Interview of Marina Glazatova, Head of the Department of Technical Regulation and Metrology, to the publication RZhD-Partner

The current state of shaping and reviewing the normative base for the technical regulation can be described as operational.  And it means that the Russian economy will acquire more civilized and progressive outlines. We are talking to Marina Glazatova, the director of the Department of Technical Regulation and Metrology of the RF Ministry of Industry and Energy, about the origins of the reform and the course of its implementation.

- Marina Konstantinovna, please remind me what brought on the need to carry out a technical regulation reform in the country?

I believe that, in order to provide an explanation, it would be beneficial to remember that the history of the standardization system development goes back with its roots to the formation of the Russia’s statehood. A reference to the Russian gages can be already found in chronicles, in Russkaya Pravda and the missive letters of Russian feudal lords (kniazes). In 996 a.c. kniaz Vladimir from Kiev issued the Code on observing unified weight and length gages throughout Russia. Any gage is, first of all, a standard. Hence, the old Russian Code on measures and gages can reasonably be viewed as the beginning of the Russian standardization. But I want to emphasize that I am referring here to the introduction of the obligatory application of a single approach to measures and gages, and it was exactly what was required by the developing economy. Assurance of measurement uniformity was achieved in Russia in the course of the evolving industrial standardization, on the threshold of transition from the 17^th  to the 18^th century.  In 1841 the Depot for master weights and gages was established for preserving master gages used for checking standard measures.

Starting 1920, planned economy construction was launched in our country and, consequently, approaches to the standardization were altered. From the mechanism that was aimed at the coordination of the activities of separate enterprises, standardization turned into the system of technical requirements of the state as the single Customer. Already by 1940 two categories of All-Union standards were established – OST VKS – the standards confirmed by the All-Union Standardization Committee, and OST NK – standards confirmed by standardization committees of the people’s commissariat. Starting this period, the departmental principle will rule in the development and confirmation of standards, which is logical for any command-and-control economy. In 1968, for the first time ever, a complex of state standards called “The state standardization system” (GOST 1.0-68-GOST 1.5-68) was consolidated, establishing standard types for products, as well as standard categories. At the same time, norms of economic sanctions were approved for the application against enterprises that did not comply with standard requirements and technical conditions in the course of producing and selling goods. And it was also a logical step, since the state, being the only owner in such an economy, is the only customer and the only buyer, and, accordingly, all the requirements to the goods produced are set in the documents that must be followed by producers (who, again, are state-owned).  

We have come to the most important subject. The attitude to property has changed in Russia – and it is the cause for conducting the reform. Attempts to blindly cling to the former system will either hinder the economy development or create ugly regulation mechanisms.

There is a multitude of examples supporting my statement. For example, technical conditions for the production of goods include own know-how developments of an enterprise, which, in the environment of the recognition of different property categories and the protection of property rights, will be protected by the intellectual property law.

Moreover, as a rule, technical conditions in particular contain the know-how of the production process and of the products as such, and both are actually patented. They are the main tools used by economic agents in their competitive struggle. State sanctions for violating technical regulations created a situation, in which only one option for production conditions was predominant for all the players. The competition as such was eliminated. The scientific and technical progress was ensured only by scientific organizations, thus virtually leveling out the fourth production factor – the entrepreneurial initiative capable of establishing the most effective combinations of economic resources.      

It was exactly the absence of competition that engendered the paradox of the directive state: the product quality was ensured not by economic mechanisms but by the normative requirements of standards.

Acceptance of the Law On Technical Regulation arranged everything in proper order – the state sets forth the requirements related to safety, to put it in one word, hence, those are obligatory requirements. All other requirements and standards are non-mandatory, and they serve for boosting competitiveness. Accordingly, each enterprise uses them guided by its own interests.

We had to remove excessive technical barriers in trading, put out of the way the redundant administrative pressure and the unnecessary regulation left over as a heritage of the planned economy, and, under the condition of the state’s withdrawal from the total control practices, to ensure an effective protection of the consumer market from dangerous products. In essence, back then the issues of technical regulation became a peculiar Rubicon. We either had to boldly cross it and confidently move forward by the path of progress, or to step back and be cast away into the past.   

- How can you evaluate the present state of the reform implementation?

-To begin with, it is operational. I will not hide the fact that, especially in the beginning of the implementation of the Law on Technical Regulation, we had extremely tense situations, when the apologists, arguing for the review of its main norms and for wrapping up the reform as a whole, did everything to put hard brakes on the preparation of new documents. It suffices to say that the Law, that came into effect in July, 2003, remained almost totally idle for almost two years.

Today the reform advances, and it means a much more civilized, progressive outline for our economy. The government has approved the Program for the development of technical regulations, the documents containing mandatory requirements to the safety of products and to the production processes. Systems of technical regulation comprising the list of technical regulations are built in all the key industries of the Russian economy.  

A large-scale review of tens of thousands of former norms and requirements is under way. Some of them are acknowledged to be useful and are included into the new system of technical regulation, they are reconciled with international requirements. Other regulations are developed in accordance with the new dictates of the time, some obsolete ones that impede the normal development of the economy are removed. 181 technical regulations are to be worked out by 2008. We believe that by 2010 there will be about 300 of such baseline documents bearing the status of federal Russian laws. They are developed by thousands of leading experts from government executive bodies, from renowned scientific and public institutions, from the biggest Russian business structures. Over 70 completed texts of technical regulations are placed on the official site of Minpromenergo and on the sites of legislators. After these documents are discussed they will be introduced to the government. Besides, quite many technical regulations are developed by initiative groups of enterprises and business associations.   

Yet another confirmation of the fact that the reform of technical regulation has become irreversible is the fact that it is known about and participated in by an increasing number of people, that it occupies, with its complicated issues and sometimes difficult for common people’s understanding terms, a constantly growing space in the media.

- What are the tasks of Minpromenergo of Russia, and, in particular, of the Department you are the head of, in terms of the reform implementation?

- The main task of Minpromenergo is to coordinate the overall progress of work in the sphere of technical regulation, therefore, our Department is authorized to act as the federal body of technical regulation. We work out proposals as to how the technical regulation reform is to be developed further on, we conduct the coordination work to ensure the reform implementation, and we strive to support this line of activity to the fullest extent with proper methodology. 

Any technical regulation is a document innovative in its content, and, of course, it requires a from-the-ground-up methodology to support it. Minpromenergo functions include conducting tenders for the development of technical regulations, preparing annual amendments to the governmental program for the development of technical regulations, organizing the work of the Government Committee for the Technical Regulation, coordinating the activities of a plethora of bodies and organizations, establishing expert committees, etc. And, naturally, we are also responsible for providing the information support.

- It is known that the development of technical regulations is carried out in the environment of a turbulent discussion regarding what they actually should look like. One of the opinions claims that these documents are to contain specific technical requirements (with numerical values) to the site falling under regulation. The second opinion maintains that the technical regulations are to include only significant requirements that can be applied to a rather wide classification of objects. Minpromenergo supports the first option. What are its advantages?    

-Advantages are evident. A technical regulation is the federal law under the stipulations of which will operate the state control, the courts and the inspection bodies. Thus, the contents of the regulations are to be plain and clear, and, what is most important, they are to be univocal and to allow no varying interpretations. Therefore, the more precise is the text, the better the law will operate. Vague legal wordings always result in “one law for the rich, and another for the poor”.  Technical regulations encompass safety requirements, and to apply them using this principle is dangerous, to say the least.

If we restrict the texts of technical regulations and include into them only some significant requirements (and in this case we would need to determine the significance priority), then where shall we put the others? Into some sort of semi-voluntary documents? In my opinion, it would do little to ensure safety…

- How do you evaluate the progress of work on the creation of industry-related technical regulations? Is there a possibility for “blank spots” appearing in an industry by 2010?

The issue of the speed of the technical regulations’ development is, it seems, the most debatable one. It is to be mentioned that this issue is often used as a political slogan. It is actually a technically complicated, meticulous professional work. 18-20 months time frame for such a work as the development of a new branch of legislation does not seem to be sufficient. But the work continues at full tilt, and this work is becoming more quick and more systematic further down the road, because we are gaining experience.      

I want to emphasize that we deem important not only to meet the development deadline, but also to work out the comprehensive list of technical regulations needed by the year 2010. With this goal in view, the governmental committee has approved five systems of technical regulations – for the energy, construction, railway, space and fire safety segments. Twelve more are in the process of being developed, there will be 17 systems altogether. But we believe that 17 systems do not cover the whole list of the systems that are yet to be developed. We conducted a special methodology meeting dedicated to this issue, and we hope that in about one month – one month and a half a comprehensive list of such systems will be prepared. The most important is the content of these systems. First of all, they include the list of technical regulations, which will be developed for each industry or line of activity, secondly, they include the understanding of how the compliance assessment system will look like, the understanding of what the state will do regarding the obligatory constituents, in other words – what can be submitted under the control of self-regulated organizations and to the non-mandatory agency in the course of establishing voluntary certification systems. Yet another question to be answered is how the corporate standardization will be developed and how quality control systems will be integrated in this segment. All is to be interrelated both in a single system and between the systems.

- Is not there a danger that the rapidly developing scientific and technical progress will outrun the legislative effort, and that, given the long period needed for the law development and acceptance procedure, the technical regulations will already be intellectually worn out at the stage of their acceptance?

- Of course, the science and technologies develop at a fast pace, and there will be a time when the technical regulations will need to be reviewed. It is a routine, continuous work aimed at perfecting the legislation. However, I would like to emphasize that the essence of the reform is to ensure that technical regulations will not contain technical solutions, as it is typical for standards, but rather technical requirements, which are not changed that often. A certain amount of time is required to understand which specific factor is dangerous in a new material or a new substance, and to determine its safety criteria.  

We need to finally realize that the application of new technical solutions is a tool of competitive struggle. And it is exactly the standardization that is to help an enterprise select the most suitable technical decision. Standards are not to be imposed, they are to be popular and in demand.

- Russia is negotiating for joining the World Trade Organization.  Would it be expedient to settle down to the course of replicating the systems of Western standards and how balanced are the technical regulations developed in our country?

- We cannot just replicate Western standards, because Russia is the only country with 7 climate and geographical zones, and 19 soil zones. The only possible solution is to reconcile and balance the systems, and even that can be done only if it does not contradict our specifics, which, by the way, is totally in agreement with the WTO requirements.  

Moreover, the WTO rules specifically require the harmonization with international standards, and not the replication of the standards of separate countries or groups of countries, because such an approach would be viewed as discriminatory towards other participants.

The average world level of the harmonization of requirements is 35-37%. We maintain it, and sometimes we go even further. For example, the project for the special technical regulation On the Safety of Low-Voltage Installations is reconciled with the EU Directive by 85%.

- What holds back the launched reform? What, in your opinion, needs to be done in order to ensure its successful completion?

- There are three arresting factors involved. As the main one I would mention the stubborn desire to change the Law On the Technical Regulation instead of following its stipulations. The second factor is the absence of points of view regarding standardization that would be adequate to the up-to-date tasks that we face. The third factor is the constant attempts to replace the real work with a threadbare political discussion as to whether it is possible or impossible to implement the Law. 

Actually, everything has been taken care of to ensure a normal work process – a comprehensive system has been established, which is participated in by all the interested parties, including governmental departments, producers and consumers.

Maybe there is a shortage of information and Internet does not allow to make everyone familiar with the information at hand, so, thank you for the opportunity to discuss this subject in you magazine.

- So, what are your law-making plans for the near future?

Everything is outlined in the governmental order, which specified and itemized the Program for the Development of Technical Regulations. There are plans to start developing 97 regulations, in addition to the ones that are being developed at present.