There is a “Cinderella” among all the Directives that could become (we hope) in the mother of all the Directives: it is the 2001/95/CEE Directive.

To this it is related the DL 21 May 2004 n° 172 that indicates the receivement in Italy and how to apply the 2001/95/CEE and also what are the sanctions for the trasgressors.

Everyone who think to be able to put in the market with stupid tricks products that are dangerous or unsafe, may read both the Directive and the DL very accurately.

Here there is a little part of the 11 Article:

1. The fact is a very bad crime and the producer or the importer that put in the market dangerous products in contrast with the prohibition in article 6, comma 2, letter e) is punished with the arrest for an year or with a fine from 10.000 euro to 50.000
2. The fact is a very bad crime and the producer or the importer that put in the market dangerous products is punished with the arrest for an year or with a fine from 10.000 euro to 50.000 euro.
3. The fact is a very bad crime and the producer or the importer that does not respect the rules in the article 6, comma 2, letters b), numbers 1) and 2), c) and d), 1) and 2), is punished with a fine from 10.000 euro to 25.000 euro.
4. The producer or distributor who does not collaborate to the activities in the article 6, comma 2, letter a), has to pay a fine from 2.500 euro to 40.000 euro.
5. The fact is a very bad crime and the producer who does not respect the dispositions in article 3, comma 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 and the distributor who does not respect the dispositions in the same article at the comma 6, 7, 8, 9, have to pay a fine from 1.500 euro to 30.000 euro.

We do not think we have to write more, neither for the transgressors nor for the controllers.

Everyone has to take his own responsibilities.

Our social relations and the education are aspects of a big model that the society has created.

The rules may be different between Countries ore cultures, but courtesy and respect are present in every society, in every country and in every time, at least between equals. And because in our occidental society we considered to be equal, respect and courtesy are characteristic of a good social relation.

So we can not accept that the basilar rules of respect and education are forgotten in social relations, mostly in the web.

I hope that everyone of us know that a dialogue begins and ends with a greeting and that, if we have to ask someone for something, we have to be gentle and to say “Please” before asking.

Maybe it is not clear that under an e-mail address there is a person like us that would like to be greeted.

We do not know why to accept request like: “Imported ship from America 33feet what to do and how much does it cost the CEE mark” without anything more (and it is only one of the examples).

We sent them back to the sender as the anonymous telephone requests; maybe these persons are unaware of asking without permission and courtesy.

Our web pages are open and we like to have new guests, but those who are not educated are gently accompanied to the exit: also this makes better the quality of life

In fact if we may mention the CEI, many will read Italian Episcopal Conference, others will read electro technical Italian committee, so abbreviations can often be treacherous.

When they are clear they are a language for experts and since many wish to be experts, we look at the proliferation of acronyms, which are taken from English and then are used in Italy, forcing the translation and then the interpretation.

Let us return to SIL, which is the level of integrity of the system. It is not so much dark.

Looking at rules and directives we understand that it is absolutely useful to know the level of safety of a system and its level of integrity and sometimes it is necessary to evaluate the safety of what we use. Then why do we not try to simplify and make clear the languages?

The answer is simple. Technicians, also the good ones, are concerned with resolving the problems, to make sure machines and security systems, but they do not worry if they are not understood and they do not care in speaking a common language. This way each person can become important in its own back yard, almost as in politics.

Discovering after many research and studies that what in service would refer to RESS (essential safety requirements and health) corresponds, also if not directly, to SIL means discovering that the problem of security is common to all the productive and social sectors, and so it would be more useful and convenient for us to have a single language!

Clearly for the technical is not worth the same logic because they divide up the knowledge and have them evolve in watertight compartments. In addition of being a source of prestige this is also a source of profit, but the person who pays is always the consumer!

And the consumer pays in terms of money and pays also in terms of security, because if they make complicated what is really simple, it means that in the end nothing is applied and we found situations in which the RESS are unknown to the mechanics and the SIL is unknown to electronic.

At this point, a compliment to the engineers and especially to those who have the task of creating and disseminating the safety rules, it is absolutely essential!

This is a quotation from a colonel in force in 1976: -The army management is made in order to make it difficult the easy through the unnecessary-. And we add: -not only there-.

We have transformed a great opportunity, which had origin in top 100 us immediately after war, passing through the development of the most advanced Japanese industries, to get to us, a rule which had as principal objective the satisfaction of the customer in a chaotic set of unnecessary procedures and pre-packaged forms and copies.

Who knows the business issues has the situation clear, because after a first period of euphoria, which led many to spend high figures and the same regions to finance unlikely projects, we moved on to find that are not modules and cards that improve the management, and we have reached today to a sense of generalised refusal and widespread scepticism.

Who writes for years has ceased to be as consultant for ISO 9001 to draw attention on the effectively control and improvement of management, using in practice the most useful criteria specified by the standards, almost in silence and without advertising it within the companies.

Of course, the ISO (someone still cite the 9002) has influenced many employees, such that almost daily, when for the CE marking we need to have the procedures for control of production (FPC to put it likes to so many consultants, the clear objective to speak between similar), many are asking:-but then do we need ISO?-

No, clear and categorical answer. Procedures are the way of working which companies have because they produce all days, and are not related to ISO, so to make the CE marking, they do not need ISO or other documentations.

It is important to Work well, with constant attention to safety and health of anyone who produces and of those who use the product. All the rest are things that you do with good sense, a bit of commitment to learn new things and especially to understand them.

Are we damaging ourselves? No, we are realistic, sincere and honest.

All the directives and the European regulations say clearly that only people who live within the EEC or has in this field a legal representative can affix the CE mark. It follows that who is outside of the EEC can not!

What did Chinese do, but in reality all those who are outside the EEC and even those that working within this want to eliminate their traceability?

They have affixed a CE mark, similar to that regular, but with minor changes; usually they have approached the C and the E in a way as to seem the trade mark applied by the European Community but in fact DIFFERING from it.

When in a possible and rare control some authorities said that that mark could not be affixed by the “Chinese” in turn they said it was not the EC mark, but the acronym of China export, sometimes succeeding in preventing proper sanctions.

The European Community has made clear in a clear way the shape and dimensions of the EC mark, and has warned anyone not to put brands that were similar to the correct one.

We remind you that the correct form of the EC mark is the one you can find in our pages, where the C and the E are derived from two circles one in the other and the minimum size in height must be 5 mm.

Moreover the general ignorance made that even products that certainly respect the standards and the directives are marked wrong!Attention: we are not talking about products of small companies, for example the USB Vodafone pins for surfing in the Internet have the wrong EC mark and we can assure that this is not an isolated case.

So between those who apply the counterfeit EC mark and those who apply the wrong EC mark on correct products, the confusion is total. Perhaps a solution would be the literal application of the law, that is a fine of 2,500 euro and the seizure of the products.

Certainly a drastic attitude for an error not too serious, but the question arises: is so difficult to carry out a correct logo? And it is possible to think that the multinationals are unable to control such a trivial thing?

The result of these process is to leave the consumer in doubt: is it printing error or China export?

We insist on the fundamental point from which depart all the directives and all the regulations related on the EC mark: this point is security.

When the legislator approves and publics directives and regulations, he has to ensure the security to the final user in connection to the technical progress and productive possibilities. This is why many rules and directives are continuously updated.

Therefore everyone is able to understand that are the requirements of security to determine the complexity of procedures to activate to apply the EC mark on the product, and not its commercial cost or its dissemination.

More a product may cause damage to the User, as in the case of machinery, more accurate must be the analysis of risk and much more complex the interventions to eliminate or reduce the dangers.

For these reasons and not for trade speculation, the internally assistance to apply the EC mark, may have extremely variable costs and move from a few hundred euro to a several thousand.

We said rhetorically that security has no price, but facts show that very often it does not have value and to ensure a minimum of security the CE mark can be given only after having followed a well defined path, which is not the burocratical compilation of modules, but the detailed assessment of characteristics and circumstances.

Therefore look at the EC mark with the aim of obtaining a safe products before that functional, because it is always better that a product stops working rather than those who use it.

A safe product is a guarantee not only for the users, but also for those who produce it and put it in trade, otherwise it becomes a time bomb, it is only a matter of time.

The declaration of conformity is the step immediately before the application of theEC mark in the procedure of the marking.

It is written after the risk analysis and in order to be truthful, that is consistent with the reality, it is necessary that: 1 they know the regulations related to the product that they are treating, 2 the product complies in the project and in the execution, with all the requirements contained in standards.

The customers perhaps are convinced that those who for example, build a chandelier, are perfectly aware of the regulations related to this product. Unfortunately, this is a rational and ideal condition that does not find correspondence in reality.

In both design and construction, in this and many other areas they proceed for experience, for information transmitted orally, habit and heard. The cases in which companies possess and use the Rules which concern their products are in reality a minority and concern the companies of excellence.

This fact is that the majority of the products CE marked and with “regular”declaration of conformity are in accordance with the requirements of the rules, but this is not verified by whoever agrees to the declarations.

What are the risks that customers run? In reality very few compared to those potential, because the manufacturers are not imbeciles or unable, but certainly superficial in signing documents that have nothing to comply, if not the form on which they are written.

In addition there is to say that many associations of category, not all, use to provide modules and fax similar of declarations, but they do not explain the importance of the CE marking on the level of security. Indeed they want to postpone the more possible the dates of entry into force of the directives and rules rather than help their members to put themselves in order. Has all this meaning?

Sometimes it is ridiculous that some associations say that the CE mark is not important, implying that they do not need the marking in the general sense, while they well know that if it is not always needed the mark, thedeclaration of conformity always serves, and so the difference between the mark and the declaration of conformity is only in the presence of the label.

The Members believe or pretend to believe to associations and they place on the market products which do not have the CE mark for which there has not been anyprocedure for security, in accordance with their associations. We ask then:-Qui prodet?-. Certainly not to the customers, who paradoxically may be the same in the various associations.

We have talked of shortcoming detectors in the system of quality management and we have mentioned the incorrect application of the CE marking as a sign of a deep problem in the application of ISO 9001. This concerns companies with the obligation to CE MARKING the products, let’s see now another “detector” which concerns all the companies without distinction.

In many certified companies a subject that creates confusion and doubt is that of the management of the documents of external origin and fortunately the new edition of the regulations has made something more clear.

However it remains the problem of identifying these documents and then the problem of how to treat them and the fact is that very few companies apply the protocol of the documents in entry, considering that this is a bureaucracy more suited to a public body that to a private company.

Well, if there is something to copy from the management of entities is the protocol of the documents and the management of the budget, and while of this last it would be too complicated to speak in here (because it falls in the logic of quality) on the protocol it is appropriate to spend a little time.

How can a company establish on which documents intend to base its work if it does not identifies them? Those which are producted within thw system, thanks also to business programs and to the correct management of the computer documents, are treated properly, but how can be used those which come from the outside if they are not even identified?

So if a company does not perform the protocol of the entry documents we can conclude without fear of contradiction that its management system has a big problem and if they are certified, then the problem is also present in the certification body.

Our experience suggests that the 90% of the certified companies that we know does not apply the protocol of the entry documents. We are faced with two assumptions: are we unfortunate or actually the certification method applied is very elusive?

Those of you who deal with applied quality can see.

Obviously it is not sophisticated, but when we see a chromatic signal it means that it has identified something.

Can we find something similar in the field of quality? Or better, is there a way to demonstrate that a management system of quality is not managed correctly or even worse, that a certification was “granted” also if there are serious non-conformity?

Yes! The answer is called CE!

When an organisation decided to adopt the management system of quality respecting the ISO 9001 2008 (Ex 2000), they must follow the mandatory standards, which should be respected anyway, but in this situation the conditional is not permitted.

Therefore to check immediately, simply and effectively if there is a’ hole‘ in the system, a non-conformity criticism, it is sufficient to investigate the presence or absence of CE marking on the products if it is provided.

It would seem obvious that in the presence of mandatory standards operating for the safety of the product organizations are in accordance regardless whether ISO 9001 2008, but it is not.

Who writes met lots of companies with management system for the quality, certified by notified bodies, which not only did not mark the products correctly, but in some cases they did not even mark them.

Is it possible that notified bodies, which in some of their operational areas also provide the service of the EC certification of the product, do not monitor the application and the respect of the directives on CE marking? Yes! strange, but possible.

This is one of many warped aspects of ISO 9001 IN ITALY, where it’s easier to buy a title that studying; but not everywhere: in other countries there are controls and the criterion is that controlled and controllers cannot and must not have common interests and common objectives and that circumventing law costs much more that respecting it.

Perhaps also here someday to say ISO 9001 will mean talking about quality and not only of cards, taste for the well done and not sick for unnecessary modules. Perhaps.

That said, a little for us and a little to stimulate some curiosity about this provision which many consultants have contributed to ridicule during these years transforming it from excellent opportunity to unnecessary illusion and expensive disappointment, let’s see if it deals something with the EC.

ISO 9001 and the EC depart from the same point: quality is not or is not only benefit, the quality is the respect for what was expected, so for both is important the model, the project or the reference standard.

For the ISO the point of departure is what you want, in general with corporate targets, in particular with the activities of process, for the EC the point of departure are the Directives and Harmonised standards, but the criterion remains the same for both.

We can say that the CE marking is a species of ISO9001, also if restricted, but with contours well defined by laws, directives and regulations, and the same time it can be assumed that ISO9001 includes automatically the CE marking, as this is governed by binding rules (those famous that often some do not identify).

Another common aspect of these two systems is the fact that they supplies guarantee of respect towards a model, they provide security but they do not certify the “quality”. This means that we can have a safe product but with limited benefits, we can have a company with a good system of management, but in bankrupt

Then what are they FOR? We can not confuse the necessary with the sufficient, because to manage a company as to make the marking we must necessary things, but these may not be sufficient for the prosperity of the company or the success of a product. To obtain these last objectives we need to introduce the criterion of Total Quality, but this is another story. Perhaps we will talk about it another time.