6.4.2 国家認定機関の非競争性及び非商業性

The Regulation’s aim of setting up a coherent framework for accreditation that establishes accreditation as the last level of control is underpinned by the principles of non-commerciality and non-competition.

For this reason, while accreditation is supposed to be a self-supporting activity, it is to be provided on a not-for-profit basis. This means that national accreditation bodies do not have the objective of maximising gains or distributing profits. They may provide their services in return for payments or receive income, but any excess revenue is to be invested in further developing their accreditation activities as long as these correspond to the overall tasks of the accreditation bodies. The primary objective of accreditation remains not to produce any gain but to fulfil a task in the public interest.

Regular excess revenues could be a signal that there is a potential to reduce the tariffs charged for accreditation and to encourage smaller conformity assessment bodies to apply for accreditation. Given the prominence that the Regulation gives to accreditation’s not-for-profit character, recital 14 clarifies that accreditation is not to produce any gains to its owners or members. In the case that there should nevertheless be any gains, the situation may be corrected by the reduction of tariffs or the revenue may be reused for the further development of accreditation, so as to avoid any conflict with the not-for-profit principle of the Regulation. One could reasonably expect that any excess revenues generated by an accreditation body could also be used to support the accreditation body’s involvement in the accreditation activities in the European, international or public sphere.

Regardless of the legal structure of the national accreditation body, there should thus not be a regular transfer of excess revenue to the owners or members of the national accreditation body – be they public or private. Using accreditation as another form of revenue for the state would in consequence cast serious doubts on its compliance with the Regulation’s intentions concerning the not-for-profit character of accreditation

Following the same logic, accreditation is to be established as a clearly distinct activity from any conformity assessment activities. A national accreditation body is therefore not allowed to offer or provide any activities or services that a conformity assessment body offers or provides. Neither may it provide consultancy services, own shares in or otherwise have a financial interest in a conformity assessment body or compete with conformity assessment bodies, so as to avoid any kind of conflict of interest.

Furthermore, to safeguard the principle of non-commerciality the Regulation also foresees that accreditation bodies are not allowed to compete with other accreditation bodies. Within the EU, they are only to be active on the territory of their own Member State. Only in exceptional cases, specified in Article 7.1 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 is cross-border accreditation foreseen. Unless these conditions are met, conformity assessment bodies have to seek accreditation with the national accreditation body of the Member State they are established in. This applies for all conformity assessment activities that take place in Europe and concern products or services that are to be placed on the market (271).