Public consultation on EU rules for products used in the construction of buildings and infrastructure works
Is Regulation (EU) N° 305/2011 (Construction Products Regulation) a benefit or a burden? Should we maintain the regulation as it is, should we amend it or repeal it?
Do construction sector actors understand the system and the meaning of CE marking? Are performances reliable? Is the declaration of performance being used? Does the CPR satisfy the needs of the sector? Are member states able to enforce the CPR?
Is it not sufficient to maintain the European technical specifications, developed and used on a voluntary basis by those interested in and benefitting from cross-border trade? Can mutual recognition be made effective?
You have an opportunity to have your say: https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-eu-rules-products-used-construction-buildings-and-infrastructure-works_en
Director Standardization and Certification
6 年It is.
Chercheur en histoire économique et sociale
6 年It’s regrettable that few people have been able to take a little bit of their time to understand the essentials of the CPR. Indeed, the CPR is organised in such a way that, for those who were fulfilling the CPD requirements, no fundamental change was needed in order to fulfil with the CPR requirements. Some minor changes were of course due, but I was and I remain convinced that only good willingness was necessary to overcome all of them. I hardly understand the pertinence of the series of questions that even eminent experts have apparently not yet solved!!! What guidance efforts have been made by sector organisations or by NB advisory group or other expert groups or even, and maybe very specially, by EU and MS institutions? When I look at all the good work that was accomplished by all the actors under the CPD, I wonder how the mess of the present situation has been made possible? It’s really a pity!!!
Key Account Manager, export & standardization, at Kera Group Oy
6 年Few member states, as our Finland, has understood and acted to develop the missing part of "total implementation" of the CPR. The missing part is similar to the National Annexes of Eurocodes. hEN's do not set any requirement levels, as those are to be set by member countries. CPR already has a tool for this, unfortunately members has not taken it into use: Construction Product Contact Point. National requirement levels for harmonised performances should be set at CPCP, available free of charge for anybody. We developed in Finland National Application Standards (NAS) already during CPD time, because our authorities did not have recourse nor interest to set requirement levels for products. BUT: I heard a rumor that EC shall start lobbying for members to get this CP in action. Eric probably knows the source of this information.
Policy Officer at Dutch Waste Management Association
6 年Tim Brethouwer, Adrie Veeken, wellicht vergezocht, maar in het kader van de circulaire economie kan dit wellicht interessant voor onze sector zijn op het moment dat wij bijvoorbeeld organische reststromen inzetten voor het bouwen van wegen?
Test Expert / Projectmanager bij SGS INTRON
6 年An opportunity to voice our opinion! Thanks for sharing.