MATTIUZZO Corrado (ENTR) ATEX/05/2/4.1

From:

Békési Zsófia [[e-mail]]

Sent:

vendredi 16 septembre 2005 15:14

To:

MATTIUZZO Corrado (ENTR)

Subject:

components Hu position

Importance: High

Page 1 of 2

27/10/2005

Dear Mr Mattiuzzo,

Regarding the consideration paper sent for 4 weeks circulation on the 26

th

of August Hungary has the

following position:

Regarding the argumentation of the paper:

Article 8(3) states indeed that the conformity assessment procedures shall apply to components with
the exception of the affixing of the CE marking. In our point of view this provision cannot be
interpreted in a way, that it would mean components shall be marked with the NB’s number.

The argumentation is based on Article 10 and 11. Both of these Articles are part of Chapter III “CE
conformity marking”. This means that all provision of this chapter shall be left out of consideration
because of the provision of Art 8(3). So it is irrelevant how it is formulated, that the ID number shall be
affixed in Art 10, because the whole article is under the title “CE conformity marking”. This applies to
Art 11 even in a greater extent, because all the consequences foreseen are related to the incorrect
affixing of the CE marking.

At the last meeting of the ATEX Standing Committee also the Commission stated, that we cannot
draw any conclusion regarding components from such provisions, which do not apply on them.

Regarding the essentials:

Components have no autonomous function. They have to fulfil the Essential Health and Safety
Requirements together with the equipment/protective system in which they are mount in. The
equipment/protective system is subject to conformity assessment procedure, and at the end the CE
marking with the NB’s number affixed on the equipment/protective system will certify the conformity of
the mount-in component in that particular function. So beside the written attestation of conformity, the
characteristics of the component will be certified in the certificate of conformity of the
equipment/protective system as well. In conclusion: there is no safety gap.

Regarding traceability and lack of information:

The component is marked with the identification marking of the attestation of conformity. Due this all
components and the related documentation can be identified.

Regarding legal background:

The declaration of the obligation of marking the components with the NB’s number would mean in
Hungary’s point of view, that a new obligation would be introduced, which is not included in the
directive, nor was intended by the legislator. In our point of view the creation of a new obligation by
means of interpretation could go beyond the implied powers of the Commission and the comitology
procedures, and would need the amendment of directive 94/9/EC.

Best regads,

Zsófia Békési

Ministry of Economy and Transport

tel: [phone]

fax: [phone]

e-mail:

[e-mail]

###########################################

This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange.
For more information, connect to http://www.f-secure.com/

Page 2 of 2

27/10/2005