lab
Market surveillance methods
2
Market surveillance methods 2
Project: wall and ceiling mounted luminaires
Why field tests:

Many shortcomings in previous investigations
 Potentially hazardous (fire risk – electrical risks)
 many companies involved, small and big
 Numerous different types on offer (hundreds-thousands).
 Need to test large numbers of luminaires to make an visible
impression on the trade.
Market surveillance methods
Product inspection ‘in the field’
Example
wall and ceiling mounted luminaires
Selection of legal requirements (labelling) and standard
requirements.
Requirements should be easy to test and require little or no
equipment.
 EN 60598-1, par. 3.2: Marking (CE, brand, wattage)
 EN 60598-1, par. 3.3. Additional information (instructions for the
proper and safe use; language)
 EN 60598-1, par. 4.3: Wireways: smooth and free from sharp
edges, burrs, …..
 EN 60598-1, par. 5.2.10: cord anchorage
 electrical safety by test finger
Market surveillance methods
product inspection ‘in the field’
wall and ceiling mounted luminaires
 Determine which legal sanctions to take for each
shortcoming
 Proportionality principle
 Consistency
 Determine which companies will be inspected
 large retail chains (bulk of sales)
 Training of field inspectors

technical training to recognize shortcomings
 Consistency in interpretation of the requirements
 Legal training
Market surveillance methods
product inspection ‘in the field’
wall and ceiling mounted luminaires
Results
Appr. 60 inspections
48.000 luminaires blocked (sent back to importer /
manufacturer)
Percentage non compliances down from appr 30 % to 8
% when checked in a second round of inspections
Market surveillance methods
product inspection ‘in the field’
Inspections + laboratory testing
For example: luminaires international project
 Advantages:

Gives a more detailed impression of conformity
 Can be aimed at safety relevant tests
 Disadvantages

Requires expensive laboratory testing
 For the same resources less product inspections
Market surveillance methods
3
Inspection of conformity assessment and
certification files
For example:
Gas appliances Directive requires certification by a notified body. This
leads to a file of the design of the appliance and the tests performed
to assess its conformity.
 Advantages:
 Inspection of this file avoids doing the expensive laboratory tests

Thorough design and conformity check can be done
 Plays also role in the assessment of the notified body
 Disadvantages

Requires highly specific up to date knowledge of the products involved
and therefore highly trained inspectors
 Time intensive
Market surveillance methods
4
Prioritization
 AIM: optimum contribution to increased
consumer protection with available resources
 Variables to consider:
 Economic operators
 Market surveillance methods (enforcement)
 Products
 Selection of inspection items and tests
Prioritizing products







Risk assessment of the product types
Analysis of accident and fire statistics
Information from consumer complaints
Information from regular inspections by field inspectors
Results from previous investigations
Concerns in society and political concerns
Analysis of RAPEX & Article 9 Notifications
 And:

Market information (brands, manufacturers, market penetration,
etc.)
 Consumer exposure
Products
 Typically projects are chosen based on the following criteria:
Prioritizing products
Products
Art. 9 and RAPEX notifications
Prioritization
 AIM: optimum contribution to increased
consumer protection with available resources
 Variables to consider:
 Economic operators
 Market surveillance methods (enforcement)
 Products
 Selection of inspection items and tests
 Administrative requirements
 Safety relevant tests from standard
 MS is not conformity assessment; not necessary
to test all standard requirements
 Select safety relevant tests from the standard
based on:
 Previous knowledge of frequency of non compliance
 Costs
 Ease of test
Inspection items and test
Selection of inspection items and tests
Example:
Cross border project Luminaires 2006




First large scale joint market surveillance
project for the LVD
Organized by LVD ADCO
Project management: the Netherlands
Participants: 15
Why Luminaires?
 Risks: electric shock; fire risk
 Accident statistics:
 Hardly accidents involving lighting; some mention
of fires, caused by proximity to bed clothing
 High percentages of non conformity
 From previous investigations (in NL up to 40%)
 Many notifications in CIRCA and RAPEX
(the European information exchange systems)
 Within the possibilities of the organizations
Scope
 luminaries falling within the scope of EN 60598, part 1,
1.2.9: portable luminaires
 That is: portable luminaire: luminaire, which, in normal use,
can be moved from one place to another while connected to the
supply.
 Not: wall- or ceiling mounted and trafo-fed luminaires
 Reason: increased complexity with wider scope
Which requirements tested?
 EN 60598-1:2004 Luminaires- General requirements
and tests
 EN 60598-Part 2: 1997 Luminaires: Particular
requirements -Section 4 : Portable general purpose
luminaires
 Selection of requirements that are safety relevant.
 Tests of the requirements should be within the
possibilities of the laboratories
 Test should be inexpensive
 Previous experience taken into account.
Test requirements
standard
description
EN 60598-1, par. 3.2
EN 60598-1, par. 3.2.1
EN 60598-1, par. 3.3
Marking
Mark of origin (trade mark – manufacturer)
Language of instructions for proper and safe use
EN 60598-1, par. 4.3
EN 60598-1, par. 4.10.1
Wireways, free and smooth without sharp edges
Insulation
EN 60598-1, par. 4.25
Mechanical hazards (sharp points and edges)
Chord anchorage
EN 60598-1, Par. 5.2.10
EN 60598-1, par. 5.3.2
EN 60598-1, par. 5.3.3
EN 60598-1, par. 7.2.3
EN 60598-1, par. 8.2.1
EN 60598-1, par. 10.2.2
Twisting of internal wiring – protection against damage of
wiring
Shielding from metal parts when guiding through openings
from metal parts
Resistance to Earth
Protection against electric shock; test finger
Electric strength
Phasing of the action

Market orientation

Identification of EU importers and manufacturers
Collect information on market shares, etc


Sampling and Administrative requirements

Select businesses for sampling,
collect samples and
Check administrative requirements





CE marking, DOC, technical file if present.
Testing against the standard requirements
Reporting
Results
A total of 226 luminaires was investigated
 Main results: see beneath.
Item
CE marking
DOC
Technical File
Technical shortcomings
P
200
95
51
64
F1
26
131
175
29
F2
F3
F unclassified
43
74
16
P: pass; F1: minor shortcoming; F2: shortcoming; F3: serious shortcoming
More information:
PROSAFE publication:
Best Practice techniques in
Market Surveillance
 Downloadable from:
http://www.prosafe.org/read_write/file/EMARS_Best_Practice_Book.pdf