In order to clarify the obligation for CE marking according to the EN 1090-1, the Dutch branch organization for steel asked the following question for written answer E-001233/2018 to the European Parliament. The below answers were given by Ms Bieńkowska on behalf of the Commission (18.6.2018)

Q1       Is the Commission aware that the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT), which performs a supervisory role on behalf of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Public Works in the Netherlands, has decided to suspend enforcement of the rules in the case of manufacturers who supply assembled metal structures as part of a building or of infrastructure, where the manufacturer both produces the materials in a factory and assembles them at a building site?

A1       Yes, the Commission was made aware of this by letter of 7 December 2017 from Koninklijke Metaalunie.

Q2       Does the Commission consider that a metal structure which is produced by a single manufacturer and assembled on site by it (and which becomes part of a building or of infrastructure) in order to perform a single contract that it has accepted falls under the Construction Products Regulation (CPR) and the European harmonised product standard EN 1090-1?

A2       If a construction product (e.g. a metal structure) is both manufactured and incorporated into the construction work (e.g. a building) by the same economic actor, no transaction or change of ownership of that product takes place between the manufacturing and the incorporation phases. The Commission recalls that, according to Article 1 of the Construction Products Regulation 305/2011 ('CPR'), the Regulation lays down conditions for the placing or making available on the market of construction products. In these particular circumstances, and in the absence of any further information to the contrary, the CPR does not appear to be applicable.

Q3       What action will the Commission take to clarify whether or not a metal structure which is produced by a single manufacturer and assembled on site requires an FPC certificate?

A3       Consequently, the Factory Production Control (FPC) certification rules based on the CPR do not appear applicable either in the situation described above.

These questions will be discussed at the Administrative Cooperation Group (AdCo) CPR on 13 & 14/11/2018. Please contact Dirk De Moor ( if you should have any questions/remarks/considerations.

The underlying idea is that in this situation the performance of the construction product is specified in the contract between the manufacturer/installer and the client. Market surveillance through the distribution channel is impossible.

However, precautions should be made to generalise this statement to all kinds of products as this could virtually mean the end of the CPR. The main purpose of the CPR is to make the manufacturer assure the performance of his product and provide objective information to the client to make his decision.

As discussed at the Belgian mirror committee steel construction, the Factory Production Control (FPC) certificate was highly valued to assure the quality of the products. Following the European Commission answer, this FPC would be no longer needed in this particular situation.