background image

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

From: 

Békési Zsófia [bekesi.zsofia@gkm.gov.hu]

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: +36 1 374 2748

 

fax: +36 1 302 4549

 

e-mail: 

bekesi.zsofia@gkm.gov.hu

 

  

background image

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