27.4.92 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC106/9
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilDirectiveontheapproximationofthelawsofthe
MemberStatesconcerningequipmentandprotectivesystemsintendedforuseinpotentially
explosiveatmospheres
(92/C106/04
On22January1992,theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle100AoftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity ,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheSectionforIndustry,Commerce,CraftsandServiceswhichwasresponsibleforpreparing
theCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon6March1992.TheRapporteur
wasMrPerrin-Pelletier .
Atits295thPlenarySessionon25March1992,theEconomicandSocialCommittee
unanimouslyadoptedthefollowingOpinion.
TheCommitteeapprovestheCommissionproposal
subjecttothefollowingcomments.typesforminingequipment .Low-risksurfaceequip­
mentissubjecttointernalqualitycontrolbythemanu­
facturer.
1.2.2.IndrawingupthisdraftDirective,theCom­
missionwasatpainstoconsultawiderangeof
interestedparties,andinparticulartheAdvisoryCom­
mitteeonSafety,HygieneandHealthProtectionat
WorkwhichissuedaninterestingOpiniononthedraft.1.PresentationoftheDirective
2.Generalcomments1.1.Generalaim
1.1.1.Theseriousnessoftheriskofexplosionhas
ledalltheMemberStatestoadoptparticularlystrict
safetylaws.AtCommunitylevel,anumberoftechnical
directiveshaslaiddownsafetyrulesonflameproof
electricalequipmentusedatgroundlevelorinmines.
ThepresentdraftDirectiveseekstolaydowngeneral
principlestopreventexplosionrisks,takingaccountof
technicalprogressachievedhithertointheelectricity
fieldandalsorisksofnon-electricalorigin(overheating,
laserbeams,vibrations,etc.).
1.1.2.ThedraftDirectiveisbasedonArticle100A
oftheTreatywhoseaimistocompletetheSingle
Marketbyremovingtechnicalbarrierstotrade.Align­
mentofMemberStates'legislationisbasedonahigh
safetylevel.
1.1.3.ThisdraftDirectiveformspartofthe'new
approach',andthetechnicaldetailsthereforecome
understandardization activitiesoftheEuropeanCom­
mitteeforStandardization (CEN),andtheEuropean
Committee forElectrotechnical Standardization
(Cenelec).2.1.Scope
2.1.1.Inattemptingtocoverboththeelectricaland
non-electrical risksinthesameDirective,theCom­
missionhasventuredtoassociatetwotechnicalfields
whereexperienceindealingwithexplosionsisvery
different.Theseisawell-developed industrialexpertise
onelectricalrisks;anumberofEuropeanandnational
regulationsandmanyEuropeanandnationalstandards
arecompliedwithandgivesatisfaction .
2.1.2.Existingpracticesintheelectricalandelec­
tronicindustryforpreventingtheriskofexplosion
shouldnotbeunderminedbythedisappearanceofthe
'oldapproach'Directives.Fortheelectricalrisk,the
draftDirectives'roleshouldbeconfinedtoremoving
technicalbarrierstotraderesultingfromnationalregu­
lationsandcertificationproceduresimposedonmanu­
facturers(ifindeedthereareanyatpresent).
2.1.3.Muchlesshasbeenachievedinthecaseof
non-electricalrisks.Themanufacturers ofspecialized
machinesincorporating electricalequipmentwhich
requiresanexplosionprotectionsystem,maywelldeal
withotherexplosionrisks(choiceofmaterialsetc.).
Howeversuchindustrialpracticemaybeguidedbythe1.2.Marketingprocedures
1.2.1.Miningequipment (categoryM)willbesub­
jecttothird-partycertificationatproductleveland/or
underthefirm'squalityguaranteesystem(twopro­
ceduresareavailable,dependingontherisklevel).
Forsurfaceequipment,threetypesofprocedureare
providedfor,dependingonrisk,justastherearethree

NoC106/10 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 27.4.92
technicalspecificationsoftheclientsectors(especially
oilandchemicals).Thereislittlenationalstandardiz­
ationinthisfield,andatpresentnosignificantEuro­
peanstandardization .Atallevents,thepresentstateof
knowledgecoversonlyalimitednumberofmechanical
risksofexplosion .
2.1.4.Inthenon-electrical area,thelackofacom­
montechnicalbasistogetherwiththepotentialappli­
cationoftheDirectivetofirmswhicharenotspecialized
inflame-prooftechniquesmeansthatEuropeanstan­
dardshavetobedrawnupquickly.Wethoroughly
welcometheCommission'sannouncement thatCEN
andCenelecaresoontobegivenastandardization
mandatetoplugthegapsinstandardization arrange­
ments.
2.2.Linksbetweenrulesfordesignandforuse3.Specificcomments
3.1.Theproblemofinstallations
3.1.1.TheDefinitionofEquipmentwhichfalls
withinthescopeoftheDirectiveshouldbeclarifiedby
addingthequalificationthatitshouldbecapableof
causinganexplosionbymeansofapossibleignition
source.(Otherwise,explosionssuchasthosecausedby
failureofaboileroracompressedairreceiverwould
beincluded.)
3.1.2.TheDirectivedoesnotstateclearlyenough
howinstallations willbehandled.Thesituationis
especiallydelicatewhenanumberoffirmsarerespon­
sibleforcarryingouttheinstallation,andwhenthe
electricalandmechanicalrisksareinextricablylinked.
3.1.3.TheDirective'scertificationproceduresare
notwell-adaptedtothespecificcaseoflargeinstal­
lations(forexample'turn-key'factoriesinthechemical
industry)withawiderangeofequipment.Thefinal
user,responsibleatleastforassemblingtheequipment
inquestion,andpossessingappropriatelyqualifiedper­
sonnelindependentofthoseresponsibleforoperating
theequipment,shouldbeauthorizedtocertifythe
equipment,ofwhateverriskcategory,himselfwithout
necessarilyhavingtocallinanotifiedbody,asprovided
forinAnnexXIIoftheproposal.
3.2.Cumbersomeprocedures
3.2.1.Completequalityassurance(moduleH)isa
possiblesolutionforsomelargefirms,butitisunrealis­
tictosuggestitasanordinarycertificationprocedure.
Smallandmedium-sized enterpriseswouldalsohave
greatdifficultyinsettinguptheproceduresforpro­
ductionqualityassurance(moduleD)orproductqual­
ityassurance (moduleE)inadditiontoatype-approval
procedure.Theproblemwouldbeacuteforsmallpro­
ductionruns.2.2.1.TheDirectiveharmonizesonlytherulesfor
marketingequipmentintendedforuseinpotentially
explosiveatmospheres .Itdoesnotharmonizethecon­
ceptofexplosionzonesonthesiteofuse,definedin
manydifferentwaysinthevariousMemberStates
andindustrialsectors(mining,chemicals,oiletc.).In
practiceamanufacturer maybefacedwithseveral
definitionsofa'potentiallyexplosiveatmosphere'
dependingonthecustomerorthecountryofdelivery.
Thissituationcangiverisetomisunderstandings ,and
hencetodangersifusersdonotfollowthesametechni­
calreferences .
2.2.2.TheCommission'sSocialAffairsDirectorate­
GeneraliscurrentlyintheprocessofdraftingaDirec­
tiveonconditionsfortheuseofequipment,basedon
Article118AoftheTreatywhichdealswithsafetyat
work.AsalreadyemphasizedbytheAdvisoryCom­
mitteeonSafety,HygieneandHealthProtectionat
Work,itwouldhavebeenpreferableifthetwoDirec­
tives(oneondesignandtheotheronuse)hadbeen
draftedatthesametime,becauseitisthisnewDirective
whichwillhavetoissueanaligneddefinitionof
explosionzones.
DoneatBrussels,25March1992.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
MichaelGEUENICH