1. PED Intentions and development

2. Development of PED and guidelines
Analysis of the status quo
Definition of aspired scenario
Possible revision of PED
Possible revision or restructuring of guidelines

3. Primary Intentions Free movement Harmonisation Common safety level
Improve competitiveness of manufacturer
Improve competitiveness of European Code on Pressure Equipment

4. Free movement Prior PED Afterwards
15 different Pressure Codes, multiple examinations, waste of time and resources
Afterwards
still different national Pressure Codes, but acceptance of conformity procedures of PED, some problems with in-service inspection and notified Bodies

5. In-service inspection
In-service inspection is not covered by the scope of PED
Annex I PED offers a broad range of technical solutions
Required extent and kind of in-service inspection determined by the technical solution chosen

6. Complicacies in the context of In-service inspections
PED requirements on information's for the user
Information exchange between manufacturer and user
Different design solutions (based on different Codes) permissible
Inspection bodies often familiar only with their National Codes

7. Harmonisation
Defined in Art. 95 of the Treaty, PED matches harmonisation on:
Conformity assessment
Essential safety requirements
Partly on Notified Bodies
No harmonisation on:
Specific technical requirements
Appointment and surveillance of N.B.

8. Common safety level
Established national Codes still used, minor changes
Decline of safety is observed by mass produced vessels from third countries
Total harmonisation could not achieved by New Approach Directives

9. Specific technical requirements
Predominance of national Codes, especially of AD-Merkblatt, BS 5500, Codap, ASME
EN is slow in demand
Some EN are delayed
The introduction of a CEN consultant has improved considerably the link between PED and standardisation

10. Appointment and surveillance of Notified Bodies
Recently discussions to improve the importance of accreditation
CIRCA System has achieved better transparency and information exchange between Member States
Discussions on the role of the EA have started

11. Competitiveness of manufacturer
National protectionism is reduced
Better access to markets of other M.St.
The new approach concept of PED has downgraded the situation of European manufacturer on the global competition

12. Competitiveness of European Code on Pressure Equipment
PED as an umbrella for several national Pressure Codes is not accepted as an European Code
Other Codes may prevail in the global competition

13. Role of the guidelines
Community legal system has no obligatory formal possibility to interpret a Directive
Harmonized standard are only specifying essential safety requirements
Interpretation of Directives is in the responsibility of the Member States
Diversity of interpretation should be avoided
Guidelines are a tool to close the legal gap and help to improve harmonisation

14. Feasible scenario of the development of PED
Specific regulations will be predominated by ASME, this will cause a burden for European PE technologic development
Increasing bureaucracy on accreditation will cause additional economic charges for Notified Bodies,which could be a burden for their technical judgement
The New approach concept will reduce technical barriers of trade in Europe, but not in Third countries

15. Aspired scenario of development
Concentration of engineer recourses on an accelerated development of a common European standard on PE ?
Competition of different national Codes fulfilling the ESR, but introduction of an “Annex ZA” procedure for national Codes ?
Revision of PED has to reflect the chosen aim

16. Basic goals
Promotion of an European way of pressure equipment technology
Access to further development remain in Europe
New approach principle should not lead to randomness in fulfilling the ESR
High safety level could be kept
Strengthen the position of European manufacturer in the global competition

17. Consequences
Narrow the room for interpretation by including guideline solutions in the PED
National Codes should grow together by harmonizing their further development
It may be necessary to find a way outside CEN because national Codes are normally not standards

18. Thank you for your attention