Changing draft standards when they have already reached the CEN inquiry stage, is no easy undertaking. Yet the examples of industrial trucks and cement presented in this issue are proof of the fact that subsequent corrections can be carried out successfully nonetheless. It is, however, more efficient to consider the interests of occupational health and safety at an early stage in the preparation of standards.

Interview with Mr Karsten, Chairman of the Laender High Joint Committee of Labour Inspection Services (LASI).

Construction product standards for preventing “bricklayer’s scabies”

In KANBRIEF 2/99 we referred to the fact that the European draft standards prEN 1726-11 and prEN 14592 do not deal adequately with the static stability of industrial trucks when driving. Due to the safeguard action by the German, French and Italian delegation in the Standing Committee (according to Art. 6 of the Machinery Directive 98/37/EC), the Member States were called upon by CEN to draw up proposals for amendment.

In order to accelerate the international and European standardization process, it would at first glance appear practical to prepare draft standards in one language only and not in two (ISO / IEC) or even three (CEN / CENELEC). Standards could then presumably be introduced on the market rather more quickly, but what effects would this have on quality, comprehensibility and user friendliness?

If OH&S experts involved in standardization are of the opinion that a draft standard contravenes fundamental OH&S interests, then they should object to the document. We have already reported on the special significance of the “closed opinion of occupational health and safety” in this connection. If the national standards body does not take this vote into account, the person objecting can apply to the chairman of the relevant DIN standards committee within one month for conciliation

The future participation of German experts in European standardization projects in the field of personal protective equipment (PPE) is at risk due to lack of financing. Up to now, the cost of DIN’s work for the coordination of the European standards bodies in the field of PPE has been borne by manufacturers, statutory accident insurance institutions, users and EU funds. However, since EU funds are to run out before long, future financing is at risk.

DG “Enterprise” of the European Commission has published its “Comments on Directive 98/37/EC” (1999 edition). The document was not prepared with the consensus of all interested parties and certain key aspects do not reflect the position of the Machinery Safety Standing Committee (Art. 6(2) Machinery Directive) or of the Federal Republic of Germany.

www.hvbg.de/bia/stoffdatenbank