Report on Conformity to Type
(CTT): CIML Item 10.4
Presented to:
46th CIML Meeting Prague 13 Oct 2011
Presented by:
Stephen O’Brien – CIML Member
Manager, Measurement and Product Safety Service
Ministry of Consumer Affairs
New Zealand
CTT - Background
• Conformity to Type (CTT) issues and concerns
considered within OIML for sometime
• 45th CIML resolved to organise CTT Seminar
• These Seminars were an opportunity to discuss and
identify potential way forward for CIML
consideration at today’s meeting:
– CTT(I) – Utrecht 29,30 June 2011
– CTT(II) – Prague 10 October 2011
• Thank seminar organisers, speakers and participants
Utrecht CTT Seminar: CTT(I)
• Held in Utrecht, the Netherlands, 29th and
30th of June 2011
• Attended by 43 delegates. Good cross section
of representation
• Day 1 – Seminar speakers with a variety of
perspectives
• Day 2 – Panel discussion, identification and
analysis of critical issues
Utrecht CTT(I) – Key Points
• From global perspective CTT has many complexities
• CTT important for on-going confidence in OIML
certification systems
• Regulators need assurance that production
instruments are consistent with OIML type
• Manufacturers need ‘level playing field’
• Pre-market CTT needed to incentivise compliance by
introducing potential to get caught
• Prevent ‘dumping’ non-compliant instruments
Prague CTT(II) – Key Points
• Follow-up CTT Seminar held on the 10 Oct
2011
• Attended by approximately 70 participants
• The seminar was recorded and will be
transcribed
• Presentations and comments of
participants during seminar used to inform
future work
Prague CTT(II) – Key Points
• Considered Utrecht Seminar report
• Reviewed IEC Conformity Assessment and
the UNECE International Model
• Identified how the content and quality of
OIML certificates and documentation could
be improved (to support CTT)
• A draft definition of OIML CTT was
discussed and refined into a scope for CTT
activity – incorporated into CIML resolution
Action for Consideration: 1
• CIML resolution is drafted to formally assign
responsibility for CTT to the work programme
of an OIML Technical Committee.
(Consideration and clear direction need to be
given to where this work is assigned)
Action for Consideration: 2
• CIML resolution is drafted to formally request
this Technical Committee to develop a
guidance document on Conformity to Type
Document intended to:
– to reference current CTT programmes in the
US and EU
– identify ‘best practice’
– inform future global development work in
this area.
Where to Assign CTT?
• It remains for the CIML to consider and
decide where this work is assigned and
completed
• CTT has overarching implications for all
instrument categories and for both the MAA
and Basic certificate systems
• US and Australia have previously indicated a
willingness to take on secretariat
responsibility to complete this work
Where to Assign CTT?
1. Current Technical Committee:
– TC 3/SC 1: Pattern Approval and
Verification Secretariat – United States
– TC 3/SC 5: Conformity assessment
Secretariat –United States
2. New Technical Committee
– TC 3/SC 6: Conformity to Type
Secretariat - BIML and / or other economy
to be confirmed
Where to Assign CTT?
• Discussions at the Prague Seminar - unable to
unanimously decide on a TC recommendation
• The Seminar participants were asked for an
informal indication of their preferences
• Not a representative sample of CIML
Members
• Results are only for your information
Where to Assign CTT?
1. New TC or Existing TC:
20 to 9 in favour of Existing TC
2. TC 3/SC 1 Pattern Approval and
Verification or TC 3/SC 5 Conformity
Assessment:
11 to 9 in favour of TC 3/ SC 1
In Conclusion
It still remains for the CIML to consider and decide
on the proposed draft resolutions and where this
work should be assigned.
I appreciate the CIML’s attention and consideration
of these matters.
Thank you for your attention
(Discussion and Review of Draft resolutions)