HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"L 297/66
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
16.11.2011
COMMISSION DECISION
of 14 November 2011
in application of Article 7 of Directive 94/9/EC of the European Parliament and the Council as
regards a prohibition measure adopted by the German authorities in respect of a mobile phone
‘Expert XP-Ex-1’ ATEX DE-01-11
(notified under document C(2011) 8046)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2011/741/EU)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
so that they can take all appropriate measures with
respect to the equipment or protective system concerned,
in accordance with their obligations under Article 2(1) of
Directive 94/9/EC.
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union,
(4) On
17
March
2011,
the
authorities
of
Germany
formally
notified to the European Commission a prohibition
Having regard to Directive 94/9/EC of the European Parliament
measure concerning the placing on the market and the
and the Council of 23 March 1994 on the approximation of
withdrawal from the market/retailers of a Mobile Phone,
the laws of the Member States concerning equipment and
mark and type XP-Ex-1, manufactured by Experts
protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive
Intrinsic Safety Specialists, Groningsewet 7, 2994 LC
atmospheres ( 1 ) (the ATEX Directive), and in particular
Barendrecht, Netherlands. According to the documents
Article 7 thereof,
submitted to the Commission, this product was subject
to the conformity assessment procedure referred to in
Article 8(1)(b) of Directive 94/9/EC, attested by the EC-
Type Examination Certificate No BKI09ATEX0014 X
Whereas:
issued by BKIEx — ExV Robbanásbiztos Berendezések
Vizgáló llomása Kft., Mikoviny Samuel u. 2-4, 1037
Hungary — Notified Body No 1418.
(1) Article
2(1)
of
Directive
94/9/EC
states
that
Member
States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that
the equipment, protective systems and devices to which
(5) The
German
authorities
indicated
that
their
measure
was
the Directive applies, may be placed on the market and
based on the non-conformity of the product with the
put into service only if, when properly installed and
essential health and safety requirements referred to in
maintained and used for their intended purpose, they
Article 3 of Directive 94/9/EC and set out in Annex II,
do not endanger the health and safety of persons and,
in particular in points 1.0.5 (Marking) and 1.3 (Potential
where appropriate, domestic animals or property.
ignition sources), related to the incorrect application or
shortcomings of the harmonised standard EN 60079-
11:2007 Explosive atmospheres — Part 11 —
Equipment protection by intrinsic safety ‘i’ (IEC 60079-
(2)
Article 7(1) of Directive 94/9/EC provides that when a
Member State ascertains that equipment, protective
11:2006), which is referred in the EC-Type Examination
systems or devices bearing the CE conformity marking
Certificate issued by BKIEx — ExV:
and used in accordance with its intended use are liable to
endanger the safety of persons and, where appropriate,
domestic animals or property, it shall take all appropriate
— paragraph 5.3 (energy and power limitation not in
measures to withdraw such equipment or protective
accordance)
systems from the market, to prohibit the placing on
the market, putting into service or use thereof, or to
restrict free movement thereof. The Member State shall
immediately inform the Commission of any such
— paragraph 6.3.1.1 (minimum distances not kept:
measure, indicating the reason for its decision.
voltage 4,2 V needs a distance of 1,5 mm; the
existing distance is about 0,2 mm)
(3) Pursuant
to
Article
7(2)
of
Directive
94/9/EC,
the
Commission is required, after entering into consultation
— paragraph 10.5.3 (power supply not in accordance)
with the parties concerned, to declare whether it finds
such a measure justified or not. If the measure is found
justified, the Commission shall inform the Member States
— diagram/table (capacitance of the main circuit board
without limiting elements; maximum amount 299 μF
( 1 ) OJ L 100, 19.4.1994, p. 1.
is a multiple of 3 000 of the permissible limit).

---

EN
16.11.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
297/67
(6) The
German
authorities
submitted
the
Order
of
Regie
concerned, the Commission considers that the Mobile
rungsprsidium Darmstadt Unit IV/Wiesbaden informing
Phone ‘Expert XP-Ex-1’ fails to comply with the
about sales ban concerning Mobile Phone Expert XP-Ex-
essential health and safety requirements referred to in
1, with the related grounds, reports and letters, and a
Article 3 of the Directive 94/9/EC and set out in
Quality report by KEMA No 211518000/A on Mobile
Annex II, in particular in points 1.0.5 (Marking) and
Phone XP-Ex-1, to substantiate their findings.
1.3 (Potential ignition sources). These non-conformities
and the related technical deficiencies give rise to serious
risks for users,
(7) According
to
the
German
authorities,
the
Mobile
Phone
does not meet the essential health and safety
requirements of Directive 94/9/EC for electrical
equipment of Category 2: it can produce hazardous
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
sparks in case of faults, therefore the requirements of
the intrinsic safety protection mode are not fulfilled.
The German authorities conclude that this product is
Article 1
not safe for use in Zone 1 environments (Category 2G)
The measure taken by the authorities of Germany prohibiting
and represents a real ignition danger in the case of
the placing on the market and the withdrawal from the market/
intended use.
retailers of a Mobile Phone, mark and type ‘Expert XP-Ex-1’,
manufactured by Experts Intrinsic Safety Specialists, is justified.
(8) On
8
April
2011,
the
Commission
wrote
to
the
manu
facturer — Experts Intrinsic Safety Specialists — and to
the Notified Body who issued the EC-Type Examination
Article 2
Certificate — BKIEx — ExV Robbanásbiztos Beren
This Decision is addressed to the Member States
dezések Vizgáló llomása Kft. — inviting them to
communicate their observations regarding the measure
taken by the German authorities.
Done at Brussels, 14 November 2011.
(9) To
date,
no
reply
has
been
received.
For the Commission
(10) In light of the documentation available, and the
Antonio TAJANI
comments or the absence of comments of the parties
Vice-President

---