ATEX transition period is almost over

Dr Thorsten Arnhold, Marketing Director and Product Manager with R Stahl gives industry an update on the ATEX Directive.

From the 1st July 2003, Directive 94/9/EC - the ATEX Directive - comes into force.

A harmonisation directive, the provisions included in 94/9/EC replace the existing divergent national and European legislation that covers the same subject - equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres.

So after 30th June, "products may be placed on the market in EU territory, freely moved and operated as designed and intended in the expected environment, only if they comply with 94/9/EC".

The really important part of the new directive is that, for the first time, essential health and safety requirements are laid down for non-electrical equipment intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres.

These requirements also cover equipment intended for use in environments which are potentially explosive due to dust hazards and protective systems, and devices intended for use outside explosive atmospheres which are required for or contribute to the safe functioning of equipment or protective systems with respect to risks of explosion.

While the EC's Blue Guide offers help in implementing this and other new directives, more detail is available on the EU's Europa website (www.europa.eu.int).

Of note for equipment suppliers are the thoughts of the ATEX standing committee which met on 6th and 7th February to iron out some outstanding issues before the legislation goes live.

One of particular concern is the issue of quality assurance issue associated with document retention.

According to Annex IV, paragraph five of the ATEX Directive, the manufacturer - or where relevant the authorised representative or importer - shall, for a period ending at least ten years after the last piece of equipment was manufactured, be able to make available to the national authorities: the documentation of the quality system; information about updating of the quality system; and audit reports and certificates of the notified body.

Larger organisations have a certified quality management system according to the ISO9000 standards.

For these manufacturers it is difficult to keep all quality documents and all changes to the quality system for such a long period.

So in the opinion of the standing committee, the requirements of this particular part of the legislation are fulfilled if manufacturer keeps at the disposal of the national authorities at least the actual quality management system documents plus the following documents which have to be kept for a period ending at least ten years after the last piece of equipment was manufactured.

These documents comprise: the audit reports and certificates of the ISO9000 certifier (this will be one or two audit reports per year that include the actual state at that moment of the quality system with changes); and the audit reports and notifications of the notified body that issued the production quality assurance notification.

The standing committee then went on to consider a number of specific equipment issues.

For example, it was felt that spray booths as an integral whole do not fall under the scope of the ATEX Directive and as such cannot be labelled with special markings for explosion protection.

It was also felt that plastic containers and tanks, as a general rule, did not fall under the scope of the Directive.

However, the committee considered that they might fall within the definition of a "component" as defined in Article 1 of the Directive.

The committee also considered the case of whether or not a pump/electric motor combination intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres should be classified as electrical equipment within the meaning of Article 8.

It concluded that a distinction had to be made between two different circumstances.

For example, for the purposes of the Directive, a pump and electric motor constitute a "safety-related" device - they cannot be considered separately for the purposes of assessing explosion risks.

In this case, the unit as a whole is to be considered an item of electrical equipment.

A split tube motor pump falls into this category.

On the other hand, the pump and electric motor may form part of the same functional unit, but they do not constitute a "safety-related" unit for the purposes of explosion protection - no new explosion risks arise as a result of their being combined.

They do not therefore constitute an item of equipment which, as an integral whole, falls within the scope of Directive 94/9/EC, but rather a combination of "individual items of equipment" in terms of explosion protection.

In this case, therefore, pump and electrical motor must be considered separately in terms of the application of this Directive.

Remember: after 30th June 2003 no excuses will be accepted and no extensions granted to the transition period.

Back to top