Working Group on ATEX
ATEX_WG/11/1/06
Notes on the Ex Marking for ATEX products
At the last working parties meetings under the ATEX 94/9/EC Directive – Administrative Co-operation (AdCo) on 23-24 June 2010 and Working Group (WG) on 7 July 2010 – discussions had been held on the specific marking of explosion protection “Ex Marking” (also known as “the hexagon”): its definition, its use and its legal situation, also in view of the alignment of the Directive to the New Legislative Framework.
Main issues pointed out:
1. In the ATEX Directive 94/9/EC, the Ex Marking is defined in Annex II, 1.0.5:
______
1.0.5. Marking
All equipment and protective systems must be marked legibly and indelibly with the following minimum particulars:
- name and address of the manufacturer,
- CE marking (see Annex X, point A),
- designation of series or type,
- serial number, if any,
- year of construction,
- the specific marking of explosion protection followed by the symbol of the equipment group and category,
- for equipment-group II, the letter ‘G’ (concerning explosive atmospheres caused by gases, vapours or mists),
and/or
the letter ‘D’ (concerning explosive atmospheres caused by dust).
Furthermore, where necessary, they must also be marked with all information essential to their safe use.
______
2. In the current ATEX Guidelines (3rd Edition, June 2009), the Ex Marking is mentioned in § 11.2 and in Annex I:
______
11.2 Supplementary/Specific Marking
It is the intention of Directive 94/9/EC that the design of the specific marking follows the design, as specified in Directive 84/47/EEC. Although there is no requirement in Directive 94/9/EC it is recommended to continue to use the established design (see Annex to these Guidelines). This marking has to be followed by the symbol of the Group and Category […]
______
______
ANNEX I: DISTINCTIVE COMMUNITY (EX) MARK DRAWN FROM DIRECTIVE 84/47/EEC
[…]
______
3. It is a question, if the rules of the ATEX Directive 94/9/EC do prohibit the use of the Ex-hexagon Marking for other purposes than for demonstrating the conformity with that Directive. But by a legal point of view, it seems that the Ex Marking is not a protected brand, or at least it is not protected in the same way as the CE marking.
4. In fact, in many cases, the Ex-hexagon Marking is used as a “market advantage” also in products that must not be CE marked (outside the scope of the ATEX Directive 94/9/EC), in order to show that it is safe to use in ATEX zones. But only equipment which is within the scope of the Directive should be allowed to be marked with the Ex Marking.
5. It appears difficult to Member States to prevent possible misuse of the Ex-hexagon Marking. There are also concerns regarding national provisions on the Ex Marking that could lead to differences between Member States and even possible barriers against free circulation.
6. The New Legislative Framework include specific provisions for the CE Marking (in particular in the Regulation 765/2008/EC) and a relevant effort is currently developed at EU level to improve the legal status and for the enforcement of legal protection of the CE Marking. It has been suggested to take advantage from the alignment of the ATEX Directive 94/9/EC to the New Legislative Framework (in particular to the Decision 768/2008/EC) to improve the legal status and protection also of the Ex Marking.
7. According to the information provided by the European Commission services, for the Ex Marking, as for other specific markings defined in other Directives, it would be more difficult to have something in common as for the CE Marking. The question could be addressed at national legislation level, through transposition and implementation provisions.
Taking into consideration the above, it was agreed to draft a paper on the situation of the Ex Marking, in order to have a common vision on the issue and possible problems and misuse, and proposals for its enforcement in the framework of the alignment exercise, to be shared and discussed at the next ATEX WG meeting.
In order to provide a first answer to the need of providing the same level of protection, by a legal and practical point of view, to the “general” CE Marking and to the “specific” Ex Marking, the European Commission services proposed that in the aligned text of the ATEX Directive, specific provisions for Ex Marking can be added to R12 “Rules and conditions for affixing the CE marking”, in particular at the end of point 2, as follows:
______
Article R12
Rules and conditions for affixing the CE marking
1. The CE marking shall be affixed visibly, legibly and indelibly to equipment, protective systems and devices referred to in Article 1(2) or to its data plate. Where that is not possible or not warranted on account of the nature of the product, it shall be affixed to the packaging and to the accompanying documents.
2. The CE marking shall be affixed before the equipment, protective system or device referred to in Article 1(2) is placed on the market, and it may be followed by a pictogram or any other mark indicating a special risk or use. The CE marking shall be accompanied by the specific marking of explosion protection followed by the symbol of the equipment group and category, as required in Annex II, 1.0.5.
______