Glen Dale from Euralarm presented the industry perspective on certification of security systems at the CRISP final conference in Brussels 16th March 2016.

1. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
An Industry perspective
Glen Dale
General Director / Euralarm

2. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
Euralarm Positioning
 We represent the electronic fire
safety and security industry.
 We provide leadership and
expertise for industry, market,
policy makers and standards
bodies.
 We support the idea of a Single
European Market in our sector.
 We are the only trade
association in our sector with an
active office in Brussels.

3. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
3 associations in 1
Fire Section
Security Section
Services Section

4. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
A Strong network

5. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
Based on the 2015 figures published
by the EU Commission:
• Through our industry members
and associations, we represent >
5000 companies in a
€67 billion market
– 48% systems
– 32% services
– 20% products
• Those companies have nearly
700 000 employees
• An 11% market growth is
expected over the next 5 years
Serving a big community

6. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
Our Strategic Goals
A Market-driven standards
system that works for consumers
and the industry
• Euralarm’s voice is heard by
CEN, CENELEC and the EU
Commission
• Direct cooperation with CCMC
A Single market approach to
testing auditing and certification
in the fire safety and security
industry
• Euralarm expects a positive
legislative proposal on
Security Products from the EU
Commission (DG Home) in
2016
1
2

7. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
Improving fire safety in tourist
accommodation to prevent
unnecessary deaths and injuries
• Oct. 29, 2015: Resolution of the
EU-Parliament asking the
EU Commission to release
legislation to improve Fire
Safety in hotels.
A Europe-wide system to
recognise skills and qualifications
of personnel working in the
industry
• Euralarm members are very
active in providing training
• Improve coordination with
national authorities
3
4
Our Strategic Goals

8. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
CRISP
CRISP
Observations from an Industry perspective

9. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
CRISP
The Positives:
 The STEFi model addresses, in an innovative way, some of
the “softer” aspects of an installed system.
 To date standards and certificates have addressed the
technical performance of products and systems – but not from
an installed and operated system approach and how it may
impact the employees and the public at large.
 The STEFi model addresses also the cost aspect with
respect to integration and future possible upgrades as well as
training requirements
 STEFi reviews under Freedom infringement, how the system
ensures that personal data and images are kept secure and
doesn’t infringe on personal privacy rights

10. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
CRISP
Issues that need addressed in a next phase:
 Appointed Experts
 Selected and appointed by the evaluation body
 Security – Technical (forensic - scientific)
 Trust – staff, consumers, consumer associations
 Efficiency – economic background, relevant technical knowledge
 Freedom infringement – human rights, data protection lawyers....
 How to build up this database of willing experts?
 Experts in their field – will they be experts in STEFi evaluation - or will
there be different STEFi experts for every installation?
 They are unlikely to provide services for free – and are likely to be
expensive
 Is a pan-European result required or a national approach?

11. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
CRISP
Issues that need addressed in a next phase:
 Pan-European calibration
 Test labs often perform “round robin testing” of a “gold model”
to ensure calibrated and uniform results
 How might this be addressed with installed systems
 Some aspects of what is acceptable from a video observance
point of view is down to national culture. Does this imply that
although STEFi is generic, testing and certification is national
 The Industry (Security components) has been advocating with the
EU Commission (DG HOME) the need for pan-European
certification. It is hoped that a legislative proposal is released soon!
 The Industry would not easily accept a move to another
complex national system certificate

12. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
CRISP
Issues that need addressed in a next phase:
 Freedom infringement
 Aspects of data protection are addressed in the new EU
General Data Protection Regulation 2018.
 This is a legal requirement – can this not be self-certified
by the user/integrator
“The primary objectives of the GDPR are to give citizens back the
control of their personal data and to simplify the regulatory
environment for international business by unifying the regulation
within the EU.” (1)
(1) Wikipedia

13. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
CRISP
Issues that need addressed in a next phase:
 Business model
 From a manufacturers perspective we have many product
standards ensuring product quality – especially in the areas
of Fire Safety and Security.
 Some countries also require testing of a configured system
– albeit technical performance testing
 The question is who is the driver who wants to submit the
integrated / installed system for STEFI testing?
 The user or integrator? - costs may be significant
 There needs to be a clear business model or driver for
STEFi to be successful

14. CRISP Final Conference – 16 March 2017 6th CoU Meeting, Brussels
Thank you
CRISP