regulation (ec) 391/2009 art. 10.1 mutual recognition ......a matter was brought up where acceptance...

Regulation (EC) 391/2009 Art. 10.1 Mutual Recognition

Technical Review Meeting 9 June 2016 in Oslo

Technical Review Meeting Report

June 2016

P a g e | 2

Executive Summary

A full day’s Mutual Recognition Technical Review Meeting (MR TRM) was organized on 9 June 2016 at the offices of DNV GL in Oslo by the EU RO MR Group (the Group).

The aim of the MR TRM was to:

• present the current status of the MR TR development process Tier 1 to Tier 5 products andenable the collection of feedback on MR technical issues regarding new and existing MRTRs and the MR certification process;

• provide information on existing MR TRs and related Change Requests (CRFs) andRequests for Clarification (RfCs);

• talk about suitable (type approved) products for further MR TR development;• discuss with industry participants their respective input and proposals.

The MR TRM was attended by representatives of the European Marine Equipment Industry and other relevant associations along with members of the EU RO MR Technical Committee to enable a two way exchange of technical information on the development and maintenance of MR TRs.

The discussions resulted in all participants agreeing on action items to be followed up.

Overall, the feeling expressed by those attending the MR TRM was, that there were useful and constructive exchange of technical and procedural information related to the MR process under a collaborative atmosphere.

3 | P a g e

Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 3

Contents ...................................................................................................................................... 4

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5

EU RO MR Group Presentations .................................................................................................... 6

Industry Presentations ................................................................................................................. 7

Overview of TRM Discussions ....................................................................................................... 8

Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................................ 11

Action List - Technical Review Meeting, 9 June 2016, Oslo ........................................................... 12

Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 13

• Appendix A: List of registered Participants ........................................................................ 13

• Appendix B : MR TRM Agenda ............................................................................................ 14

• Appendix C: EU RO MR Group Presentations ..................................................................... 15

• Appendix D: Industry Presentations ................................................................................... 31

P a g e | 4

Introduction

This MR TRM was organised by the EU ROs to present the current status of the MR TR development process and to enable the collection and initial discussion including review of feedbacks on MR technical issues regarding new and existing MR TRs and the MR certification process. It was also an opportunity to provide information on existing MR TRs and related Change Requests and/or Requests for Clarification. In addition the identification of suitable products for MR TR development from a prescribed list maintained by the EU RO MR Technical Committee was subject for discussion following the principles as laid down in the latest version of framework document.

The MR TRM was attended by representatives of European based Marine Equipment Industry Associations and manufacturers along with members of the EU RO MR Technical Committee. It encouraged a two way exchange of technical information on the development and maintenance of MR TRs. The list of registered participants can be found in Appendix A.

The meeting was chaired by Lee Woon-ho, (KR), EU RO MR Technical Committee Chair, supported by the Advisory Board Chair of the EU RO Group Masaki Matsunaga, the Secretary Irene Wieja and members of the EU RO MR Technical Committee Group.

The meeting was hosted by the DNV GL AB member Matthias Wiese and moderated by Dr Ulrich Foerster, LR.

The EU ROs provided an overview on an update on MR TR development and actual stage of maintenance process related to the technical input and feedback as received from a wide range of industry. Details of the agenda of the MR TRM can be found in Appendix B.

The MR TRM objectives were to:

• Present the current status of the MR TR development process and collected feedback ontechnical issues;

• Discuss the status of current Change Requests or Requests for Clarification related toexisting TRs;

• Provide an opportunity for industry input for future prioritising of MR TR development.

This report provides an overview of presentations as delivered during the TRM and summarises the discussions and conclusions that were drawn from the MR TRM. It also lists the follow up activities.

P a g e | 5

EU RO MR Group Presentations

This paragraph summarizes the content of the presentations given by the EU ROs (Appendix C).

Presentation 1: Introduction and Aim/Scope of TRM

Overview of the agenda and topics in and out of scope for the MR TRM.

Presentation 2: Brief update on previous TRM actions

Progress update with regard to the status of the follow up actions of the first TRM in April 2015. Feedback was given to the relevant stakeholders

Presentation 3: Technical Requirement Maintenance:

3a: Change Requests and Requests for Clarification

3b: Feedback on existing Tier 1 – 4 TRs

Brief summary of all industry feedback on technical issues relating to TRs that had been collected under use of the Group’s maintenance process and procedures. During the past maintenance cycle, there were 8 Change Requests and 4 Requests for Clarification (RfCs) received, all considered as completed with no pending action.

Presentation 4: Technical Requirement Development

4a: Feedback on draft Tier 5 TRs

4b: Potential MR Products for next tiers

Summary of the actions taken during the industry consultation phase of the Tier 5 MR TR development project and overview of feedbacks received so far.

Setting the scene for the Product Consideration Process.

Introduction and information on potential MR product development.

P a g e | 6

Industry Presentations

This paragraph summarizes the presentations given by Industry representatives (Appendix D).

Presentation 1: Siemens: Tier 1-4 TRs & Framework Document

Feedback on existing Tier 1- 4 TRs & Framework Document for Low Voltage Devices, e.g. Contactors, Circuit Breakers, Electrical/Electronic Relays.

Presentation 2: Siemens: Tier 5 TRs

Feedback on draft Tier 5 TRs for Low Voltage Devices, e.g. CPS, Pilot Devices, Soft Starter, AC Semiconductor Controllers.

Presentation 3: G&O Maritime Group (Pres Vac): Proposal for Product

Suggestion as potential product: ‘Automatic pressure/vacuum relief valves for cargo tank vent systems’ that are not covered by IMO MSC Circ. 677 or the Marine Equipment Directive, where type approval is required by some classification societies and where other classification societies require only certificate of inspection.

Presentation 4: Air Products AS

Re-consideration as potential product already suggested: ‘Nitrogen generating system with membrane’ (after refusal due to opt- out criteria 3 and 4).

Presentation 5: Brunvoll AS

Suggestion of potential product: ‘Thruster systems, or parts thereof’

Presentation 6: Eaton

Suggestion of potential product: ‘Public Address (PA)/General Alarm (GA)’

P a g e | 7

Overview of TRM Discussions

1. Introductions and welcome addresses

Introductions and welcome addresses were given by the hosting society, DNV GL, and the EU RO MR Advisory Board Chair (NK) followed by an introduction round table of the meeting participants.

The Moderator introduced the aim and objectives of the meeting, reminding that all EU ROs are competitors, and emphasizing that no business model related topics, no political discussions, no lobbying and or questions related to IACS involvement are seen as appropriate.

The Secretary General SEA Europe in his courtesy address reiterated the high importance of the MR scheme and the role of SEA Europe continuously providing technical input to the scheme and organizing good feedback from the marine equipment industry. He also stated that the model of MR is ranked as very important within a wide range of the manufacturing industry expecting to see a reduction in costs and administrative burden; however, maritime safety should never be compromised under the scheme.

He highlighted the importance of the clarification of the Group’s position regarding four topics which are summarised below and concluded as follow-up actions.

1. Co-existence of certificates (MR and individual certificates) resulting in additionalcosts/administrative burden, connected to the desire to phase out individual certificates

2. MR certificates should be accepted on a wider scale – supported by a common logo asquality stamp

3. Extend MR scheme to basic materials (priority for the industry)

4. Request the inclusion of products of a category of higher safety levels than level 3, i.e. as afirst step to consider products in the fringes of products subject to unit certification.

The Secretary General SEA Europe further outlined that the European equipment manufacturing industry is known for high quality products and reassured not to put good reputation at stake by compromising safety.

The Group’s Technical Committee Chair introduced the meeting agenda.

2. Brief update on previous TRM actions

The follow-up actions of the last TRM meeting were reported to be completed.

The Moderator explained and/or reiterated the product development process, the industry consultation and subsequent feedback processes of the outcome to the commenting industry representatives.

In this regard it has been requested by the Moderator that the term ‘completion’ should only covers one cycle of review period. It is the Group’s understanding that products initially rejected to become

P a g e | 8

part of the MR scheme can be tabled again based on further technical and technological developments.

To underpin the above, the Group will revisit the scope and application as initially defined in the covering TR for touch screens to consider increased functionality.

3. Technical Requirement (TR) Maintenance:

3a. Discuss technical issues relating to Change Requests & Requests for Clarification;

3b. Collect feedback on technical issues relating to existing Tier 1-4 TRs;

TC chair explained the processes, inviting for comments wherever seen appropriate to improve quality of TRs.

Positive feedback was given by industry to the changes established by the EU RO Group regarding witness testing.

Inconsistencies and conflicts in TR wording

Inconsistencies and conflicts in phrasing and wording in the TRs were illustrated and asked to be removed.

Deviation in application cases

Questions about the limitation of application of MR TA certificates were raised. It was explained that Tier 1-4 TRs are stand-alone products governed by defined application cases. A change to the pre-defined application case requires consequently a review of the boundaries of application case.

System integrity

If a product is integrated into a more complex system, the system will be tested under its complexity, but the individual type approved product might be accepted if MR certified. Additional checks and surveys need to be undertaken with regard to the end user system functionality. The challenge remains how to deal with complex systems in the context of MR.

Acceptance of certificates

A matter was brought up where acceptance of an MR TA certificate had been refused by several class surveyors involving different ROs.

The Group members declared that the issue of acceptance of MR TAC between EU ROs had not been brought to attention of the Group so far. The Group explained that an MR TAC can be refused due to the non-acceptance of Flag Administration of MR TACs. The Group requested that any issue related to non-acceptance should be brought to the attention of the EU RO MR Secretariat. It was also advised that in case of non-acceptance of MR certificates where a product is found not to be in compliance with the MR TRs the Group’s alert procedure/process is utilized.

P a g e | 9

4. Technical Requirement Development:

4a. Discuss feedback on technical issues relating to draft Tier 5 TRs;

Industry input during consultation phase

The Moderator stated that there was a relatively low interest from industry with regard to the technical consultation process of Tier 5 product TR development (only 9 comments received on the draft Tier 5 TRs).

As a general remark, one industry representative appreciated that the products previously considered as part of the next Tier product development actually resulted in TRs. To further improve the quality of TRs, it was suggested to harmonise/align the terminology of TRs with other in international recognised standards used terminology like the IEC standard.

Further specific points were raised in a related industry presentation.

The Moderator explained that editorial modifications proposed to the draft Tier 5 TRs in this TRM would be taken into account as far as possible and that any technical input will be fed into our maintenance process.

4b. Potential MR products for next tiers;

The TC Chair explained the Product Consideration Process (PCP) and presented potential MR product groups eligible under MR. It was stated that the products listed during the TRM are representing the products as proposed by the EU ROs, however, that industry is still invited to propose products using the PCP.

Industry representatives brought up their proposals, cases and inquiries (see industry presentations).

MR coverage and application cases

The difference between other regulatory schemes in comparison to the EU RO MR scheme was discussed. A product might only be considered as eligible under MR if it is a product subject to classification requirements and does not fall under any other statutory regime (e.g. SOLAS). It has been reemphasised that products covered by the Marine Equipment Directive are out of the scope of MR scheme.

It was further stressed that the application case, i.e. intended use of a product is to be seen as an important aspect under MR considerations. Special application cases have consequently to be evaluated by the Group under safety criticality considerations.

Complex systems under MR

It has been noted that in specific application cases of higher complexity these products were rejected based on the application of the Simplified Risk Based Model (SRBM), i.e. in this case opt-out criteria 3 /4 will apply.

P a g e | 10

The industry requested the Group to define a sub-system structure including criteria to assess system complexity in the context of safety criticality assessment under MR.

The Moderator explained that for system complexity and risk assessment technology more experience has to be gained within the scope of existing MR products.

It was suggested to inquire whether an MR certificate for parts of a system might be looked into as an interim solution. It was concluded that more complex units are currently not considered to be included under the MR scheme, but that the group would look into intermediate steps, e.g. system break down.

It was further concluded that an in-depth analysis would be needed and that the Group would take the proposals into consideration and feedback the outcome to the initiators.

MR Information on societies’ websites

One industry representative stated that MR information was hard to find on individual societies’ websites, so the EU ROs were tasked to improve their internal web presence related to EU RO MR.

Summary of Discussions, Review of Actions and Meeting Outcome

A draft list of specific actions as collected during the MR TRM, was presented to all participants for their review and comments. (see Conclusions and Recommendations)

Conclusions and Recommendations

The MR TRM covered a wide range of issues related to

- the MR TR development process - the processes to maintain certification integrity under MR

and how to handle specific topics as raised by industry representatives.

P a g e | 11

Action List - Technical Review Meeting, 9 June 2016, Oslo

Actions for EU RO Group:

No. Issues Raised Timeline Raised by 1. Co-existence of individual RO Type Approval

Certificate (RO TAC) and Mutual Recognition MR TAC

30 Sept 16 SEA E

2. Acceptance of existing MR TACs and awareness of governing processes within the EU ROs, but also on a wider scale.

30 Sept 16 SEA E Kongsberg Brunvoll

3. Can the MR scheme be extended to consider basic material?

30 Sept 16 SEA E

4. Can we consider products, i.e. equipment or components that might be categorized under unit certification in the existing MR scheme.

30 Sept 16 SEA E Air Product Brunvoll Eaton

5. Achieve consistency in all technical and procedural related EU RO MR documents with the aim to harmonize the wording with applicable international standard definitions.

ongoing, first alignments have been implemented in Tier 5 already

Siemens

6. Can we consider different application cases for products eligible under the MR scheme?

29 Aug 2016 G&O Maritime

7. Can we consider increased functionality of existing MR products recognizing latest developments in marine technology?

29 Aug 2016 Siemens

8. Revisit presentations given by industry and feed the proposals including rating suggestions into our Product Consideration Process (e.g. regarding PA/GA systems and high voltage devices).

29 Aug 2016 Eaton Siemens Brunvoll Air Product G&O Maritime

Actions for Industry Associations:

No. Issues Raised Raised by 1. Industry is welcomed to review the existing EU RO MR website and

suggest areas of potential improvement. EU RO MR Group

P a g e | 12

Appendices

Appendix A: List of TRM Participants

Participant Surname First Name Email Address

EU RO MR Group

EU RO MR AB CHAIR/NK Matsunaga Masaki [email protected]

Assistant / NK Yotsui Hitomi [email protected]

EU RO MR TC CHAIR/KR Lee Woon-ho [email protected]

EU RO MR Secretary Wieja Irene [email protected]

EU RO MR Secretariat Stange Cathrin [email protected]

ABS Trevisan Lucio [email protected]

BV Bellon Didier [email protected]

BV (incoming CHAIR) Courregelongue Laurent [email protected]

CCS Ge Benqui (Benjamin) [email protected]

CRS Anzulovic Ivica [email protected] ([email protected])

DNV GL Flagstad-Andersen Eivind [email protected]

DNV GL Laanke Lars [email protected]

DNV GL Wiese Matthias [email protected]

LR Hampson David [email protected]

LR Foerster Ulrich [email protected]

NK Nakamura Satoshi [email protected]

PRS Poturalski Jacek [email protected]

RINA Paravagna Andrea [email protected]

RS Zakharov Alexey [email protected]

Industry

Brunvoll AS Andresen Knut [email protected]

Danish Maritime Rostell Klaus [email protected]

Eaton Rivella Oscar [email protected]

Eaton Cannella Maurizio [email protected]

G&O Maritime Group Palmqvist Ronni [email protected]

IMCA Bradshaw John [email protected]

Kongsberg Maritime ASA Gjertsen Geir [email protected]

Norsk Industri Andersen Tor [email protected]

Norsk Industri Gorvell-Dahll Lars [email protected]

Rolls Royce Marine AS Garen Rune [email protected]

SEA Europe Tygat Christophe [email protected]

Siemens Schroeck Michael [email protected]

VDMA Mutschler Jörg [email protected]

P a g e | 13

mailto:[email protected]











Appendix B: MR TRM Agenda

1. Meeting Type: 2nd Industry Technical Review Meeting2. Location: DNV GL HQ, Oslo3. Date: Thursday, 9 June 20164. Start Time: 09h30 (local time)

5. AGENDA

Time Item Presenters 09:30 1. Introductions and welcome address from:

a. EU RO MR Advisory Board Chair;b. Relevant industry participants;

Masaki Matsunaga, AB Chair Relevant industry participants

10:00 2. Update on previous TRM actions: Lee Woon-Ho, TC Chair

10:30 3. Technical Requirement Maintenance:a. Discuss technical issues relating to

Change Requests & Requests forClarification;

b. Collect feedback on technical issuesrelating to existing Tier 1-4Technical Requirements;

Lee Woon-Ho + Relevant industry participants

12:00 Lunch 13:30 4. Technical Requirement Development;

a. Discuss feedback on technical issuesrelating to draft Tier 5 TechnicalRequirements;

b. Identify and prioritise suitableproducts for potential Tier 6Technical Requirements;

Lee Woon-Ho + Relevant industry participants

15:00 5. General feedback on MR technical aspects Lee Woon-Ho + Relevant industry participants

15:30 6. Summary of discussions, review of actionsand meeting close

Lee Woon-Ho

P a g e | 14

2nd Industry Technical Review MeetingAgenda 1. Introduction and Aim/Scope of TRM

9 June 2016 in Oslo

EU RO MR Group

1. Introduction Welcome, safety brief and introduction of roles (Host: DNV GL) Welcome address and introduction round meeting participants (AB Chair)

- SEA Europe Welcome by Moderator, purpose of the meeting (Moderator) Introduction of meeting agenda (TC Chair)

2. . Brief update on previous TRM actions

3. Technical Requirement (TR) Maintenance;a. Discuss technical issues relating to Change Requests (CRFs) &

Requests for Clarification (RfCs)

- Presentation from Industry – Siemens’ feedback for Tier 1 – 4 TRs

b. Collect feedback on technical issues relating to existing Tier 1-4 TRs

4. Technical Requirement Development;

a. Discuss feedback on technical issues relating to draft Tier 5 TRs

- Presentation from Industry – Siemens’ feedback for draft Tier 5 TRs

b. Potential MR products for next tiers

- Presentation from Industry – G&O Maritime

- Presentation from Industry - Air Products

- Presentation from Industry - Brunvoll AS

- Presentation from Industry – Eaton

5. General feedback on MR technical aspects

6. Summary of discussions, review of actions and meeting close

Technical Review Meeting

1

Appendix C: EU RO MR Group Presentations

P a g e |15

To present the current status of the MR TR development processfor Tier 1 to Tier 4 MR approved products and collect feedbackon technical issues;

To discuss the status of current Change Requests (CRFs) orRequests for Clarification (RfCs) related to Tier 1 to Tier 4products;

To provide an opportunity for industry input into the MR TRdevelopment process.

Aim of the meeting


2

To present the current status of the MR TR development processfor Tier 1 to Tier 4 products and enable the collection offeedback on MR technical issues regarding new and existingMR TRs and the MR certification process;

To provide information on existing MR TRs and related ChangeRequests (CRFs) and Requests for Clarification (RfCs);

To identify and define suitable type approved products for MRTR development from a prescribed list* maintained by the EURO MR TC.


* Note: This list comprises of existing rule requirements for type approved productswhere type approval alone will satisfy these requirements.

3

In-Scope of the meeting

P a g e | 16

The discussions on single issues that could lead to an EU ROhaving to change its class requirements;

The discussions of technical or procedural issues that are outsideof the scope as described in previous slide;

The discussion of commercially sensitive matters such as prices(actual or potential), costs, compensation levels, markets, businessstrategy, terms of sale, upcoming bids and similar matters;

The promotion of individual agendas or political discussion relatedto Reg.(EC)391/2009;

Any intention as a platform for the lobbying other groups such asIACS, etc.


4

Out-Scope of the meeting

9 June 2016 in Oslo

EU RO MR Group

2nd Industry Technical Review MeetingAgenda 2. Brief update on previous TRM actions

P a g e | 17

Update on actions of previous TRM (21/04/15 at St. Petersburg)

1

Actions Status of Action

Amend the TR maintenance process to ensure that a response is always provided on the outcome of

EU RO MR Group’s considerations of feedback along with the rationale for accepting/rejecting, etc.;

Completed, 04/06/15, SEA Europe

Provide a consolidated response on all feedback provided by Siemens to date (actions taken / not

taken, etc.);

Completed, 15/07/15, Siemens

Create a Change Request for ‘Electric Relays’ based on Siemen’s feedback at the TRM; Completed (CRF024), 15/07/15 ‐ 19/05/16,Siemens

Create a Change Request for ‘Air Pipe Automatic Closing Device’ based on feedback from Danish

Maritime;

Completed (CRF023), 15/07/15 ‐ 19/05/16, Danish Maritime

Create a Change Request for Display Monitors, Video Screens, Terminals (to include touch screens)

based on feedback from Danish Maritime.

Completed (CRF027), 15/07/15 ‐ 19/05/16, Danish Maritime

Create a Change Request for ‘Air Compressors’ based on feedback from Netherlands Maritime

Technology;

Completed (CRF022), 15/07/15 ‐ 19/05/16, Netherlands Maritime

Ensure that all TRs reflect the agreed position on witness tests for non‐accredited labs (as described

in draft Tier 4 TRs) – NB: see recent update to TRs and Framework document on 17/04/15;

Completed, 15/07/15, Siemens

Review all tier 4 feedback received in TRM and adjust TRs accordingly – providing on the outcome of

EU RO MR Group’s considerations of feedback along with the rationale for accepting/rejecting, etc.;

Completed, 30/06/15, relevant Industries

Review the feedback received from VDMA and provide a response; in the near future; Completed, 15/07/15, VDMA

Clarify level 3 product list decisions (including Hydraulic Actuators, electro hydraulic power units for

valve control (LPD), vision marine PCs and monitors (both with and without touch screens) plus PD

automation modules) and provide reasons for rejecting MR for those products proposed by industry,

which fall into the ‘No’ category;

Completed, 27/08/15, SEA Europe

Select 11 products for Tier 5 TR development and publish the list prior to Tier 5 project initiation. Completed, 04/06/15, SEA Europe

9 June 2016 in Oslo

EU RO MR Group

2nd Industry Technical Review MeetingAgenda 3.a. Technical Requirement Maintenance

P a g e | 18

1

Technical Requirement Maintenance

Change Request Forms (CRFs) 28 CRFs in total since July 2013 8 CRFs since 1st meeting in April 2015 No pending CRF at the moment

☞ Summary of the 8 CRFs

Requests for Clarification (RfCs) &Technical Interpretations (TIs) 4 RfCs/TIs since Jan. 2015

☞ Summary of the RfCs/TIs

Technical Requirement Maintenance

2

P a g e | 19

9 June 2016 in Oslo

EU RO MR Group

2nd Industry Technical Review MeetingAgenda 3.b. Feedback on Tier 1 – 4 TRs

1

Feedback on Tier 1 – 4 TRs

Products list for Tier 1

1. Electric Driven Motors < 20 kW2. Circuit Breakers (without electronic devices)3. Contactors (without electronic deivces)4. Fuses5. Display Monitors, Video Screens, Terminals6. LV Enclosures & Boxes7. LV Transformers8. Mechanical Joints9. Resin Chocks

10. Switches11. Sensors

P a g e | 20


2


1. Accumulated Battery2. Air Pipe Automatic Closing Device3. Cable Ties4. Class III Pipe Fittings5. Computers and Programmable Logic Controllers

(PLCs)6. Electrical/Electronic Relays7. Electric Cables - Heating Cables8. Expansion Joints9. Flameproof Luminaire (Lighting Fixture)

10. Plastic Piping Systems (Components)11. Spark Arrestors


1. Adjustable Steel Chock2. Air Compressor3. Battery Chargers4. Cable Trays & Ducts (Glass Reinforced Plastic/GRP)5. Connecting Systems for Cable Repair (Cable Splices)6. Electrical Actuators for Valves7. Insulation Panels for Provision Rooms and Chambers8. Boiler Remote Level Indicators9. Pneumatic Actuators for Valves

10. Cable Trays & Ducts (Metallic)11. Solenoid Valve Assembly12. Stationary Lighting Fixtures/Flood Light Projectors


3

P a g e | 21


1. Temperature Gauges and Transmitters2. Valves for Seawater Systems3. Valves for Freshwater Systems4. Circuit Breakers with Electronic Devices5. Contactors with Electronic Devices6. Valves for Sanitary Systems7. Tachometer8. Thermal Insulation of Organic Foams for Piping9. Valves for Bilge Systems

10. Valves for Lubricating Oil & Hydraulic Oil System


4

Feedback on Technical Matter

Refer to CRFs in the Agenda 3.a


5

P a g e | 22

Feedback from Industry; Presentation by Siemens


6

9 June 2016 in Oslo

EU RO MR Group

2nd Industry Technical Review MeetingAgenda 4.a. Feedback on Tier 5 TRs

P a g e | 23


1. Electro-pneumatic Level Transmitters2. Electronic Power Units for Valve Control3. LV Soft Starters4. Pressure Gauge/Transmitters5. Level Gauge/Transmitters6. Valves – Cargo Oil Systems7. Control & Protection Switching (CPS) Devices8. Pilot Devices9. Flow Gauge/Transmitters

10. AC Semiconductor Controllers11. Valves – Fuel Oil Systems

1

Feedback on Tier 5 TRs

Sent out the draft TRs for Industry Consultation

on 16 Feb. 2016 to 31 Industry Associations

all the drafts posted athttp://www.euromr.org/tr-development

Requested to provide Industries’ feedback by

25 April 2016

2


P a g e | 24

Feedback from Industry

Number of replies: 9 3 for ‘LV Soft Starters’ 2 for ‘Pilot Devices’ 1 for ‘AC Semiconductor Controllers’ 1 for ‘Control & Protection Switching (CPS)

Devices’ 1 for ‘Flow Gauge/Transmitters’ 1 for Pressure Gauge/Transmitters’

3


4


Tier 5 TR Danfoss Drives Emerson Process Management

Eaton Industries GmbH

IEC Standards Committee SC121A

AC semiconductor controllers; - - - X

Control & protection switching (CPS) devices; - - - X

Flow gauges/transmitters; - X - -

LV soft starters; X - X X

Pilot devices; - - X X

Pressure gauges/transmitters; - X - -

Feedback from Industry

Review by Lead ROs Review by TC

Approval by ABAdoption

P a g e | 25

Feedback from Industry; Presentation by Siemens


5

9 June 2016 in Oslo

EU RO MR Group

2nd Industry Technical Review MeetingAgenda 4.b. TR development - potential MR products

P a g e | 26

Product Consideration Process

1

Flow chart for Development of TR

2

P a g e | 27

Selection of Products for MR

Risk Assessment Methodologies reviewed by EG Risk Simplified Risk Based Model developed

3

Criteria for Selection of MR products

Simplified Risk Based Model (opt in/opt out criteria) is applied aspart of the election process of the EU RO for products suitable for MR

The Process• Any RO or manufacturer may, at any time, propose new products for MR;

• The ROs generate & agree on a list of possible products eligible for MR;

• The products are checked towards the opt in/opt out criteria by TC;• For those products eligible, the Technical Requirement development

process shall be applied.

4

Simplified Risk Based Model

P a g e | 28

Opt in Criteria

1. The technical standards of recognised organisations are identicalor very similar (Preamble paragraph 17 in 391/2009);

2. The technical standards of the EU recognised organisations referto the same or to equivalent internationally recognised testingstandards (like IEC, ISO etc.);

3. No EU RO Classification Rules apply a certification scheme for theproduct, which is more stringent than the scheme as defined byEU RO Mutual Recognition procedure for type approval;

4. The operational context is well established, no new operationalprocedures introduced, no new environmental context.

5


Opt out Criteria

1. The product is not ready for the intended use, i.e. system context notclearly defined as required for the TRs;

2. The failure of the product may lead to a loss of a main ship function(essential systems definition from IMO);

3. The failure of the product may lead to a loss of a safety function(e.g. fire protection, live saving appliances, SOLAS requirements);

4. The failure of product may constitute an unacceptable threat to safetyand/or the environment;

5. The product needs to be tested in-situ as part of an assembly orsystem (system design) to be able to issue the MR certificate;

6. The failure of the product may result in immediate consequencesto the ship (collision, grounding, fire etc.).

6


P a g e |29

Potential MR Products

Products under consideration

Developed: 55 Products (incl. Tier 5) Potential MR Products

Proposed by Product Consideration

Process: 3 Products

Potential: 8 Products

7

Potential MR Products

Products proposed by Industry;

Presentation by G&O Maritime

Presentation by Airproducts

Presentation by Brunvoll AS

Presentation by Eaton

8

P a g e | 30

EU RO Technical Review MeetingTier 1- 4 & Frame DocumentLow Voltage Devices, e.g. Contactors, Circuit Breakers, Electrical/Electronic Relays

siemens.comSiemens AG 2016

© Siemens AG 2013. All Rights Reserved.

09.06.2016 Michael Schroeck / DF CP R&D VC 2Page 2

EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 1- 4

• Framework document 3

• Circuit Breaker, Contactorswith/without electronic devices 4

Appendix D: Industry Presentations

P a g e | 31



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 1- 4Framework-Document: Witnesstesting

Framework Document, Version 4:

Framework Document, Version 5:

TRM Action 7 (2015-07):

Highly appreciated not to refer to single TR anymore

Consistency should be ensured



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 1- 4TR Contactors, Circuit Breakers with/withoutElectronics: Witnesstesting

Contactor/Circuit Breaker without electronic Devices:

Contactor/Circuit Breaker with electronic Devices:

Conflict with framework document, Consistency is not given

Merge with/without electronic Devices (already proposed and refused 2015)

P a g e | 32



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 1- 4

Michael SchroeckCertificationDigital Factory DivisionControl ProductsDF CP R&D VC 2

Werner-von-Siemens-Str. 4892224 Amberg, Germany

Phone: +49 9621 80 2417

E-mail:[email protected]

siemens.com

EU RO Technical Review MeetingTier 5 Low Voltage Devices, e.g. CPS, Pilot Devices, Softstarter, AC Semiconductor Controllers

siemens.comSiemens AG 2016

P a g e | 33



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5

• General/Editorial 3

• Limit of ratings 7

• Reference to UR E10 10

• Environmental Categories 12



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5General

Pilot Devices

Softstarter

AC Semiconductor Controllers

CPS

Inclusion of these devices is highly appreciated

P a g e | 34



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Editorial (see also Tier 1 - 4): Date of IEC 60721‐3‐6

TR:

Extract from the standard:

Could be corrected with the next revision



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Scope/Definition: Softstarter

Softstarter:TR-Draft:

IEC 60947-4-2:

Use definition of the standard:Better: AC Semiconductor Motor Controllers and Starters

P a g e | 35



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Scope/Definition: CPS

CPS:TR-Draft:

IEC 60947-6-2:

Use definition of the standard:Better: Control and protective switching device (CPS)



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Limit of Ratings: Softstarter

TR:

No limit in the standard

Almost all series of softstarters are rated below 20 kW and up to more than 20kW This would lead to one MR-Certificate for softstarters < 20kW and several

Class-Certificates for softstarters > 20 kWinstead of several Class-Certificates for softstarters nowadays

Delete the limit

If this is not possible extent to 100kW due to EU RO Class Regulations

P a g e | 36



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Limit of Ratings: AC Semiconductor Controllers

TR:


Delete the limit

If this is not possible extent to 100kVA due to EU RO Class Regulations



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Limit of Ratings: Pilot Devices

TR:


Almost all series of pilot devices have multiple ratings, e.g. 24V and 230V

Many control circuits are rated below 100V

Delete the limit

Is the intention that pilot devices < 100V need no certification/TA at all?

P a g e | 37



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Type Tests, Reference to UR E10: AC Semiconductor Controllers, CPS

TR – AC Semiconductor Controller:

TR – CPS:

Reference to UR E10 is not necessary anymore because everything is covered inAnnex Q of IEC 60947-1

Other TR of low voltage devices refer to Annex Q of IEC 60947-1 only

Delete the references to UR E10

Ensure consistency of TR of low voltage devices



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Type Tests, Reference to UR E10: Softstarter

TR – Softstarter:

Reference to UR E10 is not necessary anymore because everything is covered inAnnex Q of IEC 60947-1


Delete the references to UR E10

Ensure consistency of TR of low voltage devices

P a g e | 38



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5Environmental Categories: Softstarter

TR – Softstarter:

Extract from Tier 1-3 Feedback to Siemens, July 1st 2015


Delete the references to different environmental categories

Refer to Annex Q of IEC 60947-1 only



EU RO Technical Review Meeting: Tier 5

Michael SchroeckCertificationDigital Factory DivisionControl ProductsDF CP R&D VC 2

Werner-von-Siemens-Str. 4892224 Amberg, Germany

Phone: +49 9621 80 2417

E-mail:[email protected]

siemens.com

P a g e | 39

EU RO Mutual Recognition

2nd Industry Technical Review Meeting

Høvik, June 2016

Company Introduction

2

GERTSEN & OLUFSENAPRIL 2014

ATLASSEPTEMBER 2014

PRES-VACAPRIL 2015

HECO SEPTEMBER 2015

P a g e | 40

Company Introduction

3

G&O Maritime Group

Vibration Compensators

Bio Reactors

Incinerators

Tank Venting Equipment

Piston rod stuffing boxes

4

Proposal for Product Tier 6Automatic pressure/vacuum relief valves for cargo tank vent systems

SOLAS

(that are not covered by IMO MSC Circ. 677 or the Marine Equipment Directive)

P a g e | 41

5

Proposal for Product Tier 6

o Type approval required by some classification societies e.g. BV, CCS and DNV-GL

o Other classification societies require only certificate of inspection

Automatic pressure/vacuum relief valves for cargo tank vent systems(that are not covered by IMO MSC Circ. 677 or the Marine Equipment Directive)

P a g e | 42

Pioneering Nitrogen Membrane Technology WorldwidePioneering Nitrogen Membrane Technology Worldwide

Air Products ASEU RO Mutual Recognition

Oslo June 9 2016

Jostein Hageland Air Products AS


For Marine, Offshore and Petrochemical industries

P a g e | 43


Multinational Corporation producing Industrial Gases, Chemicals, and Energy /Environmental Systems

Exceeding 9 Billion Dollars in Sales

World’s 4th larges industrial gas company

Operation in over 50 CountriesApx. 19,000 Employees

Fortune 500 company

Strives to obtain Best safetyrecord of any Industrial Gas company

Air Products Inc.

European Headquarters in Hersham, UK

World Headquartersin Allentown, Pennsylvania


Established 1970Engineering and manufacturing company specializing in gas production and processing systemsfor the Marine, Offshore and Petrochemical industries.

Part of Air Products’global operations.

Centre of excellence for marine and other industry spec.-compliant systems.

In-company manufacturing of membranes (USA)

Air Products AS – Norway

P a g e | 44

Pioneering Nitrogen Membrane Technology Worldwide

Air Products AS Main officeVige, Kristiansand


Air Products Norway

Manufacturing/ assembly

Testing/class inspection

P a g e | 45


ISO 9001 & ISO 18000 Certified

Awarded Samsung Q-Mark Gold since 2006

Class Approvals:ABS, BV, DNV, GL, KR, LRS, RINA, and others

Approvals and certification


Air Products AS Markets Segments

P a g e | 46


Air Products Norway’s main Oil &Gas markets:

N2 generators for:

• Offshore production platforms• Onshore production fields• FPSO• FSO• Floating LNG (FLNG) carriers• Onshore

refineries


Air Products Norway’s main Oil &Gas markets:

Shell ”Prelude”FLNG

P a g e | 47


Air Products Norway’s main marine markets

Marine N2 generators for;Chemical tankers

Product tankers

LNG carriers

Offshore supply vessels

Reefer vessels (Banana Carriers)


Products for Marine Marked

P a g e | 48


Keep it simple!• Standardized design• Well proven , marine membranes

(Air Products make)

• Type approved• Simplified maintenance

Key focus for Air Products membrane systems


Design and assembly in Norway

Tested in Norway

Membranes made by Air Products

Commissioning by Air Products’ ownpeople

Spare parts follow up 20 years+ from Norway

Air Products Norway

P a g e | 49


Small capacity N2 generatorsNitrogen generator NC1

2016:• A significant number of units are delivered

since design in release 2005.

• Majority supplied to LNG carriers

• Carry DNV type approval(all other class appriasals available)

Compressor 1

Compressor 2

Generator 1

N2 Receiver

Generator2

Typical system set-up for LNG carriers


Small capacity N2 generatorsNitrogen generator NC1

Two purposes for using Nitrogen onboard LNG carriers

• Inerting of void spaces and pipes/pumps –to avolid explosion(No inerting of cargo tanks)

• Nitrogen is very dry:Dewpoint is – 700Celsius

P a g e | 50


Small capacity N2 generatorsNitrogen generator NC1Capacity 10-420m3/h @ 95-99.9% N2 purity


Full inert gas system by Nitrogen generator

CCR(Main)

ECR

(Sub)

Bridge

(Sub)

Local

(Main)

N2Receiver

Nitrogen for purging, stripping and topping-up

Nitrogen for tank inerting during cargo

discharge(full inert gass system)

95-99.9% N2 purity

95% N2 purity

Ex.Area Deck

Safe areaEng. Room

Double block& bleed

arrangement

P a g e | 51


Full inert gas system by Nitrogen generator

Membrane bank Membrane

bank


The membraneseparator module

P a g e | 52


N2 System - flow diagram

(Optional)

N2 generator

(Optional)


Air Separation principle

P a g e | 53


In-house technology and manufacturing of membrane modules

Full process insight(transfer of technology) including diagnostics

Air Products


EU RO Mutual Recognition

Air Products AS Application Process

P a g e | 54


Initial correspondence


Following correspondence

P a g e | 55





P a g e | 56





P a g e | 57


Reply from the EU RO MR Technical Commitee


P a g e | 58

P a g e | 59

P a g e | 60

P a g e | 61

P a g e | 62

P a g e | 63

P a g e | 64

P a g e | 65

P a g e | 66

Eaton operates in 2 sectors


Eaton’s Crouse-Hinds Business

Syracuse, NY Headquarters and oneof 35 global facilities today

• World’s leading provider of electricaland instrumentation products forharsh and hazardous environments

• Founded in 1897 in Syracuse, New York• Portfolio of 100,000+ products• 2014 Sales: +1.6 Billion• Around 3,600 employees worldwide

Preferred Solution for Engineering Safety & Productivity for over 115 Years


P a g e | 68

Crouse-Hinds by Eaton brand architecture

Industrial / EX CommercialInstrumentation Airport LightingHaz. Area Comm


Product portfolio


Hazardous AreaCommunications

• Signals & Alarms• Communication Systems• CCTV Cameras and Systems• Phones

P a g e | 69

Our markets

Broad diversification covering industrial and commercial markets.Petrochemical Power GenerationEnergy ExplorationWastewater Treatment

ManufacturingMarine / ShipbuildingMetals & MiningPharmaceutical

Offshore / Onshore DrillingAlternative Fuels Food ProcessingCommercial Construction

Our Products Perform Reliably Under the Most Demanding Conditions Imaginable


We provide bothstandard productsand customizedsolutions to meet customer need inapplication below

HAC

· IP platform· CCTV· PAGA· Intercom· Signaling alarm· Mining

communications

Crouse –Hinds HAC solutions


P a g e | 70

Marine SystemIMCOS

•PA/GA•Talk back•PABX•Entertainment•V Sat•LAN•CCTV

Offshore/Onshore systemSonix

•PA/GA•Talk back•HMI Access units•Matrix management•Dual power amplifiers•Power management•PBX interface•Loop monitoring

PA/GA & Intercom

More than 3,000 systems delivered during last 20 years


Type Approvals & Certification

IMCOS is Type Approved by Seven Classification SocietiesHAC PAGAs have Type Approval from SEVEN Classification Socities

DET NORSKE VERITAS. BUREAU VERITAS. GERMANISCHER LLOYD. REGISTRO ITALIANO NAVALE. LLOYD’S REGISTER OF SHIPPING. AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING. CHINA CLASSIFICATION SOCIETY.

Additionally systems are incompliance with

MODU. UKOOA. MMF. SBG.


P a g e | 71

Mutual recognition approach


We see good opportunities from MR: Currently approved by six Organizations with more business

opportunities coming from additional classifications• We have not yet applied for MR

A common standard for testing (IACS E10 ) is already in place

BUT: PA/GA currently not listed in product list

••

It is a System made with type approved components => Level 4?It is provided with peripherals (Panels, Speakers, Phones…) => Level 3?

All products needs to be included Main system FAT is requested to be witnessed by RO Surveyor. How

can this be managed inside MR scope?

As already noted, 100% witness testing would lead additional effort• Not all labs are Nationally Accredited Laboratory as requested in annex V of EU RO MR

Design Evaluation Scheme

12© 2013 Eaton. All rights reserved 11

P a g e | 72

*****

regulation (ec) 391/2009 art. 10.1 mutual recognition ......a matter was brought up where acceptance...

Documents