Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
Lifts, escalators and moving walks are used more than
1billion times a day in the European Union. It is the most used
vehicle for travelling, and the safest by far. The community
of the travelling public appreciates the mobility and access
that lifts, escalators and moving walks provide to all groups
in the community. They also expect that their journeys are
made as safe as possible, but this goes without saying and
the ride comfort is so high today with the new smooth ride
experience and perfect levelling accuracy that the user does
not even realize or perceive that he/she is entering or leaving a
lift. Conversations continue, documents or business cards are
exchanged, introductions made and lots of laughter heard on
travelling lifts.
The lift brings us together. It is one of the few meeting points in
todays vertical cities. That is where vertical neighbours get to
know each other, that is where couples meet, that is where life
goes by, uninterrupted.
More than five million lifts are in use today in Europe, to
the satisfaction of the immense majority of users. But not
everything is perfect. In many countries, more than half the
existing lifts are 25 years old or even older. Few of them have
been modernized to meet current safety and performance
requirements. Accidents, even fatal accidents still happen
every year. The lift industry is aiming at making the lift ride
absolutely safe. The lift may not fall sometimes. It may never
fail. Full stop. The user gives his/her own life to the lift and
does not expect to encounter any problems. And so it should
be. Contrary to most other transport means, lifts are used
mostly by persons who are not the owner or the driver of
the vehicle.
Ageing lifts can be made more energy-effective, safer, more
reliable and comfortable through regular maintenance and
through improvements.
This document, produced in the spring of 2013 is the first
document that ELA publishes since the launch of the Safety of
Existing Lifts campaign, some 11 years ago. It is a milestone
in the long process that, through best practices exemplified
further in this document, will produce a harmonized set of
national legislation for the existing lifts that do not carry the CE
marking, in other words lifts that were not installed in the era
of the European Lifts Directive 95/16/EC, but date from before
the turn of the century, from 1997 and before.
The fact that some lifts installed in the late 1800s are still
functioning is a reminder of the incredible sturdiness and
safety of lifts. On average, a lift lasts six times longer than any
car on the road, to the full satisfaction of its users.
Maintenance
National
The
The
Associations or others.
2. Background
In 2003, the European Committee of Standardization (CEN)
has added to its well-known European Standard for new
lifts, EN 81 part 1 and 2, the key standard for the safety of
existing lifts, EN 81-80: 2003. This standard was the result
of several years work by committed safety experts from the
lift industry, government authorities, third party inspection
bodies, consumers organizations and insurance companies.
Since then, the main lift norm EN 81-1/2 is being replaced by
the new norm EN 81-20/50, but the on-going process keeps its
existing lifts references to EN 81-80.
EN 81-80:2003, Safety rules for the construction and installation
of lifts Existing lifts Part 80: Rules for the improvement
of safety of existing passenger and goods passenger lifts,
categorizes various hazards and hazardous situations, each of
which has been analysed by a risk assessment. It then provides
a list of corrective actions to improve safety progressively.
D
LOGY, R&
TECHNO
EN81 series
EN81 series
of standards
EN81 series
EN81-1/2
EN81-1
1920
1979
COUNTRY-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES
IN LEVEL OF SAFETY
1985
1998
The Delta
shall be
determined
by the
National
authorities
2004
2010
2020
2003
3. European Recommendation
95/216/EC (reference to)
When the European Commission (EC) produced the Lifts
Directive 95/216/EC, all stakeholders knew that the document
was only destined to regulate the installation of new lifts, but
the very large stock of lifts that equipped the existing buildings
throughout Europe remained under the sole responsibility
of national governments. Still, the EC, after consultation
of the various stakeholders, including EEA and EFLA at the
time, decided to add a short one page Recommendation
95/216/EC with the 10 recommendations to make existing lifts
safer, whatever their age. It is only a Recommendation, since
the European Commission only sees to the further integration
of Europe and not to the existing set of national regulations
that remain the responsibility of the member states.
This has been the basis for the lift industry experts, when they
set to the huge task of identifying risks that lifts could pose. The
Committee of experts provided a carefully detailed list of 74
risks, both to users and to workers. The 10 recommendations
document was the basis for their work on the new norm, the
Safety Norm for Existing Lifts EN 81-80:2003 (SNEL).
The list of the 10 recommendations from 1995 is as follows:
4. Statistics about
the European Lifts portfolio
Europe is the first continent and by far for the number of
lifts installed. The installed basis (more than 5 million lifts)
represents some 50 % of the number of lifts installed in the
world. This is changing rapidly with the coming of age of
Asia, particularly China, where more than 400 000 lifts were
installed in 2011, while Europe only installed some 110 000
units in the same period and North America some 20 000
units.
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxemburg
The Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
United Kingdom
TOTAL
10
2 100
2 500
2 500
2 700
960
150
1 500
20 000
18 000
6 000
950
25 000
350
500
340
2 489
1 100
5 000
2 450
5 000
1 000
450
19 000
2 800
3 588
17 500
11 950
88 280
88 000
84 000
133 200
31 500
4 600
56 000
520 000
650 000
411 900
37 300
915 000
5 770
8 100
9 700
87 500
37 700
87 488
147 000
43 500
41 800
10 195
857 283
109 575
198 000
313 000
274 900
8 221 000
10 444 000
6 982 000
10 163 000
5 556 000
1 266 000
5 266 000
65 952 000
81 147 000
10 773 000
9 939 000
61 482 000
2 178 000
3 516 000
514 862
16 805 000
4 723 000
38 384 000
10 799 000
21 790 000
5 488 000
1 993 000
47 371 000
9 119 000
7 996 000
73 640 000
63 396 000
155 877
5 251 291
Europe also has a large share of the new generation of MRL lifts
(Machine Room Less) than any other continent, North America
remaining very traditional for the types of lifts installed, except
for the high rise applications in city centres.
the use of lifts are not reported by the victims. Only statistics
for workers are fully reliable, since these must be reported for
Health & Safety reasons, in order to improve equipment and
practices.
2000
Worker
accidents
1500
1000
User
accidents
500
0
2008
2009
2010
23 %
18 %
11 %
10 %
7%
4%
17 %
7%
3%
2011
11
5. Other aspects
when implementing SNEL
The implementation of EN 81-80 per country, based on the 74
defined risks, will vary in content and scheduling, to allow for
any local differences in the assessment of those risks.
The definition of risks levels, categorized as extreme, high,
medium or low, will depend on previous country history of lift
regulation and applied standards, accident statistics, specific
product knowledge and social expectations.
In SNEL, annex A, the described methodology of the National
Filtering Method provides a tool for easily and successfully
defining the when and what status of each predefined
SNEL risk.
Today, this filtering process, which has been applied
successfully in several European countries, among them
Belgium, France, Spain or Austria, is on-going in other EU
member-states
Using the filter as recommended by the experts who wrote the
norm, will bring a de facto safety harmonization of the existing
lifts. It will be a great leap forward for European integration.
12
seniors +75
20
15
15%
8%
2000
2006
10
5
2020
2030
2040
People do not want to leave their homes where they have been
living for many years despite age and mobility problems.
EN 81-80 SNEL combined with CEN/TS EN 81-82 Rules for
the improvement of the accessibility of existing lifts for persons
including persons with disability can help to achieve this.
13
5. Other aspects
when implementing SNEL
14
5.3.3 Once SNEL has been integrated and well applied in your country: follow up
Once SNEL has been implemented as local legislation, many
questions from all kind of sources will come up.
The main objective of having a smooth application of the new
law is to have the law interpreted consistently by all parties.
Therefore, a continued dialogue between all parties is required
in order to re-adjust the practical work if necessary.
To have an overview of possible obstructions, we will sum up
a list of elements to be taken into account when the law starts
to be applied:
a)
Lift companies need to plan the impact on
available resources and time schedules within their
organization. This exercise is part of the preparation
work as well;
b) Safety components capabilities and safety levels,
which are the result of the practical application
of SNEL, are to be defined, after consultation with
inspection bodies and involved civil servants;
15
16
SNEL is not:
w This standard does not have an EU mandate related to a
17
Start
Series of fatal accidents
Request from national
Political world
authorities at AFNOR
AFNOR authority
measures
Prioritization of safety
measures
(3 periods)
18
Background
After a much publicized series of accidents, involving children
among other victims in 2002, the French government decided to
legislate urgently. The French federation and AFNOR provided
statistics and indications on the worst risks, recommending
to Minister Gilles de Robien (Housing) to filter the existing
legislation and apply EN 81-80 for the risks which were not yet
covered by the French legislation. Car doors were for example
already compulsory since the early 1980s and did not need
legislating. Nevertheless, the French lift stock was then one
of the oldest in Europe, since France had had much less
reconstruction than Germany after the last world war. More
importantly, France made a huge effort at building apartment
blocks and social housing in the 1960s when the repatriation
of the French population from Algeria took place. The French
economy had also developed much earlier than the economy
of countries such as Spain for example, or Poland since it
became a Member State in the European Union.
000 lifts for the medium risks enclosed in the SAE legislation.
It ends on July 3, 2013, except if the government postpones
the closing date by 6 months to another year. The French
lift federation has defended the idea of not extending the
deadline because it maintains safety risks while penalizing
the owners who have done the work early or within due
time. For the French lift sector, it is possible to keep the July
date for all lift owners to have at least passed the order for
the second phase of safety upgrading on their lift by the due
date. There remain some 120 000 lifts on which the work to
be done in the second phase still needs to be done.
At the beginning of February 2013, 60 % of lifts concerned
had been upgraded already. The modernisation of the
remaining 40 % will last well into 2014, even if all orders
are passed by July 3, 2013
19
w 3) The third and last 5-year period ends on July 3rd, 2018.
drastically in 10 years
6
5
1
0
20
Impacted
by SNEL
Others
3
2
1
0
2004
2055
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
21
22
The last revision seems to be the right one and all stakeholders
owners included have accepted the new plan. The new
Royal Decree imposes a timetable for safety upgrading of all
lifts in Belgium, for private residential or professional use.
The oldest lifts (installed before 1954) which have a historical
or patrimonial value will have to be modernized by the end
of 2022. AGORIA, the Belgian association assesses the total
number of existing lifts in Belgium at about 85 000 units.
23
24
25
31 December 2007
31 December 2008
1977 &1983
31 December 2011
26
st
st
st
27
28
EN 81-80
(prior legislation covering
only 33 % of SNEL)
High
30 %
75-80 %
Medium
33 %
65-90 %
Low
30 %
40-70 %
(before RD57-2005)
29
30
GREEN: This colour/grid means: standard EN 81-80 has been implemented through a
national law, including a defined position for the SNEL filtering (= defining the SNEL
risks to be covered, including a time-schedule)
YELLOW: This colour/grid means: national legislation or guidelines in preparation
RED: This colour/grid means: a rather slow progress or nothing has been undertaken
so far or no information received/available for the EN 81-80 implementation
31
9.1 France
9.3 Austria
9.2 Germany
The Betriebssicherheitsverordnung application since 2002
has obtained very good results across Germany, through the
recommendation to owners issued by the notified bodies
during their periodical inspections. Still the German lift
industry, the TVs and the authorities realize that only the lifts
used by workers are covered (the great majority of lifts), but
also that some owners have not upgraded their lift, following
the report and recommendations based on SNEL, made by
the TVs. All stakeholders have agreed at the end of 2012, to
revisit the guideline and to try to obtain a complete coverage
of the existing lift stock in Germany in the coming years.
32
9.4 Spain
The programme described earlier has been completed in 2011
for the latest works resulting from inspections. The existing lift
stock is much younger in Spain than in comparable countries,
since the economic development came later. The works to be
done were therefore much lighter and easier to organize
than in other countries. The lift industry and the authorities are
discussing an extension of the programme to cover minor risks
that were not dealt with in the 2005 legislation.
9.5 Belgium
The Belgian Royal Decree was postponed twice by subsequent
ministers, under intense lobbying by a group of residential
building owners. The heaviest risks were supposed to be
originally covered by January 1st, 2008, but it will only be
the case on January 1st, 2014; and the safety upgrading of
residential historical lifts is postponed until much later.
These only represent a small fraction of the installed stock of
lifts, so the bulk of the SNEL programme will be completed
by 2022. It can still be considered as a success even if the
successive ministers lacked the necessary resolve to apply an
indispensable legislation and postponed urgent decisions on
high risks for years.
The latest victim of the lack of car doors in Belgium is a student
who died at the end of 2011 in Huy. He was working at night
cleaning offices and was crushed against the wall of the car
by a large bin stuck on the wall; a typical accident that would
not have happened if decisions taken in 2004 for high risks
had been applied as initially decided in by the Royal Decree,
by 2008. The successive ministers in charge postponed twice
the application of the safety upgrading for high risks. The latest
decision in Belgium (December 2012) involves all stakeholders
and is firm, in terms of works to be done and of timing.
33
10.1 Norway
10.2 Sweden
34
10.3 Portugal
In Portugal, the government has accepted at the end of 2012 to
discuss an application of SNEL at the same time as it accepted
to integrate lifts & escalators in the transposition of the Energy
Performance of Buildings Directive. This late decision proves
that it is never too late to promote SNEL and obtain at least the
coverage of the highest risks by legislation.
Next to these very good or good experiences, there are many
European countries where nothing has been done at all or
nothing obtained by the lift industry to improve the safety of
the existing lift stock.
10.5 Italy
35
10.6 Greece
The Greek case is another difficult case, in the sense that the
Greek government adopted a SNEL legislation, defining some
20 risks that need to be covered, but the new legislation,
though voted and published is not applied in practice.
36
11.1 Pros
11.2 Cons
(What are the reasons why a country does not legislate)
37
38
associations,
national
notified
bodies,
standardization bodies, and legislator;
national
39
Share European & other experiences on modernisation for improving safety of existing lifts, and
Make
40
15.1 France
w Presentation
by J.L. Detavernier (French Federation France) 2012
Power Point
15.2 Spain
w Presentation
by I. Aranburu (FEEDA Spain) 2012
Power Point
41
Published by