PED 97/23/EC Certification for suppliers outside EEC

[EuroWeld]

Dear all,

I have a question about PED certification related to delivery of materials from example Asia to be used in pressure equipment were the PED is applicable.

Situation: We buy a complete machined forged tubesheet from an Asian company and use this in a heat exchanger were the PED is applicable. This company is certified according for PED by an Asian notified body.

Question: Shall this company be certified by an European notified body or is an Asian sufficient for PED certification?

If yes or no please explain the reason.
Thanks in advance,

Euroweld

 

[SJones]

Which conformity assessment module applies and is the Asian notified body listed here:

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newapproach/nando/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.notifiedbody

?

Steve Jones
Materials & Corrosion Engineer

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

 

[ulyssess]

I assume that you mean the certification of the quality system of the material manufacturer. This certification must by carried out by a competent body established as a legal entity within the European Community,
see Guideline 7/16, 7/2:

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/pressure-and-gas/files/ped/ped-guidelines_en.pdf

An Asian company may carry out this certification only if the are established on European territory. Otherwise I would have strong doubts if this certificate is not a falsification like several others I saw.
But this quality system certification is needed only when the material manufacturer delivers the material with a 3.1 material certificate. If the material is delivered with 3.2 certificate, a quality system certificate is not needed, see guideline 7/5, direct inspection route.
In any case, the pressure equipment manufacturer is the only legal responsible for a careful choice of his material supplier and of the correct certification.

 

[EuroWeld]

Ulyssess, thanks for your response. This is just what I was looking for. Now noticing that this asian NoBo is not included in the Nando list. I have seen that a lot of Asian companies have such certifications. Strange?!?! So when we buy materials including 3.2 certificate at a fabricator that does not has a OA system certified by a Nando Nobo this is still ok with PED requirements right?

Thanks,

 

[ulyssess]

Yes, a 3.2-certificate is sufficient. In this case you have the choice either to carry out the inspection of the product yourself or to mandate a third party to carry out the inspection on your behalf. For more details see EN 764-5.
A material manufacturer should know the regulation that only accredited bodies have the right to certify the QA-system and to carry out the specific assessment of materials required in the PED. If a material manufacturer does not even know this, I would not trust in his QA-system at all.

 

[EuroWeld]

Ulyssess, is it not a little bit strange that purchaser can perform the inspection to obtain a 3.2 certificate? This manner is not that independent! Is this commonly used? I will investigate deeper to find out how and why these companies haves PED certifications by non Nando NoBo"s!

Thanks, Euroweld

 

[SJones]

EN 10204 does not require an independent purchaser's authorised inspection representative. It is commonly used, and some purchasers have a dedicated function for it.

Steve Jones
Materials & Corrosion Engineer

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

 

[ulyssess]

Euroweld, why a little bit strange? The pressure vessel manufacturer is fully responsible for the choice of his suppliers and also for the inspection of the materials. If he mandates this task to a company that does not carry out the work in a correct way and if the material does not fulfill the requirements, the pv manufacturer will have all problems later in his shop.